I am in the process of building several badly needed
Workstations.
In the past we have been getting custom workstations based on the Core2 Quads w/ workstation Graphics.
After doing several weeks of investigating outside of SW forums I seem have found that people with larger assemblies (1k-2k parts) were using and specifying Workstations utilizing Dual Quad Core Xeon (5400series) with server mother boards capable of up to 128gb of ram.
Was hoping to get some Input from guys that have had experience with both or the knowledge of what kind of differences I may see.
Last Workstation from last year specs:
Core2 Quad 2.40ghz 8mb cache
MB - Intel 975XBX2KR ATX
Corsair TwinX pc8500 4gb ram 1066mhz
fx4600 768mb
250gb SATA 3G NCQ
OS - XP64PRO
What I am working on is actually a little less expensive:
Dual Xeon Quad Core 2.5ghz 12mb cache 1333mhz FSB (Harpertown)
MB I5400PW FSB 1600/1066/1333
16gb RAM(up to 128mb) 4x4Gb Kingston performance memory ECC FBDIMM (don't have the exact speed..but it's 800-1333mhz..as I under stand min is 1/2 the bus speed)
Dual Quadro fx1700 512mb Video (non-SLI)
2X 80gb Baracuda SATA 3G (Raid 0)
Vista 64 ULTIMATE
(I have checked to make sure all parts are compatible with each other and certified where applicable)
Any input as to why one is better than the other? Maybe one is preferred for specific types of works? Any input is appreciated.
In the past we have been getting custom workstations based on the Core2 Quads w/ workstation Graphics.
After doing several weeks of investigating outside of SW forums I seem have found that people with larger assemblies (1k-2k parts) were using and specifying Workstations utilizing Dual Quad Core Xeon (5400series) with server mother boards capable of up to 128gb of ram.
Was hoping to get some Input from guys that have had experience with both or the knowledge of what kind of differences I may see.
Last Workstation from last year specs:
Core2 Quad 2.40ghz 8mb cache
MB - Intel 975XBX2KR ATX
Corsair TwinX pc8500 4gb ram 1066mhz
fx4600 768mb
250gb SATA 3G NCQ
OS - XP64PRO
What I am working on is actually a little less expensive:
Dual Xeon Quad Core 2.5ghz 12mb cache 1333mhz FSB (Harpertown)
MB I5400PW FSB 1600/1066/1333
16gb RAM(up to 128mb) 4x4Gb Kingston performance memory ECC FBDIMM (don't have the exact speed..but it's 800-1333mhz..as I under stand min is 1/2 the bus speed)
Dual Quadro fx1700 512mb Video (non-SLI)
2X 80gb Baracuda SATA 3G (Raid 0)
Vista 64 ULTIMATE
(I have checked to make sure all parts are compatible with each other and certified where applicable)
Any input as to why one is better than the other? Maybe one is preferred for specific types of works? Any input is appreciated.
I haven't found much information on here about Dual XEONS other than a post where someone commented "You don't need Dual XEONS for simple part Modeling".
That's the type of information I'm looking for, but more such as what type of modeling would you use Dual Xeons for, and is the new I7 faster or more capable than the Xeon no matter what type of modeling I do.
Most of our assemblies including the sub-assemblies total in excess of 1500 parts, probably as many as 3000 in some instances. Some of our "Complete System Assemblies" cover several types of Equipment and could eventually drive my total up into the 6000-7000 parts range(possibly more than 10k in some instances).
server hardware is more for extensive labor intensive apps with massive error checking.. the kind of stuff you DON'T do with a workstation..
Since you do work with some massive assemblies.. I would go with an i7 system, high clock, lotsa ram, and 64bit vista.. (need that with lotsa ram) Decent vid card too.. maybe the 570 or 1700 quadro..
What about this....
CoreI7 965 Extreme 3.20ghz 8mb L3 Cache
Asus Rampage II Extreme MB, Inel X58
12gb (maxed out) OCZ Intel Extreme Edition DDR3 PC10666 1333mhz RAM (6 x 2gb)
Quadro FX570
OCZ 60gb SATA 2 Solid State HD
Also using Quality Case and 650w PS from Cooler Master
along with SATA DVD Burner
I can do this for around $3000(which is about my budget per system). Think it would handle my top level assemblies?
Then take the money saved and get the FX1700 video card instead.
The Core i7 EE965 is good.
However, at the end of the month (March 30th is when the press embargos are lifted I beleive) Intel and many of the OEM's will be rolling out the Xeon Nehalem EX's. I think these will be the cat's meow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...m_(microarchitecture)
Do a google search on 'nehalem ex'
I would wait a couple weeks for these before buying.
Cheers,
Latest Build notes:
CoreI7 965 Extreme 3.20ghz 8mb L3 Cache
ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 Motherboard - LGA 1366, Intel X58
12gb (maxed out) OCZ Intel Extreme Edition DDR3 PC10666 1333mhz RAM (6 x 2gb)
Quadro FX1700
2 x VelociRaptor 150gb HD 10k rpm (Raid 0)
Also using Quality Case and 650w PS
along with SATA DVD Burner
Dropped off the Rampage Extreme MB as I'm not a believer in OC'ing. Swapped to WD 10k drive, moved to the FX1700
Still just under $3000 including Vista64 and MS Office SBE 2007
No monitors, but We have all the monitors we need right now.
