Opinions on new workstation specs...

[Anonymous]

I know this is a common topic lately but here goes...

Workload: Inv 6, designing and fully detailing check fixtures and small
assemblies, less than 200 parts.

Current system: P3 600mhz, 512 MB RAM, Ge-force 2 MX, Win2000 (OK in part
mode, slow in IDW mode)

Proposed system: (just under $3k)
Dual AMD MP2600
Tyan Tiger MPS motherboard
1.5 Gig DDR ECC PC2100 266MHZ Ram (qty. 3 512MB)
Quadro 4 900 XGL
80 GB 7200 RPM HD (Western Digital Caviar 7200 Special Edition, 8MB cache)
CD burner
Win XP Pro
Office XP
using existing Sony 21" Trinitron monitor

I would like the new workstation to be efficient for 2.5-3 years using new
versions of Inventor, with similar workload. I figure to upgrade the RAM to
2 GB if needed, but not much else in that time.

Thanks for any tips,
Brad

[Anonymous]

Decent machine, certainly not top of the line but a nice machine. You would probably be fine with 512 mb of ram based on the description of your assemblies though.

HOWEVER.... it is unrealistic to expect a machine to last 30-36 months. I would suggest you buy an $1800 machine and use it for 18 months rather than a $3000 machine and use it for 30 months. In all seriousness I would go with a single processor, less ram and a lower end video card if it meant I could replace the machine in 18 months instead of 30. I make this statement out of experience....

Rich Thomas

[jmartzig]

i agree with rich's comments above also. although now i've been running this slow 933M p3 xeon w/768 ram & quadro2 pro for over 2 years now, and it seams at this point it would be easier for me to get a new job with a company that actually updates there hardware, seeing that i've been basically begging for 2gig's of ram for the past 6 mos. "it's not in the budget" (read in a really whining voice) - but having me struggle and crash and wait isn't a money muncher. real smart thinking, huh? yeah - i'm bitter if you can't tell. -Joe

[MechMan_]

I'll agree with Rich. With assemblies around 200 parts your spec'd system is a bit strong. While IDW's do make use of dual CPU's with your size assemblies I think a single, faster CPU will do you better in both performance and price. A bit over-the-top on RAM as well.



IMO, Single CPU, 1GB PC2700 RAM, and a lesser Quadro card (if prices differ enough) will save you some money to put towards another upgrade in 1-1.5 yrs.



MechMan



I'll disagree with Rich on the RAM. I'd stick with 1GB.

[MechMan_]

I've seen that upper management attitude all too many times. They see money flying out the window when a new, faster, more efficient computer rolls through the door but they don't see the money getting flushed down the toilet when their employees lose countless hours of work due to unstable (read in "old OS install") systems and when employees have to wait for their tools (computer) to catch up with them.



You have my sympathy Joe.



MechMan

[Anonymous]

the only thing i would do different is go with dual xeon's.

they are already faster and you would have a better chance of being able to
swap them out for faster cpu's when they are avalable.

you could cut the ram to a gig and the card to a 700 or 750.



Matt


"Bradley Bruns" wrote in message
news:EC739E226AD406FA594598F47F4C9AC8@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I know this is a common topic lately but here goes...
>
> Workload: Inv 6, designing and fully detailing check fixtures and small
> assemblies, less than 200 parts.
>
> Current system: P3 600mhz, 512 MB RAM, Ge-force 2 MX, Win2000 (OK in part
> mode, slow in IDW mode)
>
> Proposed system: (just under $3k)
> Dual AMD MP2600
> Tyan Tiger MPS motherboard
> 1.5 Gig DDR ECC PC2100 266MHZ Ram (qty. 3 512MB)
> Quadro 4 900 XGL
> 80 GB 7200 RPM HD (Western Digital Caviar 7200 Special Edition, 8MB cache)
> CD burner
> Win XP Pro
> Office XP
> using existing Sony 21" Trinitron monitor
>
> I would like the new workstation to be efficient for 2.5-3 years using new
> versions of Inventor, with similar workload. I figure to upgrade the RAM
to
> 2 GB if needed, but not much else in that time.
>
> Thanks for any tips,
> Brad
>
>

[MechMan_]

"the only thing i would do different is go with dual xeon's"



For 200 part assembiles? That is like hunting with a bazooka. Gets the job done but you're not left with much (money) when you're done.



