Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Dual Xeon E5 2690's, Quad Sli GTX 680's

Last response: in Systems
Share
February 22, 2013 3:20:52 PM

Hello Guys,
Im thinking of building a workstation simply because my system right now just wont cut it. Note price does not matter willing to spend this much for render times.

Heres what im thinking:

Case: Corsair 900D Supertower

Motherboard: EVGA SR-X Classified

Processors: 2x Intel Xeon E5 2690's (Would have prefered the E7 8870 Decacores but dont wanna take away X79)

Memory: 96GB Kingston HyperX Beast 2400Mhz

Graphics Cards: 4x EVGA GTX 680 Classified 4GB (Will probably wait for GTX Titan to come out and run 4 of those instead)

Storage: OCZ Revodrive 960GB, 10x ADATA XPG SX900 512GB SSD's, 2x 3TB Seagate Barracuda

Power: 2x Corsair A1200i's (Not sure if this is enough power)

Raid Card: Im completely clueless here please leave recommendations

Sound Card: HT Omega Claro Halo XT

Monitors: 3x Dell U3011's

Peripherals: Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2013, Razer Deathadder 2013, Astro A40 2013, Astro A50, Pysko Audiolabs Carbon

Note: This whole system will be watercooled by Koolance products, CPU's, GPU's, probably wont have enough room for ram watercooling but ill see. Also I will be doing mild gaming on this computer simply because I have another system for gaming.

Let me know what you think. Please help me with the raid card situation. Also im going with Razer Products simply because I have big hands and think the DPI will be neccesary for 30" monitors.
February 22, 2013 3:31:12 PM

Quote:
Storage: OCZ Revodrive 960GB, 10x ADATA XPG SX900 512GB SSD's, 2x 3TB Seagate Barracuda


Stay very very very far away from the OCZ Revodrive. These things are not ready for prime time and have extremely high fail rates. You don't want to trust your data to these. Plus they take up valuable PCI slots and if you want to run 4-way SLI then you want all your slots available.

10 SSDs????? Do you really need that much storage? Most cases won't house that many drives. Plus the SSDs slow down once you get them full to over 80% capacity.

Quote:
Graphics Cards: 4x EVGA GTX 680 Classified 4GB (Will probably wait for GTX Titan to come out and run 4 of those instead)


If rendering is your goal and not game playing I'd heavily suggest checking out the new Quaddro K5000.

Quote:
Power: 2x Corsair A1200i's (Not sure if this is enough power)


2400W? You could probably just get a single Silverstone ST1500W or the EVGA Classified 1500W and be fine.
m
0
l
February 22, 2013 3:38:32 PM

I would not recommend any gtx 680 for rendering as Nvidia basically crippled the ability to render in the gtx 6xx series. Look at a gtx 580 if you don't believe me, it gets way faster rendering scores than a gtx 680 which is why people stay away from the gtx 6xx series for folding@home. If you really want a render farm I would suggest getting a quadro if you want one of the new ones since those are meant to run 24/7 rendering.
m
0
l
Related resources
February 22, 2013 3:48:05 PM

g-unit1111 said:
Quote:
Storage: OCZ Revodrive 960GB, 10x ADATA XPG SX900 512GB SSD's, 2x 3TB Seagate Barracuda


Stay very very very far away from the OCZ Revodrive. These things are not ready for prime time and have extremely high fail rates. You don't want to trust your data to these. Plus they take up valuable PCI slots and if you want to run 4-way SLI then you want all your slots available.

10 SSDs????? Do you really need that much storage? Most cases won't house that many drives. Plus the SSDs slow down once you get them full to over 80% capacity.

Quote:
Graphics Cards: 4x EVGA GTX 680 Classified 4GB (Will probably wait for GTX Titan to come out and run 4 of those instead)


If rendering is your goal and not game playing I'd heavily suggest checking out the new Quaddro K5000.

Quote:
Power: 2x Corsair A1200i's (Not sure if this is enough power)


2400W? You could probably just get a single Silverstone ST1500W or the EVGA Classified 1500W and be fine.


Whats the advantages of a K5000? They seem to have the amount of CUDA cores and thats what i'd mainly be interested in for AE, and the 680's I'd be getting would have 4GB of VRAM. I was looking at the GTX Titan and this card looks like its going to destroy everything. http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gt...

As far as storage goes yes I would like to have this much storage and I already checked the 900D should be able to house this many SSD's and HDD's and the Revodrive on techtommarow/motherboardsorg is a 240GB flavor and he hasnt had any issues yet. Only difference is mine is faster and bigger.

Im not sure how much power this system will draw but I think I saw somewhere that the CPU's alone draw 500-700 watts when running 2. And yes the power may be overkill but I typicall do go overkill on power seeing as Im using 1200W platinum for a 3960X and 2x 2690's in my gaming rig.
m
0
l
February 22, 2013 3:50:01 PM

mightymaxio said:
I would not recommend any gtx 680 for rendering as Nvidia basically crippled the ability to render in the gtx 6xx series. Look at a gtx 580 if you don't believe me, it gets way faster rendering scores than a gtx 680 which is why people stay away from the gtx 6xx series for folding@home. If you really want a render farm I would suggest getting a quadro if you want one of the new ones since those are meant to run 24/7 rendering.


