Community
Civil 3D Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Civil 3D Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular AutoCAD Civil 3D topics.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Upgrading PC, Civil 3D Requirments

15 REPLIES 15
Reply
Message 1 of 16
mrz999
2479 Views, 15 Replies

Upgrading PC, Civil 3D Requirments

Getting a new PC.  Any recomendations on PC requirments going from 32 to 64 bit? other than Cads general reguirments.  Looking for a machine that is lighting fast.  Video card, Grafics cards, Memory RAM anything?  thanks

15 REPLIES 15
Message 2 of 16
MarySeufert
in reply to: mrz999

I would at the least double the minimum requirements for RAM from Autodesk's minimum requirements to run Civil3D. A solid state hard drive is a great upgrade to make your system wicked fast if you can afford it. Look for a video card with a certified driver, to save you from minor graphics issues.

 

A lot depends on your price point. And if you are buying a finished box or assembling it yourself.

 

Look at posters signatures to get a feel for what people are running. I don't have any problems with my current setup. Granted I don't work on huge developments anymore thanks to the current economy.

 

~ Mary

EXPERT ELITE MEMBER
Message 3 of 16
Sinc
in reply to: mrz999

Some general points:

 

  • Xeons are a waste of money for C3D.
  • FireGL/Quadros are a waste of money for C3D.
  • Don't go with Intel HD Graphics...  Get a real graphics card (nVidia GeForce 500-series works VERY WELL, at half the price/performance as a Quadro).
  • Getting multiple cores or CPUs doesn't help...  You want at least a dual-core, but more likely, anything you're looking at these days will be a quad-core.  That's OK.  But don't go for multiple CPUs - they're wasted on C3D.  Also, quad-core is plenty...  You're probably spending excessively when going to higher numbers of cores, although sometimes those work better, but the benefit comes from higher CPU clock speeds, not number of cores.

 

Most important thing is your CPU...  I still like the i7-2600 (go with the i7-2600K if you want to overclock)...  Great performance for a cheap price.  The i5-2500 is close behind.  The new i7-3960X is the absolute king of performance right now, but not sure it's worth the price, compared to the i7-2600.  There are a few other neat options if you're looking at a laptop, such as the i7-2860QM I got in my latest laptop (works as well as my i7-2600 desktop), or the even-better i7-2960XM (although this latter option will decrease your battery life significantly over an i7-2860QM, with not a whole lot of difference in perceived performance).

 

If you get a laptop, make SURE it can do 1920x1080 resolution.  It can be a 15" screen, as long as you have decent eyesight, but make sure it can do that 1920x1080 resolution.

 

Try to get 16GB of RAM.  8GB minimum (or 12GB if you go with an older tri-channel i7 like the i7-960 or i7-980).  Any more is probably a waste of money, unless you are working on some REALLY REALLY BIG models (far larger than the average C3D user).

 

SSD for primary hard drive can make a huge difference.  And the prices are becoming more-reasonable...  Just don't get a cheap SSD.  Shoot for something like an Intel....  SSDs are DEFINITELY not all created equally, and the Intels seem to be leading the pack.  And I highly recommend SSDs for laptops - they improve battery life, as well as performance in C3D.  And they're QUIET.  And can help you avoid the need for a laptop cooler (laptop CPUs are notorious for cutting down to slower clock speeds if they get too hot, which can require you to have a laptop cooling pad in order to avoid constant CPU slow-downs -- SSDs run cooler than mechanical hard drives, which helps keep your whole laptop cooler).

 

And of course, Windows7 x64.  Don't even consider anything else as far as OS.

Sinc
Message 4 of 16
neilyj666
in reply to: mrz999

My setup seems to work just fine even with a xeon processor

neilyj (No connection with Autodesk other than using the products in the real world)
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.

EESignature


AEC Collection 2024 UKIE (mainly Civil 3D UKIE and IW)
Win 11 Pro x64, 1Tb Primary SSD, 1Tb Secondary SSD
64Gb RAM Intel(R) Xeon(R) W-11855M CPU @ 3.2GHz
NVIDIA RTX A5000 16Gb, Dual 27" Monitor, Dell Inspiron 7760
Message 5 of 16
sboon
in reply to: neilyj666

If you want a no compromises kick-**** laptop then take a look at one of these.

 

 

http://gdgt.com/eurocom/panther/4-0/specs/

Steve
Expert Elite Alumnus
Message 6 of 16
Sinc
in reply to: neilyj666


@neilyj666 wrote:
My setup seems to work just fine even with a xeon processor

Yes, Xeons work, they're just more expensive while providing no additional value for C3D.