MechMan

[Anonymous]

Of course we didn't ask what his parts are like! I can make a single part that will drop dual xeons to their knees LOL

[Anonymous]

not considering he's alreday going dual mp's and
will be spending alot of time making idw's.

a xeon 2.4ghz / 533 fsb is cheaper than the 2.6mp
anyways, so money isnt an issue.

Matt

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"MechMan" <mechman> wrote in message
href="news:f14ff96.5@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f14ff96.5@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

"the
only thing i would do different is go with dual xeon's"

For 200 part assembiles? That is like hunting with a bazooka. Gets the job
done but you're not left with much (money) when you're done.

MechMan

[Anonymous]

The duals were for faster IDW performance, better
stability, and better ability to run excel, word, IE, Photoshop, Acad, etc at
the same time as Inventor.  Not all of those at once, but maybe 3 or 4
simultaneously. I need to prepare quotes, make presentations, sell,
model, detail, and get the prints done ASAP so I can go out and sell more
stuff (we are a small machine shop)  I've been approved for
$3k, but if I can spend less and still get an efficient system, everybody
will be happier.

-Brad

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"Matt Stocking" <
href="mailto:mstocking@remove-nospam.xtech-outside.com">mstocking@remove-nospam.xtech-outside.com>
wrote in message
href="news:08D9B6F151EC88F0C91D845849A7E774@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:08D9B6F151EC88F0C91D845849A......

not considering he's alreday going dual mp's and
will be spending alot of time making idw's.

a xeon 2.4ghz / 533 fsb is cheaper than the 2.6mp
anyways, so money isnt an issue.

Matt

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"MechMan" <mechman> wrote in message
href="news:f14ff96.5@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f14ff96.5@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

"the
only thing i would do different is go with dual xeon's"

For 200 part assembiles? That is like hunting with a bazooka. Gets the
job done but you're not left with much (money) when you're done.

MechMan

[MechMan_]

My apologies Matt. I had not realized Xeons were so cheap nowadays.

MechMan

[Anonymous]

another thing to think about. most new motherboards have sata controllers on
them.
western digital is about to relese a 36gig 10k rpm sata drive thats under
$200.

thats going to be the best thing until scsi you can get for drives in terms
of speed anyways.


Matt

[mengland]

Since I have been butting my heads with my accounting department a bit lately over this issue I'll put in my 2 cents. Although I think the receptionist here now has a faster processor than I do.


We have a couple of 6 year old dual Xeon machines here (450 Mhz) and the accounting department is giving us hell about getting new computers. I do most of the Inventor work on a 1 1/2 year old machine a 1.3Ghz P4 unit with 768MB ram.

I wouldn't go for dual processors again. They add a lot to the price and don't add any performance in most applications. The motherboards fo dual processors cost considerably more than single chip mobo's.

If you are going to spend the money on dual processors I would go Intel as there top chip leads AMG's for performance. Value wise the AMG's are great but value and dual processor don't go together well. A single 3.8 P4 should get you better performance and cost less.

I'd go with 1x 1.0 G ram chip to save more free slots for the future. 1 G is the "prefered" set up for Inventor per Autodesk whay go more as it is a lot of ram and the prices are always dropping.

Although I think we will be using cd players for a good while longer you might be able to get a cd burner/dvd player for a pittance more than a cd burner.

80 GB is pretty big if you save most of your parts into a network library it won't get much use. At any rate putting in a smaller drive will cut a good chunk off the price and reduce seek times a hair. You can always easily add a second hard drive later.

On video cards I have had real good performance out of Geforce 3's. Not that a Quaddro 900 xgl isn't sweet, its just a grand more than a Geforce 4.

This computer had a Geforce 2 MX when I got it and was a dog. Upgrading to a Geforce 3 was a huge improvement.

Be sure to remind the accounting guys what a great buy the 21' monitor was and how you'll never need to upgrade it so they can see that you really are fiscally accountable.

[Anonymous]

no problem. wasnt long ago they were 3 times the
price of everything else.

Matt

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"MechMan" <mechman> wrote in message
href="news:f14ff96.10@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f14ff96.10@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

My
apologies Matt. I had not realized Xeons were so cheap
nowadays.

MechMan

[MechMan_]

My memory is outdated. Time to upgrade...or at least apply a service patch. 😉

MechMan

[Anonymous]

well, first a quadro 900xgl 'only' costs ~$500,
p4's stop at 3.08ghz, its amd not amg, and 40 gig drives only cost $30 less than
80gigers.  🙂

he also stated that hes going to alot of
multi-tasking, so thats going to require 2 cpu's wether intel or amd.

you could try the new chips with HT, but i wouldnt
count on them.