As I said just now the main reason I would be buying Nvidia cards is simply for CUDA and from what I see the Kepler is significantly more powerful at computing and rendering(because of CUDA).
m
0
l
February 22, 2013 4:04:03 PM

Quote:
Whats the advantages of a K5000? They seem to have the amount of CUDA cores and thats what i'd mainly be interested in for AE, and the 680's I'd be getting would have 4GB of VRAM. I was looking at the GTX Titan and this card looks like its going to destroy everything. http://www.geforce.com/hardware/de [...] ifications


The K5000 is a professional card. It's slower than the GTX 680 - but on purpose. It's meant to handle the finer redraws that the gaming cards can't touch.

Quote:
As far as storage goes yes I would like to have this much storage and I already checked the 900D should be able to house this many SSD's and HDD's and the Revodrive on techtommarow/motherboardsorg is a 240GB flavor and he hasnt had any issues yet. Only difference is mine is faster and bigger.


Pretty much everything I've read about the Revodrive has been in the negative category. I don't really recommend expensive storage devices like that because of high fail rates and they really aren't that much better than an SSD / HD setup.

Quote:
Im not sure how much power this system will draw but I think I saw somewhere that the CPU's alone draw 500-700 watts when running 2. And yes the power may be overkill but I typicall do go overkill on power seeing as Im using 1200W platinum for a 3960X and 2x 2690's in my gaming rig.


Are you running 2 690s in your rig? The 690 is essentially a 2 GPU on 1 card so it will indeed draw that much power. A single 680 uses 1 processing unit and then whatever power that draws multiply it by 4.
m
0
l
February 22, 2013 4:06:05 PM

+1 with g-unit look at the k5000 for graphics, they are made for rendering the 680 is ment for gaming
m
0
l
February 22, 2013 4:22:24 PM

g-unit1111 said:
Quote:
Whats the advantages of a K5000? They seem to have the amount of CUDA cores and thats what i'd mainly be interested in for AE, and the 680's I'd be getting would have 4GB of VRAM. I was looking at the GTX Titan and this card looks like its going to destroy everything. http://www.geforce.com/hardware/de [...] ifications


The K5000 is a professional card. It's slower than the GTX 680 - but on purpose. It's meant to handle the finer redraws that the gaming cards can't touch.

Quote:
As far as storage goes yes I would like to have this much storage and I already checked the 900D should be able to house this many SSD's and HDD's and the Revodrive on techtommarow/motherboardsorg is a 240GB flavor and he hasnt had any issues yet. Only difference is mine is faster and bigger.


Pretty much everything I've read about the Revodrive has been in the negative category. I don't really recommend expensive storage devices like that because of high fail rates and they really aren't that much better than an SSD / HD setup.

Quote:
Im not sure how much power this system will draw but I think I saw somewhere that the CPU's alone draw 500-700 watts when running 2. And yes the power may be overkill but I typicall do go overkill on power seeing as Im using 1200W platinum for a 3960X and 2x 2690's in my gaming rig.


Are you running 2 690s in your rig? The 690 is essentially a 2 GPU on 1 card so it will indeed draw that much power. A single 680 uses 1 processing unit and then whatever power that draws multiply it by 4.


Have you taken a look at Titan to see how it would hold up compared to the K5000. Also you have to think im running 4 of these not 1. I dont know the K5000 SLI capabilites or if it has any for that matter. Also isnt the K5000 outdated shouldnt I be looking at a Quadro 6000/ Teslas?
m
0
l
February 22, 2013 4:45:42 PM

iIzChris said:
Have you taken a look at Titan to see how it would hold up compared to the K5000. Also you have to think im running 4 of these not 1. I dont know the K5000 SLI capabilites or if it has any for that matter. Also isnt the K5000 outdated shouldnt I be looking at a Quadro 6000/ Teslas?


You're comparing apples and oranges here. The Titan is a gaming specific GPU and is meant for gaming. The K5000 is meant for business applications including rendering programs. It can handle the finer redraws that the Titan can't.

The K5000 is way newer than the Quaddro 6000. The 6000 is several generations old now - it's based on the GTX 4XX series from back in 2007 - 2008. The K5000 is based on Keppler which is much newer and more power efficient. http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro-k5000.html

m
0
l
February 22, 2013 5:29:12 PM

Straight from tomshardware's review on the GTX 680:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-680-rev...

Quote:
The more complete story is that it doesn’t want to go there…yet. Sandra 2012 just showed us that the GeForce GTX 680 trails AMD’s Radeon HD 7900 cards in 32-bit math. And it gets absolutely decimated in 64-bit floating-point operations, as Nvidia purposely protects its profitable professional graphics business by artificially capping performance.


Quote:
In comparison, the GeForce GTX 580/590’s GF110 GPU is better-suited to general-purpose compute tasks. And Nvidia argues it’d rather sell you a workstation-oriented Quadro card or dedicated Tesla-based board. We’d counter that AMD’s Radeon HD 7900-series cards are, at least from a performance perspective, clearly viable alternatives in this particular workload (not to mention a lot cheaper).


The reason they artificially capped performance is because of so many people abusing the system last round where they bought the GTX 580 due to its same performance as the quadro equivalents. Who wouldn't buy a $500 card that's as good as a $2000 quadro in compute performance, and that's why they capped it this round to seperate the business vs gaming markets to make more money.
m
0
l
!