CJJ Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Another thing to consider would be getting two nVidia SLI (or Crossfire from AMD) video cards. If one card doesn't do the trick, get a pair of them to team up on your 3D rendering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f700es Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Did you see the link in post #12? The Geforce cards did better or the same overall in AutoCAD 3D performance over the Quadros as well as on par in 2D performance. With that information it's hard to spec a $1,600 Quadro K5000 when a Geforce GTX580/680 comes in at around $500. Now I am just looking at the AutoCAD results as that is all I care about and I think that is the main concern of the OP. I fully understand about AutoCAD certification but the proof is int he results as this report shows. Even if the GF cards came in slightly below the Quadros in performance it would be hard to justify the cost difference of $1k a card. I see no difference in performance in my quadro at work and my GeForce at home in AutoCAD with the same file open. Now the GF is faster in SketchUp than the quadro in the same model. Just food for thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma Posted October 16, 2013 Author Share Posted October 16, 2013 Oh I know and believe those results. But our IT has "distrust" because it's not recommended by Autodesk. So....we are going to be doing our own tests. They have some deal worked out with Dell on the cards that I'm not completely privy to, but essentially it doesn't cost us anything to test them. I have no control over the the purchasing, but since I am the lead on this project the technical feedback on what our department needs is what I am feeding our IT/purchasing. So not just any card will do, as my system (see #1 post in this) is apparently quite robust by Autodesk's standards, but the plant assembly I am working on simply brings it to it's knees. It's an ongoing soap opera, but hopefully I will have some resolution in the next few weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f700es Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Yeah but as you have seen sometimes you just can't throw any card into any machine Good luck and let us know how you get on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJJ Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 Did you see the link in post #12? The Geforce cards did better or the same overall in AutoCAD 3D performance over the Quadros as well as on par in 2D performance. With that information it's hard to spec a $1,600 Quadro K5000 when a Geforce GTX580/680 comes in at around $500. Now I am just looking at the AutoCAD results as that is all I care about and I think that is the main concern of the OP. I fully understand about AutoCAD certification but the proof is int he results as this report shows. Even if the GF cards came in slightly below the Quadros in performance it would be hard to justify the cost difference of $1k a card. I see no difference in performance in my quadro at work and my GeForce at home in AutoCAD with the same file open. Now the GF is faster in SketchUp than the quadro in the same model.Just food for thought. I was just saying what we've been buying and that we've been happy with them. We actually go for the low-end Quadro cards, as they're more than adequate for our needs. As I said earlier, I'm sure most high end video cards (gaming or otherwise) with enough RAM would perform well. Hadn't read the link in #12 until just now, and to be honest I'm not really surprised that the GTX cards came in above the Quadro cards for 3D rendering benchmarks. I'll keep that in mind next time we're pricing CAD workstations/Video cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJJ Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 Another thought... are you running an SSD or are you still on a 7200 RPM drive? I know you said your files are on a network drive, but quicker read/write to your local cache/pagefile could make a difference. We've installed a few SSDs here for users, and to be honest they said they didn't notice any change in AutoCAD (other than application load times) but for your workload, it might be more substantial of an upgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f700es Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 I was really surprised in the 2D area. I thought the Quadros would beat the GF cards in the 3D area and then lag behind a bit in the 2D. I think it is more about the GPU on the card as opposed to the amount of ram on a card. We might be getting a new CAD machine soon and I am thinking about a high end consumer unit instead of a workstation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f700es Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 Another