Author Topic: New Puter  (Read 6748 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Fish

  • Guest
New Puter
« on: November 02, 2006, 11:22:21 AM »
Hello all, yes, it's time to start gathering info. for a new cad workstation. :lol:  I'm pretty excited about this upgrade, it looks like it will be a real cad workstation in lieu of these gosh darn business computers they try to use. :realmad:  Anyways this is what I have so far and please keep in mind that we must buy from IBM.  We had hopes of building our own but those thoughts were dashed, beggars can't be choosers you know.  I'm going to try and implement going to 3D with our 2007 upgrade at the beginning of the year so there's some more to chew on.  Thanks for your info.

3.6 GHz
Dual-Core
Pentium D 960
2GB Ram PC2-4200
Ati FireGL v5100 MB



hudster

  • Gator
  • Posts: 2848
Re: New Puter
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2006, 11:34:59 AM »
hard drive? :-)
Revit BDS 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, AutoCAD 2017, 2016, Navisworks 2017, 2016, BIM360 Glue

Fish

  • Guest
Re: New Puter
« Reply #2 on: November 02, 2006, 11:52:58 AM »
160 GB
Serial ATA-150
7200 rpm

sinc

  • Guest
Re: New Puter
« Reply #3 on: November 02, 2006, 07:35:00 PM »
That's probably a bit on the low end for what you want for C3D.  It should work, but if you can manage to get the money for more oomph, I highly recommend it.  If you can swing a better CPU and better drive (ideally, two drives in a RAID 0), you'll be much happier.

CAB

  • Global Moderator
  • Seagull
  • Posts: 10401
Re: New Puter
« Reply #4 on: November 04, 2006, 07:29:14 AM »
Quote
3.6 GHz
Dual-Core
Pentium D 960
2GB Ram PC2-4200
Ati FireGL v5100 MB
160 GB Serial ATA-150 7200 rpm

As a non-computer geek it the numbers look good, but what do they mean in the real world?
3.6 GHz looks like a fast processor. I'm still at 1.2ghz AMD but no real 3d for me.
Dual-Core - Who needs it? Only works when you are running two programs at one time right?
Pentium D 960 - I'd have to look this up to see where this falls in the range of processors.
2GB Ram PC2-4200, 2 gigs of anything has got to be good, right?
Ati FireGL v5100 MB, Humm what the heck is that? Need to do some research.
160 GB Serial ATA-150 7200 rpm, that's the high speed cable & the faster rpm drive right, that seems like a good thing.

Off to do some research, I too whould like a new computer. Now if I can just convence my wife. :)


This one is very interesting, discussing all aspects of the PC  http://www.mysuperpc.com/
I'm still reading this one.


PS
Hard Drive(s)
Raid 0 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundant_array_of_independent_disks
« Last Edit: November 04, 2006, 07:44:14 AM by CAB »
I've reached the age where the happy hour is a nap. (°¿°)
Windows 10 core i7 4790k 4Ghz 32GB GTX 970
Please support this web site.

sinc

  • Guest
Re: New Puter
« Reply #5 on: November 04, 2006, 09:36:10 AM »
As a non-computer geek it the numbers look good, but what do they mean in the real world?
3.6 GHz looks like a fast processor. I'm still at 1.2ghz AMD but no real 3d for me.

You can't really compare processor speeds between classes of processors.  Inside a given class of CPU (such as Pentium D), a faster CPU equates to better performance.  But a 2.4GHz Athlon X2 will outperform a 3.4GHz Pentium D.  Similarly, a 2.67GHz Core 2 Duo (currently $530) will slightly outperform the more-expensive 2.80 GHz Athlon FX-62 ($750).

Quote
Dual-Core - Who needs it? Only works when you are running two programs at one time right?

No.  Single programs can take awesome advantage of dual-core processors.  Unfortunately, Autocad does not seem to be one of them, and dual-core results in only a minor increase in performance in Autocad.  If you regularly have other programs open in addition to Autocad, though, you will probably notice that they run smoother, and switching between apps will happen faster.

Unfortunately, it seems that all high-end processors are dual-core, so once you get to high-end performance, you will get dual-core no matter what.  As of now, the best-performing single-core processor is (I think) the Athlon 64 4000+.  If you want anything better than that, you basically have to get a dual-core.

It is a complete mystery as to why Autodesk does not write Autocad to take advantage of dual-core machines.  Instead, they seem to expect everyone to just throw money at hardware, at get the highest-performing chips available...   :?

Quote
Pentium D 960 - I'd have to look this up to see where this falls in the range of processors.

The very high-end of the dual-core Pentium class.  This class is nearing the end of its life, though, and is being replaced by better-performing and cheaper Core 2 Duo chips.

Quote
2GB Ram PC2-4200, 2 gigs of anything has got to be good, right?

