Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

another new computer for Revit thread --- with SPECIFIC questions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    another new computer for Revit thread --- with SPECIFIC questions

    firstly, I have built and overclocked my own 3D computers for several years now and have some knowledge of what Revit needs from hardware to create a fast user experience. I loathe slow workstations as time is money and I want this system to be able to be able to keep up with me as best it can... (...rant end)

    Revit User Interface and CPU:
    What my assumptions are now, is that the Revit UI (user interface) IS NOT SMP enabled (i.e. it DOES NOT make use of more than one core unless rendering) therefore relies purely on CPU clock speed to execute commands - unless it's a 3D view, in which case the GPU comes into play (this is like most other 3D packages on the market). Therefore, I will be using the i7 2600k and overclocking it as far as stability will allow. I'll be keeping the CPU cool with this or this with plenty of airflow in an EATX case.

    Hard drives:
    Another fact that I came across in this thread (#31) is that the Revit UI experience DOES NOT increase with the addition of a SSD to the system. I was thinking of using a 128gb SSD for OS and programs but if it really doesn't make a difference, then I will happily save the money and/or put it somewhere else in the system . I will be putting two 1.5TB hd's in RAID 1 to add some redundancy to my local data. I was planning on moving the working "live" revit file to the SSD to enjoy the relative performance, then, when finished at the end of the day, saving back to my big and slow(er) storage drives.

    RAM:
    Is 16gb's of RAM enough? I have Revit files of 250mb's and the trend is clear that file size will only increase. Most i7 (socket 1155) motherboards only support 32gb's max and it is difficult to find high performing kits of 4x8gb's (without paying a heavy premium). I'm sure 16gb would be plenty for the next year or so but does anyone have experience where 16gb's wouldn't be enough? I work with a lot of detail in my models and regularly import high(er) resolution meshes from 3ds max / rhino... whose files are also growing exponentially as the hardware speeds up.

    GPU:
    I will also be doing hardware rendering with Octane (among others) so Vram is important. As such, I've selected the EVGA GTX 570 2560MB card. I know others have spec'd lesser card for Revit use, but I abuse the hell out of 3d views in Revit and will also be running 3ds Max, Rhino, and other 3d software on this rig working with high resolution textures (not just the tiled stuff in the supplied Adesk library). Does nyone know of any conflicts with this card and Revit?

    so, as of now, the system looks like this:

    Case - Antec 1200 V3
    PSU - Antec CP-1000 1000W
    Hard Drive - Storage (RAID 1) - HITACHI Deskstar 7K3000 1.5TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s
    OS and Program SSD - Crucial RealSSD C300 CTFDDAC128MAG-1G1 2.5" 128GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)
    GPU - EVGA GeForce GTX 570 HD 2560MB
    Motherboard - ASUS P8Z68-V PRO
    Memory - G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model F3-12800CL9Q-16GBRL
    Intel Core i7-2600K
    CPU cooler - this or this

    right now the kit comes out to exactly $2000... higher than I would have liked and am open to suggestions to cut it down a bit. (I bet the first thing to get VE'd would be the H20 cooling kit)

    FWIW, I'll be running:
    Win#$%^ 7
    Revit 2011, 2012
    Max 2012
    Maxwell
    Octane
    Rhino
    Adobe Suite
    Sketchup

    thanks for any input - if we were in a pub, I'd happily buy you a pint :beer:

    #2
    I'm not sold on the value of SSDs yet.

    But I do think that you should consider at least making sure you can add more RAM in future. I'm using 6x2GB sticks in triple channel, but its annoying that I can't just add in extra RAM - I have to throw out some to get some more! So if you go for 16 GB, just make sure you have a slot or two left over...
    Luke Johnson | Autodesk Expert Elite Member
    Author of What Revit Wants

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by tecton3d View Post
      ....I bet the first thing to get VE'd would be the H20 cooling kit...
      You´ll need that if you are going to overclock it... but you know that already :beer:
      Klaus Munkholm
      "Do. Or do not. There is no try."

