PDA

View Full Version : Need specs for a new quad pc for LW/AE/FUSION



hairy_llama
05-30-2007, 04:11 PM
Hey. Can you guys give me some good specs/things to stay away from?

I want quad-core. AMD or INTEL? XEON or Core duo? or?
Currently thinking "core 2 quad" 2.9 ghz.

Graphics. I'm thinking the cheapest 256mb Nvida. Good idea?

Ram. ECC? non-ECC? what MHZ? I want 4gb. Is dual channel DDR2 667 mhz good?

Motherboard, any must-haves? How is the nvidia 650i?

Thanks a ton for the help!!!!!

hairy_llama
05-31-2007, 08:25 AM
no one knows?

Twisted_Pixel
05-31-2007, 08:56 AM
Firstly, you wont need the ECC ram.
I wouldn't personally go for the cheapest gfx card, but have a look at reviews.
www.tomshardware.com, is a good start for reviews, but there are other sites too.
I'm due a new upgrade, but haven't done a lot of research yet, so this is the limit of my guidance for now.

sammael
05-31-2007, 09:09 AM
I have a core 2 duo e6600 (dual core) its a great chip, very smooth computing on vista 64, I use to be an AMD man but this cpu changed my mind. I think the quad core chip would be a dream, particularly for rendering/encoding. Ill upgrade myself when the price is a bit more viable.
Decent non ecc ram should be fine im running 2gb dual channel DDR2 667 again its sweet im sure it contributes to the smooth operation of my pc.
I would go for a quality brand, you'll pay a bit more but not nearly as much as ecc.
Im using a quadro fx graphics chip but I realy cant see any advantage in LW a midrange card would be just as good.
As far as chipset I have intel 975x which seems fine, im not up with the latest ones because I have not had the need to research it lately so I cant help there.

extrabyte
05-31-2007, 11:33 AM
hi folks.

HL,

their correct about LW;

LW will benefit from as much memory and cpu cores as you can afford.

but as for the other apps, ie Fusion, AE, Combustion, Pshop, tracking software, etc will benefit more or less from a good video card as well as
cpu and memory.

if you can pop for a Quadro FX, go for it. you'll have no regrets.

if not, any of the nvidia 7900 series cards with 512 of memory are very good.

the bottom line that i've discovered is:

there truly is no such thing as too much memory.

start off now with a good mid-level Core 2 Duo cpu and
try to get a mobo that will accept the new, 'real' quad cores coming
later this year.

and at least a 600 to 700 watt psu.

here's my system specs which might help you narrow things down:

Core 2 duo e6400

Foxconn mobo

8 gig of Gskill memory(about $325 per 4 gig kit)

Nvidia/BFG 7950 gt w/512 memory

Seasonic psu 650 watt


take care.

sammael
05-31-2007, 11:53 AM
if you can pop for a Quadro FX, go for it. you'll have no regrets.


Im not too sure about that, LW does not seem to take advantage of my Quadro realy & theres not much in the way of certified driver support from nvidia, the only cert driver available causes errors in LW's opengl on my system. Its an fx3400 pci express version, not worth the money for lightwave usage imo.

hairy_llama
05-31-2007, 12:06 PM
I've noticed no performance increase from 32mb 2 cent video cards to 512mb cards in LW... that is why I was thinking get cheap video card. After effects and Fusion do not care about video card much either...

Any idea on what is a good motherboard for intel core-2 quad q6600 CPU?

Matt Drabick
05-31-2007, 12:09 PM
Amariah, I recommend the Intel D975XBX motherboard with the QX6700 quad-core CPU and four 4GB of RAM. For excellent OpenGL support I highly recommend the PNY GeForce 8800GTX 768MB video card.

Small world, I stayed in Wilmington Sunday night for the Memorial Day weekend.

Matt Drabick,
DigiTek Systems (NewTek dealer)
Raleigh, NC
919-790-5488

mattclary
05-31-2007, 12:22 PM
if you can pop for a Quadro FX, go for it. you'll have no regrets.


Well, other than regretting wasting all that money....