thought... are you running an SSD or are you still on a 7200 RPM drive? I know you said your files are on a network drive, but quicker read/write to your local cache/pagefile could make a difference. We've installed a few SSDs here for users, and to be honest they said they didn't notice any change in AutoCAD (other than application load times) but for your workload, it might be more substantial of an upgrade. Good point for the OP. So once AutoCAD is up and running there is little improvement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski_Me Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 I find it hard to believe that IT guys would not consider buying components from a different vender because they don't show up in Autodesk list. I built my system at home from the ground up and it runs autocad and inventor like a hell hound on steroids. For $5000 bucks I could build the fastest most robust system you would ever see but would your IT guys want it? Most likely not. You've got plenty of RAM but I bet it's 1333MZH, get faster RAM not more but faster like 2400MZH if your motherboard can handle it, then upgrade your video card. Mine is the NVidia 670, runs like a beast. Change those 2 things and you will see a noticeable improvement of performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJJ Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 Good point for the OP. So once AutoCAD is up and running there is little improvement? According to the user, there wasn't much difference. And to be honest, the few benchmarks I tried (file load times, mainly) didn't really show much improvement either, but we were dealing with large 2D files, not anything in 3D, so our tests may not have been an accurate representation of what anyone else will see. I didn't try to benchmark render times or refresh rates once the drawings were opened. We did see slight improvement across the board, but the main things that got faster were boot times, application load times, etc. Still, if you're spending a few grand on a new machine, I'd go ahead and put in the extra two hundred dollars for an Intel or Samsung SSD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJJ Posted October 17, 2013 Share Posted October 17, 2013 I find it hard to believe that IT guys would not consider buying components from a different vender because they don't show up in Autodesk list. As the IT guy, I immediately recognized that most of the video cards on Autodesk's approved list were more than a year old. I think it's safe to assume that newer models of an approved card will also become approved when Autodesk gets around to testing them, so use the list as a starting point and don't worry too much if your video card isn't there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handiman Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Buy from a company that specializes in CAD machines. Dell I feel is too consumer based. From my testing a gaming card is good for your lower 3D work. If you do serious 3D work then stay with the Quadro cards. I have a K4000 and I moved from a 660TI. At first I was disappointed I had spent the $$. But the more I use it the more I see the benefits. People that are "CAD drafter" and think a $1000 machine is all you need are not doing CAD for a living. There is a difference in useing CAD and being effecient with CAD. I personally do not care to wait for refreshing screens when I am on a 1/2 millon project and waiting on my screen to refresh. The client just needs his drawings. $500, 000 project, $80, 000 salary, $7, 000 software and $1500 computer. Something isn't right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f700es Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 No offense but I couldn't disagree more. In post #12 we see a real world test on the same hardware with just switching cards and it shows in AutoCAD and Inventor that a mid to high consumer card does in fact beat out a high end Quadro. Now they did not test revit, which I wish that they had. They also tested other high end programs and the quadros did better with them. I think one has to evaluate what they will be doing as to make a better hardware decision. I in fact do CAD for a living and have been doing so professionally since 1996, coming up on 17 years. As for a $1K CAD machine I really think you are overlooking what $1k will buy you today. I will admit that having ECC ram in a machine can be a benefit if you really need it but most modern systems are more than stable enough as to not need to spend the $$ on that unless you just have to. RAID in my opinion is not needed if files are kept on a server and not locally so there is one expense you can remove. Same with 10K rpm drives. Why have it unless files are local which is not a good idea. So there should be no problem