Building a new Work Station with the following configuration - Opinion and advice needed.

[drstrangelove]

Hi,

I'm planning to go with the following setup for my new build:-

Motherboard - Asrock X99-e WS
CPU - Intel Xeon e5-1660 v3 (currently not in Asrock CPU list)
Memory - either Crucial 64 GB (16GB x 4) or 64 GB (2 set of 8GB x 4) ECC Ram
HDD - 3 x Intel 750 400 GB PCie
GPU - Either going with Nvidia GTX 980 Ti or Nvidia Titan X (can't decide to go with ASUS or EVGA)
PSU - Corsair AX1200i Digital ATX
Cooling - 3 x Corsair AF140 (quite edition) fans and Corsair Hydro Series H100i GTX and will be replacing the stock fan with 2 x Corsair SP120 PWM.
Casing - Corsair Obsidian 750D
OS - Windows 10 Pro
Monitor - 2 x Dell UltraSharp 27 Monitor (U2715H)

The last build I did on my own was like 15 years ago (a gaming PC, I think it was a Pentium CPU) and been running HP WS ever since but I thought of starting to get my hand dirty and start building my own WS.

This build is entirely for work (ie NO Gaming at all). I do design work (web and mobile design) and uses Photoshop and Illustrator on daily basis (more photoshop than illustrator, programming (HTML, CSS, JavaScript) and occasionally do video using Premiere and AE (very rarely)

Need some advice and opinion here. I've been doing a lot of research and came out with the above configuration. Hoping to get final opinion from those season builder here:-

1) I'm getting 3 x Intel 750 400GB PCIe SSD. 1 for my OS and apps, 1 for my work and 1 for the scratch disk. Logically with my motherboard (X99-e WS) I should not have any problem having 3 of this SSD as each just need x4 of the PCIe. I'm aware that this SSD run on NVMe and the motherboard support that. But will this work? running 3 PCIe SSD? Can't find any review on running so many PCIe SSD on one computer.

I'm not concerned about using up my PCIe slot as I will only be running 1 GPU (dual and above GPU will cause issue with Photoshop as per Adobe recommended system setup).

2) Do you think I should go with the following memory setup? 64GB (16GB x 4) (http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/x99-ws-e/CT6910409) or 64GB (2 sets of 8GB x 4) (http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/x99-ws-e/CT6910453)? I'm a bit confuse on this. But correct me if I'm wrong, either selection above will allow my memory to run in Quad right? They are all ECC. I know ECC are slower but my concern here is stability.

3) Also I want to find out about daisy chain my monitors. I will be getting 2 x Dell UltraSharp 27 Monitor (U2715H). What is the benefit of doing daisy chaining my 2 monitors if my GPU already has 2 Display ports which I can use. Been trying to find out more on this but can't really find the answer.

4) Based on the work that I do, do you think going with 980 ti will be a better option or Titan X will give me future support?

5) I think with the PSU I will have enough power to support all my configuration. Or should I be concern about it?

6) Any issue you see with the above choice of configuration?

7) Lastly I guess I should give my reason for going with E5-1660 v3 comparing to going with i7 5690x CPU - Both of this CPU are of same build (like a twins) except that i7 will allow my to OC while xeon will allow me to run ECC ram. I choose to go with ECC ram for stability comparing to OC my CPU.

Thank you in advance for reading my long post and sharing your opinion.

 

[bambiboom]

Hi,

I'm planning to go with the following setup for my new build:-

Motherboard - Asrock X99-e WS
CPU - Intel Xeon e5-1660 v3 (currently not in Asrock CPU list)
Memory - either Crucial 64 GB (16GB x 4) or 64 GB (2 set of 8GB x 4) ECC Ram
HDD - 3 x Intel 750 400 GB PCie
GPU - Either going with Nvidia GTX 980 Ti or Nvidia Titan X (can't decide to go with ASUS or EVGA)
PSU - Corsair AX1200i Digital ATX
Cooling - 3 x Corsair AF140 (quite edition) fans and Corsair Hydro Series H100i GTX and will be replacing the stock fan with 2 x Corsair SP120 PWM.
Casing - Corsair Obsidian 750D
OS - Windows 10 Pro
Monitor - 2 x Dell UltraSharp 27 Monitor (U2715H)

The last build I did on my own was like 15 years ago (a gaming PC, I think it was a Pentium CPU) and been running HP WS ever since but I thought of starting to get my hand dirty and start building my own WS.

This build is entirely for work (ie NO Gaming at all). I do design work (web and mobile design) and uses Photoshop and Illustrator on daily basis (more photoshop than illustrator, programming (HTML, CSS, JavaScript) and occasionally do video using Premiere and AE (very rarely)

Need some advice and opinion here. I've been doing a lot of research and came out with the above configuration. Hoping to get final opinion from those season builder here:-

1) I'm getting 3 x Intel 750 400GB PCIe SSD. 1 for my OS and apps, 1 for my work and 1 for the scratch disk. Logically with my motherboard (X99-e WS) I should not have any problem having 3 of this SSD as each just need x4 of the PCIe. I'm aware that this SSD run on NVMe and the motherboard support that. But will this work? running 3 PCIe SSD? Can't find any review on running so many PCIe SSD on one computer.

I'm not concerned about using up my PCIe slot as I will only be running 1 GPU (dual and above GPU will cause issue with Photoshop as per Adobe recommended system setup).

2) Do you think I should go with the following memory setup? 64GB (16GB x 4) (http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/x99-ws-e/CT6910409) or 64GB (2 sets of 8GB x 4) (http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/x99-ws-e/CT6910453)? I'm a bit confuse on this. But correct me if I'm wrong, either selection above will allow my memory to run in Quad right? They are all ECC. I know ECC are slower but my concern here is stability.

3) Also I want to find out about daisy chain my monitors. I will be getting 2 x Dell UltraSharp 27 Monitor (U2715H). What is the benefit of doing daisy chaining my 2 monitors if my GPU already has 2 Display ports which I can use. Been trying to find out more on this but can't really find the answer.

4) Based on the work that I do, do you think going with 980 ti will be a better option or Titan X will give me future support?

5) I think with the PSU I will have enough power to support all my configuration. Or should I be concern about it?

6) Any issue you see with the above choice of configuration?

7) Lastly I guess I should give my reason for going with E5-1660 v3 comparing to going with i7 5690x CPU - Both of this CPU are of same build (like a twins) except that i7 will allow my to OC while xeon will allow me to run ECC ram. I choose to go with ECC ram for stability comparing to OC my CPU.

