Who's buying systems over $5000?

[Scott Erstad]

Brian Kitts, I sent you a PM via this site yesterday, have you recieved / noticed that?

 

Scott

[Tommy L]

Smart set-up...I'd like to see some pics of this if you don't mind

 

Here is my workstation in our studio. Im waiting for some cabinetry for the nodes. It was pretty easy to set up. The only issues Im having is with DR. I really want to harness all that power for stills, just a couple of tweaks and Im there.

On a side-note. Im generally an advocate for being as environmentally friendly as possible, so I do feel a little guilty about this setup.

[Devin Johnston]

You are making a HUGE assumption that a $5k system is going to be 2x as fast as a $2k. Huge. I think if it is even 20% faster, then you'd be lucky.

A $2K system isn't going to be dual processor a $5K system is, if you put the same processors in both computers the dual processor system will be twice as fast as the single. There is no assumption to be made here it is faster, I know this because I have both types of computers in my office.

 

You can easily get a quad-core workstation today for well under $1000 (not counting monitors of course). Another $1k would net you a very quick render node, which when used together with the workstation I say would equal, or even surpass the one single $5k system.

 

There are a few problems with this, first you'd be getting the absolute slowest quad core chip out there, a high end system will have one of the fastest, and your ram will be limited to 2Gb. Second you will need a network to run this system so you need to factor that in, I'd say you'd need at least 3 of these single processor systems to equal the more expensive dual processor, add in the cost of a network and a network server and you have roughly the same cost as the high end system. You will also have the added delay of network traffic to contend with and all the extra work it took to set everything up. You'll wind up spending more money on all of that than you would with the high end system just to get the same speed.

[Scott Erstad]

smart setup indeed, and I love the hammer right on top - nice stage dressing!

Scott

[SandmanNinja]

B-b-b-but where are the dancing girls? And the bar?

 

Man, I'm disallusioned.

[Hazdaz]

...your ram will be limited to 2Gb.

Why would you be limited to 2GBs? Based on what?

I'd say you'd need at least 3 of these single processor systems to equal the more expensive dual processor

Not a chance. x2 $1000 quad-core PCs (8-cores total) would perform as fast or faster than one $5000 dual processor (8 cores total)

 

in the cost of a network and a network server and you have roughly the same cost as the high end system.

Again, not a chance in hell. Why would you need a server? And few people today don't have a router - and for those that don't $50 will get you everything you need to network these PCs together.

 

You'll wind up spending more money on all of that than you would with the high end system just to get the same speed.

You'll probably spend HALF as much on x2 quad-core PCs than the $5000 system that you mentioned. Getting 8-cores and about equivalent speed for $2k is a heck of a lot cheaper than one 8-core machine for $5k.

[Devin Johnston]

Why would you be limited to 2GBs? Based on what?

If we're still talking about a $1K system then price is your limiting factor.

 

Not a chance. x2 $1000 quad-core PCs (8-cores total) would perform as fast or faster than one $5000 dual processor (8 cores total)

 

No, there is more to a system than the number of processors, the speed of your processors; ram and hard drive all play a part. A $1K PC is going to have slower processors, slower ram and a slower hard drive than a $5K system, what do you think your paying all that money for!

[AJLynn]

It's always better to have one fast PC than two that are each half as fast. You will use less space and power, you will not wait for your network renderer to load and you will not have to maintain two PCs. The value of these factors will vary from user to user, but there will always be some value in it.

[Hazdaz]

If we're still talking about a $1K system then price is your limiting factor.

My quad-core system came with 2GBs of RAM cost me about $750... almost a year ago. Things are obviously vastly cheaper today. And like I mentioned above, RAM costs just about nothing.

 

 

A $1K PC is going to have slower processors, slower ram and a slower hard drive than a $5K system

People think that PC building is some kind of rocket science, or black magic - it isn't. Just as an example (especially since they are in the same family), the QX6700 processor costs $500, while the non-extreme version Q6600 costs only $240 - HALF the cost, yet most benchmarks rate the extreme version to be less than 10% faster.

As another example: the QX9650 is admittedly a decent clip faster than the Q6600 - about 35% faster, yet costs a whopping $1020 - 4x as much! Even including the price of MBs and other components, you could probably build 1 workstation and 2 render nodes based on the Q6600 for the price of ONE QX9600-based system, and will crush it in terms of rendering power.

