PDA

View Full Version : Workstation



l1tay2
11-09-2010, 01:43 PM
I am in the process of purchasing my first workstation dedicated to 3d animation. I am considering the imac i7 with 8gigs of ram. Would this be efficient for lightwave 10? Also..if anyone wants to list their workstations here that would help out as well. Thanks!

rsfd
11-10-2010, 03:45 AM
Hi,
even that I am indeed a "Mac Guy", I wouldn't call the iMac a workstation.
The i7 CPU is clearly the best for 3D, but I wouldn't consider an iMac as a workhorse for excessive renderings, as it will most likely run into overheating issues.
(Of course, that depends on one's personal needs).
The iMac is a decent machine for standard 3D work with the option to run the Windows versions of LW via Bootcamp.
(It is the sad truth, that the Windows versions of most 3D packages do work better than their OSX counterparts).
8GB is enough for most standard work, 16GB would be the maximum for the iMac and could do some good with high-end work (using a lot of 32-bit imagery/textures, high-poly models, massive lighting aso).

Soth
11-10-2010, 04:25 AM
Would that be mostly used for rendering or modelling/animation?

prometheus
11-11-2010, 02:58 AM
I wouldn´t go Mac for years to come, to many plugins and tools not working with that.

Michael

crashnburn
11-11-2010, 08:33 AM
You can see my two system setups below, both self built and I bet a whole lot cheaper than an iMac. And in 5 years upto now.....touch wood......I've only had to swap a power supply. The i7 is excellent, runs cool and fast at stock speed. Some guys on here have there's running at 4GHz on air which is going to give you a very fast workstation.

l1tay2
11-11-2010, 09:16 AM
Would that be mostly used for rendering or modelling/animation?

This would be for modeling/rendering/animation...the whole deal.

l1tay2
11-11-2010, 09:17 AM
Hi,
even that I am indeed a "Mac Guy", I wouldn't call the iMac a workstation.
The i7 CPU is clearly the best for 3D, but I wouldn't consider an iMac as a workhorse for excessive renderings, as it will most likely run into overheating issues.
(Of course, that depends on one's personal needs).
The iMac is a decent machine for standard 3D work with the option to run the Windows versions of LW via Bootcamp.
(It is the sad truth, that the Windows versions of most 3D packages do work better than their OSX counterparts).
8GB is enough for most standard work, 16GB would be the maximum for the iMac and could do some good with high-end work (using a lot of 32-bit imagery/textures, high-poly models, massive lighting aso).

Thanks for the reply....So maybe the best option would have a pc custom built?

nickdigital
11-11-2010, 11:46 AM
Thanks for the reply....So maybe the best option would have a pc custom built?

Yes if you're not opposed to working on a PC.

Cheaper to build.
Easier to customize.
More 3rd party plug-ins are available on a PC compared to a Mac.

l1tay2
11-11-2010, 11:57 AM
Yes if you're not opposed to working on a PC.

Cheaper to build.
Easier to customize.
More 3rd party plug-ins are available on a PC compared to a Mac.

Thanks! Could you offer any advice as far as specs go? Like what graphics card you recommend? processor? memory?

nickdigital
11-11-2010, 12:02 PM
Like what graphics card you recommend?
Stick with NVidia.


processor?
I think the current speeds that are out there are probably fine. Obviously the more cores the better.


memory?
You can never have enough RAM so as much as you can afford is good. I think going with at least 2gb per core is a good starting point IMHO.

l1tay2
11-11-2010, 12:17 PM
Stick with NVidia.


I think the current speeds that are out there are probably fine. Obviously the more cores the better.


You can never have enough RAM so as much as you can afford is good. I think going with at least 2gb per core is a good starting point IMHO.

Good deal. Thanks Nick

rsfd
11-11-2010, 12:42 PM
Thanks for the reply....So maybe the best option would have a pc custom built?

well, as nickdigital states, this would probably be the best option when you don't rely on OSX.
His hardware tips are pretty much what you have to look for on Win-PC.
(And if you're lucky, Michael "Lightwolf" Wolf catches this thread, he could give you very good hints for custom PCs too, as he is - besides his coding capabilities - someone who has a rich knowledge about hardware).

Kevbarnes
11-11-2010, 02:49 PM
Hi l1tay2

Check out Interpro Workstations (Details Below) not far from you.