Thank you in advance for reading my long post and sharing your opinion.

drstrangelove,

In my view, the proposed configuration should be excellent for your use. On Passmark Performance Test, there are 14 systems listed using the E5-1660 v3 (9 are Precision T5810, 2 are HP z440) The highest rated Xeon E5-1660 v3 system:

Rating = 5156
CPU= 16481 (ASRock X99 WS)
2D = 852 (Quadro K4200)
3D = 4139
Memory = 2492
Disk = 4850 (Samsung 850 EVO 500GB)

The highest individual results in each parameter:

CPU= 16481 (ASRock X99 WS)
2D = 868 (Quadro K2200)
3D = 4139 (Quadro K4200)
Memory = 2492 (16GB) (There are 2 43GB systesm scoring 2363 and 1620)
Disk = 26001 (LSI MR9361-8i)

As the E5-1660 v3 is not common, I thought to compare results with the similar Xeon E5-1650 v3. On Passmark there are 102 systems with the following highest results in each parameter:

Rating = 6251
CPU= 16454 (ASUS X99 E-WS)
2D = 1040 (GTX 980)
3D = 10867 (GTX 980)
Memory = 3003 (64GB) (ASUS X99-E WS)
Disk = 22329 (LSI MR9361-8i) (Precision T5810)

These results are indicators of a few trends I've noticed recently:

1. Results from the E5-1650 v3 can be surprisingly close to the E5-1660 v3 and there seems to be a correlation with very high Xeon E5 performance on the ASUS X99 WS series.

2. RAM: the quantity depends a lot on the number of simultaneous programs , file size, and complexity, VM's and so on. My last thee systems have had 16, 24, and now 32GB and in reality I don't think I ever pressed even the 24GB. I do typically run 4 or 5 programs at once: 2D CAD, 3D CAD (max Solidworks), rendering, graphic design (max: Adobe CS) wordprocessing, and a browser and file sizes are moderate. Overall, I think you could prepare for 64GB but start with 32GB and see the results.

2. The GTX 980 is an amazing performer in both 2D and 3D , having the top 5 highest graphics scores on the E5-1650 v3. However, I'd suggest a close look at the current and potential applications, and for maximum flexibility in running workstation drivers- stability, high anti-aliaising and viepworts, my suggestion is to consider a used Quadro K5200 (8GB) which can produce 4D score near the 7000 mark. The thing is, there are Quadro Maxwell 4000 and 5000 very near, and next year the Pascals. If the Quadro M6000 is an indication- 3D scores in the GTX Titan category, the M5000 should be a great one and really the K5200 is a great performer and for a workstation cardto be in GTX 970 league in 3D is a sign that WS cards are finally becoming solid all-rounders- costly, but they can do everything well plus the important features that consumer / gaming cards can't do well or at all compare a GTX Titan to a low end Quadro in Maya). The used K5200 idea is to in effect rent a partly depreciated very high-performing card until the Maxwell and Pascal cards can be evaluated.

3. I've never been aware of a system with 3- PCIe SSD.s, but it seems possible as long as there are enough PCIe slots and lanes. With an X99 though you might look into the performance of M.2- which can be quite amazing. The other aspect is that the disk subsystems using LSI RAID controllers can be amazing- Passmark scores of 40000 and 60000 which no other disk specification can even approach. The problem is while the controller is known, the disks attached and the RAID configurations is unknown, but I suspect there are RAID 50 or 60's off of fast and large- 900GB+ SSD's. I think it would be worthwhile to consider an LSI 9300-series controller.

4. The 1200W PSU should be more than adequate and would be enough to power a dual CPU system with three GPU's.

5. CPU: would stay with the Xeon E5-1600 series which has been, one of the best series ever from a cost / performance view, along with the X5600 (LGA1366). I think overclocking should be off the list for any workstation, especially where there is rendering- stability, stability, stability.

6. I've been using a pair of Dell Ultrasharp U2715H monitors which are run off a Quadro K4200 (4GB) simply connecting to two of the DisplayPort connections. As you know, the U2715H is DisplayPort only. I have to say that the change from 1920 to 2560 is not as impressively wonderful as I anticipated. My previous monitor was an HP 2711x that has no anti-glare coating and I would say that if you have a workspace that can be be fairly dark, consider a glossy screen. When I tried the Quadro K4200 in my secondary Dell Precision t5500, the 3D rtest esults were better running a single 1920 monitor- shifting less pixels.

So, overall, an excellent concept / basis and you might consider a few options. Very good choice of case too.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

1. HP z420 (2015) > Xeon E5-1660 v2 six-core @ 3.7 / 4.0GHz > 32GB DDR3 ECC 1866 RAM > Quadro K4200 (4GB) > Intel 730 480GB (9SSDSC2BP480G4R5) > Western Digital Black WD1003FZEX 1TB> M-Audio 192 sound card > 600W PSU> Logitech z2300 > Linksys AE3000 USB WiFi > 2X Dell Ultrasharp U2715H (2560 X 1440) > Windows 7 Professional 64 >
[ Passmark Rating = 5064 > CPU= 13989 / 2D= 819 / 3D= 4596 / Mem= 2772 / Disk= 4555] [Cinebench R15 > CPU = 1014 OpenGL= 126.59 FPS] 7.8.15

Pending upgrade: HP /LSI 9212-4i PCIe SAS /SATA HBA RAID controller, 2X Seagate Constellation ES.3 1TB (RAID 1)

With Quadro K2200:
[ Passmark Rating = 4918 > CPU= 13941 / 2D= 823 / 3D= 3463 / Mem= 2668 / Disk= 4764

2. Dell Precision T5500 (2011) > Xeon X5680 six -core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz, 24GB DDR3 ECC 1333 > Quadro K2200 (4GB ) > Samsung 840 250GB / WD RE4 Enterprise 1TB > M-Audio 192 sound card > Linksys WMP600N PCI WiFi > 875W PSU > Windows 7 Professional 64> HP 2711x (1920 X 1080)
[ Passmark system rating = 3490 / CPU = 9178 / 2D= 685 / 3D= 3566 / Mem= 1865 / Disk= 2122] [Cinebench 15 > CPU = 772 OpenGL= 99.72 FPS] 7.8.15

with Quadro K4200:
[ Passmark system rating = 3585 / CPU = 9346 / 2D= 683 / 3D= 4708 / Mem= 1850 / Disk= 2202]

With Quadro 4000
[ Passmark system rating = 3339 / CPU = 9347 / 2D= 684 / 3D= 2030 / Mem= 1871 / Disk= 2234]

 

[profoundnoah]

I would recommend, an ASUS board, then go for the titan X for CUDA development and more VRAM. If its for workstations and rendering, the titan x is still somewhat better than the 980 ti.

