Workstation question

[CTravert]

Hi all, 

So coming this July my company finally gave me the green light to update my workstation (an old Dell T3500).

I have been given a rough $4K budget and I have been looking at the new Dell T3600.

Here are the specs I was looking to get some feedback on:

Xeon E-1660 (6 core @ 3.3Ghz)

Win 7 Ultimate 64 bit (with XP compatibilty)

8GB EEC Ram @1333MHz

Nvidia Quadro K4000 (3GB ram, 2 DP+ 1DVI-I)

256GB SSD for OS

500GB HDD for data (Already have in the T3500)

According to Dell, that sums up to a $3487.50 bill.

This computer is expected to last me for about 4 years (according to my boss).

What do you guys think? should I add anything to meet the 4 year life expectancy?

(Note that I am not allowed to build my own computer, it has to be from a mfg  )

Any suggestions are welcome.

Clement

[dgorsman]

If this is to last 4+ years, I think more RAM will be appropriate - programs, data, and projects will only get bigger and more complex.  12 - 16 GB range would be better.

If they insist on a manufacturer, consider smaller company like Xi (they may have a corporate account with Dell, so you may be out of luck).  You'll get more bang for your buck with a non-Xeon based computer.  Check for others hardware to see what they are running.

[CTravert]

I don't think they have a corporate account with them as we have multiple workstation from both HP and Dell. We also have a few VAIO and Lenovo Laptops.

I just tried that company you gave me and it came out to $3533.58 so it's about the same.

Only con is the case they provide you is a bit more on the Gamer side than the engineer side. 

I'd like to keep it classy in the office 

Thanks for the Ram input as well.

[LT.Rusty]

---

@CTravert wrote:

I don't think they have a corporate account with them as we have multiple workstation from both HP and Dell. We also have a few VAIO and Lenovo Laptops.

I just tried that company you gave me and it came out to $3533.58 so it's about the same.

Only con is the case they provide you is a bit more on the Gamer side than the engineer side. 

I'd like to keep it classy in the office 

Thanks for the Ram input as well.

---

Gaming hardware provides a lot more bang for the buck when you're working with Direct3D stuff.  Workstation hardware generally gets you better OpenGL performance.

Inventor uses Direct3D.

We've been trying to get our company to buy us gaming machines for the last couple hardware upgrade cycles.  They'd rather buy Xeons and bottom-end Quadros.  *facepalm*

[sam_m · Accepted solution]

Inventor is primarily a single-threaded application, but there's been some progress towards using multiple cores over the last few releases...

so, cpu - basically choose the fastest you can afford from this list:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

graphics card - Inventor is DirectX, as just mentioned, so you're arguably wasting money on a workstation card.  Just choose the fastest you can afford from:

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

256gb ssd - go for decent quality ssd like the samsung pro

500gb hd for data - "already in present pc" - how old is present pc?  and you want it to last another 4 years with valuable data?  personally would get a new and, depending on need for data-security, i'd possibly raid together (2 x 500 7200rpm in Raid1 or even 3 drives for Raid5).

[swhite]

More RAM, we want more, more. Shove as much RAM in there as you can possibly get or you will be sorry down the road. The more RAM you have, the less often your computer needs to access the hard drive and therefore the faster your computer will run. Even if you have an SSD drive, the bridge between the HD and RAM is still a bottleneck. Get as much RAM as possible, even if that means downgrading something else a tiny bit.i got 16GB and still wish I could add more, but am at this computers limit.

http://www.ehow.com/about_5340577_importance-ram-computer-speed.html

[mrattray]

I also suggest maximizing the amount of RAM. You can never have too much, and it's really cheap these days. I have 32GB in my workstation now and my mother board can support 64GB if I ever need to upgrade.

[CTravert]

Alright, 

I'm going to push for 32Gb of RAM then. It's putting me slightly over budget ($250) but after all, they are expecting this unit to last for at least 4 years so this way I shouldn't run into any issues for a while.