Tom was really helpfull gave good advice;

I've Just bought the following:

Case : IPW-Ci7 Case (Antec P183) - Coolermaster Silent Pro - 600W -Modular
Mainboard : MSI® X58A-GD65 Mainboard (2x PCI-E x16 - SLI / CrossFire / 6x DDR-3 slots)
Graphics Card(s) : ATI FirePro V5800 1GB GDDR5 (PCI-E x16) ** 1x DVI / 1x DisplayPort **
Hard Drive (1) : Corsair® Force Series - 120GB - SATA2 - SSD [285MB/s / 275MB/s (Read/Write)]
Hard Drive (2) : Western Digital "Black Edition" 1TB - 7,200rpm - SATA3 - 64MB Cache
Hard Drive (3) : None
Hard Drive (4) : None
Optical Drive(s) : LG 22x DVD+/-R/RW/RAM - DL (S-ATA) - Black
Sound Card : Intel® High Definition Audio (7.1) (Realtek Codec)
Network Card(s) : Realtek® Gigabit LAN
Operating System(s) : Microsoft Windows 7 Professional Edition (64-bit)
CPU(s) : Intel® Core i7 980X Extreme (6x 3.33GHz / 12MB L3 Cache) w/ HT
Memory : 12GB "Major Branded" DDR-3 1333MHz (PC3-10600) (6x 2GB)
Mouse / Keyboard : Logitech Deluxe 250 Keyboard (USB) / RX250 Optical Mouse (USB)
Warranty Terms : 2 Year(s) Return to Base (RTB) (Inc. Parts and Labour)
Monitor(s) : None

£2295 + £25 delivery

(£2726.01 – Inc. VAT)

I'm just setting it up now - i'll let you know



Tom Green
[Director]

InterPro Workstations Ltd
Jupiter House
Drummond Road
Astonfields Industrial Estate
Stafford
ST16 3HJ

Tel: 0845 241 6745
www.ipworkstations.com

[email protected]

Soth
11-11-2010, 03:48 PM
This would be for modeling/rendering/animation...the whole deal.

If rendering is included then you should go for i7 if not I would go for fastest i5 and then overclock it a bit. :)

l1tay2
11-12-2010, 10:22 AM
Hi l1tay2

Check out Interpro Workstations (Details Below) not far from you.

Tom was really helpfull gave good advice;

I've Just bought the following:

Case : IPW-Ci7 Case (Antec P183) - Coolermaster Silent Pro - 600W -Modular
Mainboard : MSI® X58A-GD65 Mainboard (2x PCI-E x16 - SLI / CrossFire / 6x DDR-3 slots)
Graphics Card(s) : ATI FirePro V5800 1GB GDDR5 (PCI-E x16) ** 1x DVI / 1x DisplayPort **
Hard Drive (1) : Corsair® Force Series - 120GB - SATA2 - SSD [285MB/s / 275MB/s (Read/Write)]
Hard Drive (2) : Western Digital "Black Edition" 1TB - 7,200rpm - SATA3 - 64MB Cache
Hard Drive (3) : None
Hard Drive (4) : None
Optical Drive(s) : LG 22x DVD+/-R/RW/RAM - DL (S-ATA) - Black
Sound Card : Intel® High Definition Audio (7.1) (Realtek Codec)
Network Card(s) : Realtek® Gigabit LAN
Operating System(s) : Microsoft Windows 7 Professional Edition (64-bit)
CPU(s) : Intel® Core i7 980X Extreme (6x 3.33GHz / 12MB L3 Cache) w/ HT
Memory : 12GB "Major Branded" DDR-3 1333MHz (PC3-10600) (6x 2GB)
Mouse / Keyboard : Logitech Deluxe 250 Keyboard (USB) / RX250 Optical Mouse (USB)
Warranty Terms : 2 Year(s) Return to Base (RTB) (Inc. Parts and Labour)
Monitor(s) : None

£2295 + £25 delivery

(£2726.01 – Inc. VAT)

I'm just setting it up now - i'll let you know



Tom Green
[Director]

InterPro Workstations Ltd
Jupiter House
Drummond Road
Astonfields Industrial Estate
Stafford
ST16 3HJ

Tel: 0845 241 6745
www.ipworkstations.com

[email protected]

Wow..thanks for the detailed info. That setup appears to be a beast!! I almost feel dumb even asking if an imac would be efficient in the first place. Ha!