Possibly the best value in DDR2 RAM, but not the best in performance.  Should work well, though.  Just make sure you get the 1GB sticks, so you have expansion room.  Sounds like Civil-3D really wants 4GB, at least until they fix the memory leak problems (which may be in the next service pack).

Quote
Ati FireGL v5100 MB, Humm what the heck is that? Need to do some research.

On the low-end of the midrange graphics cards.  Looks like it's roughly about the same as a Quadro FX 1300 or maybe 1400.  Should work relatively well for Autocad.  Autodesk reports that Smooth Line Display causes stabiliity problems with ATI cards, so that feature is disabled, but all in all it should work well.

Quote
160 GB Serial ATA-150 7200 rpm, that's the high speed cable & the faster rpm drive right, that seems like a good thing.

The limiting factor in hard drives tends to be the raw speed of the drive, not the cable (although cable can come into play, and of course your MOBO has to handle the high-speed transfer).  7200 RPM is actually the slowest of the current drives, but some drive technology makes it difficult to directly compare RPMs.

No matter what drive you get, getting two smaller ones and putting them in a RAID 0 makes the pair act like a single drive, in something they call a "Striping array".  As you write a file to the disk, one chunk gets sent to the first disc, and while that is writing, another chunk gets set to the other disc.  Basically, both discs are used at the same time, so a RAID 0 can nearly double the performance of whatever disc drives you put in it.  Since it sounds like Civil 3D is INCREDIBLY inefficient with its disc access, this is a key point.

I just ordered one myself, from components:

2.67 GHz Core 2 Duo
Gigabyte 965P-DQZ (Intel 945GZ Express chipset)
nVidia Quadro FX 1500 (256MB DDR3)
2GB PC6400 DDR2 RAM
2x36GB Raptor 10K Hard Drives in RAID 0
DL-DVD burner
Nexus Breeze tower with silent fans and 400W PS
Samsung 204B 20.1" LCD monitor
Windows XP + Office Basic OEM
UPS

Total price: just under $3000.  Looks like I could have gotten two 19" monitors for the price of one 20", but I really like the 1600x1200 display.  I'll probably add another 19" monitor as a second (along with another 2GB RAM), once I start using Civil-3D a lot.  Should be here Tuesday.  I can hardly wait!   :-)
« Last Edit: November 05, 2006, 12:00:34 AM by sinc »

CAB

  • Global Moderator
  • Seagull
  • Posts: 10401
Re: New Puter
« Reply #6 on: November 04, 2006, 10:05:20 AM »
Wow sinc, sound like you may have a new heat source in your office. :)
Do let us know how you like it.
And thanks for taking the time for the in-depth reply.
So using this "2x36GB Raptor 10K Hard Drives in RAID 0" will give you the effective of a very fast 72GB drive?
I've reached the age where the happy hour is a nap. (°¿°)
Windows 10 core i7 4790k 4Ghz 32GB GTX 970
Please support this web site.

CAB

  • Global Moderator
  • Seagull
  • Posts: 10401
Re: New Puter
« Reply #7 on: November 04, 2006, 10:10:22 AM »
When you pick a video card, How would you know if it will work well with Autocad?
I've reached the age where the happy hour is a nap. (°¿°)
Windows 10 core i7 4790k 4Ghz 32GB GTX 970
Please support this web site.

sinc

  • Guest
Re: New Puter
« Reply #8 on: November 04, 2006, 10:12:29 AM »
So using this "2x36GB Raptor 10K Hard Drives in RAID 0" will give you the effective of a very fast 72GB drive?

That's the idea.  8-)

Mark

  • Custom Title
  • Seagull
  • Posts: 28762
Re: New Puter
« Reply #9 on: November 04, 2006, 10:19:48 AM »
So using this "2x36GB Raptor 10K Hard Drives in RAID 0" will give you the effective of a very fast 72GB drive?

That's the idea.  8-)

Wouldn't that be a "very fast 36GB disk".

The only problem I have with RAID 0 is if you lose one disk in the array.
TheSwamp.org  (serving the CAD community since 2003)

sinc

  • Guest
Re: New Puter
« Reply #10 on: November 04, 2006, 10:21:12 AM »
When you pick a video card, How would you know if it will work well with Autocad?

Check Autodesk's Graphics Hardware List.  Looks like, overall, the nVidia cards work the best.  There's also one NEC card that works with no issues.  The ATI FireGL and Radeon cards all have minor issues, but work well overall.