Matt

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"mengland" <
href="mailto:mikeengland@hamiltonassoc.com">mikeengland@hamiltonassoc.com>
wrote in message
href="news:f14ff96.13@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f14ff96.13@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

Since
I have been butting my heads with my accounting department a bit lately over
this issue I'll put in my 2 cents. Although I think the receptionist here now
has a faster processor than I do.

We have a couple of 6 year old dual Xeon machines here (450 Mhz) and the
accounting department is giving us hell about getting new computers. I do most
of the Inventor work on a 1 1/2 year old machine a 1.3Ghz P4 unit with 768MB
ram.

I wouldn't go for dual processors again. They add a lot to the price and
don't add any performance in most applications. The motherboards fo dual
processors cost considerably more than single chip mobo's.

If you are going to spend the money on dual processors I would go Intel as
there top chip leads AMG's for performance. Value wise the AMG's are great but
value and dual processor don't go together well. A single 3.8 P4 should get
you better performance and cost less.

I'd go with 1x 1.0 G ram chip to save more free slots for the future. 1 G
is the "prefered" set up for Inventor per Autodesk whay go more as it is a lot
of ram and the prices are always dropping.

Although I think we will be using cd players for a good while longer you
might be able to get a cd burner/dvd player for a pittance more than a cd
burner.

80 GB is pretty big if you save most of your parts into a network library
it won't get much use. At any rate putting in a smaller drive will cut a good
chunk off the price and reduce seek times a hair. You can always easily add a
second hard drive later.

On video cards I have had real good performance out of Geforce 3's. Not
that a Quaddro 900 xgl isn't sweet, its just a grand more than a Geforce 4.

This computer had a Geforce 2 MX when I got it and was a dog. Upgrading to
a Geforce 3 was a huge improvement.

Be sure to remind the accounting guys what a great buy the 21' monitor was
and how you'll never need to upgrade it so they can see that you really are
fiscally accountable.

[MechMan_]

Thanks Matt. I wasn't up to tackling that post. B-)



I won't even get into the "1 G is the 'prefered' set up for Inventor per Autodesk" statement.



MechMan

[Anonymous]

i meant that in fun but wasnt sure if i was going
to be taken the wrong way 🙂

Matt

style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

"MechMan" <mechman> wrote in message
href="news:f14ff96.15@WebX.maYIadrTaRb">news:f14ff96.15@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

Thanks
Matt. I wasn't up to tackling that post. B-)

I won't even get into the "1 G is the 'prefered' set up for Inventor per
Autodesk" statement.

MechMan

[Anonymous]

H actually has some good points. And Intel has 3.6 GHz chips they just don't release them because AMD hasn't been competetive enough. They get the most money from their fastest chip, and the lowest yield. If the current process will turn out 3.6 GHz but you can get the 3.6 GHz price out of the higher yield 3.06 GHz because AMD is lagging then the better for you.

Kent and I always disagree on this but for pure modeling performance the fastest single processor you can buy is the way to go. If you are running multiple apps you might consider keeping your old workstation and having two, if that isn't an option then perhaps multiple processors is necessary. As for video Geforce is a remarkable bargain but come on w/o hw clipping planes etc. they do pale compared to a professional class card. I would only recommend geforce to someone on a very strict budget.

Regarding his references to pricing he might not be from the US and his prices may vary significantly from what we are used to seeing.

Rich Thomas

[Anonymous]

I been keeping quiet on this one, but you drug me into it . 8^)

I will agree that it really depends on how much multitasking you are going to be doing.
And multitasking doesn't just mean having multiple apps open, it means that more than one
has to be doing something for duals to be of much value.

I guess all I know is that I much prefer working on my AMD1.4 dual vs working on my Intel
1.5 single. I put that 1.4 together back when I think there was only 2 AMD chips
faster than the 1.4 for ~ $ 1,700. I am starting to get the itch to upgrade it more
because that is the way I am than a real need, but when the time comes I will probably
just buy two new faster processors and call it good so I think I can easily get 36 months
out of it for just over 2K. Besides if I do that for the price of a couple of
motherboards and probably a little memory I can make two other people in the family
happy.

--
Kent
Member of the Autodesk Discussion Forum Moderator Program


"rllthomas" wrote in message news:f14ff96.17@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...

> Kent and I always disagree on this