Some of my own thoughts on the subject.
P4s have a lot of instruction sets that just aren't being used yet. So you
won't really see a huge increase in speed between top PIII's and a P4. I
don't expect this will last, however. In fact, XP may already address it,
I'm not sure. My choice would be the P4's. Even if you're software isn't
using them to their fullest yet, the life cycle of a processor tends to be a
little longer than the life cycle of the applications, and lately, the OS.
If you go down one step from the fastest process, or maybe two steps down,
youcan get a dual processor machine for hte same price as a singel process
at the very highest speed. Dual processors do not double the actual speed
of a computer. But they do offer a significant performance boost. Someone
will probably point out that ACAD offers limited support - at best - for
dividing itself between multiple processors. This is true, but you very few
people ever have only one process going on at once. If nothing else, your
OS is busilly monitoring itself for interrupts, checking the TCP/IP stack to
see if anythign new has arricved, listenning tot he keyboard, etc. I would
definitely go for the second processor, even if it means dropping down a
noth or two in speed.
Why do you need 40 GB at workstations? Please don't tell me that you have
all 16 drafters storing theirdrawings locally. I'd switch over to smaller,
high performance drives. Personally, I use a 15,000 RPM SCSI drive. There
is a thread up above somewhere about various raid options. I'd also take a
long hard look at that. In any event, store all you data somewhere cetral,
back it up, etc, and aim your local drives for maxed out speed, you never
want to have to wait for your machine to find some DLL that hadn't loaded,
it could add whole seconds to your day.
There is another great thread in this NG somewhere on dual monitors. I do
not actually have a dual monitor setup myself, but I wiulll before the week
is out. And from everyrthing I've read, those who do have one will never
ever go back to just one monitor. And it makes sense - the screen area of 2
17" monitors is greater than a single 21" monitor. Or one 15" and one 19"
may be the way to go.
"jason martin" wrote in message
news:4F301CCDC3ACD781A7304736CA342CDF@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Tim -
> See the thread titled "The Ideal CAD Computer" started by James Dixon on
10/16/2001.
> Some of them are a stretch, but there are also some very good
recommendations.
>
> jason martin
> frankfurt-short-bruza
>
> "Tim Lear" wrote in message
news:F4FFD5E9C49BAC983D2BF18485544CC7@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > We are a small Architectural Firm, We have 16 drafters, We are planning
to
> > purchase new computers
> >
> > Autocad's Recommended pc is a P2,
> >
> >
> > What should the recommended PC be. Here is what I am planning
> >
> > P4 1.0 to 1.5 GHZ
> > 512 M RAM
> > 32 or 64 M Video card
> > 40G hd
> >
> > 5 of these pc's will be doing 3d graphics.
> >
> > Any comments would be great.
> >
> > Tim Lear
> >
> >
>
>
![Autodesk Design & Make Report](https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/1350519iCB55845EBFC43016/image-size/large?v=v2&px=999" "Autodesk Design & Make Report")