Spec Me: FAST 3D Rendering Rigs (x2) £4.7K

[:(Rhodri:)]

For rendering machines I'd recommend going for a pre-built unit that's designed for the task, the boxes tend to then be designed to be thrashed 24/7 and easily stackable. Unless she's actually using a GPU renderer you can skip expensive GPU's to be honest, it's all about CPU core count, speed and having lots of fast RAM in 3D rendering.

Most professional setups will not be over-clocked - having a bit more speed is not worth it not being reliable 24/7 in my experience (bear in mind rendering can run a CPU at 100% for days on end).

 

[spoffle]

^ most professional prebuilds won't be overclocked because they will want to sell you a more expensive CPU, or multiple CPUs instead of you getting free performance out of a CPU.

A 3930K is highly overclockable, the main reason they are sold at the speed they are is due to the fact that they run hot and suck a lot of power at higher speeds, over anything to do with stability.

In other situations, it's simply more cost effective for people to buy more CPUs to get more performance rather than overclocking due to the cost of their time doing anything hands on.

As for being designed to be thrashed 24/7, they're not really. Outside of making sure they have good cooling, that's about it. They will all be using off the shelf parts, now they will use good quality reliable off the shelf parts, but they're nothing special or different to what you or I could buy and build ourselves for less money.

It's not just a bit more speed either. My 3930K is near 50% overclocked which brings a lot more performance in the rendering applications I use.

 

[Zuban]

I am quite happy to leave my 3930k at 4.5ghz running for days on end rendering, decent water cooling, sensible overclock without pushing things to the absolute limit, no problems, have had my 3930k for a year now spending most of its time at 100% usage and I've not had a single crash whilst rendering.

 

[ULP]

Stick with quadro for GPU, dispite folk saying no need for quadro now the specs on GeForce are so good. You need performance drivers only designed for quadros. They can handle 100s of millions polys for complex scenes.

I'm a 3D Artist, architectural visualisation. Recommend quadro 4000 or above.

 

[spoffle]

Stick with quadro for GPU, dispite folk saying no need for quadro now the specs on GeForce are so good. You need performance drivers only designed for quadros.

I'm a 3D Artist, architectural visualisation. Recommend quadro 4000 or above.

A Quadro isn't necessary, it really isn't. They are very expensive for this type of use, and Autodesk's software makes very good use of games orientated GPUs.

For this use, they are doing interior and furniture renders, they won't be dealing with ridiculously complex models.

Plus, Zuban's already confirmed that their GTX670 is fine for heavy use. I have only ever used game GPUs for my own builds.

I have used quadros, and for just the viewport, they're not really worth it. The lower end quadros are generally popular because they provide better performance than lower end games GPUs, but that's about it.

I have used various games GPUs for CAD workstations, and I have quite a few friends who do the same, one works in a studio where they use only games GPUs in their computers.

There's just no need for a quadro unless you have very specific, usually CUDA related requirements.

Plus, it's quite silly recommending a £700 GPU for interior and furniture renders.

 

[ULP]

A Quadro isn't necessary, it really isn't. They are very expensive for this type of use, and Autodesk's software makes very good use of games orientated GPUs.

In order to have optimum performance it's smart to have the correct hardware what it's designed for, the drivers are updated all the time for further improvement. Plain stupid having a gaming card in there because it has great specs comparison. Not as simple as that.

 

[ULP]

I thought you cannot have dual i7's? Pointless process as they can't work along side each other or something?

YOUR BASKET
1 x EVGA SR-X Dual Socket (Socket 2011) Motherboard £559.99
2 x EVGA GeForce GTX 670 FTW 2048MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card £319.99 (£639.98)
1 x OCZ RevoDrive3 240GB PCI-E SSD - (RVD3-FHPX4-240G) £299.99
2 x Intel Core i7-3820 3.60GHz (Sandybridge-E) Socket LGA2011 Processor - OEM £224.99 (£449.98)
1 x Cubitek HTPX ICE Series Case - Black £199.99
1 x Seasonic X-Series 1050w '80 Plus Gold' Modular Power Supply £189.98
3 x Kingston HyperX Genesis 32GB (8x4GB) DDR3 PC3-12800C9 1600MHz Quad Channel Kit (KHX1600C9D3K8/32GX) £179.99 (£539.97)
1 x Seagate Barracuda 2TB 7200RPM SATA 6Gb/s 64MB Cache - OEM (ST2000DM001) HDD £72.98
1 x Pioneer 24x Internal DVR-S20LBK DVD Rewriter including Labelflash - Retail £20.99
Total : £2,990.35 (includes shipping : £13.75).