 

[fport]

drstrangelove says:

This build is entirely for work (ie NO Gaming at all). I do design work (web and mobile design) and uses Photoshop and Illustrator on daily basis (more photoshop than illustrator, programming (HTML, CSS, JavaScript) and occasionally do video using Premiere and AE (very rarely).

Then posits a huge overkill box for lots of money that will trundle for years and years into the future. I can see your desire for instant speed
of having your files and productions snapping back and forth as you call on them. SSD's can do that just fine, especially if you have a fast
CPU and a fast GPU and big RAM.

This is the single fast processor take on a system with thought to balance and cost:

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i7-5960X 3.0GHz 8-Core Processor ($899.99 @ Micro Center)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! Dark Rock Advanced C1 50.5 CFM Fluid Dynamic Bearing CPU Cooler ($153.00 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Asus RAMPAGE V EXTREME EATX LGA2011-3 Motherboard ($512.98 @ Newegg)
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 64GB (8 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($599.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Samsung 850 Pro Series 256GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($134.89 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Samsung 850 Pro Series 256GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($134.89 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Samsung 840 EVO 500GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($235.89 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Black 2TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($245.95 @ Newegg)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Black 2TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($245.95 @ Newegg)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX Titan X 12GB HYBRID Video Card ($1038.76 @ Amazon)
Case: Thermaltake Core V71 ATX Full Tower Case ($99.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: SeaSonic 1050W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($202.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Optical Drive: LG BH16NS40 Blu-Ray/DVD/CD Writer ($81.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $4587.25
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-08-23 11:36 EDT-0400

 

[drstrangelove]

Hi bambiboom,

thank you for your detail explanation. I'm actually divided between 1650 and 1660 and based on your posting, it convince me that it's best for me to go with 1650 (cost half of 1660).

On the GPU, I do see the stability with using WS GPU but in terms of cost, it is much higher. To be honest, I've never use 'gamer' GPU on my previous WS as they all come with Quadro cards but since I'm building my own WS this time I thought of giving a GTX GPU a try and see how it goes based on the following reason:-

1) Based on my research Photoshop (80% of my daily work) do not used too much of GPU power comparing to CPU, RAM and Disk.

2) I'm aware that Nvidia coming out with new Quadro cards soon so I've been thinking it might be worth waiting. This give me the opportunity to try the GTX card (which is 3 times cheaper) and if it work well than I'm saving good money in all future GPU upgrades. I've also be reading people posting on recommended card for photoshop and the conclusion is, Photoshop + Quadro is overkill unless you are working on 3D. I don't know how true this is but I think its worth trying and if it didn't work well, I will make small loses.

Hmm... I know nothing on this LSI RAID controllers thing so I'm going to do some reading on the LSI RAID controllers. Looks interesting and worth exploring it.

My current monitor are dual HP 24" so thought of going to dual 27". I'm not expecting much with 27" unless I'm going for the 4K or 5K monitor.

On memory. Currently I'm using 32gig and thought of going to 64gig for peace of mind. Initially I plan to get 128gig but decided to go with 64gig as I think it would be a waste. Comparing in term of dollars, the 64gig and 32gig pricing is not much different.

Glad to know that my PSU will be fine. On the case, I initially wanted to go with CaseLab case but due to the long waiting period. decided to grab the 750D instead.

Once again thank you for your detail explanation. I really appreciate it.

 

[drstrangelove]

Hi profoundnoah,

I was considering ASUS but I found a forum for Asus x99-WS e owner and got very concern with all the issues those owners are getting. I then found Asrock and it seem like a highly recommended x99 motherboard. One of the reviewer even declare Asrock x99 motherboard is the only x99 motherboard that is rock solid comparing to other x99 motherboard he had tested.

Another little secret - I love blue and my PSU cables I will be getting the custom sleeving for the cables and it will be blue. Asrock X99-WS e motherboard come in blue heatsink . Why I choose Corsair fan against Be Quiet or Noctua fan is because of the colour ring (and they come in blue). Sorry I know it is a bad reason to decide on a motherboard but somehow I'm confident with Asrock.

Thanks for taking your time to reply to my post. Appreciate it.

 

[profoundnoah]

Ah, its no problem. Might I ask what you will be doing with this rig? I'd imagine lots of things with your specs.

 

[bambiboom]

Hi bambiboom,

thank you for your detail explanation. I'm actually divided between 1650 and 1660 and based on your posting, it convince me that it's best for me to go with 1650 (cost half of 1660).

On the GPU, I do see the stability with using WS GPU but in terms of cost, it is much higher. To be honest, I've never use 'gamer' GPU on my previous WS as they all come with Quadro cards but since I'm building my own WS this time I thought of giving a GTX GPU a try and see how it goes based on the following reason:-

1) Based on my research Photoshop (80% of my daily work) do not used too much of GPU power comparing to CPU, RAM and Disk.

2) I'm aware that Nvidia coming out with new Quadro cards soon so I've been thinking it might be worth waiting. This give me the opportunity to try the GTX card (which is 3 times cheaper) and if it work well than I'm saving good money in all future GPU upgrades. I've also be reading people posting on recommended card for photoshop and the conclusion is, Photoshop + Quadro is overkill unless you are working on 3D. I don't know how true this is but I think its worth trying and if it didn't work well, I will make small loses.

Hmm... I know nothing on this LSI RAID controllers thing so I'm going to do some reading on the LSI RAID controllers. Looks interesting and worth exploring it.

My current monitor are dual HP 24" so thought of going to dual 27". I'm not expecting much with 27" unless I'm going for the 4K or 5K monitor.

On memory. Currently I'm using 32gig and thought of going to 64gig for peace of mind. Initially I plan to get 128gig but decided to go with 64gig as I think it would be a waste. Comparing in term of dollars, the 64gig and 32gig pricing is not much different.

Glad to know that my PSU will be fine. On the case, I initially wanted to go with CaseLab case but due to the long waiting period. decided to grab the 750D instead.

Once again thank you for your detail explanation. I really appreciate it.

drstrangelove,

I've looked at a lot of test results for Xeon E5- 1600 and 2600 CPU's and they're always interesting. The E5-1650 though I think might be the best cost / performance Xeon ever and I'm very glad the position has been maintained in the Xeon line.