Kevbarnes
11-12-2010, 11:14 AM
Hi I1tay2

Other Info:

The Graphics Card: ATI FirePro V5800
allows upto 3 monitors via "EyeFinity" technology (see attached pdf from Interpro) supported in Windows Vista and windows 7.

The SSD (Solid state HD) on the Operating system should improve loading, startup and HD read/write times.

Other options on processors:

Intel® Core i7 950 QuadCore @ 3.06GHz would have been slightly cheaper

The Cheapest i7 Dual 6 Core (2.66 GHz) came in at just over £4000.00 inc vat.

The extreme i7 Dual 6 core(3.33 GHz) was just over £5000.00 inc vat (a beast!)

rsfd
11-12-2010, 11:38 AM
Wow..thanks for the detailed info. That setup appears to be a beast!! I almost feel dumb even asking if an imac would be efficient in the first place. Ha!

to be fair: it's hardly comparable, as it's a complete different price range (and without monitor).
At ~ € 2760,- (ex VAT) it's closer to a MacPro (which is Server Grade Hardware Xeon CPU plus ECC-RAM).
Even if I'm not that much into PC hardware, I wonder if ATI is a good choice on Windows.
(I'm always told and I've read various articles, that Nvidia provides better performance and especially better Drivers on Windows).
I would recommend some more research for the Graphics Card.
(but of course I'm leaving it up to you)

JonW
11-12-2010, 10:50 PM
With 3d you want as much CPU resources as possible. But it doesn’t generally need to be in one box. You can set up one good box & add nodes later, or over the years just move your old boxes to the farm.

Work out the total cost of your new box & divide the price by the total GHz. Basically what you are trying to do is get the maximum GHz per dollar. This is a lot easier to do with a PC than a Mac.

prometheus
11-14-2010, 05:27 AM
Doesn´t Ati cards rule out cuda reliant software and plugins?

Michael

rsfd
11-14-2010, 03:21 PM
Yes, AMD/ATI cards cannot use CUDA, as CUDA is Nvidia technology (as is PhysiX).
AMD/ATI has FireStream, but it's not that relevant.
OpenCL and DirectX 11 is similar, but not bound to proprietary hardware, which makes them more interesting solutions, imo.

Markc
11-17-2010, 12:31 PM
Apparently Nvidia are releasing the Quadro 4000 for the Macpro this month (256 CUDA cores, 2GB Ram, $1199)

jomax
11-18-2010, 01:03 AM
reading the post it seems confusing
i am looking for a low range graphics card
should i go for Nvidia or Ati

i personaly like ATI (no specific reasons)

rsfd
11-18-2010, 06:03 AM
Apparently Nvidia are releasing the Quadro 4000 for the Macpro this month (256 CUDA cores, 2GB Ram, $1199)

The Quadros aren't worth their price on Macs.
Drivers are just too poor:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/12/a-second-look-at-the-nvidia-quadro-fx-4800-mac-edition.ars
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/11/nvidia-brings-fermi-quadro-4000-kicking-mostly-screaming-to-mac.ars


reading the post it seems confusing
i am looking for a low range graphics card
should i go for Nvidia or Ati

i personaly like ATI (no specific reasons)

Are you on Mac or PC?
On Mac it's not that much of a deal, as drivers are equally behind.
ATI actually is better on Mac than Nvidia.
On PC it seems that Nvidia is better.
And it depends, if you are using software that takes advantage of Nvidia's CUDA technology (Nvidia offers special drivers for some AD apps and Adobe uses CUDA for several tasks in some of their apps, and I guess all GPU renderers use CUDA).
One problem is that CUDA is bound to Nvidia hardware. ATI offers FireStream, but there aren't that much companys who seem to use it.
DirectX 11 and OpenCL are more open in relation to hardware.

l1tay2
11-18-2010, 07:29 AM
Hi l1tay2

Check out Interpro Workstations (Details Below) not far from you.

