topic Work Station Build in Inventor Forum

Work Station Build

KaynePellegrino — Fri, 16 May 2025 19:22:05 GMT

I'm trying to piece together a fairly high end workstation and need help choosing the CPU.

I know that Inventor runs better the faster the single core speed is. But I also use programs like Blender and Unreal which benefit from the higher multi-core speeds. I'm curious if it would be better to get something like an AMD Threadripper Pro 5995wx even though it has a lower single core speed (Lower performance in Inventor), but better performance for Blender and Unreal. As opposed to something like an Intel i9 14900KS, which should make Inventor perform better.

I currently use an i9 12900K CPU and sometime have slow response times when changing model states or switching around a lot of user parameters at once just on one single part. I'm scared to even see what it would be with a multi part assembly that has the same kind of user parameters for all the components.

If an AMD Threadripper PRO 5995wx and the i9 14900KS are about the same in performance, BUT are better than my current CPU, it seems like it would be better to switch to the AMD CPU. I'm just not sure how either would perform. So I'm hoping someone on here can help me out.

Betreff: Work Station Build

Logos_Atum — Tue, 20 May 2025 07:11:58 GMT

Hi,

can you share the remainder of your system specs and the renderer you plan to use? Maybe you´re dealing with a bottleneck somewhere else. I like the idea of the KS but I fail to see the use in the Threadripper unless you need a lot of PCIE lanes, which makes sense given you use GPU based accelerators for hardware rendering.

The KS probably delivers the best Inventor performance. Given you´re looking to save a bit of money, I´d look for a slightly lower tier CPU. The excess in clockspeed is just a marginal gain eventually if you compare prices. Also the new Intel and AMD line up might perform even better in Inventor.

Kind regards

Daniel

Betreff: Work Station Build

KaynePellegrino — Tue, 20 May 2025 13:02:37 GMT

I planned on using an RTX 6000 ADA GPU regardless of which CPU I choose. Then at the moment I don't need more than 64gb RAM (would prefer DDR5), and no more than a 2TB SSD (SAMSUNG 9100 PRO).

If I use the Intel i9-14900KS, then I would use the ASUS ProArt Z790-Creator Motherboard

If I use the AMD PRO 7995wx, then I would use the ASUS Pro WS WRX90E-SAGE SE EEB Motherboard

All of these parts would be from NewEgg. I don't trust amazon with PC parts, nor do I know any other pc parts websites.

But when it comes to my current main work, it's like 98% Inventor (Product Design/Development), 2% Blender (Product Beautification), 0% Unreal (Just testing stuff so far).

I'm in an organization phase where I'm converting everything from AutoCAD 2D to Inventor 3D and I need inventor to be as fast as possible because I'm utilizing several user parameters, rules, and forms across tens and hundreds of model states, depending on the ipt file. My company makes doors, there's like 3 main components; Rails, stiles, and skins. I want it where each part in the door assembly is a master part with several model states instead of having separate part files for each version of the 3 components (would mean several hundred part files). I want one master part file for each of the 3 components. That way in the door assembly I can have only 3 parts and just change the representation to make a new door, instead of having hundreds of part files and suppressing some parts and un-suppressing others to make a different door for each model state. But, when I click on a form that involves rules it sometimes takes upwards of 10-15 seconds to load the parameters every time. For some model states I need to change multiple things. Same with when I change the door assembly model states, it takes an unfavorable amount of time.

However, once the organization phase is complete I'll be moving to more product beautification and animation type things with Blender [Cycles] and possibly Unreal.

When it comes to Blender and Unreal, I have it run through with GPU more than the CPU for rendering and such. So, does it even matter to have the Threadripper over the i9 if the GPU is the same?

With the 'new Intel and AMD line up', which are you referring to? I'm unfortunately not very versed in the world of computers and have spent a week and a half watching videos about all the components and have come to the conclusion RTX 6000 ADA is probably my best GPU Choice and the two CPU's mentioned are my fork in the road, but I still feel like I'm overthinking it and could be completely wrong.

Re: Work Station Build

hollypapp65 — Tue, 20 May 2025 15:49:34 GMT

What's your current computer spec? CPU, RAM, Video card.

Does your company use Vault?

GPU won't make IV runs any faster.

CPU would be minimal.