A bit over budget and possibly overkill but would be a cracking system.

If I was you, I would take all the options and opinions with you and get some professional input. Of course there is better components out there for rendering and speccing from OC has its drawbacks I suppose...

Personally I would go for a Boxx system if it was in budget but they are the holy grail of render machines!

 

[spoffle]

It is as simple as that, and it's not plain stupid to have a games GPU in it, at all.

Quadros were big and necessary when most 3D software used OpenGL, most don't use OpenGL any more. All Autodesk software has the option for OpenGL and DX usage meaning that games GPUs and pro GPUs are very close in performance for use in Autodesk software.

 

[ULP]

It is as simple as that, and it's not plain stupid to have a games GPU in it, at all.

Quadros were big and necessary when most 3D software used OpenGL, most don't use OpenGL any more. All Autodesk software has the option for OpenGL and DX usage meaning that games GPUs and pro GPUs are very close in performance for use in Autodesk software.

Only since 2013 (3ds Max) it remains to be scene how it fairs out.

I'm on 2010 and i'm no hurry to upgrade considering the costs... Max alone you're looking near £4k. Something else for the person to consider.

 

[LOAM]

As someone who uses autocad professionally I, given the choice again wouldn't touch a 6series nv card. My 670 GB WF is complete rubbish in that environment. It's great in games, carp in autocad and dreadful with SU (open gl). It performs considerably worse than the 5870 it replaced because NV have crippled its drivers. Avoid would be my advice, the latest versions of max operate in D3D but again drivers aren't and won't ever be optimised for that application.

 

[Zuban]

its really worth firing up gpu-z and putting the sensor tab on, and see if your card is downclocking, the power saving on the 6xx cards is very aggressive and these kind of apps dont always kick the clocks up, meaning your card will be barely using a fraction of its power. I dont have autocad so I cant say if its an issue there, but if it is its easily resolved. I wouldn't be surprised if that's the issue rather than crippled drivers etc.

 

[flippant]

Only since 2013 (3ds Max) it remains to be scene how it fairs out.

I'm on 2010 and i'm no hurry to upgrade considering the costs... Max alone you're looking near £4k. Something else for the person to consider.

Max 2010 had known issues with the 4xx range of nvidia cards, I had no end of trouble with my 480. Once I moved to 2011, it worked like a dream.

I'd heartily recommend 2012 over 2010, much improved, I haven't gone on to 2013 yet as I tend to skip a version.

Like many things software and hardware choice in 3D comes down to how you work and a lot of personal preference, the whole graphic card in a workstation is pretty subjective, in CAD the drawings are as accurate as the coordinates you type, not how the vectors are displayed on screen, and the OP asked for a FAST rendering machine, not one with a very precise display.

I think the point is that buying maintaining and operating all my own equipment I can't justify spending £2k+ on a card which may only barely outperform a £300.00 one, others may feel it is worth the premium. If i feel the need for over hyped under performing hardware based on marketing sound bites, I know the way to the Apple store.....

And Zuban, having read your post, I've added MAX & AutoCAD to the Nvidia control panels profiles, and set power management to maximum performance, so it'll be interesting to see if it makes a difference, good tip, thanks for that...

 

[ULP]

who can aford to upgrade Max every year? pointless. you can pick up a quadro 4000 for £300 new or used on ebay.

Max 2010 had known issues with the 4xx range of nvidia cards, I had no end of trouble with my 480. Once I moved to 2011, it worked like a dream.

I'd heartily recommend 2012 over 2010, much improved, I haven't gone on to 2013 yet as I tend to skip a version.

Like many things software and hardware choice in 3D comes down to how you work and a lot of personal preference, the whole graphic card in a workstation is pretty subjective, in CAD the drawings are as accurate as the coordinates you type, not how the vectors are displayed on screen, and the OP asked for a FAST rendering machine, not one with a very precise display.