 

Those are cost-versus-performance and return-on-investment numbers that do not bode well for these more expensive chips.

 

what do you think your paying all that money for!

EXACTLY. What is the reason why people dump ungodly amounts of money on PCs? There is absolutely NO good reason. You are paying a MASSIVE price premium to be on the bleeding-edge of technology for a minimal speed increase (relatively speaking).

[Slinger]

Here is my workstation in our studio. Im waiting for some cabinetry for the nodes. It was pretty easy to set up. The only issues Im having is with DR. I really want to harness all that power for stills, just a couple of tweaks and Im there.

On a side-note. Im generally an advocate for being as environmentally friendly as possible, so I do feel a little guilty about this setup.

Thanks for sharing. In regards to energy consumption, that set-up probably uses less then a actual rendering farm of switches/nodes/servers/etc in a dedicated room, so no worries....and I am sure you can shut one,two,or however many machines down if needed...that wouldn't happen with the other set-up, so no worries.

[Slinger]

A $2K system isn't going to be dual processor a $5K system is, if you put the same processors in both computers the dual processor system will be twice as fast as the single. There is no assumption to be made here it is faster, I know this because I have both types of computers in my office.

 

 

 

There are a few problems with this, first you'd be getting the absolute slowest quad core chip out there, a high end system will have one of the fastest, and your ram will be limited to 2Gb. Second you will need a network to run this system so you need to factor that in, I'd say you'd need at least 3 of these single processor systems to equal the more expensive dual processor, add in the cost of a network and a network server and you have roughly the same cost as the high end system. You will also have the added delay of network traffic to contend with and all the extra work it took to set everything up. You'll wind up spending more money on all of that than you would with the high end system just to get the same speed.

I think you need to go do some more research on computer parts and how they function. Your post has alot of bad information in it. You do realize when you build your own computer you can purchase whatever processor you would like, based off the mobo pin type, correct? You do realize your remark on the limitation of 2gigs of ram is completely false and even more false when someone goes to a 64-bit OS, correct?

[Devin Johnston]

I think you need to go do some more research on computer parts and how they function. Your post has alot of bad information in it. You do realize when you build your own computer you can purchase whatever processor you would like, based off the mobo pin type, correct? You do realize your remark on the limitation of 2gigs of ram is completely false and even more false when someone goes to a 64-bit OS, correct?

 

Slinger I didn't say the system was limited to 2Gigs because it was incapable of having more I said it was limited because of the $1K price tag. Please read the entire post before commenting on things like this.

[AJLynn]

Also, I'd point out that some cheap motherboards are limited to 2GB. My firm ran into this problem recently when bringing some PCs up to current Revit specs.

 

I think Devin must be considered the local expert on the economics of scale in in-house render farming.

[Slinger]

Slinger I didn't say the system was limited to 2Gigs because it was incapable of having more I said it was limited because of the $1K price tag. Please read the entire post before commenting on things like this.

You can get 4gigs of PC6400 for less than $100 anywhere now. A p35 mobo for less than $100. A Q6600 for $200. HDD for $50. GFX for less than $200. PSU less than $100. Tower less than $50. Sata DVDdrive for $35...total cost:

Thats $785 w/o OS and monitor...which most people re-use there old ones again.

 

Maybe you need to learn to shop a little better.

[Hazdaz]

SLINGER - that is EXACTLY what I was trying to say 50 posts ago. LOL

No one is going to tell me that a $5000 PC is going to be a better deal than 1 well configured workstation based off a cheaper quad chip, and 1 or even 2 render nodes... and all for less than probably HALF of some overpriced $5000 system.

 

And I don't think anyone is trying to bash on MAXER at all - but too many people have this notion that PC hardware is a "black art" and that you have to spend big bucks to get something fast. Far from it.

[Devin Johnston]

The problem here is we are talking about two different computer systems.

 

Computer A is a system purchased by a company from a reputable manufacturer for the purposes of production rendering in an office environment. Quality, compatibility, and dependability are of the most importance not necessarily cost.

 

Computer B is a system built by an individual for the purposes of rendering on a small scale or for personal enjoyment. Cost is of up most importance as the artist wants the most power for their money.

