PDA

View Full Version : computer specs help please



dashaus
03-30-2005, 05:11 PM
sigh i just wrote this whole thing out and than when i posted it errored me saying i wasnt logged in(whicgh would make it very hard to write this post) and now its gone :'(

IM really too tired to type all that i just did again so i will tell you what i thought would go into a computer for my brother who uses lightwave as his primary program. Hes not very computer savy but apprently he can use this program pretty good. So if someone could help guide me into the right choices for a lightwave machine that would be much appreciated :)

my thoughts:
cpu- min p4 w/ht{edit: 3.0 gig}

ram- min 1 gig

vid- i was goign to go with a top ati but i hear that alot of peopl have problems so now im unsure :/

hdd- 80 gig master for winodws + proggies 200gig+ for saving the projects to and to house the page file

power- min 500 watt

sound- onboard probably

network- onboard

usb2- onboard

firewire- onboard

rom drive- maybe a dvd burner def a cd burner


--------- So any problems any one can forsee with this setup? suggestions? do you think that he will be able to get at least 3-4 years out of it? thanks in advance for any help

Vincenzo
03-30-2005, 06:36 PM
I would recommend going with an nvidia gf card. Also remember that final renders on LW use ray tracing and thus are done by CPU, so I would spend money on a hot cpu instead of hot video card. Also think HD space would be important if you are into making alot of videos.

Gui Lo
03-31-2005, 04:08 AM
Hi dashaus,
I'm going through a similiar process.

I am concentrating on the motherboard first and then adding stuff I can afford.


Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe

2GB Ram(Not sure which type/speed)

Nvidia GPU that's SLI compatable(Not sure which one...cheapest!)

Got enough harddisk with 80 GB and 40GB.

Portable iomega DVD Writer(used mainly for backup of Mac and PC files)



My current 768MB ram works fine so I guess Lightwave is really nice with memory and I do mid range CGI/video work. My but ram is so cheap now so I can go for 2GB.

These are my thoughts at the moment, hope it helps.

Gui Lo

Brianthreedee
03-31-2005, 08:11 AM
Ok, requick on CPU!

Intel, AMD same thing! Decide what your money for a CPU is, then find the one in that price range with the better rendering times!

Once you decide on a CPU, Intel or AMD, (Personally I find more bang for the buck from AMD) then decide on a mother board! When looking at the motherboar, look at the manufacturers rep and the chip sets used!

The CPU and motherboard are thee biggest things to consider for quaility and speed!

dashaus
03-31-2005, 04:04 PM
Ok, requick on CPU!

Intel, AMD same thing! Decide what your money for a CPU is, then find the one in that price range with the better rendering times!

Once you decide on a CPU, Intel or AMD, (Personally I find more bang for the buck from AMD) then decide on a mother board! When looking at the motherboar, look at the manufacturers rep and the chip sets used!

The CPU and motherboard are thee biggest things to consider for quaility and speed!
you said see which one has better rendering times..where would i find this?
[edit:typo]

dashaus
03-31-2005, 04:07 PM
Hi dashaus,
I'm going through a similiar process.

I am concentrating on the motherboard first and then adding stuff I can afford.


Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe

2GB Ram(Not sure which type/speed)

Nvidia GPU that's SLI compatable(Not sure which one...cheapest!)

Got enough harddisk with 80 GB and 40GB.

Portable iomega DVD Writer(used mainly for backup of Mac and PC files)



My current 768MB ram works fine so I guess Lightwave is really nice with memory and I do mid range CGI/video work. My but ram is so cheap now so I can go for 2GB.

These are my thoughts at the moment, hope it helps.

Gui Losli? doesnt that have to do with dual gpus? are you going for a dual gpu setup? also isnt that only with pci-e?

Brianthreedee
03-31-2005, 06:58 PM
you said see which one has better rendering times..where would i find this?

You can find them on sites like futuremark http://www.futuremark.com/
You can use sites like www.pricewatch.com to figure cost of items.

I did not give you any specific CPU for it will depend on your budget.

My system for example is:
AMD XP +3200
Nvidia FX5700 (Softmod to Quadro FX1100)
1G of DDR333 memory (Dual channel)
Nforce2 Ultra400
WD80 I[email protected] w/8mb cache.