I think the point is that buying maintaining and operating all my own equipment I can't justify spending £2k+ on a card which may only barely outperform a £300.00 one, others may feel it is worth the premium. If i feel the need for over hyped under performing hardware based on marketing sound bites, I know the way to the Apple store.....

And Zuban, having read your post, I've added MAX & AutoCAD to the Nvidia control panels profiles, and set power management to maximum performance, so it'll be interesting to see if it makes a difference, good tip, thanks for that...

 

[flippant]

who can aford to upgrade Max every year? pointless. you can pick up a quadro 4000 for £300 new or used on ebay.

Well if it gives a turnover of £100k + and is a tax detuctable expense, and is only about £495? (ex VAT Subscription) Quite a lot of companies can afford it, in fact it's pretty silly not to. As for the quadro, £300 for an old second hand card with no warranty, that still won't outperform a new card for less money? It really doesn't make sense.

I have an older quadro about somewhere, an FX4400 I think, I'd have to go dig out the pc it's in but I'm fairly sure it's not compatible with Windows 7, and XP64 is a dog of an OS, so in some cases an old cheap quadro is much much worse than any old gaming card.

If the costs involved can't be justified for the software, you may as well give up on the hardware. If the purchase is for a hobby or a student, then maybe ebay for some old bits and pieces, and use older, cheaper or even free software, blender, C4D etc. are all cheaper alternatives to MAX, Maya and the like, but in that case you really don't need a quadro.....

There are ways to cut cost in 3D work, I use most of them, and the first and most effective money saving exercise is to skip on 'professional' work station cards.

If you have money to burn, plenty of time, or you just aren't bothered about turning a profit then of course, buy a quadro, hell stick a telsa card in there as well, but it won't render faster than a couple of overclocked xeons, or even a single i7 ( I've tested this!).

I would advise any 3D designer, to learn what the computer can and can't do, how to build it and how to fix when it breaks, hardware and software, anything less is willful ignorance, laziness or stupidity. When you're mid way through an animation at 3am and it all goes wrong with a deadline looming YOU are tech support, or unemployed.

Oops, bit of a rant, sorry.

 

[triggerthat]

If the workstation is going to be used within an office, then it might be worth going for the option that provides 24/7 technical support?

 

[ULP]

Well if it gives a turnover of £100k + and is a tax detuctable expense, and is only about £495? (ex VAT Subscription) Quite a lot of companies can afford it, in fact it's pretty silly not to. As for the quadro, £300 for an old second hand card with no warranty, that still won't outperform a new card for less money? It really doesn't make sense.

I have an older quadro about somewhere, an FX4400 I think, I'd have to go dig out the pc it's in but I'm fairly sure it's not compatible with Windows 7, and XP64 is a dog of an OS, so in some cases an old cheap quadro is much much worse than any old gaming card.

If the costs involved can't be justified for the software, you may as well give up on the hardware. If the purchase is for a hobby or a student, then maybe ebay for some old bits and pieces, and use older, cheaper or even free software, blender, C4D etc. are all cheaper alternatives to MAX, Maya and the like, but in that case you really don't need a quadro.....

There are ways to cut cost in 3D work, I use most of them, and the first and most effective money saving exercise is to skip on 'professional' work station cards.

If you have money to burn, plenty of time, or you just aren't bothered about turning a profit then of course, buy a quadro, hell stick a telsa card in there as well, but it won't render faster than a couple of overclocked xeons, or even a single i7 ( I've tested this!).

I would advise any 3D designer, to learn what the computer can and can't do, how to build it and how to fix when it breaks, hardware and software, anything less is willful ignorance, laziness or stupidity. When you're mid way through an animation at 3am and it all goes wrong with a deadline looming YOU are tech support, or unemployed.

Oops, bit of a rant, sorry.

Stating the obvious doesn't make you point more than what it is I'm afraid...
I'm a visualiser with 7 years experience, I've built two i7 rigs both on quadros (3700 & 4000), I've also owned computers and upgraded them with gaming cards. It makes little sense to use one for the other when they are designed, managed and updated for what the supposed to be for. Call me mental for that if you like.