Look into optimizing the form and rules might give you a few seconds.

I'm using ModelState on cabinets. Full config with form and rule takes a few minutes.

Intel i7-10700 2.9GHz, 64GB RAM, nVidia P1000, SSD drives.

Re: Work Station Build

KaynePellegrino — Tue, 20 May 2025 16:25:03 GMT

Current is a pre-built

CPU: i9-12900K 3.2 GHz

GPU: Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070

RAM: 64GB

Do you know of any videos on the rules that help explain how to condense things. I have very basic and probably over explained rules that are individual for every action because I don't know how to condense and combine things yet, if possible with what I have.

Betreff: Work Station Build

Logos_Atum — Tue, 20 May 2025 17:56:28 GMT

Hello Kayne,

ok let´s get that sorted. I´d be glad for you if you got a RTX 6000 ADA, I bet most people would be if they got one. Yet the 12900k isn´t an exactly slow CPU yet and I totally agree with holly on the GPU side to a certain degree. I´d rather look for a faster storage solution in the current system but we don´t exactly know how that looks yet. I/O can make quite a difference if I got what you do right. Still I could not follow your explanation on what you do exactly yet. If you could supply detail about the assembly size (part size?). Are you converting Autocad3D to Inventor 3D? You might want to check if this is a threaded task at all or how heavily threaded it is. Probably the majority of your cores are parked while the conversion takes place. The vamping up part is too ill defined too, even though you might just get a bit more for more there.

Your choices are really expensive ones, that´s for sure. Not trying to talk about money. I am sorry, there is no way to tell for sure what you will need for now. You would not want to waste money on something you will barely touch utillization wise. Judged by my experience and by what I read, anything past and anything that is an Ada 4000 GPU will only be marginally slower than a 6000. I handled a whole stacker crane assembly on a much slower CPU years ago already. So if you can´t identify a task wherein you´re going to need the VRAM the 6000 series sports, it´s pointless to buy one. And even then you might want to consider an AMD GPU. Or an Intel one. For the CPU: given you´re only using a few cores the only thing you should have a look at first are the turbo frequencies in accordance to core usage. Usually that´s 1, 2,4 (and so on) cores active at the respective highest clockspeed. Additional cores won´t benefit you then. The architecture and cache sizes will make a difference too, but not necessarily.

If you feel like it you can run an Inventor benchmark. There are a few and you´d get an idea of where you are with your current workstation and what to expect. Try InvMark and see how your system fares compared to the confirmed results you see there.

Betreff: Work Station Build

KaynePellegrino — Tue, 20 May 2025 19:07:35 GMT

My Organizing:

Our products were designed using AutoCAD. When I joined the company I told them I need to use Inventor. So I have to read the AutoCAD Drawings and make new inventor Parts/Assemblies based on the drawings, not that I'm converting them from AutoCAD to Inventor. I'm just making new models based on the referenced drawings.

The product we make are doors that are comprised of 3 main components. 2 Rails (Top and Bottom of Door), 2 Stile Assemblies (Sides of Door)[An assembly made of 2 Components, Cap and LVL] , and 2 Skins (Front Back of Door) to make a Door Assembly. We make several different doors, so in turn, there are several different versions of each of the 3 components.

Example: We make 3 different doors

So instead of having 3 Rail part files, 3 Stile part files, 3 Skin part files and 1 Door assembly file, that's comprised of 9 interchangeable parts, I will just have 1 Master file for each component that contain model states for every version of the each component. That way my 1 Door assembly file only has the 3 master part files and I can just change their representations in the door assembly to create a new door, or revise existing model states.

I use parameters to adjust the size and shape of each component and then use rules and forms to make easy work of adjusting them. But Like you said previous, I'll have to figure out to condense the rules code down if possible.

File Size:

I don't have a door assembly yet, as I'm still working on the skin component (the most complicated one).

