New AutoCAD / Solidworks Workstation

[jboddez]

Hello,

I spoke with Autodesk's tech support group about recommended hardware for our new workstation, and they suggested I ask the question on the forums since they only hear about things that "don't work".  Here is an outline of the current system I am running:

Dell T5500 workstation

Windows 7 64-bit

(2) Xeon E5506 @ 2.13 GHz

12GB RAM

nVidia Quadro FX4800 1.5 GB

160GB 10k RPM hard drive

(2) 21" monitors @ 1920 x 1080 and 1920 x 1200

I have been experiencing slowdowns and crashes on this system with the large model I am working on, which is about 22MB in size, has roughly 130 layers and consists of a full 3D pipe model (using the Trimble Pipedesigner 3D add-on), concrete structure, 3D components for supplied process equipment, and several design layouts from the consultant (frozen most of the time).  We are only 1/3 of the way into this project and would like to grow the model through the remainder of the timeframe to include HVAC duct, electrical components, heating lines, water lines, etc.

Since we are hiring a draftsman soon, we need to get a new system and might as well get a decent upgrade to our current setup.  I have built several computers in the past for personal use, but management here has asked me to confirm with other groups before ordering to make sure I am getting the appropriate hardware (don't want to buy a lemon).  Here is what I have planned:

Customised Dell T3600 (as suggested by our IT group)

Windows 7-64-bit

Xeon E5-1620 (four-core 3.6 GHz)

32GB of 1600MHz ECC ram

Quadro K5000 4GB

256GB SSD

(2) 30" monitors at 2560 x 1600 (possibly a 3rd using one of the 21" monitors above)

Should this system be sufficient for the model that I am working on?  The Autodesk tech support mentinoed that there has been some stability issues with the nVidia K-series cards, do you have this experience or is it because they only hear about when things go wrong and this is a common card to use?  Based on benchmark reviews I was leaning towards this card as opposed to an ATI FirePro W8000/W9000, would you suggest otherwise?  Would a K4000 be plenty for what I am doing (assuming it doesn't have the same stability issues)?

Also, due to someone leaving the company I may be working on some Solidworks drafting down the road for some miscellaneous metal components.  I haven't looked into this software's requirements as this is fresh news to me.  I presume the new system above should be able to handle Solidworks no problem based on my past experience with Pro/E.  I believe the work will include smaller but more detailed models compared to the AutoCAD work I am doing now.

Any and all feedback is appreciated.  I will post this on the AUGI and Cadalyst forums for feedback there as well.

[nestly2]

Your old system is pretty well equipped, but I didn't see you mention which version (or flavor) of AutoCAD you are or will be using, and I don't know about the Trimble addon.

As a fellow pipe designer, I would recommend not letting your 3D models get too much larger, and perhaps even trim them down by dividing them up into systems or areas and xref'ing the drawings together.  I don't know if they make an AutoCAD workstation that's going to handle a single 60-80MB 3D model without some performance issues unless you always remain in 2D Wireframe.

I can't really speak to the video cards as the most recent I have is a Quadro4000, but truthfully, I'm not that impressed with it compared to my older FirePro V5800.  I do know the K-series is supposed to be much better, but I don't know anything about the stability issues you mentioned.

Good to see that you're doing you homework, I'll be interested in seeing your results.

[braudpat]

Hello from France

<<< Your next PC (maybe) >>>

Customised Dell T3600 (as suggested by our IT group)

Windows 7-64-bit

Xeon E5-1620 (four-core 3.6 GHz)

32GB of 1600MHz ECC Ram

Quadro K5000 4GB

256GB SSD

The Xeon E5 1620 is a 4 cores 8 threads with 10 Mb cache L3 running at 3.6 Ghz (Turbo Speed at 3.8 Ghz)

Xeon E5 is a fast processeur with a lot of cache, so for me, it's a very good choice !

Using a NVidia Quadro series K is "normal today" but you will not see a "big" difference between series 4000 and series 5000 ...

K4000 = 3 Gb GDDR5 - Interface 192 bits - Bandwidth 134 Gbps -  768 cores

K5000 = 4 Gb GDDR5 - Interface 256 bits - Bandwidth 173 Gbps - 1536 cores

So for me, a Quadro K4000 is quite enough ... for Autodesk Software : ACAD, REVIT, INVENTOR, etc

Please check with Solidworks if K4000 is OK ?

Bye, Pat

[jboddez]

Thanks for the feedback!