The v3 versions of E5's are a bit confusing as a 1660 v3 is 8-core but at 3 /3.5 whereas the 1660 v2 is 6-core at 3.7 / 4.0GHz. In real-world systems, the 1660 v2 by virtue of the clock speed produces more cps than the v3 with more cores, making the 1660 v3 appear ostensibly retrograde. On Passmark, the 1660 v2 is rated No. 32 with an average CPU score of 13772, while the 1660 v3 is No. 47 at 12303. By the way, the No 46 CPU is the E5-1650 v2 at 12523 so a v2 1650 is getting through more cycles than a v3 1660. In rendering having the more threads will be significantly faster but the core /cycle rebalance means I'm better off with a v2. I spend more time modeling on the first core, so that speed counts- literally. With the E5-1650 v3, Intel wisely maintained the higher clock speed- though minus 100MHz from the v2- this equals No. 35 at 13437 . However, the greater memory bandwidth and 2133 DDR4 will make the v3 faster in multithreaded use- I think- it might actually be a wash. So, yes, I would second the motion to use the E5-1650 v3.- it seems almost impossible to do better than the E5-1650.

I see your situation re: the GPU a bit better and know a lot of people have very good results in Adobe CS- 2D- with GTX I'd mention I tried a GTX several years ago- GTX 285- but in rendering from 3D models- a quite different situation and I never produced a usable rendering from it.

The world of RAID controllers is slightly high-density and has a steep learning curve in which you have to know a lot just to buy one, never mind setting them up. If you're determined to have the very top disk performance- inevitable. I'd recommend at least looking into a it a bit, just to understand the whole picture, but I approach these with some trepidation and may keep it simple. With the Precision T5500, which has a 3GB/s disk controller, I really need the improvement to 6GB/s, but the Intel 730 480GB SSD in the HP z420 is so fast, I don't fell data deprived in that system and I'm debating whether I want the configuration complication of the LSI 9212.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[drstrangelove]

Hi profoundnoah,

I do web and mobile design so 80% of my time on the computer are working on photoshop with a lot of small size layers. Illustrator is for me to do simple icons or working on client logo. I do use premier and after effect but very rarely. This is totally a work computer with no game install.

Cheers

 

[drstrangelove]

Hi BambiBoom,

Oh man you are right about RAID. I got all confused and decided to go and sleep after reading some of the info . Will read again later tonight but I might skip this kind of setup for this build as my knowledge with all this new technology are limited (last build was like 15 years ago). But again with me, I might just jump into it and stress out later.

Interesting finding on the Xeon. That's one think I notice that newer model may not always be better now. Is this an in thing with the industry now? I don't remember getting that kind of issue 15, 20 years ago (man typing that make me feel old). Or it has always been? Some supposedly low end model may function better than higher end. But I guess it depend on the overall setup and usage to really see the power of them. I don't know.

I totally agree with you when come to 3d those Quadro card is a monster! I have a friend who are into interior design and uses 3d to render his design idea. He swear by Quadro and Quadro alone.

Can't wait to start my build but I'm taking my time with this to do it right (hopefully)

Thanks and cheers

 

[profoundnoah]

May I have your budget? I could make your system a little better if I know what we're working with.

 

[fport]

Fast single multi-core with Titan GPU and big RAM is the bang for the buck.


http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Xeon-E5-1650-v3-vs-Intel-Core-i7-5960X

https://www.pugetsystems.com/blog/2015/07/09/Actual-CPU-Speeds---What-You-See-Is-Not-Always-What-You-Get-675/

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-Quadro-K5200-vs-Nvidia-GTX-Titan/m20811vs2191

 

[bambiboom]

Hi BambiBoom,

Oh man you are right about RAID. I got all confused and decided to go and sleep after reading some of the info . Will read again later tonight but I might skip this kind of setup for this build as my knowledge with all this new technology are limited (last build was like 15 years ago). But again with me, I might just jump into it and stress out later.

Interesting finding on the Xeon. That's one think I notice that newer model may not always be better now. Is this an in thing with the industry now? I don't remember getting that kind of issue 15, 20 years ago (man typing that make me feel old). Or it has always been? Some supposedly low end model may function better than higher end. But I guess it depend on the overall setup and usage to really see the power of them. I don't know.

I totally agree with you when come to 3d those Quadro card is a monster! I have a friend who are into interior design and uses 3d to render his design idea. He swear by Quadro and Quadro alone.

Can't wait to start my build but I'm taking my time with this to do it right (hopefully)

Thanks and cheers

drstrangelove,

RAID: RAIDs are two kinds- RAID 1 for mirroring of disks to protect against data loss when there's a failure and RAID 0 where a pair of drives divides the data into two halves by "striping" two different disks and then the read /write access time is halved. Then there are many combinations of RAIDs 1 and 0 such that the performance and protection is combined, but some combinations use the disks such that the total usable capacity of 5 drives is that of only one of the drives. It makes my head spin too when I read the way these are set up- the RAID controller has to have it's own BIOS to be the be the startup subsystem to initiate the system BIOS and so on. RAID 0 two is extremely complicated to repair which is why there is a RAID configuration with a parity disk to recover it and even then a RAID disk failure can take days to rebuild. I only copied the data- about 50GB- off a RAID 10 server with 2X 73GB and 3X 146GB SAS drives and it took 15 hours.

With SSD's, and especially PCIe SSD's and even moreso M.2, I think the access problem is solved- making RAID 0 a bit redundant unless the most extreme performance is necessary and a good backup configuration to data protection I think is more sensible for most users not on a server / network.

In the end, I think the best situation on an X99 board might be to have an M/2 Drive with an OS / applications partition and and a working files partition- scratch disk, then a good, fast SATA III mech'l drive with a partition containing a system image. As soon as the system is configured with all the programs, and updates, make a pristine system image that can restore everything with a click and keep it in the partition. Then, have a USB 3.5" external enclosure with ventilation and a fan ( I use a StarTech Aluminum enclosure costing about $40) containing a disk the same size as the mech'l drive- and setup a periodic incremental backup plan that backsup the files /foldres that have changed in the specified period. I only run the backup drive when backing up which means they last forever, plus it isolate them from viruses and surges. This is not the cutting edge of high performance and sophistication, but a very good performance with less complexity.