It's a fast system, for me. The CPU was $95 cheaper and renders faster then a [email protected] The $95 I saved went to a better video card, the FX5700 instead of a FX5200 and better motherboard, Nforce2 Ultra400 instead of just an Nforce2.

This is why I say decide on your budget. The mother board is going to be around for awhile but you may up grade the CPU, video card, hard drive and memory several times. So take the time to get the best/flexible board you can. Then from there your cpu, then so forth.

Since lightwave is more CPU dependent I did not feel the need to get a very high end card, but mind you, your screen updates when moving around in perspective mode seem more video card dependent.

Mind you I may have gotten an AMD but that was MY budget, you decide based on your needs.

Gui Lo
03-31-2005, 07:10 PM
SLI does allow 2 video boards to be used together but it is not a requirement. I intend to use one first then if a new card comes out with PPU to do the physics or Lightwave can do hardware rendering then I can get another to use also. In this case my first Vid Card can still be used.

In reply to Brianthreedee IMHO it is the opposite. Choose the motherboard first because that will give you the choice of CPUs. For instance I chose the Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe since it uses the 939 socket for AMD CPUs. This means that it will accept the new 64 bit CPUs and also dual core CPUs.

You can go to .http://www.blanos.com/benchmark/ for a very rough real world speed guide.

Cheers
Gui Lo

Brianthreedee
03-31-2005, 07:30 PM
Gui Lo is correct.

I hadn't read my post fully so I had not realized it infered the CPU first. Like Gui Lo said you should look at the motherboard. As I thought I was pointing out, :) the motherboard is the component that will be around the longest, so you want to get one that has the best longevity! From that stand point a AMD64/opteron based motherboard does have better longevity than an Intel solution. Simply look at the history of the two parts. Intel has a history of changing the mother board (Socket) with almost every new chip design.

dashaus
03-31-2005, 10:10 PM
if the cpu is more dependdent on rendering than the vid card than do you guys think a dual cpu setup would be better?
and evryone is saying get nvidia gpu but what exactly makes them better than ati cards for this program...what are these problems people are having with the ati cards? is it because lightwave uses opengl and the ati cards have always been inferior in the opengl department compared to nvidia?

Gui Lo
03-31-2005, 10:28 PM
For me its a matter of experience.

We have two used two Asus motherboards with a AMD cpus and nVidia cards. These have always worked great so I'll just stick with the same guys when I update.

Dual CPU(two CPUs) is fast but I think quite expensive since they are more specialist and two CPUs are needed. I have a feeling that Dual Core(one CPU) will be more efficient(power/price).

Cheers
Gui Lo

dashaus
03-31-2005, 10:36 PM
For me its a matter of experience.

We have two used two Asus motherboards with a AMD cpus and nVidia cards. These have always worked great so I'll just stick with the same guys when I update.

Dual CPU(two CPUs) is fast but I think quite expensive since they are more specialist and two CPUs are needed. I have a feeling that Dual Core(one CPU) will be more efficient(power/price).

Cheers
Gui Lo
this computer has to last awhile so id rather spend the money and not have to in the near futre spend more(besides im not even paying for it :P)

Captain Obvious
04-01-2005, 07:44 AM
Lots of Lightwave render benchmarks here...

http://www.blanos.com/benchmark/

See which processor gives the most bang for the buck!

Brianthreedee
04-01-2005, 12:35 PM
Well an AMD64 or Opteron motherboard would last longer then an intel system. For starters, if you buy a single cpu system today, tomorrow you can upgrade to the dual core cpu. Now your single cpu system just became a dual for the cost of a single cpu. Same applies if you get a dual cpu opterton system today, tomorrow it becomes a quad cpu system. Honestly if money is not a major issue a dual opteron system would give you the most bang for the buck over the long haul.

Captain Obvious
04-01-2005, 02:27 PM
Has AMD said that their dual-core processors will be pin-for-pin compatible with their current single-core processors, and work in the same motherboards? If not, I have my doubts about whether or not it would work.

dashaus
04-01-2005, 03:31 PM
Has AMD said that their dual-core processors will be pin-for-pin compatible with their current single-core processors, and work in the same motherboards? If not, I have my doubts about whether or not it would work.
good question:)
btw: good website captain

dashaus
04-01-2005, 04:09 PM
according to that page the athlon 64's do seem to perform better than the p4's ..interesting edit: ok it definetly appears that the athlon 64's are kicking butt but there is only one test of an athlon 64 fx? ive been outta the loop for awhile but the fx is supposed to be a better chip so it should perform better than the athlon 64 in the same tests right?