Personally I've have worked on crazy scenes containing multiple 100s of millions polys containing anything from proxys to nurbs, a gaming card would fall apart dealing with viewport swift command arch rotates and general maneuverability there. I like to be in a position to be able to cope with whatever comes along in my work. That makes sense to me.

 

[Zuban]

Horses for course though, if you deal with scenes that will push a gaming card beyond its limits and a professional card will do it then it could make sense to use one then, but it seems unlikely in this case they will be dealing with that level of complexity.

The last scene I've been working with is just shy of 23 million poly's and rising, around 2000 objects in total and my gtx670 is coping fine.

 

[flippant]

Stating the obvious doesn't make you point more than what it is...
I'm a visualiser with 7 years experience, I've built two i7 rigs both on quadros (3700 & 4000), I've also owned computers and upgraded them with gaming cards. It makes little sense to use one for the other when they are designed, managed and updated for what the supposed to be for. Call me mental for that if you like.

Personally I've have worked on crazy scenes containing multiple 100s of millions polys containing anything from proxys to nurbs, a gaming card would fall apart dealing with viewport swift command arch rotates and general maneuverability there. I like to be in a position to be able to cope with whatever comes along in my work. That makes sense to me.

Well OK, if that's how you feel then you should probably carry on using those quadros, as I said it's just my opinion .

I can tell you though, my gaming card doesn't fall apart dealing with multi million polygon scenes, even with shadows ambient occlusion and advanced transparency enabled in the viewport, I admit that this one wasn't cheap (690) but the last two (580 & 480 and the 275 before that) have all performed just fine.

Back before I stopped with the quadros I remember my old ATi x800 happily outperformed the Quadro in my workstation, it's why I stopped using them in the first place, but that was a good 7 or 8 years ago, when I'd only been at this for about 15 years (See what I did there, you young whipper-snapper!).

All this advice needs to be taken with caution, I don't use NURBS, and the OP may need to, 3D Studio MAX is optimised for gaming cards, and we don't know what the OP will use, I use creative suite a great deal, and Photoshop & Premier do make really good use of the cuda cores in my 690, but that's CS6, not 5 or below,the OP may have no need for image manipulation. If the OP's workstation is for Microstation I don't have a clue what is best, same for Solid works, or a mysterious in house render engine built around an old renderman box. Most of my render work is for screen use, so I tend to output at around 2000 pixels wide, never more than 4000, so I don't need massive amounts of ram, FX work for film is going to be a lot bigger and so need more RAM, animation or stills, games or technical illustration.... and on.... and on..... and on.

I've been doing this for years, I know how to get the best out of my workstations, I still see the sales guys they still tell me 'You need a BoXX workstation with Quadro or a FireGL'. I try them, they aren't any better, faster, prettier, rinse and repeat every couple of years.

Of course, as far as the OP is concerned we could all be pre-pubescent trolls, making this stuff up for ***** & giggles & posting on an ipad, just saying....

 

[ULP]

Horses for course though, if you deal with scenes that will push a gaming card beyond its limits and a professional card will do it then it could make sense to use one then, but it seems unlikely in this case they will be dealing with that level of complexity.

The last scene I've been working with is just shy of 23 million poly's and rising, around 2000 objects in total and my gtx670 is coping fine.

Tomorrow you're asked to produce an highly detailed complex animation of a busy street in a large city, containing physics and particle systems. You want to have the kit to make whatever case happen.

 

[flippant]

Tomorrow you're asked to produce an highly detailed complex animation of a busy street in a large city, containing physics and particle systems. You want to have the kit to make whatever case happen.

Real time physical simulation is a pretty complex area, will you be doing fluid simulation as well, because I'm pretty sure that will be a different specification machine than one used for rendering interior design scenes and furniture, you know, like the ones the OP asked about......

Anyhow, if that's what you do, then I can see that a quadro would help, in fact if I was building a workstation for real time physics simulation, I would go with a quadro, and I'd also consider a Telsa card, because it's a different field, but pre-viz and simulation isn't really rendering CGI, so if the OP is looking for a simulation workstation maybe want's to do a spot of finite element testing, or maybe some fluid dynamics, he's going to need another thread!

As it happens, I probably do have enough computing power for that, but it's not really my field, I'm more into built environment stuff. I usually get clients asking for a 3 minute animations of a museum for a Monday morning presentation, at 4pm Friday!