The Autodesk site says the K4000 is a certified card 'with issues', namely that it does not do smooth diaplay or texture compression.  I don't need either of these since I only do 2D layouts from the model, no rendering to speak of, but still the fact that they claim this series of cards has issues on their driver website and from their technical support is a bit concerning.  Reviews I have read say that the FirePro cards perform similarly, but that their drivers are not as stable as the Quadro's.  This is why some real-world feedback is great to help me choose the right card.

I would like to explore breaking the model into different files to help reduce file size and hopefully speed things up.  I asked on another forum if you can edit the Xref objects from the overall model or not, maybe some people can comment on that here as well.  It would be difficult to break the model into different areas since parts of the piping and systems run throughout the whole building.  If I break the model into different systems instead of areas, this should have the safe effect of speeding things up I presume?

What is the difference going to be in performance when I have several smaller files Xref'd into one overall model, mostly frozen, as opposed to one large file with the same components frozen?  Would you recommend working on the smaller files independently and then only reviewing the overall model to check for collisions/issues after the fact?  I have only been using AutoCAD for a few months, so just looking for some general guidelines on the best way to make these large models easier to handle since it can not be all avaialble in one file at the same time.

[dgorsman]

Think I'll put my remaining comments here, seeing as you've got the link over at AUGI.

Video cards will only affect render abilities if you are using certain types of render engines (and not those in AutoCAD).  AutoCAD wouldn't be my first or even second choice for rendering images or animation.  For your purposes, the only work you see from a video card is pushing objects to the display.  Better card, faster regeneration.

Piping is rarely single piece except in the pipeline world, and that is usually not modeled due to its simplicity.  Facility piping allows for all sorts of break points in pipe runs, whether they are welds or mating flanges.  Those work very well for breaking runs out by area, guided by a key plan.  And, as you noted, you can also break things out by system.  We have clients who do things both ways.  The key is to keep the models a respectable size and only load in the XREFs you need for what you are working on.  For example if you are running pipe inside a compressor building you would load in the compressor, any associated connecting pipe models, but not the model for the flare stack and rack at the other end of the plant.  Once you've got the piping connected up to the compressor and you know where the reserved space is, you could unload the equipment model as well.

Working on piping "live" through XREF is never a good idea.  While its nice to have everything for a plant showing, it degrades performance and ultimately most of it has little to no impact on specific, detailed design on any given area.

[jboddez]

My new workstation just showed up last week and I thought I should give an update on the specs I decided on and first impressions:

Customized Dell T3600

Windows 7 Pro

i7-4770 3.4 GHz quad core

32GB DDR3 ram

Quadro K4000

256GB Samsung SSD

39" Seiki LED television at 4K resolution

21" monitor @ 1200 x 1920 (from previous setup, in portrait mode)

So far I am quite happy with this setup.  The speed has definitely improved.  Hard to comment on stability at this point since I have only used it for a couple days, and most of that was importing settings and setting things up.  I broke up my model into a few different files and x-ref'd them together as suggested.  This helped speed things up even on the previous system, so it will become a regular practice for me.

The biggest difference is running a 4K TV.  There is significantly more space to work on the model.  All of the controls and info bars are neatly around the perimeter of the screen, and now I don't even need to hide tabs like the properties or layer info to keep my modelspace viewport quite large.  There is enough detail to see what is happening even when zoomed out to see the whole project I am working on.  You still need to zoom in to work on things for more detail and ease of selecting the right object, but that is expected.

The only drawback of this monitor so far is its limitation to run at 30 Hz at 4K.  For what I am doing (drafting) this is hardly even noticable.  For gaming or similar high speed action, it would be more of a concern.  The picture is very bright and vibrant, no complaints on the colors (not that they are critical for what I am doing, just need to see one is different from the other).  I just had to turn the sharpness down to 0 and adjust the brightness and contrast down a bit to make it similar to my other monitor.  I am sitting roughly 20-24" away from the screen and it is easily usable without neck or eye strain (yet).  And to answer the obvious question, the cost is less than most 30" computer monitors out there, just do a search for it (not sure if I am supposed to post links to external sources).  I would highly recommend a similar setup to others who are considering a new workstation or upgrading an existing one.  Just make sure your video card supports it, part of the reason I went with the K4000 as the lowest Quadro card that would do 4K.

One "Windows" issue with the high resolution is using other standard monitors at the same time.  As far as I know, only Windows 8.1 is able to set DPI differently on multiples monitors.  I have my text set at 125% to be usable on the 4K screen, but this makes folders on the second monitor quite big and blocky.  A minor setback that will hopefully be addressed with a future update to Windows 7.