CPU's: That's an unnecessarily complicated situation, nad it's all really nomenclature, the slighlty annoying idea of the version numbers. When the Xeon v2's went to v3, the same designation processor had more cores, but at a slower speed- only the E5-1650 was recognizable as having the same position in the E5 line. The core to clock speed ratio is critical in choosing, so when the E5-1660 v2 6-core ! 3.7 /4.0 became an 8-core @ 3.0 /3.5 it should have become the E5-1780, but the E5-1680 v3 is an 8-core @ 3.2 /3.8 while the v2 was 8-core @ 3.0 /3.9. The E5-1680 v3 to me should have been called the E5-1687 as the cores and speed is about the same as the E5-2687w v2- which I think is perhaps the classic Xeon. The E5-2687w v3 though did the same thing as the 1660 and is 10 core @ 3.1 / 3.5- more cores but lower clock speed and it makes it seem like downgrading in an odd way.

I wrote Intel just before the E5-v3 release that expressed the confusion and suggested a system to rename the CPU's in a logical manner- doing away with all the version numbers so it wouldn't appear that Xeon E5's were remodels having the clock speeds degraded, but were something new. The Haswell E5-1660 v3 would be the E5-1780- reflecting the additional cores, the E5-1650 v2 as Haswell, the E5-1750, the E5-1680 v3- with 10 cores, the E5-1790. I had a polite, personal reply that Intel has their own way of doing things. But the version mess could have been avoided and it appeared to me- and a lot of others that the new v3 version had more cores, but were slower. And, people are paying as much for a used E5-2687w v2 on Ebay as a new v3 with 10 -core but slower configuration. There are gaps in the line which there is not an attractively fast 4, 6, and 8 core CPU in both single and dual CPU's. The E5-2643 situation suffered - the v3 is the same 6-cores but minus 100Mhz. I hope the Skylake Xeons sort this out and they're not "v4"'s.

GPU's: Yes, adding 3D- viewport software, and rendering from 3D moels is another world of demands on the GPU and except for the better anti-aliaisng of workstation cards- I used Solidworks with x128 AA- the desktop cards have an acceptable image image and certainly faster at the same price point.

Sorry to ramble on,...

Yes, computers will be easy and useful some day.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

"Mein Führer, I can walk!"

 

[drstrangelove]

May I have your budget? I could make your system a little better if I know what we're working with.

Hmm... I'm hoping to do one within $8k.

 

[drstrangelove]

Hi BambiBoom,

Interesting, I'm in my office and check out my computer and I have RAID 10 setup on my existing HP WS and I didn't even know that LOL. I guess my IT guy got it setup for me.

Don't worry about rambling, your comment been great help for me. Got me thinking. At least it convince me going with 1650 would be a better investment and hearing from real user is much better than those 'paid' reviews.

Thanks and cheers.

 

[bambiboom]

Hi BambiBoom,

Interesting, I'm in my office and check out my computer and I have RAID 10 setup on my existing HP WS and I didn't even know that LOL. I guess my IT guy got it setup for me.

Don't worry about rambling, your comment been great help for me. Got me thinking. At least it convince me going with 1650 would be a better investment and hearing from real user is much better than those 'paid' reviews.

Thanks and cheers.

drstrangleove,

I'm pleased to help if I can.

I noticed your earlier reply to profoundnoah and if you have a budget of $8,000 a lot of possibilities are opened, quite very quick 8-core and even better, a dual CPU system. Here's a couple of older sort od generic examples:

BambiBoom PixelCannon Cadarendercompilagrapharific iWork TurboSignature Extreme ModelBlast 8000_1.2.15

CPU: Xeon E5-1680 v3 20M Cache, 3.2 /3.8 GHz, 8-core, 135W > $1,723

CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Seidon 120XL RL-S12X-24PK-R1 120mm CPU Liquid Cooling System > $80

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=FAN-RLS12X

Motherboard: SUPERMICRO MBD-X10SRH-CLN4F-O ATX Server Motherboard LGA 2011 > $420

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813182931

Memory: 64GB (4) Samsung DDR4-2133 16GB/2Gx72 ECC/REG CL15 Server Memory > $800 ($200 ea.)

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=D42116G4S

GPU: PNY NVIDIA Quadro K5200 8GB GDDR5 2DVI/2DisplayPorts PCI-Express Video Card > $1.996

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=PNY-K5200

Disk 1: Plextor M6e 512GB PCI Express x2 Solid State Drive (MLC) > $506.

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=PXAG512M6E

Disk 2 and 3: Seagate Constellation ES.3 ST3000NM0023 3TB 7200RPM SAS3/SAS 6.0 GB/s 128MB Enterprise Hard Drive (3.5 inch) ) > $480 ($240 ea.)

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=HD-ST40NM3

Optical Disk: LG Black 16x Blu-Ray BDXL SATA Internal rewriter with 3D Playback, Model BH16NS40 > $100

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827136264

Power Supply: Seasonic PLATINUM-1000 1000W 80Plus Platinum ATX12V/EPS12V Power Supply > $209.

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=PS-PLA1000

Case: LIAN LI PC-D8000 No Power Supply ATX Full Tower Case (Black) > $400
http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=CA-D8000

Fan Controller: NZXT Sentry-2 5.25" Touch Screen Fan Controller > $23.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811992005&cm_re=fan_controller-_-11-992-005-_-Product

Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit English (1-Pack), OEM > $139.

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=MSFQC08289
_______________________________________

TOTAL = $6760.

I think of the E5-1680 v3 as more or less the single CPU version of my favorite Xeon of all time, the E5-2687w v2 (8-core @ 3.4 / 4.0 GHz)

> and using a Supermicro Superworkstation which provides a case, motherboard an dpower supply - you only need to plug i the CPU's, RAM, GPU's, and DRives:

BambiBoom PixelCannon Cadarendergrapharific iWork TurboSignature Extreme ModelBlast 9800 ®©$$™®£™©™3.24.15

Case /Motherboard /Power supply : Supermicro SuperWorkstation SYS-7038A-I Dual LGA2011 / Suprmicro X10DA / 900W Mid-Tower Workstation Barebone System (Black) > $663

http://www.supermicro.com/products/system/tower/7038/SYS-7038A-i.cfm
http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=SY-7038AI

CPU: (2) Intel Xeon Processor E5-2643 v3 :20M Cache, 6-core @ 3.4 / 3.7 Ghz, 20MB, 135W > $3,040 ($1519 ea)

http://ark.intel.com/products/81900
http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=E5-2643V3

Memory: 64GB (8x 8GB) Samsung DDR4-2133 8GB/1Gx72 ECC/REG CL15 Server Memory > $872 ($109ea.)