Sinc
Message 7 of 16
neilyj666
in reply to: mrz999

Good clarification - for what it's worth a xeon probably wouldn't have been my first choice

neilyj (No connection with Autodesk other than using the products in the real world)
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.

EESignature


AEC Collection 2024 UKIE (mainly Civil 3D UKIE and IW)
Win 11 Pro x64, 1Tb Primary SSD, 1Tb Secondary SSD
64Gb RAM Intel(R) Xeon(R) W-11855M CPU @ 3.2GHz
NVIDIA RTX A5000 16Gb, Dual 27" Monitor, Dell Inspiron 7760
Message 8 of 16
Sinc
in reply to: neilyj666

The Xeons also typically lag behind the i7/i5 in terms of performance (for C3D, anyway).  What Intel does is introduce the latest technology in i7/i5 (and even i3).  These chips tend to preceed the Xeons in CPU speed and performance.  Then in their next round of development, they put that tech into Xeons.  The Xeons are more-complicated, supporting more RAM than the i7/i5, and multiple CPUs, which are not supported for the i7/i5.

 

However, most i7/i5 chips these days (especially the 2nd Gen) support up to 32GB of RAM, and more than 16GB RAM yields very low results for most users of C3D.  There are a FEW who might notice a difference between 16GB and 32GB, but not many.  (At least as of C3D 2012.)  So there's not a lot of value there.  And of course, since C3D doesn't support multiple cores for the most part, let alone multiple CPUs, the mult-CPU functionality yields you nothing.

 

And at any one time, the latest Xeon chip tends to lag in CPU speed behind the fastest i7 chip.  Yet the i7 is typically less-expensive.  And since CPU speed is the most-important thing in C3D performance, and C3D can only use a single core for almost all operations, you gain by shooting for the fastest i7.  Especially considering the MMU (Memory Management Unit) improvements in the 2nd-Gen i7/i5/i3 series, which a large part of why a 2nd-Gen i7 running at 3GHz will significantly outperform a 1st-Gen i7 running at 3GHz.  "Turbo Boost" helps, too...  That lets your CPU ramp-up the CPU speed of the core that's running C3D, since the other cores aren't being used.

 

There are other applications where Xeon chips (especially two Xeon chips in a multi-processor system) can be an advantage.  But C3D is not one of them.

Sinc
Message 9 of 16
neilyj666
in reply to: Sinc

Thanks for this - interesting

neilyj (No connection with Autodesk other than using the products in the real world)
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.

EESignature


AEC Collection 2024 UKIE (mainly Civil 3D UKIE and IW)
Win 11 Pro x64, 1Tb Primary SSD, 1Tb Secondary SSD
64Gb RAM Intel(R) Xeon(R) W-11855M CPU @ 3.2GHz
NVIDIA RTX A5000 16Gb, Dual 27" Monitor, Dell Inspiron 7760
Message 10 of 16
arturopolanco
in reply to: Sinc

"FireGL/Quadros are a waste of money for C3D"

 

mmmm... Recommend your graphics card NVIDIA Geforce, and believe that quality is less than one NVIDIA Quadro.

 

link: http://www.nvidia.com/page/nforce5_intel.html

 

I understand that the NVIDIA Geforce are engineered for video games, and NVIDIA Quadro for CAD

 

link: http://www.nvidia.com/object/bfp_autocad_2011.html


Arturo Polanco
AEC Solutions Specialist - Civil Infrastructure

Web | Moodle | Youtube | Instagram | Twitter | Facebook | MeWe | VK

Message 11 of 16
Cadguru42
in reply to: arturopolanco

I use a Quadro 2000, but that's not really for C3Ds use. I use 3ds Max and Photoshop CS5.5 and those programs actually use the Quadro drivers.  Unless you're doing a lot of real time 3d viewing of your civil projects, most of the time your viewport(s) are in the 2d wireframe mode, which the Quadros don't do any better than a typical game card.

 

I have a Crucial M4 256GB SSD (Do not go with any Sandforce SSDs as they have problems right now.) as my main drive and a 600 GB 10k RPM HDD that has all my drawings.  Windows 7 64-bit is a must have. I only have 6GB of RAM and that seems to be perfectly fine for all that I do.  Even working in 3ds Max with a scene with over a million polygons I never see the virtual memory get above 5GB and I rarely get into projects that large.  If I was getting a new machine, I'd go with 8GB of RAM, but I'm fine with the 6GB I have now.  

 

As Sinc said, Xeons just for C3D aren't worth the money. I used to use dual Xeons, but the clock speed on them is usually slower than the i7s and that is the driving factor for C3D.  Xeons have a larger cache usually, but that still doesn't help with C3D much not to mention the cost of Xeons.