Thanks guys. 

Kinda wish I could select all of your answers as the most appropriate one.

[brian.cranston]

Think about going to E5-1650 (3.2/3.8GHz), it'll save you about $500.  Then put that into more ram.  I expected to see DDR3-1600 ram, but the difference would be minimal, probably less than 3% overall speed difference.

You might consider a new Ivy Bridge XEON like the E3-1270V2 or higher.  It will about 10% faster than the Sandy Bridge E3's.  It's only a quad core, but as was mentioned, most of Inventor is single threaded anyway.

One more idea- try the Dell Outlet.  They have some pretty sweet deals there and you can get the full warranty.  I've bought a couple computers there, one just last week.

-Brian Cranston

[Accudyne1]

We have had good luck with Boxx Technologies, might be worth checking them out also.

[kwilson_design]

+1 to Boxx Tech. My specs are in my sig and I couldn't be happier. Granted I could get a lot more CUDA and GPU performance for the price I spent but our IT is still reluctant to use *gasp* gaming cards on a workstation. I know I know .

Anyways, I put my Boxx machine thru the ringer daily and it dishes everything out. I started with 16 GB RAM but went up to 32 GB shortly after. Now I'm at 64 GB only because it's needed for very large high resolution offline rendering since I use the CPU. You don't have to go as extreme as I did on my rig to get a great Boxx machine. They make very nice affordable high-performance machines and their customer support is great. 

Everyone else in my department uses some HP Z-line workstation. I started on a Z400, Z600, Z800 and now on the Boxx. I wished they all used Boxx machines as the performance is great which in turn boosts productivity. Give them a look 😉

http://www.boxxtech.com/

[swhite]

Yah, never understood that. The only real difference between a gaming card and a graphics card is about 400 to 800 bucks. They are the exact same cards, the only difference is the drivers for the graphic workstation have been certified to work with graphics programs. So if your program glitches you can rule out that as a possible cause. Frankly, I would rather save the 800 bucks and buy more RAM or an SSD drive. I use a gaming card at home and a certified card at work and notice no difference whatsoever, except the computer I got at home runs faster as its better.

[sam_m]

years ago they used to be 99% the same card, to the extend you could flash the bios of the gaming card and turn it into a workstation one...  These days, i think there's more difference to them, but I think I've read it's mainly to do with adding greater compatability to the OpenGL standards (and thus why they're still recommended for OpenGL cad software).  As we don't require this extra funtionality it's moot and thus the only thing to consider is whether the workstation drivers and support is deemed worth it.

Tbh, i find the entire debate a little funny.  People quote that the workstation cards are more accurate and thus if you're designing a bridge then you might want that accuracy to make sure there isn't a problem.  But... erm... As soon as you move over to the idw environment to detail anything, spec'ing tolerances, etc.  then it's all cpu-bound calculations.  Having a gaming card isn't going to suddenly change an object 100mm long into 98mm long and display different dimensions in the idw so I really can't understand this arguement.

It is interesting to note that it seems like the people with workstation cards seem to be posting of problems just as frequently (if not more so) recently 😉

[dgorsman]

Amusing, indeed.  That particular "accuracy" problem doesn't occur in any technical design software.  The problems start to occur in visualization software, where you might end up with the bridge penetrating the abutments.  But they don't make the bridge from those pretty pictures.

[CTravert]

Well I won't be doing any advanced redering such as 3DS or any of that. What I do do, is production drawings from 3D to 2D for our guys in the shop so I do need it to look as clear as possible. I don't want my solids to bleed into each other on paper.

So as long as the only bad thing is a bit of "stepping" on the edge of my models while rotating them in the software, I thinnk I can live with this. I am not asking to get true to life pictures but more processing power to handle as many components as possible in my assemblies.