Brianthreedee
04-01-2005, 07:12 PM
Yes, current road maps show the dual core opteron being pin to pin compatible and according to inveiws with AMD the AMD64 when it becomes dual core will also be pin to pin.

The AMD64 FX is the top of the line cpu right now, no P4 can touch it unless over clocked. The FX usaully has larger cache and slightly faster MHZ wise then AMD64.

Side by side profiles show the AMD64 is faster the equalivent P4. Some bench marks show neck and neck, but rendering wise the AMD64 is much faster.

Money wise for long term investment, an AMD64 or Opteron system is better as descibed before. I'm also going to run those benchmarks on my XP3200 from that one site and post them so stay tuned for it as a base line. Mind you though I recomend an AMD64 over the XP as the XP3200 is the end of the road for the XP. AMD64 has much more road ahead of it.

OK my bench marks for Radiosity was 3944.6 seconds and for the Teapot was 191.9 seconds... with lightwave 8.2's Radiosity and Teapot benchmark scenes.

dashaus
04-02-2005, 09:28 AM
ok guys i think i have almost picked a system!
it is from a website called http://www.boxxtech.com
now my problem lies in which video card to get.
they have a few ati cards and a few nvidia cards(all pci-e 16)
i knwo im going to shy away from the ati cards so know it comes down to the nvidia cards.
the choices are as follows:
a NVIDIA Quadro FX 540 128MB DDR
b NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400 128MB DDR
c NVIDIA Quadro FX 3400 256MB G-DDR3 <- $912 :(

so, who uses these cards and what are your thoughts on them?

heres a link to the nvidia page is anyone wants to see the differences
http://www.nvidia.com/object/IO_11761.html

thanks for your help so far guys

Captain Obvious
04-02-2005, 10:43 AM
I don't think a "pro" video card will help Lightwave much, if at all. You might be better off with a standard video card, like the Nvidia 6600. It's a lot cheaper, and gives better performance in games and such, and LW might not care.

dashaus
04-02-2005, 10:47 AM
I don't think a "pro" video card will help Lightwave much, if at all. You might be better off with a standard video card, like the Nvidia 6600. It's a lot cheaper, and gives better performance in games and such, and LW might not care.
these are the video cards offered with the packages on boxxtech.com
edit: he doesnt play games

Brianthreedee
04-02-2005, 07:39 PM
The only area were the video card seems to play a major roll for me has been in preview modes. Like in modeler, when selecting points or polys.

My old GeForce4 TI4200 (Softmod to Quadro4 750) was fast, but when I got to a very complex model, lots of points, the screen update would drag. Now I have an FX 5700 (softmod to Quadro FX1100) and my screen updates are faster.

As for rendering times, I don't see any difference in the cards. So my suggestions is to get the fastest you can afford. I personally have a tight budget so I have to stick to the consumer versions of the Nvidia cards and soft mod them into quadros. But since your choices are options for the Boxx, I will not go into softmoding for it has it's pros and cons.

Since I find my FX5700/Quadro FX1100 to be fairly good, I would go with at least the FX 1400. If he is really good with lightwave and potentially will make money with it, I would spring for the FX 3400 as it will allow faster screen updates. Faster screen updates means more work can be done.

dashaus
04-02-2005, 08:21 PM
The only area were the video card seems to play a major roll for me has been in preview modes. Like in modeler, when selecting points or polys.

My old GeForce4 TI4200 (Softmod to Quadro4 750) was fast, but when I got to a very complex model, lots of points, the screen update would drag. Now I have an FX 5700 (softmod to Quadro FX1100) and my screen updates are faster.

As for rendering times, I don't see any difference in the cards. So my suggestions is to get the fastest you can afford. I personally have a tight budget so I have to stick to the consumer versions of the Nvidia cards and soft mod them into quadros. But since your choices are options for the Boxx, I will not go into softmoding for it has it's pros and cons.

Since I find my FX5700/Quadro FX1100 to be fairly good, I would go with at least the FX 1400. If he is really good with lightwave and potentially will make money with it, I would spring for the FX 3400 as it will allow faster screen updates. Faster screen updates means more work can be done.thanx for the info :)