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by luke.johnson View Post
        I'm not sold on the value of SSDs yet.

        But I do think that you should consider at least making sure you can add more RAM in future. I'm using 6x2GB sticks in triple channel, but its annoying that I can't just add in extra RAM - I have to throw out some to get some more! So if you go for 16 GB, just make sure you have a slot or two left over...
        thanks for the input... it is hard to justify the cost premium of an SSD IF it won't speed things up AND is lacking in capacity.

        RAM - yeah, I'm finding a nice little bottleneck in the 1155 platform's design, as well as the only motherboards I can find (preliminary Newegg search) only have 4 RAM slots and support 32gb max. Then the cost of 8gb sticks starts to muck things up, but I could probably schmooze my budget and get 2 of these though it might hurt my overclock but since I'm not trying to break a world record, that might be ok considering it would provide room for another 16gb to be added as needed.

        Originally posted by Munkholm View Post
        You´ll need that if you are going to overclock it... but you know that already :beer:
        ...lol - indeed. Still trying to decide where to put the $$ in the system... higher frequency (overclock and h20) or more RAM (as 8gb sticks are expensive)...

        hmmmph:coffee:

        Comment


          #5
          I think you'll be fine with 16gb for now. I've got 12gb and rarely max it out. I have two 150mb+ files open most of the time and never see much more than 8-9gb in use. By the time you need more, memory prices should drop to an affordable level. It's a bummer there are no 6 slot motherboards for the 1155. I can throw a 6x4gb setup on my board for $200, but a 4x8gb setup is in the $800 range.

          Comment


            #6
            Why do you need the Asus P8Z68 if you use i7 2600k? Wasn't the Z68 for processors with video chipset? (just asking)
            Revit Architecture 2013 Certified Professional

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by need4mospd View Post
              I think you'll be fine with 16gb for now. I've got 12gb and rarely max it out. I have two 150mb+ files open most of the time and never see much more than 8-9gb in use. By the time you need more, memory prices should drop to an affordable level. It's a bummer there are no 6 slot motherboards for the 1155. I can throw a 6x4gb setup on my board for $200, but a 4x8gb setup is in the $800 range.
              thanks for the input.

              Originally posted by lucis29 View Post
              Why do you need the Asus P8Z68 if you use i7 2600k? Wasn't the Z68 for processors with video chipset? (just asking)
              ...perhaps though plenty of others have OC'd the 2600k on Z68 and had good results... though I could spec something like this: P67 motherboard ... or I'm open to recommendations :beer:

              Comment


                #8
                I have some observation about your computer:

                1) If you only use it for Revit or Max, wouldn't you need a stable computer? I don't deny that OC gives you a plus of performance, but also gives you some instability not only for CPU but also for RAM. There is always the "small" chance of a processor burnout and thats a week without the computer (count the losses).
                2) Ok, lets consider that you really want a blazing computer. Why don't you buy the i7 extreme editions? or try a multiprocessor configuration? (xeons).
                3) If money aren't a problem and you really are a professional in computers why not take in consideration a cluster.
                4) For rendering you need as money cores as you have, but for simple Revit navigation only one is necessary. As far as I read through the forum the current stock speed of the i7 2600k is more than enough for all the eyecandy's in Revit.

                I wonder why iru is so quiet. Is he in vacation?

                Lucian.
                Revit Architecture 2013 Certified Professional

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by lucis29 View Post
                  I have some observation about your computer:

                  1) If you only use it for Revit or Max, wouldn't you need a stable computer? I don't deny that OC gives you a plus of performance, but also gives you some instability not only for CPU but also for RAM. There is always the "small" chance of a processor burnout and thats a week without the computer (count the losses).
                  2) Ok, lets consider that you really want a blazing computer. Why don't you buy the i7 extreme editions? or try a multiprocessor configuration? (xeons).
                  3) If money aren't a problem and you really are a professional in computers why not take in consideration a cluster.
                  4) For rendering you need as money cores as you have, but for simple Revit navigation only one is necessary. As far as I read through the forum the current stock speed of the i7 2600k is more than enough for all the eyecandy's in Revit.