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=D4218G4S1

GPU: PNY Quadro K4200 VCQK4200-PB 4GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 Workstation Video Card > $789.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133558&cm_re=quadro_k4200-_-14-133-558-_-Product

RAID Controller : LSI MegaRAID SAS 9341-4i (LSI00419) PCI-Express 3.0 x8 Low Profile SATA / SAS High Performance Four-Port 12Gb/s RAID Controller (Single Pack)--Avago Technologies > $175

Disk 1: SAMSUNG 850 PRO MZ-7KE512BW 2.5" 512GB SATA III Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) > $292.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147361&cm_re=samsung_850_512gb-_-20-147-361-_-Product

Disks 2, 3, and 4: Seagate Constellation ES.2 ST33000650SS 3TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SAS 6Gb/s 3.5" Enterprise Internal Hard Drive Bare Drive> $810 ($270 ea.)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178296

Optical Disk: SAMSUNG DVD Burner 24X DVD+R 8X DVD+RW 8X DVD+R DL 24X DVD-R 6X DVD-RW 16X DVD-ROM 48X CD-R 24X CD-RW 48X CD-ROM SATA Model SH-224DB/BEBE - OEM > $18

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827151266

Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit English (1-Pack), OEM > $139.

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=MSFQC08289
_______________________________________

TOTAL = $7098

In both systems notice the number and speed of the CPU's and in general, the very healthy GPU budgets.

Of course, if the monitors are to be included in the $8K, the system need to be a bit less expensive and in that case you might build a dual CPU system, but start with one CPU and 32GB RAM. Later a second CPU can be added when work demands it- perhaps loads of big renderings or video processing:

BambiBoom CalcuCannon Cadasimulicious iWork TurboSignature Extreme ModelBlast 9800 ®©$$™®£™©™_6.27.15

Case /Motherboard /Power supply : Supermicro SuperWorkstation SYS-7038A-I Dual LGA2011 / Suprmicro X10DA / 900W Mid-Tower Workstation Barebone System (Black) > $663

http://www.supermicro.com/products/system/tower/7038/SYS-7038A-i.cfm
http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=SY-7038AI

CPU: Intel Xeon E5-2643 v3 Six-Core Haswell Processor 3.4 / 3.7GHz 9.6GT/s 20MB LGA 2011-v3 CPU, OEM, 135W > $1500

http://ark.intel.com/products/81900
http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=E5-2643V3

Memory: 32GB (4x 8GB) Samsung DDR4-2133 8GB/1Gx72 ECC/REG CL15 Server Memory > $436 ($109ea.)

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=D4218G4S1

GPU: PNY Quadro K4200 VCQK4200-PB 4GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 Workstation Video Card > $789.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133558&cm_re=quadro_k4200-_-14-133-558-_-Product

RAID Controller : LSI MegaRAID SAS 9341-4i (LSI00419) PCI-Express 3.0 x8 Low Profile SATA / SAS High Performance Four-Port 12Gb/s RAID Controller (Single Pack)--Avago Technologies > $175

Disk 1: SAMSUNG 850 PRO MZ-7KE512BW 2.5" 512GB SATA III Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) > $258.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=SAMSUNG+850+PRO+MZ-7KE512BW+&N=-1&isNodeId=1

Disks 2, 3: 2X Western Digital Black 2 TB SATA III 7200 RPM 64 MB Cache Bulk/OEM Desktop Hard Drive, Black, WD2003FZEX > $280 ($140ea) (Files, Backup, System Image)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=WD+Black+2TB&N=-1&isNodeId=1

Optical Disk: SAMSUNG DVD Burner 24X DVD+R 8X DVD+RW 8X DVD+R DL 24X DVD-R 6X DVD-RW 16X DVD-ROM 48X CD-R 24X CD-RW 48X CD-ROM SATA Model SH-224DB/BEBE - OEM > $18

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827151266

Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit English (1-Pack), OEM > $139.

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=MSFQC08289
_______________________________________

TOTAL = $4259

I'm planning on my system doing something like this.

My other more radical idea is to buy a "barebones" Dell Precision T7610:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/DELL-PRECISION-T7610-Barebone-Workstation-Build-your-own-System-/321567999837?hash=item4adef2475d

Buy It Now > $350 or offer

to whicc you add a used E5-2687w v2 (about $2,000)
32GB DDR3 1866 ECC ($500)
used Quadro K5200 or GTX of choice ($1,000)
Various drives ($600)

> Which for about $4,500 gives a system that would have cost at least $12,000 new with an 8-core running most of the time at 4GHz, a 1300W PSU and like the Superworkstation, all you do is plug the parts in. Later when the CPU's drop in price some you can have 16 Cores / 32 threads running at 3.4GHz and run simulations of a small country.

So, a few quick cut and paste concepts.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[drstrangelove]

Wow, that's a detail recommendation bambiboom, one think for sure, photoshop do not work well with multiple CPU and GPU. Some functions in Photoshop will actually become worst with dual or more CPU. The guys from Pugetsystems did a comprehensive testing. It also indicate having more core is good but photoshop max out around 10 core (for some while most around 4 to 5 cores) before there is not real improvement with more core. You can read them here.

http://

So I think going with E5 1650 v3 would be a better value for me allowing me to maximize my investment.

I'm interested to know why you recommend a 7200 RPM HDD for the work file. Would not it be better for me to use SSD or PCIe SSD? Is it for backup reason? or with the LSI raid card, it will perform better than SSD or PCIe?

If it is for backup, I'm not concern about back up as I have a direct backup for all my files to my NAS and also store externally at AWS. In terms of files stored in my computer, they usually do not exceed 300GB as old file get deleted from my computer and stored in the NAS and AWS.

Comparing Samsung to Crucial http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/x99-ws-e/CT6910409, which one would you prefer (ignoring the cost)? I have more confident with Crucial as they have been in memory business for a long time (always use them last time when I'm building my own computer). But maybe I didn't know the background story on why Samsung might be better.

Honestly I'm kind of piss off with buying those branded WS. My current WS is HP Z800 and I was thinking of doing some upgrade just to find out that I can't for so many reasons. Can't upgrade to SSD as I don't have SSD support, can't upgrade to v3 as I can't change the motherboard (the holes to screw the motherboard to the casing is different for HP motherboard that support v3) and what not. So I have enough, not going to buy WS again and again. I guess this is one of the way for them to force you to buy the computer system rather than upgrading!.

