Build Me CAD Workstation Computer Desktop Thingy - Page 2 - Head-Fi: Covering Headphones, Earphones and Portable Audio

Herandu · 02-03-2008, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by OverlordXenu

I have an UPS. You said you had one, that fits in an HDD rack. Mine is the size of my PC...

Wow! Those cost some serious dough. Those sizes are an absolute must for servers. For home use, anyone doing commercial CAD, website or graphic work on anything other than a laptop, even a small one is a good investment.
The one I got is similar to the one at !ATX p4 12v Uninterruptible Power Supply Module better than ups, redundant power!

Davesrose · 02-03-2008, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by meat01

If it is 2D, then that video card is overkill and the processor is fine. Believe it or not, if you want to skimp, a $200 3D gaming card will work just fine with 3D or 2D. I have run Solidworks and Pro/E on a Geforce 7600GT and on an ATI x800XT with no problems.

I would respectfully disagree about the usefulness of a professional 3D card being needed for 3D. All my 3D programs have seemed to have some hardware shader issues on gaming cards: but Nvidia Quadro cards have never let me down. Oddly, even ATI Fire cards have given me issues with Maya (even when they're "certified" to run Maya). It seems that it mainly depends on if the program is optimized for direct x (where a gaming card would do fine), or opengl (which Quadro cards are optimized for). So my advice would be to consider a Quadro card if you are doing a lot of 3D (and could possibly be running programs that are OpenGL). If you want to save money on a gaming card, then check the 3D forums to make sure people aren't running into problems on your specific 3D programs.

meat01 · 02-04-2008, 12:21 AM

I knew someone would disagree with me

. All I can say, is that I have gone this route and been satisfied with the results, as has Herandu.

I really wouldn't consider Maya 3D CAD. The limitations of gaming cards with Pro/E or Solidworks is that when you spin a large model, you may lose some polygons or information. All of this information comes back and is visible when you stop spinning. I am not talking about a lot of information either. I am talking about a hole or feature here and there.

Solidworks and Pro/E are at the mercy of the processor more times than not. If you have a ton of money or your company is paying for it, then by all means go with a Quaddro. If you are paying for it or you want to save money somewhere, I would buy a cheaper graphics card, and spend more on the processor.

Davesrose · 02-04-2008, 01:54 AM

Originally Posted by meat01

II really wouldn't consider Maya 3D CAD. The limitations of gaming cards with Pro/E or Solidworks is that when you spin a large model, you may lose some polygons or information. All of this information comes back and is visible when you stop spinning. I am not talking about a lot of information either. I am talking about a hole or feature here and there.

Solidworks and Pro/E are at the mercy of the processor more times than not. If you have a ton of money or your company is paying for it, then by all means go with a Quaddro. If you are paying for it or you want to save money somewhere, I would buy a cheaper graphics card, and spend more on the processor.

As I prefaced my argument: you have to evaluate the graphics card based on what programs you're using. The OP was saying graphics and CAD and such.....so he might well be running an openGL package. Being a medical 3D animator, I have to import and export a lot of CAD and scanned data to animation packages. If you do any architectural design, you might be using OpenGL shaders for raytraced renderers. If you're working in environments that rely a lot on OpenGL, then the Quadro is worth it.

The one card I would say to totally stay clear of is the ATI Fire series: It was supposedly certified to run Maya, but I found out it actually corrupted my 3D files

It seems to have some shading incompatibilities that can lead to corrupted normals info. Maya is also the most tempramental 3D program I run: it can occasionally crash if it has some incompatibility with the card. XSI is another animation package that I'm running now. It doesn't seem to get as unstable with a non-Quadro card. I've found that GeForce cards will run Maya or XSI: it will just be limited in performance and have a few shading/viewport problems.

I'm self employed and try to spend most my money on a good graphics card and processors.....so for me, a Quadro is a good business expense and deduction. Unless you're going for a dual quad core Xeon, I have noticed that prices for decent processors are not bad these days. You can build a decent 3D system for $1500.....or with SLI and the like, you can also go up to $20K just for a PC. Oh, and then if we consider the quad SLI Plex systems...that's just $20k for your graphics

meat01 · 02-04-2008, 02:19 AM

For all we know the OP could be running 2D Autocad, in which any processor or video car will do fine.

For 3D animation, I agree a Quadro would be a must, but for 3D solid modeling and design, a 3D gaming card will work well, since you are dealing with static assemblies or renderings.

If the Quadro can be deducted, it may be a would be a worthy investment.

Davesrose · 02-04-2008, 02:42 AM

Originally Posted by meat01

For all we know the OP could be running 2D Autocad, in which any processor or video car will do fine.

Yes, very true that we're just dealing in hypotheticals here since the OP might not have seen any of the programs we're mentioning

Actually, RE 3D animation: it tends to be the rendering shaders that do best with OpenGL cards: not so much any of the animation data. Quadros can help with scenes that have a dense poly or surface count.....but it really seems to be shading and rendering of raytracers that rely on OpenGL. Anywho....I think we can agree that if it's programs that don't rely heavily on OpenGL, a Quadro is not a must. For those that do, an OpenGL card will give better performance and shading compatibilities.

acidtripwow · 02-04-2008, 12:00 PM

The one card I would say to totally stay clear of is the ATI Fire series

I would agree with this statement. We tried this at work and it did not work very well.

chesebert · 02-04-2008, 12:22 PM

The recently released Intel skulltrail mobo supporting 2 quad core for 8-core processing power should be high on your list.

chesebert · 02-04-2008, 12:25 PM

Originally Posted by Herandu

I 2nd that. I picked up a dual processor tower on the cheap off eBay to go with my GeForce and using Pro/E it is fast and the scrolling of images is seamlessly smooth. I suggest an uninterruptable power supply as well if it is critical work that is being done. I got one that fits in one of the HD slots and so far it has paid for itself many times over.

x2 on the UPS; get one that will let you work for at least 2 hours on the battery. Deadline kills

lordmozilla · 02-04-2008, 12:39 PM

can i just say that at the price of quad cores, get a Q6600 if your doing 3d. Most 3d apps are very good at handling multiple threads.

Also if its XP don't get more than 4gb, but maybe for 3d its worth looking at XP-64bit (i wouldnt recommend vista 64bit purely because vista is slower than XP, but maybe its a good choice too).

As for the graphics card, if your adventurous look at some geforce to quaddro mods or some radeon to FireXL mods.

if not i'd recommend the gaming cards since they are alot cheaper. and have alot more performance per the buck until you get to very pricey cards. (even in 3d apps)