Pc for CAD

crisbduck · 16 Mar 2010 at 21:10

Hey, was hoping for some help with getting a new pc!
I'm thinking about getting a new pc as my one now is a little slow;
I'll be using software like Photoshop, Sketchup and AutoCAD and renderers like Vray for my architecture course.
And then of course things like iTunes and internet browsing and possibly some games and dvds etc

From what I've read this sort of thing would need a cpu with more cores and lots of memory but thought I'd ask since I haven't seen these sort of programs specified.

I've currently got a 4670 which I'd like to keep for at least a while since I only got it a few months ago, a screen, keyboard, mouse, cd/dvd player but I think I need everything else. I'm looking at spending £600-700 but budgets not too much of an issue, just means more 9p noodles to live on

So cheers for any help!
xxx

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 16 Mar 2010 at 21:25

Do you need a copy of an OS??

This review gives you an indication of what CPUs do well in VRay:

http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//...ask=view&id=63&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=13

It seems that VRay can use CUDA:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kXDiB1cdDg

However you would need to get a Nvidia graphics card.

BIGBC · 16 Mar 2010 at 21:36

An i7 would be beneficial to you and should be able to get it in budget quite easily. If not i5 isn't far behind. Ive not had any issues with 6GB RAM when having ProE, Photoshop and SAMMIE (human ergonomics modelling) and am normally dealing with pretty large files.

crisbduck · 16 Mar 2010 at 21:36

Hey thanks for info, no sorry os isn't needed in the price
Had a look at the links and didn't a bit of a google search but CUDA is the gpu, or how it is built at least?
Also that graphs a great help, I guess I'll be looking for 4 cores then

If you hadn't noticed I'm pretty stupid with all the technical things.

BIGBC · 16 Mar 2010 at 21:38

CUDA is an nVidia technology that utilises the GPU cores to do tasks the CPU normally would. The nature of GPU cores means it can be much more effective in certain circumstances.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 16 Mar 2010 at 21:40

I would be looking at a socket 1156 or socket 1366 Core i7 processor TBH. The Core i5 is actually slower than the Phenom II X4 955BE and X4 965BE in VRay according to the Lost Circuits review.

crisbduck · 16 Mar 2010 at 21:51

Ohh! so would that make a noticeable difference, and would that work with the cpu or instead of it?
And I think I'm set on an i7 now

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 16 Mar 2010 at 22:01

Badas · 16 Mar 2010 at 22:08

personally with expereince in rendering, go for I7 if you have the money, graphics cards are not all that important when it comes to vray, more about ram and CPU.

good luck

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 16 Mar 2010 at 22:16

I would spend the extra on a Core i7 if possible as the Lost Circuits review shows that both the socket 1156 and socket 1366 Core i7 processors are much faster than the Core i5 and Phenom II X4.

You could probably use your HD4670 for the time being to same some money but more and more programmes are making use of CUDA and it is worth doing some research on this IMHO. Without the GTS250 the Core i7 860 build will be well under £700.

Also do not skimp on the motherboard if possible.

crisbduck · 16 Mar 2010 at 22:23

Hiya, thanks so much for putting those builds together!
I think I'll upgrade the gpu later on if I don't get too itchy haha

So whats the advantage of a 860 over what seems to be much more popular the 920/30?
also does socket matter too much?

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 16 Mar 2010 at 22:28

crisbduck said:
Hiya, thanks so much for putting those builds together!
I think I'll upgrade the gpu later on if I don't get too itchy haha

So whats the advantage of a 860 over what seems to be much more popular the 920/30?
also does socket matter too much?

The Core i7 920 and 930 use socket 1366 motherboards which are more expensive and the RAM is run in triple channel on the motherboards. The Core i7 920 and 930 also consume more power too. Socket 1366 is supposed to have a longer lifespan than socket 1156 though.