Thanks for the detail recommendation.

Cheers for now.

 

[bambiboom]

Wow, that's a detail recommendation bambiboom, one think for sure, photoshop do not work well with multiple CPU and GPU. Some functions in Photoshop will actually become worst with dual or more CPU. The guys from Pugetsystems did a comprehensive testing. It also indicate having more core is good but photoshop max out around 10 core (for some while most around 4 to 5 cores) before there is not real improvement with more core. You can read them here.

http://

So I think going with E5 1650 v3 would be a better value for me allowing me to maximize my investment.

I'm interested to know why you recommend a 7200 RPM HDD for the work file. Would not it be better for me to use SSD or PCIe SSD? Is it for backup reason? or with the LSI raid card, it will perform better than SSD or PCIe?

If it is for backup, I'm not concern about back up as I have a direct backup for all my files to my NAS and also store externally at AWS. In terms of files stored in my computer, they usually do not exceed 300GB as old file get deleted from my computer and stored in the NAS and AWS.

Comparing Samsung to Crucial http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/x99-ws-e/CT6910409, which one would you prefer (ignoring the cost)? I have more confident with Crucial as they have been in memory business for a long time (always use them last time when I'm building my own computer). But maybe I didn't know the background story on why Samsung might be better.

Honestly I'm kind of piss off with buying those branded WS. My current WS is HP Z800 and I was thinking of doing some upgrade just to find out that I can't for so many reasons. Can't upgrade to SSD as I don't have SSD support, can't upgrade to v3 as I can't change the motherboard (the holes to screw the motherboard to the casing is different for HP motherboard that support v3) and what not. So I have enough, not going to buy WS again and again. I guess this is one of the way for them to force you to buy the computer system rather than upgrading!.

Thanks for the detail recommendation.

Cheers for now.

drstrangleove,

I'd not heard that dual CPU's were a disadvantage in Photoshop, but had that there was no advantage to multiple GPU's. The idea for dual CPU's is the massive advantage of core / thread count in CPU-based rendering. The problem with visualization systems today is that so many users - myself included- end up using a variety of 2D and 3D, and rendering software that requires a lot of CPU cores, fast CPU's, and high GPU performance, and if there are Autodesk, Adobe, or Dessualt applications, a lot of CUDA cores, and if there is viewport software, complex ray-tracing, and simulation, double precision, a WS GPU and ECC RAM. In other words, everything has to be high performance and ready for any and all software that is or will be made in the next three years of so. My last desktop system was 2004- Pentium 4- and I've had WS systems ever since.

CPU: Yes, the E5-1650 since the first version has been the magic cost /performance WS CPU. The benchmarks can run higher for an E5-1650 v3 with a 2 core disadvantage than the doubly expensive 8-core E5-1660 v3

Upgrading: Really every system has about the same scope for upgrade. Motherboards have a socket and chipset that limits the CPU and RAM choices and the number of PCIe lanes. That's why I like LGA2011 and LGA2011-3 and Xeon because the CPU's can be up to dual 18-core, up 40 PCIe lanes each and I think there are LGA2011-3 CPU's that support 768(b of RAM, whereas LGA1150 is all done at 4-cores and 28 PCIe lanes.

Drives: Of course, it's possible- and faster to use SSD's for everything, it's only that mech'l drives are so much less expensive for storage. I use an 480GB SSD (Intel 730) with two partitions, one of 200GB for the OS and applications and the other for the working files. -Very fast. then there's a 1TB mech'l drive with three partitions: A storage of every file I've ever had / Media files / Program files. Then I have a USB external drive arranged the same as the mech'l in the system plus a partition that stores a system image fro quick restore.As you have a networked NAS fro storage, you could well run SSD's for the operational disks

But yes, if they were cheaper, I'd use a fast 500GB PCIe SSD for OS/applications and a 900GB SSD for storage. What amazes me in some ways, that all the work files I've ever made in 22 years of computer use is just under 60GB. There's another 350GB of live music recording, but that's on a dedicated- non-work system.

RAM: I haven't followed the differences in RAM makers closely enough and that's probably because I've never had any RAM fail and I've bought a lot of used RAM. It may be that's because I always use ECC that is made to run in very hot servers for months and years continuously. The performance of ECC is slightly reduced due tot eh parity check, and the latency of DDR4 is strangelyh igher than DDR3 but the memory bandwidth is larger and the clock speed higher. I see memory results on Passmark score relatively higher fro DDR4 for the same quantity- perhaps 20%. Back to brands: As I've had in effect excellent results with all of them, it's difficult to judge. My suggestions is to check the RAM tested for the by the maker of the specific motherboard you buy. If I had to choose, I have a sense that the Samsung build quality stands out- there's something that seems more solid and finished, but I can't back up that impression with facts.

Proprietary WS: I've had quite a few systems in 22 years- 12- I think and while every one was upgraded more than once, only two were assembled from parts. I've had contact with numerous architectural, engineering, graphic design, and industrial companies and only very few has ever used an assembled system and none of them did so twice. I object in some ways to the cost of proprietary WS, so I buy them used or better "new other" in Ebahhhh terms. The last two primary systems I bought were HP z420's that were redundant purchases- previously owned but never used. They worked out of the box and I upgraded as I bought parts so it was never out of use more than an hour or so, they've been perfectly reliable, and could be sold for more than the amount spent- systems that will end up costing bout $100/yr - $8/mo. to have. Careful shopping of that kind of system can save significant money and as importantly time- consider the time to research, order, assemble, configure, and trouble shoot a system.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[bsod1]

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Xeon E5-1650 V3 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($565.99 @ SuperBiiz)
CPU Cooler: Corsair H110i GTX 104.7 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler ($139.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Asus X99-E WS SSI CEB LGA2011-3 Motherboard ($486.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: Crucial 64GB (4 x 16GB) Registered DDR4-2133 Memory ($563.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO 500GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($177.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Samsung 850 Pro Series 1TB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($455.27 @ Amazon)
Storage: Western Digital BLACK SERIES 4TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($199.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: PNY Quadro K5200 8GB Video Card ($1799.00 @ Amazon)
Case: Corsair 900D ATX Full Tower Case ($337.36 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: SeaSonic 1050W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($209.98 @ NCIX US)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8 Pro OEM (64-bit) ($159.98 @ OutletPC)
Monitor: Dell U2715H 60Hz 27.0" Monitor ($478.99 @ Adorama)
Monitor: Dell U2715H 60Hz 27.0" Monitor ($478.99 @ Adorama)
Total: $6054.51
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-08-25 11:54 EDT-0400

 

[drstrangelove]

drstrangleove,

I'd not heard that dual CPU's were a disadvantage in Photoshop, but had that there was no advantage to multiple GPU's. The idea for dual CPU's is the massive advantage of core / thread count in CPU-based rendering. The problem with visualization systems today is that so many users - myself included- end up using a variety of 2D and 3D, and rendering software that requires a lot of CPU cores, fast CPU's, and high GPU performance, and if there are Autodesk, Adobe, or Dessualt applications, a lot of CUDA cores, and if there is viewport software, complex ray-tracing, and simulation, double precision, a WS GPU and ECC RAM. In other words, everything has to be high performance and ready for any and all software that is or will be made in the next three years of so. My last desktop system was 2004- Pentium 4- and I've had WS systems ever since.