Of cards in that list, you can bet that the more money, the better the card.  Really high-end probably isn't necessary, but will be nice if you have the $$$.  The FX1500 is the highest I could justify buying, at least right now (currently in the mid-high $500's)...
« Last Edit: November 04, 2006, 11:59:27 PM by sinc »

ElpanovEvgeniy

  • Water Moccasin
  • Posts: 1569
  • Moscow (Russia)
Re: New Puter
« Reply #11 on: November 04, 2006, 10:27:33 AM »
On work for me:
Samsung 204Ts 20.1" LCD monitor
On home for me:
Samsung 203B 20.1" LCD monitor

Between them a huge difference on matrix!
Very much I recommend to look both models and to compare.
When I shall change the second screen monitor of the house, I shall take similar on
Samsung 204Ts


sinc

  • Guest
Re: New Puter
« Reply #12 on: November 04, 2006, 10:29:14 AM »
So using this "2x36GB Raptor 10K Hard Drives in RAID 0" will give you the effective of a very fast 72GB drive?

That's the idea.  8-)

Wouldn't that be a "very fast 36GB disk".

The only problem I have with RAID 0 is if you lose one disk in the array.

You're thinking of RAID 1.  RAID 1 is called a "mirrored array", in which each disc is an exact copy of the other.  If one disc fails in a RAID 1, you do not lose anything, because the other disc is an exact copy.  In a RAID 1, both discs can be used as a pair for reading, just like in a RAID 0.  This makes for fast read times.  But the exact same thing is written to each disc during writes, which means that you get no performance benefit during writes in a RAID 1.  You only gain fault tolerance - one drive can fail, and you lose nothing.  If one drive fails in a RAID 0, the data on BOTH discs is gone (because half of each file is on one disc, and the other half is on the other disc).

There are more elaborate usages, such as four discs in a RAID 1+0.  In this usage, you join two discs into a mirrored pair, so it acts like a fault-tolerant drive.  Then you take two of these pairs, and put them in a RAID 0 striping array.  This yields the benefits of both RAID 1 (fault tolerance) and RAID 0 (faster writes).
« Last Edit: November 04, 2006, 10:33:03 AM by sinc »

Mark

  • Custom Title
  • Seagull
  • Posts: 28762
Re: New Puter
« Reply #13 on: November 04, 2006, 10:51:59 AM »
You're right, I was thinking of RAID 1 in terms of disk space, could have sworn RAID 0 was the same in terms of what the OS saw as disk space, thanks for the correction sinc.

For those that want more reading material. :-)

[ http://www.devhardware.com/c/a/Storage-Devices/RAID-Not-Such-a-Clever-Idea-for-Your-Home-PC/ ]

[ http://www.storagereview.com/guide2000/ref/hdd/perf/raid/levels/singleLevel0.html ]
TheSwamp.org  (serving the CAD community since 2003)

sinc

  • Guest
Re: New Puter
« Reply #14 on: November 04, 2006, 11:57:07 PM »
For those that want more reading material. :-)

[ http://www.devhardware.com/c/a/Storage-Devices/RAID-Not-Such-a-Clever-Idea-for-Your-Home-PC/ ]

[ http://www.storagereview.com/guide2000/ref/hdd/perf/raid/levels/singleLevel0.html ]


That first link should be taken with a large grain of salt.  Keep in mind that it was written over three years ago, and technology has changed dramatically in the interim.

The second link predicts what I think is already happening: RAID will start to become the default setup.  At least, it seems like every high-end system mentioned in recent articles on Tom's Hardware includes a RAID 0 array (usually a RAID of Raptors).

In poking around, there seems to be a lot of hubbaloo about RAID.  Part of it is about a real problem that used to exist, where data in a RAID would hit a bottleneck elsewhere in the PC (such as in the system bus), limiting performance to that of a single drive.  This does not seem to be a major issue anymore.

A good part of that first article seems to focus on the fact that RAID is not a replacement for backups.  Since this computer is going to be used as a workstation, with all important files stored on the server, this is not an issue.  (At least as of right now, I am assuming we will be using the Vault with Civil-3D, so work files will be on the local system, but the Vault will be on the server...)

There also seems to be a fair bit of concern that having two physical disks involved increases the risk of failure.  But hard disks have gotten a lot more reliable over the years.  And again, since this is a workstation with all import files stored on the server, this is not a big concern.

It does seem like the real-world performance gains are far from the ideal 2x.  It's difficult to find actual RAID benchmarks on the web from recent systems.  I found several dating mostly from 2005.  One thing that jumps out is that, since the seek time of the drive is not improved by a RAID array, performance varies widely between tasks.  Also, the difference in performance between single-drive and RAID 0 varied significantly between RAID controllers.  But in every case, a RAID 0 performed better than a single-drive by some degree or other.  And for tasks like copying files, the increase in speed seemed to be about 60-80% faster for a RAID 0.  However, for most tasks the increase in performance was much lower, more like 20-30% (depending on task).

Still, that's a 20-30% increase in speed over a single drive, on whatever drives you use, and these days drive access tends to be THE slowest thing in your computer...

Well, I have everything ordered, so I'll let you know how it performs once I get everything put together...   :-)