I can't thank you guys enough for all your input and help.
solid state drives eh? You will defiantly have to post back with a benchmark on that system..
Also, you have spec'd out a video card that to my knowledge comes with 256MB of on board memory. I bring this up because here I also deal with relatively large assemblies (3k-4k total parts) and the graphics cards here with only 256MB of ram have serious issues working with multiple open documents over time. They require regular restarting of SW or else they crash.
Let us know how it works when you get it assembled.
Xeon E5440 quad core processor @ 2.83 GHz
Tyan Server S5396 MoBo with two processor soockets and 8 DRAM slots
Quadro FX3700
4 x 2GB Kingston ECC memory
2 WD 150 GB Velocitraptors RAID1
Poew
OCZ SSD 32 GB for OS and SolidWorks
Vista 64 Ultimate
PS&C Silencer 750 watt power supply (single rail)
LianLi A20 case
My focus was on stability, noise and power consumption. All of those objectives seem to have been met nicely, with headroom to add another E5440 and 8 GB more DRAM. The SSD privides incredibily fast boot times with both Vista and SolidWorks. I highly recommend SSD's but they should be at least 64 GB.
However, the system crashes when solving CosmosFlow simulations. A number of fixes sugested by VAR and on flow simulation have not yielded any improvement. I suspect that the SSD is not large enough for Vista 64 Ultimate and SolidWorks and the temp memory file automatically default to "C" drive instead of to RAID1 drives. May have to move SolidWorks to RAID 1 drive.
Our products are large assemblies and flow simulation is an important tool. IMHO rebuild speed is not nearly as important as is stability and I would prefer to work in relative silence at the expense of speed. So, I can definitely recommend this set-up, and am definitely in love with the SSD, but a bigger SSD would have worked better, I think.
David Paulson
Environmental Cooling Products
Based upon past experience I would recommend you consider increasing the size of your power supply. 650W might be a little on the low side for that size machine. You are running a lot of ram, a high end cpu, a decent sized graphics card and two high end hard drives...not counting other dvd/cd drives....you might be pushing the limits a little too much with that size PS.
Antec provides a nice webpage to size up the PSU:
http://www.antec.outervision.com/PSUEngine (took FX1500 for calculation)
From Matt's config, it needs around 298W, max is 447W with a 50% aged capacitor (consider a very old PSU). Choose a 80Plus PSU and you have a roughly 300/0.8=375W. So, the base config needs at least a 375W to run peacefully. with a 50% aged capacitor, the PSU would be speced at 560W.
So a 650W PSU is more than enough... maybe too much ... Aim for a high efficiency PSU then, 80plus gold or Silver for example.
You seem to have some knowledge in this area, so I am asking for some clarity. Does that calculator take into consideration the increased voltage of say DDR3 PC3-14400 RAM versus the lower end DDR3 PC3-8500?
Also, the wattage it is recommending...is that the wattage required in a constant form? If so, to my knowledge the rated value of a power supply is what it is capable of outputting at max load...not constant output. So...how do you determine the constant output capability of any particular PS?
Is the voltage requirements for a Raptor 10k rpm drive the same as a standard 7200rpm drive?
Did you take into consideration that he might add a larger graphics card that might require a separate power connector?
Thanks,
Luke
The link just help you size up the PSU by determining the power needed for a constant load, like you said, in a constant form. It's different from the Peak power, a PSU has a nominal power output which should be the power it should deliver in a constant form, then, there are peak power, the max power it can deliver during a short period of time.
You can set the loading at the bottom right, default is 90%.
This webpage is just for reference (I am not the author of it)... but it gives you an idea of what you need, so sometimes, don't need to spend too much.
For the RAM, it follows a standard, and there should not be a huge difference between RAM stick of the same standard, even at different speed.
Velociraptor (not Raptor, pay attention, 1st gen is Raptor, 2nd is Velociraptor) drive are the least hungry SATA drive while offering the best performance. In fact, it comes from their server type of packaging, they are 2.5" drive with a 3.5" footprint, the smaller disk allows shorter latency, thus improved speed, but it also reduces the consumption, as it is smaller. In the calculator, taking a standard SATA drive should be safe then.
For the graphic card, you need to decide when you purchase the PSU. But given the price of high end professional graphic card and the fact that Solidworks can't use AFR or any other method split rendering, you may just end up with one entry to middle end graphic card, so, most of the case, no need of a second plug.
Right now, I have a 520W Coolermaster for the following config:
Core i7 920
6GB Ram (6 dimms)
8800GTX modded Quadro (FX4600)
2 SATA drive in RAID 0
Compare to Matt, I don't have the high clocked cpu, but from reviews, fully loaded, on a same configuration the 920 consumes ~30W less than the 965. I have normal 7200 SATA drives, compare to two Velociraptor in Matt's and I have a graphic card that consumes 3 times the one in Matt's computer. For my computer, I think the result was 400W, so I chose something around 520 to be safe.
The PSU comes with two PCI-E plug, so can handle middle entry SLI configuration. For sure, it can't run 2 FX4600 inside, but one big graphic card is no problem.