                  I wonder why iru is so quiet. Is he in vacation?

                  Lucian.
                  1) yes. stability is required for a workstation but I am confident in my ability to achieve a respectable overclock while maintaining as much stability as possible. I speak passionately about the "speed" of the computer but I will not (nor would anyone in my situation) sacrifice speed for stability for a system that is being used as a workstation. I will go as high as the hardware will allow, stress test for 24 hours, and probably back down from the highest STABLE overclock for peace of mind.

                  2a) money. i like spending mine wisely. paying for the extreme editions is just simply a waste. you can overclock a $315 i7 2600k and still have mind-boggling speed. example, for the price difference between an i7 990x and i7 2600k (roughly $735 per the 'egg) I am well on my way to another i7 2600k rendernode, which when networked, plays very well with Max for rendering. Myself, and others, will just simply never pay for the highest-end parts offered on the current market as their price markup is simply not good value for performance. Secondly, Intel is rumored to be close to releasing their next generation of processors which will outperform the current parts - again supporting the "don't buy the high end ****" dogma.

                  2b) money and timing. I had originally spec'd this system to be an overclocked SR-2 build but ... again... it isn't a good time to be building on socket 1366 when socket 2011 is supposed to arrive this fall and will outperform 1366. My "plan" is to build a very robust i7 2600k based workstation now, and when/if a socket 2011 SR-3 type of platform (or AMD's Bulldozer) chips come out, and prove themselves a wise investment for my use, I'll build another system and phase this current i7 2600k build into a rendernode... i.e. put my workstation HD's, Video card, etc on the new build.

                  3) i don't recall saying money isn't a problem nor claiming to be a professional. i've just built and overclocked my own computers several times. if money weren't a problem, i would just throw it at Boxx (my current 5 year old workstation) and say, "make it fast". this build is coming out of my pocket.... also, a cluster would be super - really - i get excited even thinking about the idea but it's just cheaper (for many reasons) for me to do test renderings on a small network of computers, then "farm" high resolution production stuff (if required for the project) out to renderfarms instead of incurring the cost of building or buying my own cluster. if things pick up enough, then economically, one can justify the cost... but right now it's not in the cards for me. in MY experience, once you learn enough to know what you need (revit, max, etc) , you can save a lot of money doing it yourself and build exactly what you want, usually (99% of the time) at lower costs than what someone else would provide you with the same... dell, boxx, hp, etc.

                  4) it might be enough for revits' candy but we're all different, and I'm somewhat of an enthusiast about this type of thing. I must say that I haven't used an i7 2600k stock system in Revit so I can't compare. I DO know that the extra speed will come in handy for plenty of other tasks I'll be using this computer for... like rendering. I'm not a hardware "professional" but think i have gathered enough information about the current hardware on the market and can put together a quick system that will match, as closely as possible, what I want out of a revit user experience... i.e. not waiting on the computer to do what I want it to do. ultimately, it's subjective and if one can get by with "enough" then good for them, I just choose otherwise.

                  :beer:

                  Comment


                    #10
                    In my opinion, you're on the right track. We have a 2600K running 4.6ghz (on air) on the same Asus Z68 in our office and it has been flawless. It was stable at 4.9, but we backed it off just for peace of mind. It actually still has a bit of head room which is insane for the cost of the cpu.

                    One of the new features on the Z68 is the ability to make use of an SSD as a sort of fast access cache for commonly accessed files. I think you could see the benefits of the increased SSD speed, without having to manually move files around at the end of the day. The new chipset, supposedly, handles that for you. I haven't gotten around to trying it out though. It would be interesting to see if it really helps or not.

                    It is, and I guess always will be, tough to convince people that a stable overclock can be achieved without sacrificing reliability. These are usually the same people who will tell you to invest in something "safer", like dual CPUs...........

                    :banghead:
                    Kaylin Richardson
                    Sr. CAD Tech
                    http://www.brownengineers.net/

                    Comment

                    Related Topics

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X