Up until 9.2 LightWave was CPU limited in geometry manipulation, and even now, I am not convinced LW makes full use of a modest consumer card let alone a Quadro.

What differentiates a Quadro from a run-of-the-mill consumer card are some OpenGL calls supported by it's drivers. Not all applications make use of those calls. Maya and XSI I think take advantage and probably a few others, but I don't believe Lightwave does. It certainly did not prior to 9.2

lots
05-31-2007, 02:56 PM
I've noticed no performance increase from 32mb 2 cent video cards to 512mb cards in LW... that is why I was thinking get cheap video card. After effects and Fusion do not care about video card much either...

Any idea on what is a good motherboard for intel core-2 quad q6600 CPU?

Lightwave relies on more than just GPU power when interacting with the UI. In fact this can be said for most CG apps out there.

Generally speaking, the faster the GPU, the more polygons at once you can have on screen, and display at reasonable speed. However, if you are modifying the mesh, causing deformations, animating with bones or dynamics, cloth simulations, etc. You will be using CPU power to process these events. Similarly if you are modeling, this is a CPU computation that modifies the mesh, not the GPU. If you have a weak CPU, your UI experience will be slow and sluggish. Similarly if you have low amounts of RAM, this can also cause a similar situation.

Basically don't pair a super high end GPU with a low end CPU. You will be wasting money and electricity :P

Since this affects almost every aspect of what you do on a computer, get the fastest performing processor per core out there that fits your budget. I'm not saying get a single core CPU. You will want the multiple CPUs/Cores for rendering speed ups. Instead you want to ensure you have alot of speed per core. Why? Because most applications you will use will benefit from it. Most applications are pretty much still single threaded. Even modeling and animating in CG apps is a relatively single threaded task. You will want dual or quad cores for rendering, and thats usually about it.

You want as much RAM as you can afford (and use with your software selection and OS). For 64bit OS, software, and hardware this limits you to a money constraint mostly. On 32bit, this limits you to 4GB.

The last thing to consider, after considering the CPU and RAM is the GPU. It is important, but as stated above there are other contributors to performance in CG apps. that will be more worth your while.

@mattclary: 9.2 is still CPU limited in geometry manipulation. The only real improvement, at least for modeller in this area was tumbling speed. Which is MUCH nicer now. I just hope that the geometry modification algorithms get updated in a similar way in the next point release.

extrabyte
06-01-2007, 11:43 AM
hello again folks.

allow me to be a little more succinct.

if you can afford a Quadro, you can't go wrong.
and your right, it makes virtually no difference in LW,
which i had said before, but it does in other content creation apps.
the 8800's are nice too.

buying a quad core now would be a waste of money
because the real quad cores are coming out later this year.
they will have a larger onboard cache that will be shared properly
amoung other things.
and absolutely, the more cores the merrier.
in fact, if i actually had the money, i'ed already be using one of the new
dual socket Xeon boards with eight memory slots filled with 4 gig sticks!

as for the mobo, any of the Nvidia 650's have had good reviews all around.
they weren't out yet when i was shopping around so i settled for the Foxconn.

and you'll need a 64 bit OS(i'm using Server 2003) for all of that memory;
not to mention to take advantage of any apps that are compiled for 64 bit.
are you listening Adobe? Eyeon?

anyway, my point is, if you have the money, go crazy.
otherwise, try not to jump in head first.
everybody has their favorites or whatever.
just do some research. there are some really great enthusiast sites online.

good luck and have fun.