Rails Part File: 79.5 MB

- Roughly 110 Model States

- Several Details

Stile Assembly File: 5.2 MB

- Roughly 45 Model States

- Made of 2 Components

- Caps Part File: 4.5 MB

- Roughly 36 Model States

- Not Very Detailed

- LVL Part File: 8 MB

- Roughly 40 Model States

- Not Very Detailed

Skin Part File (So far, not even close to done): 35 MB

- I'm still setting parameters, writing rules, and setting up forms for the skin part file. I haven't started making new model states yet, but there's to be roughly 750 model states

GPU:

I plan on periodically converting my inventor projects in STL or OBJ files and importing them into blender where I can make them look realistic and pretty for customers and for website building purposes, and also to make animations for marketing purposes. So that's why I chose the RTX 6000 ADA. Money wise, I plan on making this a company purchase, so I'm pushing for the best even if it is only marginally better. If it was my wallet then I would scale back, but if I can use the company wallet then I'm going big 😂

Benchmark:

I ran the INVMark test and got this score (Image Attached). My score seems pretty low compared to others. It does seem that those with a Threadripper have either a 'Fair' or ' Good' score. And those with I9 13/14th gen or Ultra CPU's have either an Elite or Hero score. So maybe it would make sense to go with an Ultra over the i9 and Threadripper?

Boosting & Overclocking:

I've never gone into bios before to boost or overclock components. I could give it a try though and see what happens

Betreff: Work Station Build

Logos_Atum — Wed, 21 May 2025 08:53:58 GMT

Hello Kayne,

awesome, glad you managed.

Did you have a look at how you current CPU fares with a different graphics card? Eventually changing from your mid/ low tier gaming card will get you into striking distance with the top already. Have a look at the different scores with the same CPU and a different GPU. This way you can easily fetch if there is much more improvement to be expected if you change to a Core Ultra. They offer quite a bit more boost frequency than the 12900k on more cores but consider it´s new and not proven to be stable the way 14.gen Intel CPUs are. They draw more power but that shouldn´t be the reason to drop them. Also I read that Intel will discontinue the socket of the Ultra after the 2XX series. Too much going for me, not enough room for improvement currently. 14.th gen just delivers and it´s all patched up.

Why would you have gotten a Threadripper again? Video post? A CPU only renderer or authoring/ compressing video? These are reasons I see their use in currently, apart of the PCIE lanes that will be of use if you choose PCI bifurication based storage and and/or plenty of GPU or compute boards.

For the conversion part you mentioned, that´s not GPU dependent. You won´t see any improvement. Again storage speed might make a difference. Eventually RAM speed will have an impact too. Please specify the tasks you believe you will need that GPU in. And please share your storage specs. Fast reads and writes never hurt. If you need an idea of what to expect you could set up a few RAM disks with all the datasets on them and no other storage in between to see how much that speeds you tasks up, but that´s a lot to do.

Overclocking is something but that´s a misunderstanding. I did not refer to overclocking. I referred to the turbo groups. The boost clocks your CPU assigns to a certain number of cores active simultaneously. Given your program uses only two cores for example, the boost clock is a few hundred MHz higher than it is when for example your are active. That depends on the software optimization therefore and on how many background tasks are running alongside. That might hinder the CPU to boost, as a second open program utillizes the cores too. I wouldn´t want to consider overclocking in a workstation at all. When it comes to this I´ll always prefer the stock speed and therefore a stable system. Yield rates have a direct impact on the quality of the parts already and the BIOS tends to be stable later and later in the products lifecycle too. I´m not saying something overclocked can´t be stable, surely not, but I would not want to waste time on that.

I did overclocks starting 1995 and some stability issues did not surface until later or too late if you prefer to put it that way. It´s kind of a hobby of mine. You really should´nt pair it with a productive environment. I managed to get into the 3D Mark top ten several times and I´d say you can trust me on letting go of this at work. It takes a lot of time to tune all that. Or for example build all custom cooling and mod CPU, GPU, Case, the RAM... . I enjoy it, but don´t go for something rattling at work, non the matter how much fun it is. A crash is all you want to avoid for sure.

Betreff: Work Station Build

KaynePellegrino — Wed, 21 May 2025 13:19:12 GMT

Yeah, it seems like the ones with even slightly upgraded cards did better all around. But it could just be that I haven't boosted my CPU at all and they have.

But with the Ultra, that makes sense to not want it if Intel is just gonna drop the socket soon.

And with the Threadripper, I've just seen a few things that Threadrippers are very nice in things like Blender and Unreal because of their multi-threaded and multi-core capabilities when it comes to modeling, simulations, and animation. I would be making models of my company's product and then making it look nice, and real. Then I could send rendered images and videos to my sales co-workers to upload to the website. They've done it before, but it was very basic.

