New computer build

[Anonymous]

I am looking to build a workstation and I'm having a hard time sifting through all the info on the web when trying to decide between a few things.  Here is what I'm looking at.  I would appreciate any thoughts/advice.  I would especially like to hear from people who have experience with these components and using them with Civil 3D.

Processor:

Xeon or Core i7?

If core i7, is it worth going with the LGA1366 over the 1166.  One site I read said that the little performance gained from the 1366 chip isn't worth the increase in price for the X58 mobos.

Graphics Card:

Pretty much everything I read points to using a Quadro for CAD applications.  What I'm wondering is how expensive of a card should I get?  Right now I've narrowed it down between a single FX 1800 or dual FX 580's.

The things that bug me in Civil3D with my current computer is slow regen time with corridors.  I would like to utilize the auto re-build feature on both surfaces and corridors but I usually turn it off (even on smaller type projects) because it is slow.  I also use imagery a lot and that can cause big time issues when zooming and switching between layouts.  Occasionally I like to view my model in 3D orbit mode and it would be so nice if I could rotate the view without much lag.

I am for sure going to go with Windows 7 Pro 64-bit and almost positive I will utilize a solid state drive for the OS and programs.  The amount of ram I'm looking at will either be 8GB or 12GB.

Your help is much appreciated!

[Sinc]

About the only possible way to speed up corridor rebuilds is to get the fastest CPU and bus speeds you can afford.  Also, get as much RAM as possible.

I recently did a test between a GeForce 9800 GT and Quadro FX 580, and could discern absolutely no difference, except that the Quadro FX 580 cost almost twice as much.

-- Sinc
http://www.ejsurveying.com
http://www.quuxsoft.com

[Anonymous]

That's interesting and good to know about the video cards.  Anyone overclock an i7?  I hear people are successfully overclocking them up to 4 GHz (without major overheating and glitches) and since Civil 3D doesn't use multiple cores, its is best to go with the highest processor speed possible.  For example, it would be best to go with the Core i7-860 @ 2.8GHz vs. a Core i7-920 @ 2.66 GHz.

[Sinc]

Yes, the i7-920 is a monster overclocker.  You can go that route if you wish.

But something to keep in mind is that the newer Intel chips also have turbo mode, which spikes the performance for a single core for apps that can't take advantage of multiple cores.  For example, a Core i7-860 will turbo up to 3.46GHz, and you don't have to get into the world of overclocking your company computers.

However, it isn't enough to simply look at CPU speed.  Another important factor is bus speed.  In this area, the Core i7-930 stomps the Core i7-860.

That's about all I can tell you at this point.  The processor picture has gotten muddy enough over the last year that it's hard to give a solid recommendation on the best price/performance.  Just a year and a half ago, it was very easy to say "Get the Core i7-920."  But now, it's a lot trickier.  I think we're once again in need of some Civil 3D benchmark testing on all these new chips.

The nice thing is that, no matter what you choose, you can get a real monster CAD machine in the $1500 range.  A few years ago, we used to budget more like $3500, so the hardware is definitely a lot more affordable these days.  Too bad the software prices haven't done the same thing...  😉

[Anonymous]

Hmmm, I just spent a bunch of time putting together what I thought was a monster CAD machine and it is 3k.  I'm sure it has some extras that you might not be including in your $1500 number and maybe your assuming that a persons current LCD's will be used for a new system.  Anyways, thought I would include my spreadsheet in case you see something that provokes some more discussion or seems wildly expensive and unnecessary.

I appreciate your input.  It is very helpful.

[Matt.Anderson]

I don't think you'll go wrong with that.  That is pretty close to what I had someone else build for me.  I went with a RAID configuration for my data drive and a larger SSD. 

[Sinc]

Well, the CPU cooler is probably unnecessary, unless you plan on playing with overclocking;  the FX1800 is probably overkill, at least for Civil 3D, and probably makes little difference when compared to a $130 GeForce;  if you have a server, the second hard drive is probably unnecessary;  you're getting 12GB of RAM, and I was thinking of the cost of a system with 6GB RAM;  and I wasn't including Office Small Business or the monitor stuff in my price.  You can also drop the price a bit by going with a different CPU/Mobo, and still get pretty good performance (if maybe not as good as you'll get with that i7-930).

Subtract all that out, and you're getting down into the price range I quoted.  However, your machine is a notch or two better than the machine I had in mind for $1500.  I was thinking of the bare minimum, though; you built a machine that's better, but you chose some good ways to improve from the bare minimum.

I suppose the main thing I'd do differently is get a larger SSD for the primary, or put two of them in a RAID.  The new 64-bit Windows really seem to eat up primary hard drive.  You can disable a bunch of features to minimize this, but I prefer to have a larger primary drive and leave those features enabled.  They can come in handy and significantly improve the "Windows experience", but only if they're enabled.

I generally do not store data on my primary drive, and after 1-1/2 years, my Vista x64 system is using 280GB of its primary drive.  I think the days of 80 GB primary drives are nearing their end.