working professionally in AutoCAD with today's quad core and hyper-threaded i7 based systems with over 8 gb of ram at or under $1k. Again, no offense. Just disagreeing. Not saying a high end system won't work or if you are doing something on say Siemens then yes you will need this but for AutoCAD you can save some money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReMark Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Can you recommend a computer that sells for under $1k that would be a good choice for someone doing professional grade AutoCAD work? I'd be interested in the overall specs of such a high end machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handiman Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 I am voicing what I have personally tested in the last 6 months. You can see my 2 CPU systems in my profile and the home CPU is much quicker. It cost me twice what the entry level Dell cost. My files are 20mb and larger for Mech. CAD 2D. I save the file to my C (SSD) drive every morning. Our network increases the autosave time by 5+ seconds, which occurs every 15min. Like I said the 660Ti card was very good. But when you zoom in to look at a detail and then back out it works a video card hard. Also someone earlier mentioned that 2gb of DDR3 memory on a card was plenty I disagree. Your video card must have DDR5 memory and 2gb or more is what I would recommend. If you can get by with the 5 second wait periods when changing between Model and Papers space then a $1500 machine is good, and a higher end gaming card will work. The new Corvette has big brakes, is low too the ground, fast, quick, big horsepower, and only cost $75,000. But it will not come close to running at a NASCAR race. NASCAR cars are big heavy bricks. But they are a purpose built machine. And preform as such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike_Taylor Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Can you recommend a computer that sells for under $1k that would be a good choice for someone doing professional grade AutoCAD work? I'd be interested in the overall specs of such a high end machine. By professional are you referring to content, CAD and design approach or large file sizes? Assuming you are referring to the first, this would very likely work for small to mid-sized CAD files (which is most likely what the majority of CAD operators/designers deal with). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f700es Posted October 19, 2013 Share Posted October 19, 2013 Thanks Mike, this is one of the systems I was looking at for a Cad machines replacement at work. 10 times the machine I use at work and it is a "workstation". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma Posted November 1, 2013 Author Share Posted November 1, 2013 And the system quote is in: Dell Precision T7600, MT, 1300W No Speaker option 317-9582 1 Four Core XEON E5-2643, 3.3GHz, 10M, 8.0 GT/s,Dell Precision T7600 318-1326 1 8X DVD+/-RW,Data Only,Dell Precision T3600,T5600 and T7600 318-2231 1 Thank you for Choosing Dell 318-1333 1 Dell Precision,T7600,1300W 85% Efficiency 331-4129 1 Regulatory Label,Dell Precision T7600 342-2635 1 Enable Low Power Mode for EUP Compliance,Dell Precision Desktop 320-3298 1 6GB nVIDIA Quadro 6000,Dual Monitor,2DP and 1DVI,Dell Precision Tx600 320-3316 1 Monitor Option-None 330-1085 1 No Remote Access Host Card, Dell Precision Desktop 330-3201 1 Energy Star Not Selected,Dell Precision Desktop 330-4024 1 No Resource CD for Dell Precision Desktop 330-6228 1 Windows 7 Label, OptiPlex, Fixed Precision, Vostro Desktop 421-5335 1 Dell Client System Update (Updates latest Dell Recommended BIOS, Drivers, Firmware and Apps),Precision Desktop 421-5607 1 Windows 7 Professional,No Media, 64-bit,Fixed Precision, English 421-7814 1 Dell Data Protection Access, Precision Workstations 330-9458 1 Dell MS111 USB Optical Mouse,OptiPlex and Fixed Precision 331-3037 1 Rack Mountable Platform without Rails, Dell Precision R5500 331-4094 1 Quick Reference Guide,English,Dell Precision T3600,T5600 and T7600 331-4131 1 No Out-of-Band Systems MGMT,PWS T7600 331-4135 1 Shipping Material for System,Dell Precision T7600 331-4816 1 NO RAID,Dell Precison Tx600 331-9370 1 PERC Controller, Dell Precision T7600 331-9586 1 Dell USB KB, English, WIN7/8, OptiPlex and Precision Desktop 332-0472 1 Documentation (English), Dell Latitude and Precision Workstations 470-AATC 1 US Power Cord 340-AACS 1 Dell Precision Resource DVD contains Diagnostics and Drivers 342-5065 1 PERC H310 SATA/SAS Controller for Dell Precision, T7600 342-4014 1 C2 SATA/SSD 2.5 Inch,1-4 Hard Drives,Dell Precision T7600 370-AAYJ 1 32GB (4x8GB) 1600MHz DDR3 ECC RDIMM 400-AATN 1 512GB 2.5inch Serial ATA Solid State Drive 630-AABP 1 Microsoft Office Trial, MUI, OptiPlex, Precision, Latitude 934-8147 