Tom was really helpfull gave good advice;

I've Just bought the following:

Case : IPW-Ci7 Case (Antec P183) - Coolermaster Silent Pro - 600W -Modular
Mainboard : MSI® X58A-GD65 Mainboard (2x PCI-E x16 - SLI / CrossFire / 6x DDR-3 slots)
Graphics Card(s) : ATI FirePro V5800 1GB GDDR5 (PCI-E x16) ** 1x DVI / 1x DisplayPort **
Hard Drive (1) : Corsair® Force Series - 120GB - SATA2 - SSD [285MB/s / 275MB/s (Read/Write)]
Hard Drive (2) : Western Digital "Black Edition" 1TB - 7,200rpm - SATA3 - 64MB Cache
Hard Drive (3) : None
Hard Drive (4) : None
Optical Drive(s) : LG 22x DVD+/-R/RW/RAM - DL (S-ATA) - Black
Sound Card : Intel® High Definition Audio (7.1) (Realtek Codec)
Network Card(s) : Realtek® Gigabit LAN
Operating System(s) : Microsoft Windows 7 Professional Edition (64-bit)
CPU(s) : Intel® Core i7 980X Extreme (6x 3.33GHz / 12MB L3 Cache) w/ HT
Memory : 12GB "Major Branded" DDR-3 1333MHz (PC3-10600) (6x 2GB)
Mouse / Keyboard : Logitech Deluxe 250 Keyboard (USB) / RX250 Optical Mouse (USB)
Warranty Terms : 2 Year(s) Return to Base (RTB) (Inc. Parts and Labour)
Monitor(s) : None

£2295 + £25 delivery

(£2726.01 – Inc. VAT)

I'm just setting it up now - i'll let you know



Tom Green
[Director]

InterPro Workstations Ltd
Jupiter House
Drummond Road
Astonfields Industrial Estate
Stafford
ST16 3HJ

Tel: 0845 241 6745
www.ipworkstations.com

[email protected]

Tom.. how is everything running?

Kevbarnes
11-18-2010, 12:16 PM
Tom.. how is everything running?

Tom?? ha ha... my name is Kevin, Tom Green is the contact at Interpro

I realise the post looks as if Tom has signed it at the bottom - no worries

Anyway

I'm still just setting it up at the moment, Installed CS4 and Lightwave
I'm just installing Plug-ins and preferences on my apps. which will take a while. I can only get to it on evenings and weekends.
I did a Cinebench test which gave:-
a cpu score of 8.92
Open GL score of 65.17

no problems yet but i'll keep you posted.

Kev

ps The ssd makes a lot of difference just starting up and opening apps
and I am also enjoying using the new monitor (Dell U2711) crystal sharp

l1tay2
11-23-2010, 07:43 AM
Tom?? ha ha... my name is Kevin, Tom Green is the contact at Interpro

I realise the post looks as if Tom has signed it at the bottom - no worries

Anyway

I'm still just setting it up at the moment, Installed CS4 and Lightwave
I'm just installing Plug-ins and preferences on my apps. which will take a while. I can only get to it on evenings and weekends.
I did a Cinebench test which gave:-
a cpu score of 8.92
Open GL score of 65.17

no problems yet but i'll keep you posted.

Kev

ps The ssd makes a lot of difference just starting up and opening apps
and I am also enjoying using the new monitor (Dell U2711) crystal sharp

Thanks for the update KEVIN..ha. I am going to post the machine I am customizing later today.

Tom-IPW
11-26-2010, 04:33 AM
Hi folks,

Thanks for the recommendation Kevin. I hope things are well with you and your workstation.

If anyone wants any help or advise - please post on here and i'll be happy to help.

Not as a sales person - as a tech person.. I leave sales to other people :)

Free help and advice.. I'm not here to sell.

We obviously test a lot of new hardware and things that are not even out... so if anyone's interested.. fire away!

Kevbarnes
11-28-2010, 07:34 AM
We obviously test a lot of new hardware and things that are not even out... so if anyone's interested.. fire away!

Hi Tom

Good to hear from you, great to see you on the forum.

I'd be interested in future development of the i7 Range of processors.
are there plans for an 8 core processor at any time?.

Overclocking:
with the ‘Extreem’ i7 range I understand that the ‘Turboboost’ feature
Can take a 3.33 GHz to 3.60 GHz Automatically depending on demand.

Can this be manually set higher than 3.33 ghz. And would it need extra cooling?

l1tay2
11-29-2010, 09:58 AM
Hi folks,

Thanks for the recommendation Kevin. I hope things are well with you and your workstation.