Sande
06-01-2007, 02:04 PM
Up until 9.2 LightWave was CPU limited in geometry manipulation, and even now, I am not convinced LW makes full use of a modest consumer card let alone a Quadro.
I agree. I have not seen any good benchmarks of LighWave 9.2 and Quadro vs. consumer card, but I guess there's not much difference. I used to ran my GeForce as Quadro a few years back and while other apps gained performance advantage with those drivers (main difference between consumer card and Quadro is drivers, hardware is pretty much the same), LightWave was not affected. Things may have changed regarding LW's performance under Quadro-drivers, but I doubt it.

hairy_llama, Have you considered Mac? I switched to Mac a few months back. First I bought a laptop and I just loved OSX, the overall design and build quality. I bought my desktop comp just few weeks from that and I haven't regretted. Major selling point for me was the ability to run Windows natively with Intel-processors if I have to...

hairy_llama
06-01-2007, 02:09 PM
I have thought about mac, currently it will not work to well in our workflow... although we are thinking about switching our edit system to mac because we are getting a RED camera and mac natively supports it. Also it seems a lot of LW plugins do not work on mac...

js33
06-02-2007, 02:27 AM
I just purchased some new stuff. Will put it together tomorrow.

Intel Quad-core Q6600 2.4 ghz
Asus P5K Deluxe motherboard with the new P35 Bearlake chipset
EVGA 8800 GTS 320mb
4 gig PC6400 800Mhz ram (2 x 2gb) - Motherboard will hold 4 more gig but not ready to move to 64 bit yet.
Seagate 750gb SATA HD
Pioneer 20x SATA DL DVD burner
Zalman 600 watt Heatpipe cooled PSU
XP Pro OEM

Price for everything listed above was under $2000

blueshift
06-05-2007, 11:26 AM
Hi all!
I'm looking at moving up to a Quad core in the near future and got waylaid by a Mac rep at the Comp USA store. the Mac Pro quad core seemed like an intriuging option but.... When I went to the apple site I found the free boot camp software was still in beta but would be out of beta when osx Leopard comes out. Sande you said you moved to the Mac from windows pc any problems with boot camp booting to your windows operating system. What windows operating system are you running on your Mac?

ColinSmith
06-05-2007, 05:36 PM
IAfter effects and Fusion do not care about video card much either...

Any idea on what is a good motherboard for intel core-2 quad q6600 CPU?

Just on After Effects.... how much effect the video card has depends a lot on what you do, for 3d camera stuff you're dealing with an openGL preview, and for some plugins like Magic Bullet and Colorista with GPU acceleration.... well.... it makes a huge difference, my q6600 renders the same affect at 1fps on the CPU and 15 fps on the 8600gts on HD video....

My motherboard is a Asus P5B deluxe, and seems to be doing fine so far. Mainly picked that one because I knew it'd work with my video capture card though.

Qslugs
06-05-2007, 09:14 PM
Go mac and throw XP on there via bootcamp. I second that comment.

Gaze
06-06-2007, 10:27 AM
For comparison sake, ended up getting this pre-built system recently for $1,099 (+$135 for upgrade to XFX GeForce 7950 512MB upgrade*) +tax:

CPU:
Intel QuadCore Q6600 PC 2.4 GHz

MB:
ASUS P5N-E SLI 650i SKT 775

VB:
nVidia 16x PCI-E XFX GeForce 7600 GT 256MB
-or-
XFX 7950GT 512MB PCI-E SLi (add $135)

HD:
250GB SATA2 16mb 7200

RAM:
2GB (2x1GB) Kingston 800MHz

CASE:
550 Watt ANTEC 900

DVD:
20X DVD+/-RW DL 8.5GB

MISC:
8.1 Surround Sound Giga LAN

3-yr Warranty


*Went with 7950GT for the two DVI outputs to run dual-DVI monitors at highest resolution/colors.

Heard rumors quad core prices will drop by July or August if you can hold out.

mattclary
06-06-2007, 10:35 AM
Go mac and throw XP on there via bootcamp. I second that comment.


This is actually a pretty viable alternative. When it comes to high end hardware, I think Apple is worth a look. Seems like I compared a while back and they were evry close for similar specs.

Having said that, I could never bring myself to buy an Apple. I would hate to think of myself as an "Apple user". ;)

beverins
06-06-2007, 10:49 AM
My system is a qx6700 overclocked to 3.2ghz on an Asus Workstation pro (has overlock profiles) and the system is rock solid. Dropped render times for an animation I was doing with Vue 6 Xstream from 15mins a frame (AMD 4200+) to 2-5mins a frame with this monster, rendering with 16 threads.