1 Dell Limited Hardware Warranty Plus Service Initial Year 994-9710 1 ProSupport: Next Business Day Onsite Service After Remote Diagnosis Initial Year 994-9900 1 ProSupport : 7x24 Technical Support , Initial 938-4548 1 Dell Limited Hardware Warranty Plus Service Extended Year(s) 994-3472 1 ProSupport: Next Business Day Onsite Service After Remote Diagnosis 2 Year Extended 994-3572 1 ProSupport : 7x24 Technical Support , 2 Year Extended 989-3449 1 Thank you choosing Dell ProSupport. For tech support, visit total price with taxes $7500 CDN. And this is a "discounted" price Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma Posted November 1, 2013 Author Share Posted November 1, 2013 After discussing this quote with our design team, and according to Dells build site for a T7600, it appears these can be built with up to 128GB Ram. Not sure what the price difference would be for that, but in the grand scheme of things when looking at the overall price of the machine, probably not that much. Also with regards to Ram, these specs refer to 1600mhz. I have no idea if that board would work with other speeds, but would there be any noticable gains in using a higher speed, say 2400 mhz? I don't know enough about Ram and all it's many faces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enigma Posted November 4, 2013 Author Share Posted November 4, 2013 Some feedback on that workstation quote from a post I made on one of my nerd forums, from one of the main administrators who is an expert in system configuration and building, but not necessarily well versed in Autodesk programs. I hope to hear this week if this quote is within budget when our CFO returns from his whirlwind tour of our as yet to be implemented UK operations. “A couple of observations. The T7600 series chassis has actually been replaced by the T7610 which was released about a week and a half ago. If you are set on going bleeding edge top of the line, you may want to look there first, though it doesn't look like they have the customization options working on their site. The main difference is the T7610's will ship with hexacore Xeon's by default. That being said, there may be a few areas to look at where you could get more power for your money. The Main draw of the T76xx series chassis is their ability to house a second CPU. If you are not planning on buying the second CPU, it might be better to look at a T56xx or even a T36xx, which is going to have a fairly large price drop between similarily configured models. Depending on what you are doing, you may want to consider adding the second processor. The T5600 also supports a second processor if you want to go that route. We don't have the 5600 listed on our Premiere site since we don't buy that chassis, so I can't look at the exact options it has. Why the hell dell changed their site so you can't even see the options without a premiere login I'll never know. Autocad is one of those applications that truely will take advantage of all the Quadro video card features and processor horsepower you can throw at it, especially when you start using words like "Massive" and "3D Rendering" The more processor cores, the more ram, and the more video cards you can throw at it in SLI mode, the faster your renders will happen. Processor speed is secondary to processor cores in this instance, and physical cores trump hyperthreading virtual cores because autocad will be using the physical core to it's fullest extent. It's a similar story for ram. Faster ram does help, but if you can get 25% more ram by going with the slower stuff, it would be worth it in this instance. Autocad leverages the CUDA / FERMI engine for rendering quite extensivly though, so one of the best upgrades you can do is put multiple Quadro cards in the machine in SLI mode, regardless of the size or number of monitors. The video card is even more important than the ram or the processor in this particular instance. If you only intend on going with a single quadro card, you do not need a 1300 watt power supply. Even a 525 watt is adequate to run the highest end single quadro. Going with dual Quadro 6000's would give you a tremendous boost in render speed. If you aren't planning on running multiple drives, the smaller less expensive chassis would be the way to go. The T76xx series chassis are massive. They are taller than a cooler master ATCS 840 case, and they are really, really, really heavy. If you can go with the smaller chassis but double the video card, and a lower speed but higher core count processor or two and still meet your budget, that would likely be a worthwhile change. If you can get them to spring for a fusionIO PCI express based SSD card, that would also be a good thing. That would probably obliterate your budget though.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.