View Full Version : Render PC (130k picture attached)

03-17-2003, 09:21 AM
Hi, I'm looking for your opininons on a PC that I'm about to build.
Will I gain much from a mainboard with 4 ramslot's or will 3 do just fine? (2GB vs. 1.5GB)

This is the current plan (http://medlem.spray.se/kitesurf/ugly-side.jpg)
Please correct me if I'm spending the money on totaly wrong stuff.

I will not use it to work on, only as a rendermachine in the basement to take the rendering load of my mac laptop.

What OS is best for this use?
Running OS X Jaguar on the laptop and my other mac, might wanna use 802.11g for comunicating with this PC, as I hate cables :)


03-17-2003, 01:29 PM
There are 1GB RAM sticks in case 1.5GB are not enough :D

Besides that, you picked one of the fastest P4 boards out there i think...i'd go with it.

But i am allergic against Realtek :D
Maybe find an Intel or 3Com network card...

As OS i'd use WinXP professional or Win2000 professional.

Don't think you're spending your money on totally wrong stuff...you sure you only want to use it as render slave? ;)

03-17-2003, 01:51 PM
Looks good, especially that motherboard. That's the one I decided on earlier today myself. It's going to be a couple of months before I buy, so things may change, but if I were buying today, that's the board I'd get. The SIS 655 chipset is great and that board does not include a lot of bells and whistles that I consider unnecessary.

03-17-2003, 02:13 PM
I would do some research before using more than two DIMM slots. Some motherboards recommend registered memory in order to use all four slots.

If you choose a dual-channel motherboard (e.g., one based on Intel's granite bay chipset), you'll get a slight boost by using pairs of DIMMs. I don't know how much effect memory performance has on rendering time.

For now, Windows 2000 is probably the best choice. I can't recommend Windows XP, due to the product activation scheme. I wouldn't recommend Windows 9x for a system with more than 512 MB. If the Linux renderer is successful, that will be a good choice, too.

Last comment: I'm not a huge Dell fan, but you may be able to find a comparable PowerEdge on sale for 500 $US, or less. (Sites like Techbargains (http://techbargains.com/) and dealnews (http://dealnews.com/) publish 5 - 10% coupons, occasionally.) Is Dell a convenient choice in Sweden?

03-17-2003, 02:27 PM
The SIS 655 supports dual channel memory.

03-17-2003, 04:31 PM
The manual of that Gigabyte board doesn't mention anything about registered RAM, doesn't even seem to support it (?)

AFAIK Intels E7205 and 7505 also support unbuffered RAM in all slots...that's pretty cool, isn't it? :)

But yea my Tyan Tiger MPX (Dual Athlon board) forces me to use registered RAM if i fill more than two slots...but it's stable as a rock.

03-19-2003, 03:44 PM
I think most boards recomend using registered ram for over a Gig of the stuff. And AMD are better than Indetl, so long as u have enough fans (but its in the basement right)


03-21-2003, 07:59 AM
Thanx for your comments, I'm starting to feel this is a good set up, or at least a decent.

Had a look at chris benchmarks but didnt see any clear difference in ram usage. Thats a nice site, I will for sure add my bench results to him.
That site could charge money if they grow and had a better searchfunction!

We have lot Dell's in sweden, even if I have had the impression of Poweredge being overpriced at the swedish secondhand market.

And yet nothing I tried comes close to OS X for working, so I stick to my mac for a wile, but not for rendering anymore though.

03-21-2003, 08:14 AM
Originally posted by Epita
I think most boards recomend using registered ram for over a Gig of the stuff. And AMD are better than Indetl, so long as u have enough fans (but its in the basement right)


I have seen different oppinions on that, I was elsewere told that Lightwave rendering depend some upon "SSE2 instruction set" and that AMD processors dont support those. And at chris benchmarks they dont seem to perform the same if I compare clockspeed/rendertime.

But those AMD's might have better prices per mhz if overclocked, even though P4's might be overclocked too.
Is the P4 2.4Ghz ok to OC alot?

03-21-2003, 06:04 PM
LightWave is one of Anand's standard benchmarks. Have a look at the Athlon XP 3000+ review (http://anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1783). I'd say the results are inconclusive. If SSE2 comes into play, as it does in the radiosity_reflective_things benchmark, then the Pentium 4 dominates: a 1.8 GHz Willamette P4 beats a 2.25 GHz Athlon. On the other hand, a 1.73 GHz Athlon beats a 2.8 GHz Northwood P4 in the sunset benchmark.