When it comes to the rendering aspect though, I would be relying on the GPU.

With the storage speed, I found some fairly fast SSD's that I think would definitely be an improvement to what I have now.

And with the conversion, definitely makes sense to need fast storage. Unfortunately, like you said, that would be a lot to do to test that and I don't think I could figure out how to set that up without watching a lot of videos on it to make sure I don't break something.

With the boosting & overclocking. I didn't realize those were different things. But that makes sense. I try to only have my inventor and file explorer open to minimize how much my pc is doing at once. But even then it's slow. I've been updating my drivers and making sure as much is cleaned up as possible. I'm not sure what else I could do to improve it.

But what it sounds like is the Ultra and Threadripper aren't going to be as effective in the long run compared to the i9's

Betreff: Work Station Build

swalton — Wed, 21 May 2025 13:47:30 GMT

Have you seen InvMark? It's a 3rd party benchmark tool based on Inventor.

https://invmark.cadac.com/#/

Betreff: Work Station Build

MattH_Work — Wed, 21 May 2025 14:35:21 GMT

As a matter of interest, how long does it take to open Excel in its own right?

We found iPart / iAssembly performance to be greatly improved when we switched off all Excel add-ins ( in Excel itself ). This sped up Excel startup from 10 seconds down to ~1. A time-saving which was then felt within Inentor

Betreff: Work Station Build

KaynePellegrino — Wed, 21 May 2025 18:40:49 GMT

I have and got a score of 58'622 on the first run of 1 test and 67'946 on the second run of 5 tests in a row

Which seems like my build is low to low-mid when it comes to builds for inventor/CAD

Betreff: Work Station Build

KaynePellegrino — Thu, 22 May 2025 12:08:21 GMT

It opens like instantly. I don't think excel has ever given me issues, so far

Betreff: Work Station Build

Logos_Atum — Fri, 23 May 2025 12:48:06 GMT

Well buy whatever you want to. All splendid choices.

Have a nice day

Re: Work Station Build

marcelmacuf — Thu, 29 May 2025 14:57:18 GMT

Intel 13 14 and core ultra CPU are famous for terible stability and data corruption! 10 % of 14900KS CPU are going back to reseller after 6 months because of stability issues. 10 % is unbelivable big number. In case of AMD CPUs it is less than 0.001 %
Even AMD will be slower let's say by 5 % I will go AMD way. I would rather sacrifice few % of speed to get 50 % bigger reliability.

Re: Work Station Build

Logos_Atum — Thu, 03 Jul 2025 09:52:30 GMT

That´s a bit bold a claim. There is plenty of working motherboard/ CPU combinations and given you take the time to look for a good pairing that´s not a problem at all. I´d recommend the 14 series without hesitation, but I can´t say anything in favor of a general approach. I have not yet built a system that did not run rock solid with 12th, 13th or 14th gen Intel. I might add they´re not even all water cooled, even though a good AiO will allow you to exted the boost time to forever, which can make a difference.

Admittedly it takes me days to check any part for known problems and look for good pairings. The 12th gen might even be a bit strange at first, but 14th is all that you´d expect for most of the lessons learned are part of these.

There is great AMD CPU´s. Actually the 9800X 3D is one of the fastest CPU´s you can get for some workstation tasks. They won´t be the best when it comes to multicore, but they will deliver in other fields.

Yet again-

1. run benchmarks and try different projects

2. try your storage with RAM disks to see which part needs raw throughput (project folder, swap, install folder, temp)

3. try different file systems and block sizes for storage and swap (if you can make sense of them)

4. never forget to check reads and writes for different block/ file size performance- that´s insanely important to differenciate

5. check your codecs and if their featureset requires GPU or CPU cores - that´s days or weeks

6. same for renderers- check CPU/ GPU featuresets- again days or weeks and some features might not be available

7. what causes utillization peaks on your hardware, is there hardware that does perform better at handling those peaks

The approach to detail what will be the best for you, mustn´t be cut short by generalizing. Neither the tasks nor the tools and software used. The same does apply to hardware. We´re not fanboys.

Edit: a good VENN can show all the criteria matches well visualized if you need to justify your purchase