We design Hydraulic power units and assemblies start to get rather heavy when showing every bolted connections and fittings. My ultimate goal is to be able to do a 100% complete assembly showing every little details and be able to make exploded views out of it. It's rather simple but yet very demanding when you start to go pass 500 components.

So far looks like I'm going to stick with the i7-4770 since it's the best single threading CPU on the market.

Then memory will be maxed out at 32GB according the the mobo I picked. 

Then one of these GTX Titan with 6GB of ram. 

I don't think I will run into too many issues at this point compared to my old T3500 on XP 32bit with 3GB of ram.

I got to admit, it is a bit sketchy to go from a full fledge workstation to a "gaming grade" hardware workstation.

[swhite]

"We design Hydraulic power units and assemblies start to get rather heavy when showing every bolted connections and fittings."

Exactly why we no longer use bolted connections, because every time a change is made in the assembly, it checks every single constraint for bolted connections even if not associated with the changed part. We have made our own bolt assemblies to place in assemblies which solves this problem. Just make bolt assemblies of the largest grip (one washer included - attached) and place those in your assemblies. This bolt assembly will then fit any grip within the provided range and maintain proper thread extension past the nut. You will notice an immediate change in how your assemblies act, they will go from sluggish to normal operation again.

[dgorsman]

The computer gaming industry has changed significantly since the early years.  Its no longer somebody holed up in their parents basement, basking the glow of a CRT as they plink away at some barrels in Doom.  In some places there are teams of professional gamers who do nothing *but* play, and are paid well engough to do so (rediculous IMHO but *shrug*).  Its whats driven the home PC market to spank the average workstation computer in virtually every aspect except for a few niche areas which the average designer doesn't get into.  Thankfully we're the beneficiaries of such development.

[swhite]

Agreed, if your not doing high end graphic output or as I used to do Graphic Design where the colors on screen had to be calibrated to match the printed output, the extra money for a dedicated card is not really worth it IMO. It is money better spent getting a better card with more GDDR memory and a faster clock speed. For what you might spend on an average driver certified GPU you could by a normal GPU at the top end of the line. All you are paying is for someone to have tested these cards with drivers specifically made for some programs. And I am willing to bet that the average user would not be able to tell the difference between two side by side screen images, or even working with both. It doesn't mean its faster, it is just they guarantee it wont have little glitches you might otherwise run across once in a blue moon. Program crash? You just know it isn't your graphic card driver is all causing it, and frankly, since I am not in product testing, knowing or not knowing that for certain doesn't help me a bit anyways. And yes, this computer has a dedicated card, but I still have the same issues everyone else has that doesn't have one, I just know my drivers are't the cause, and therefore likely not thiers either 🙂

[WORKSTATIONresearch]

Has anyone considered a dual boot option?  If so and have successfully implemented it can you provide pros/cons in working in a dual boot environment?

Most companies, particularly larger engineering organizations, haven't gravitated to Windows 8.  This is a small product development company and communicating to others at this point in time requires Windows 7.  But so far implementing a dual boot environment hasn't been possible.  The install of Windows 7 on a Windows 8 system begins, but there doesn't seem to be a way to install the drivers when requested, even though they are virtually the same in our case.  Incidentally nearly all prebuilt PCs come with Windows 8.  It does appear from this topic that custom built engineering workstations with Windows 7 are still available from vendors targeting that market.  But that could change pretty soon, possibly with the release of Windows 8.1.

Any comments will be greatly appreciated.

[CTravert]

I picked W7 Ultimate. I am personally not ready to switch to 8 as it still has an oddball feeling to it.

So after all of this talk, my boss decided that I would get a laptop instead of a workstation. The reason behind this is because, here in sunny South Florida, we get a few hurricanes and chances are we get stranded at home. So here is the new specs of the laptop I just got quoted. It packs less punch than a workstation but it should still be plenty for our use. I'm a bit sad I couldn't stick to the 4770 i7 CPU because this one seemed to have the best single threading specs as mentioned before. Let me know what you think.