CPU: Yes, the E5-1650 since the first version has been the magic cost /performance WS CPU. The benchmarks can run higher for an E5-1650 v3 with a 2 core disadvantage than the doubly expensive 8-core E5-1660 v3

Upgrading: Really every system has about the same scope for upgrade. Motherboards have a socket and chipset that limits the CPU and RAM choices and the number of PCIe lanes. That's why I like LGA2011 and LGA2011-3 and Xeon because the CPU's can be up to dual 18-core, up 40 PCIe lanes each and I think there are LGA2011-3 CPU's that support 768(b of RAM, whereas LGA1150 is all done at 4-cores and 28 PCIe lanes.

Drives: Of course, it's possible- and faster to use SSD's for everything, it's only that mech'l drives are so much less expensive for storage. I use an 480GB SSD (Intel 730) with two partitions, one of 200GB for the OS and applications and the other for the working files. -Very fast. then there's a 1TB mech'l drive with three partitions: A storage of every file I've ever had / Media files / Program files. Then I have a USB external drive arranged the same as the mech'l in the system plus a partition that stores a system image fro quick restore.As you have a networked NAS fro storage, you could well run SSD's for the operational disks

But yes, if they were cheaper, I'd use a fast 500GB PCIe SSD for OS/applications and a 900GB SSD for storage. What amazes me in some ways, that all the work files I've ever made in 22 years of computer use is just under 60GB. There's another 350GB of live music recording, but that's on a dedicated- non-work system.

RAM: I haven't followed the differences in RAM makers closely enough and that's probably because I've never had any RAM fail and I've bought a lot of used RAM. It may be that's because I always use ECC that is made to run in very hot servers for months and years continuously. The performance of ECC is slightly reduced due tot eh parity check, and the latency of DDR4 is strangelyh igher than DDR3 but the memory bandwidth is larger and the clock speed higher. I see memory results on Passmark score relatively higher fro DDR4 for the same quantity- perhaps 20%. Back to brands: As I've had in effect excellent results with all of them, it's difficult to judge. My suggestions is to check the RAM tested for the by the maker of the specific motherboard you buy. If I had to choose, I have a sense that the Samsung build quality stands out- there's something that seems more solid and finished, but I can't back up that impression with facts.

Proprietary WS: I've had quite a few systems in 22 years- 12- I think and while every one was upgraded more than once, only two were assembled from parts. I've had contact with numerous architectural, engineering, graphic design, and industrial companies and only very few has ever used an assembled system and none of them did so twice. I object in some ways to the cost of proprietary WS, so I buy them used or better "new other" in Ebahhhh terms. The last two primary systems I bought were HP z420's that were redundant purchases- previously owned but never used. They worked out of the box and I upgraded as I bought parts so it was never out of use more than an hour or so, they've been perfectly reliable, and could be sold for more than the amount spent- systems that will end up costing bout $100/yr - $8/mo. to have. Careful shopping of that kind of system can save significant money and as importantly time- consider the time to research, order, assemble, configure, and trouble shoot a system.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

Thanks for the info mate. I have to agree those branded WS are reliable. To be honest having use them for many many years, I've never once had problem with any of the parts. I don't upgrade my computer often, usually my WS can last me for about 3 to 4 years before I get a new one. My z800 is coming to 4 years I think, so I thought why not upgrade rather than buying a new z800 series again, thats when I got all the surprises from HP technical team. Anyway, you have the z series so you know it is very proprietary except for memory, GPU and CPU. But with the current motherboard I cannot upgrade to xeon v3 or support DDR4 and HP new motherboard cannot fit into my z800.

I love the construction of z serious, no wire all just plug in and the way they handle the airflow is marvelous. Well, it was designed by BMW so no surprises on how they handle airflow in the case man. I guess I'm just being an 'angry old kid' wanting to rebel from those branded WS Hopefully it won't bite me back.

 

[drstrangelove]

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Xeon E5-1650 V3 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($565.99 @ SuperBiiz)
CPU Cooler: Corsair H110i GTX 104.7 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler ($139.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: Asus X99-E WS SSI CEB LGA2011-3 Motherboard ($486.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: Crucial 64GB (4 x 16GB) Registered DDR4-2133 Memory ($563.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO 500GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive ($177.99 @ Amazon)
Storage: Samsung 850 Pro Series 1TB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($455.27 @ Amazon)
Storage: Western Digital BLACK SERIES 4TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($199.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: PNY Quadro K5200 8GB Video Card ($1799.00 @ Amazon)
Case: Corsair 900D ATX Full Tower Case ($337.36 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: SeaSonic 1050W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply ($209.98 @ NCIX US)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 8 Pro OEM (64-bit) ($159.98 @ OutletPC)
Monitor: Dell U2715H 60Hz 27.0" Monitor ($478.99 @ Adorama)
Monitor: Dell U2715H 60Hz 27.0" Monitor ($478.99 @ Adorama)
Total: $6054.51
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-08-25 11:54 EDT-0400

Thanks for the recommendation bsod1, Again I'm getting ASUS recommendation. Is it really reliable? Do you have experience with them? Sorry it is not that I'm doubting your recommendation. But I got concern after reading a Asus X99-WS e owners forum (which has over 150 pages) having all kind of issues with it, not forgetting the horrible customer service where user RMA their board just to get back the same board with a message no issue with the board and etc.

Cheers

 

[profoundnoah]

Asus is a company I can personally stand by. They have supplied my family for over 9 years now and Ive never had a defect with their boards. Im not too sure about the x-99 boards, but I think Asus has corrected the issues