Here is a comparison of the Core i7 920 and the Core i7 860:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/default.aspx?p=47&p2=108&c=1

You could probably fit in a Core i7 930 based build within the same budget but you will have less RAM(6GB).

crisbduck · 16 Mar 2010 at 22:39

Thats great thanks!
I've looked a little into memory, from what I understand higher MHZ is better but also lower CL numbers are better? I don't really understand these too much, but are the more expensive sticks worth it?

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 16 Mar 2010 at 22:51

Also you may want to consider whether you want to have a motherboard which has USB3 and SATA3.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 16 Mar 2010 at 22:54

JonJ678 · 17 Mar 2010 at 09:21

I don't understand why the 860 is being recommended here. The 920 at 4ghz is where it's at for student cad work.

My experience is also that 6gb of ram is sufficient.

Good chance that windows is free via your uni since you're doing architecture. Otherwise it's 30 quid for students last time I checked.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 17 Mar 2010 at 14:28

JonJ678 said:
I don't understand why the 860 is being recommended here. The 920 at 4ghz is where it's at for student cad work.

My experience is also that 6gb of ram is sufficient.

Good chance that windows is free via your uni since you're doing architecture. Otherwise it's 30 quid for students last time I checked.

http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/intel_lynnfield/ts75.gif no notlinking

http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//...ask=view&id=63&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=13

In VRay the 2.93GHZ Core i7 870 which uses socket 1156 is ahead of the 2.93GHZ Core i7 940 which is a socket 1366 processor.

Anyway I have told the OP the advantages and disadvantages of socket 1156 any way and have listed both socket 1156 and socket 1366 based builds.

JonJ678 · 17 Mar 2010 at 23:21

The i7 940 runs at 3059 MHz out of the box. The i7 870 runs at 3200 MHz out of the box. As such the 870 would be expected to be fractionally faster. A more interesting question is why it edged a lead over the 965 which should have been a bit quicker again. I imagine there is enough error margin in their testing to explain this, even if the different motherboard & ram are unable to.

The X58 i7 architecture is fundamentally faster than the P55 i7 architecture. The only exception to this rule is when using a single gpu, where the onboard pci-e controller of the P55 system edges a slight lead. Shame on you for declaring the 870 superior when it's tested at a higher frequency than the 920 (or even 940) it's compared with.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 17 Mar 2010 at 23:29

JonJ678 said:
The i7 940 runs at 3059 MHz out of the box. The i7 870 runs at 3200 MHz out of the box. As such the 870 would be expected to be fractionally faster. A more interesting question is why it edged a lead over the 965 which should have been a bit quicker again. I imagine there is enough error margin in their testing to explain this, even if the different motherboard & ram are unable to.

The X58 i7 architecture is fundamentally faster than the P55 i7 architecture. The only exception to this rule is when using a single gpu, where the onboard pci-e controller of the P55 system edges a slight lead. Shame on you for declaring the 870 superior when it's tested at a higher frequency than the 920 (or even 940) it's compared with.

The Core i7 870 is still faster though in VRay out of the box. The socket 1156 build also has more RAM and lower power consumption too.

The OP said the following:

"If you hadn't noticed I'm pretty stupid with all the technical things. "

Hence the setup which offers the best out of the box performance which minimum mucking around is actually better advice.

I know plenty of people who run high end computers who cannot be bothered overclocking manually and this is why TurboBoost is such a useful technology to have. Even AMD is copying it.

JonJ678 · 17 Mar 2010 at 23:40

i7 940 (22 +1) * 133 = 3059MHz
i7 870 (22 + 2) * 133 = 3192MHz

Turbo boost does run when all four cores are active. Indeed it provides precisely the boost I've ascribed to it when all four cores are active; it would have been irrelevant for me to say the 870 runs at 3.6ghz when only one core is active.

I've read the intel whitepaper on turbo boost and then spent a fair few hours looking into how it works. You've failed to grasp even the basics of its operation.

Further I'm capable of independent thought beyond this benchmark. For example, that an architect is going to be bright enough to achieve the trivial 4ghz (with all four cores active) overclock on either chip, making stock speed comparisons redundant.