If anyone wants any help or advise - please post on here and i'll be happy to help.

Not as a sales person - as a tech person.. I leave sales to other people :)

Free help and advice.. I'm not here to sell.

We obviously test a lot of new hardware and things that are not even out... so if anyone's interested.. fire away!

Tom,

I was recently told that the Dual Intel Quad Core Xeon E5620 was a better processor than the i7(for animation). What are your thoughts on this?

Tom-IPW
12-01-2010, 02:53 AM
Hi Tom

Good to hear from you, great to see you on the forum.

I'd be interested in future development of the i7 Range of processors.
are there plans for an 8 core processor at any time?.

Overclocking:
with the ‘Extreem’ i7 range I understand that the ‘Turboboost’ feature
Can take a 3.33 GHz to 3.60 GHz Automatically depending on demand.

Can this be manually set higher than 3.33 ghz. And would it need extra cooling?

Hiya Kevin,

There's a bit of a demo on here :-

http://www.intel.com/technology/turboboost/index.htm

It only really applies to the first core if the voltages and temperatures allow it. It would easily do it in your system with no fuss and you won't need extra cooling in your chassis.

You can 'overclock' your frequency over and above the 3.33GHz (stock speed) in the BIOS - I can help you with this if you like and your Turbo Boost will increase as a result also.

Perhaps dropping me a mail would be the best thing if you want to do this.

Regards.

Tom

Tom-IPW
12-01-2010, 03:07 AM
Tom,

I was recently told that the Dual Intel Quad Core Xeon E5620 was a better processor than the i7(for animation). What are your thoughts on this?

For an output yes - and by that I mean a dual configuration on the whole for rendering and analysis work (although I've cited an example below which contradicts that because you don't suggest which i7 you're thinking about). If you're modelling, then the chances are you're only using one or two cores at any one time. In which case I wouldn't recommend a pair of "slower" Xeon processors over a faster i7 chip.

The memory controller on the E5620 only really handles 1066MHz RAM effectively (whereas a i7 970/980X or something similar will handle 1333/1600+) and the QPI (which is the replacement for the old Front Side Bus - if you're familiar with it?) is 4.80GT/s vs 6.40GT/s on the i7 980X.

The QPI... if you're unsure - is effectively your bandwidth for your CPU, GPU and RAM. In the olden days the memory controller was on the mainboard (doing its own thing) and anything the CPU was doing used to get passed down this 'passage' en-route to the RAM and back again.. It was determined that this was too narrow for memory intensive work and it was causing a bottleneck to the system overall. So by copying what AMD had been practicing for years, Intel integrated the memory controller directly in to the processor itself which takes one 'hop' away and allows for a more direct access... not to mention the huge increase in bandwidth it provides.

Xeon's are only worth it if you're prepared to go a fair bit up the range.

It's like buying a bod standard Audi at 'A' price, when a Golf costing half as much will do exactly the same job (performance wise).

I appreciate that it is no the be all and end all, but if you take something like Cinebench R11.5 and do the CPU tests on a pair of E5620's you will score about 8 points. Which is the same as an i7 970 (which is actually 6 cores vs 8 cores). Clock speed is more important to be honest. You need to consider that 8 cores @ 2.4GHz = 19.2 total, and so is an i7 970... 6 cores @ 3.20GHz = 19.2 also.

The problem with the Xeon's is that you need ECC or ECC Registered memory which is nearly twice as much as 'desktop' RAM, the case and mainboard are 2/3x the price and it is slightly noisier. If you can afford a better Xeon that the E5620 - then it's worth considering. Otherwise for single threaded applications and tasks you'd be losing out of a pocket full of money and about 25% perfornace (vs a i7 970).

(apologies it's so long winded)

Tom-IPW
12-01-2010, 03:10 AM
I'd be interested in future development of the i7 Range of processors.
are there plans for an 8 core processor at any time?.


Sorry I missed this mate.

No plans as yet... well... no official ones.

I have a new roadmap and the replacement to the socket 1156 stuff is debuting in Q1 next year, but it doesn't effect the socket 1366 ranges.

The socket 1366 is their flagship and they're going to release a 990X - and that's about it for 2011.