C3D 2022-2024
Windows 10 Pro
32GB RAM
Message 12 of 16
arturopolanco
in reply to: Cadguru42

understand


Arturo Polanco
AEC Solutions Specialist - Civil Infrastructure

Web | Moodle | Youtube | Instagram | Twitter | Facebook | MeWe | VK

Message 13 of 16
Sinc
in reply to: Cadguru42

And just to be clear, you can't simply compare clock speeds, which is why I've been confused for years why Autodesk's minimum specs simply say "3GHz or faster" while simultaneously recommending an Intel P4.

 

Each generation of chips has made significant advancements in technology.  This often goes on a "tick-tock" sort of schedule...  One year is a major jump in many respects, the next is refinements on that process, then a major jump, then refinements....  As an example, Intel came out with the original Core stuff, then made major improvements in the Core2.  Then they jumped to the Core i7/i5/i3, and made major improvements in the 2nd Gen Core i7/i5/3 (aka "Sandy Bridge").  We should now be hitting another "tick"...

 

Comparing CPU speed between chips from different generations makes no sense.  Each "tick", CPU speeds slow down (as does power usage), yet performance goes up.  Each "tock", they improve the sundry other elements that prevent the new CPU speed from being utilized to the fullest extent.  So a 3.0 GHz P4 would be a "tick".  After the P4, they went to the P4 Extreme (tock), then the Core (tick), then the Core2 (tock), then the i7/i5/i3 (tick), then the 2nd Gen i7/i5/i3 (tock)....  (OK, I know this is a simplification, and CPU experts will argue details, but hopefully this is a simple guideline that is understandable to people who aren't CPU experts...  I freely admit that I'm doing this from memory, and I didn't really research all the details, but I hope I got the gist right.)

 

That's why you can't compare CPU speed amongst the different chips.  A 3.0 GHz P4 would be considered "pathetic" for C3D performance these days.  (Here's one of the exceptions...  The P4 Extreme mostly ramped-up CPU speed, rather than make significant other improvements, so a P4 Extreme would probably have higher clock speeds.)  Then a 3.0 GHz Core would perform much better (although as another exception, I'm not sure they ever hit that high a clock speed with the original Core systems).  Then a 3.0GHz Core2 will perform better than anything yet mentioned, by a signficant margin.  A 3.0GHz Corei7 is way better.  And a 3.0GHz 2nd-Gen Corei7 is significantly better than that, largely due to the improved memory management.  By contrast, 2.8GHz Core 2 can deliver "OK" performance, despite the fact that it's below Autodesk's 3.0GHz recommended minimum requirements, and will deliver FAR BETTER performance than the "pathetic" 3.0 GHz P4.

 

All of these statements are qualified by the fact that C3D is a single-threaded app (for the most part).  Should it ever start using multiple cores to a significant extent, all this goes out the window, and it becomes a new ball game.

Sinc
Message 14 of 16
Sinc
in reply to: Cadguru42


@engrtech wrote:

I use a Quadro 2000, but that's not really for C3Ds use. I use 3ds Max and Photoshop CS5.5 and those programs actually use the Quadro drivers.  Unless you're doing a lot of real time 3d viewing of your civil projects, most of the time your viewport(s) are in the 2d wireframe mode, which the Quadros don't do any better than a typical game card.




Exactly.  That's why Quadros are such a waste of money for most C3D users.  The cost is SO much more for similar 2D performance, and at least in my experience, most C3D users only work in 2D-Wireframe mode, only occassionally using the 3D view modes to check details (such as accuracy of topos).

 

If you are using software other than C3D, such as 3DS Max, you may have different concerns.  But if all you do is use C3D, you can get faster 2D-Wireframe performance with a much-cheaper GeForce 500-series than with a more-expensive Quadro.  And you still get decent 3D performance, unless you are working with REALLY big models.

Sinc
Message 15 of 16
wedzisi
in reply to: Sinc

What about ASUS G74SX Gaming Notebook for C3d

Intel®  Core™ i7  2630QM  Processor

Intel® HM65 Express Chipset

DDR3 1333 MHz SDRAM, 4 x SO-DIMM socket 16 G SDRAM

NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 560M with 3GB GDDR5 VRAM

2.5" SATA 750GB / 7200rpm 

2.5" SATA 160GB  SSD

Message 16 of 16
rl_jackson
in reply to: Cadguru42

That should work fine, however there are some new Intel chips being released near the end of the week (supposedly) and you may want to wait on you purchase as this may cause the prices to drop on 2nd gen. i7 cores.


Rick Jackson
Survey CAD Technician VI

Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.

EESignature

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Rail Community


Autodesk Design & Make Report