If I take my techno hat off for a minute and look at it from a business and marketing point of view... AMD is so far behind on performance in the high-end/enthusiast sector Intel doens't need to show it's hand yet on 8-core. Don't believe it's not near ready though. :)

l1tay2
12-01-2010, 06:57 AM
For an output yes - and by that I mean a dual configuration on the whole for rendering and analysis work (although I've cited an example below which contradicts that because you don't suggest which i7 you're thinking about). If you're modelling, then the chances are you're only using one or two cores at any one time. In which case I wouldn't recommend a pair of "slower" Xeon processors over a faster i7 chip.

The memory controller on the E5620 only really handles 1066MHz RAM effectively (whereas a i7 970/980X or something similar will handle 1333/1600+) and the QPI (which is the replacement for the old Front Side Bus - if you're familiar with it?) is 4.80GT/s vs 6.40GT/s on the i7 980X.

The QPI... if you're unsure - is effectively your bandwidth for your CPU, GPU and RAM. In the olden days the memory controller was on the mainboard (doing its own thing) and anything the CPU was doing used to get passed down this 'passage' en-route to the RAM and back again.. It was determined that this was too narrow for memory intensive work and it was causing a bottleneck to the system overall. So by copying what AMD had been practicing for years, Intel integrated the memory controller directly in to the processor itself which takes one 'hop' away and allows for a more direct access... not to mention the huge increase in bandwidth it provides.

Xeon's are only worth it if you're prepared to go a fair bit up the range.

It's like buying a bod standard Audi at 'A' price, when a Golf costing half as much will do exactly the same job (performance wise).

I appreciate that it is no the be all and end all, but if you take something like Cinebench R11.5 and do the CPU tests on a pair of E5620's you will score about 8 points. Which is the same as an i7 970 (which is actually 6 cores vs 8 cores). Clock speed is more important to be honest. You need to consider that 8 cores @ 2.4GHz = 19.2 total, and so is an i7 970... 6 cores @ 3.20GHz = 19.2 also.

The problem with the Xeon's is that you need ECC or ECC Registered memory which is nearly twice as much as 'desktop' RAM, the case and mainboard are 2/3x the price and it is slightly noisier. If you can afford a better Xeon that the E5620 - then it's worth considering. Otherwise for single threaded applications and tasks you'd be losing out of a pocket full of money and about 25% perfornace (vs a i7 970).

(apologies it's so long winded)

Tom,

Thanks for the valuable information. Here is the system that i am thinking about getting. It will be used for modeling, animation, and rendering.


System Board: Intel X8 5520 SATA Workstation System Board (no SLI Support)
Processor: DUAL Intel Quad-Core Xeon E5620 2.4GHZ 1066 MHz L3 12MB 5.86 GT/s QPI w HT & TB
Operating System: Windows 7 Professional 64-Bit
Memory: 24GB DDR-3 PC3-10600 1333MHZ Registered ECC (6 x 4GB)
Primary Hard Drive: 1TB SATA II 7200RPM 32MB Cache
Graphics Card: Nvidia Quadro FX 1800 768 MB

What are your thoughts...

JonW
12-01-2010, 11:25 PM
Don’t forget that Modeler & Layout only use one core. It’s only when you are rendering that all cores are being used. So an overclocked 980 maybe worth looking at for that high speed single core.

Using an SSD for OS & current work is very worthwhile.


Fans used with server boards & boxes are very noisy. I have 1 Intel box for my E5335 CPUs & it has 1 massive fan an the back. Looking at Intel's current boxes it still looks more or less the same layout. Also the layout of their box prevents putting tower coolers on the heatsinks. You also need a server power supply because of the connections required for the MB. They are far more expensive as well. I’m using a Chenbro case which has the room for large HS & large quiet fans.
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100802


Some benchmarks.
http://www.3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3&scene=39


When using Xeons, it’s usually more economical to use the top end CPUs. Divide the cost of your whole box set up by the GHz of each CPU speed, & I think you will find you get more GHz per dollar for the top end CPUs.

It’s more economical to use the cheaper CPU but only in a render node, because you don’t need all the extra components as you do in a workstation.


Cinebench R11.5
16 threads W5580: 11.39
8 threads E5450: 7.17
8 threads [email protected]: 6.10
8 threads E5335: 4.47