 

In my office I barley have time to do the work I need to do much less build a computer, install all the software, set it up on the network and work out any bugs that may occur. To me it's much more valuable to be able to open up a box, do some minimal software installation and begin working. I get a warranty from a single place where I can immediately get tech support if necessary and although it may cost me a few hundred dollars more I get the peace of mind that any problems I have will be fixed immediately. Companies like Boxx specialize in delivering type A computers, these machines are probably 30% more expensive than a machine you could build your self, you’re getting the same hardware and software but what your paying for is quality, compatibility, reliability, and dependability from a well known and respected company. As anyone who’s built a system from scratch as I have will tell you something always pops up with these custom built systems, and at this point I have no patience for it.

 

Each company and individual has to make their own decisions; we decided long ago that buying $5K leading edge machines was the best way to go for us because sometimes it’s just better to have all that power under the hood. Having render nodes is great for rendering but for other things like video editing they don’t do you any good, it’s nice to have a fast system in cases like this.

[F J]

u'll have to excuse Hazdaz.. he thought "the 3-core AMD might just take back the performance crown from Intel"

 

the Q6600 isnt even THAT spectacular anymore, as it gets outperformed by the Q9300 (the low-ranker of its family) n for a bunch less power consumption (

 

i think the topic of this thread is clearly aiming at WorkStations, not the best bang for the buck..

 

i agree u can build a NICE render node(s) around the Q6600 (or Q9300/Q9450) with PC2-6400 RAM.. but i wouldnt get this RAM on a WorkStation.. climb up to PC2-8500 (or even PC3-10600 if u wanna have a fine lil beast)..

 

so in this line of thought i'd say its ok to invest some more on a stronger Quad (probably xtreme edition so u can really take advantage of OC), though i would still vote against dual-quad systems, as everything is much more expensive, starting with dual-socket mobo, n dedicated CPU's that will work as dual-socket, to (again) dedicated RAM (unless of course money isnt even an issue at the bottom of the list)..

 

think it has become standard to have a "lil bomb" for a WorkStation, n have all the addicional (if needed) horse power come from "best bang for buck" render nodes..

[Ky Lane]

I have a 8 core mac pro, and a quadcore Dell XPS. Both awesome machines and worth the bucks.

[Slinger]

u'll have to excuse Hazdaz.. he thought "the 3-core AMD might just take back the performance crown from Intel"

 

the Q6600 isnt even THAT spectacular anymore, as it gets outperformed by the Q9300 (the low-ranker of its family) n for a bunch less power consumption (

 

i think the topic of this thread is clearly aiming at WorkStations, not the best bang for the buck..

 

i agree u can build a NICE render node(s) around the Q6600 (or Q9300/Q9450) with PC2-6400 RAM.. but i wouldnt get this RAM on a WorkStation.. climb up to PC2-8500 (or even PC3-10600 if u wanna have a fine lil beast)..

 

so in this line of thought i'd say its ok to invest some more on a stronger Quad (probably xtreme edition so u can really take advantage of OC), though i would still vote against dual-quad systems, as everything is much more expensive, starting with dual-socket mobo, n dedicated CPU's that will work as dual-socket, to (again) dedicated RAM (unless of course money isnt even an issue at the bottom of the list)..

 

think it has become standard to have a "lil bomb" for a WorkStation, n have all the addicional (if needed) horse power come from "best bang for buck" render nodes..

If you invest in quality ram and mobo, you don't need to get an extreme cpu...the only difference is they have unlocked multis--yes you can OC a bit eaiser, but if you buy quality parts, it is no issue.

BTW, I run G SKill HZs and stock are 800mhz at 4-4-4-12 at 2.1volts. I run them at 890mhz at 4-4-4-8 at 2.1 volts. I guarantee you my tighter timings will run better then your 5-5-5-15 timings on 1066ram....food for thought too...my G-Skills also can run at 1002mhz at 4-4-4-12 stock timings/stock voltage.

 

 

It seems to me alot of people here are clueless about computer parts---those asking and those giving advice. Some people may want to go do some more research on the basics before giving out information.

[AJLynn]

When I built my workstation I did a bunch of testing on timings, and couldn't get them to produce any performance difference when rendering. (They're not really supposed to but I took an open minded approach.) Now I can't really see paying extra for:

 

-RAM that is spec'ed to run at a faster clock than you'll be able to hit with you MB and CPU

-RAM that costs a lot more because of timings. Some of the stuff out there is just plain crazy.

 

But anyway, back to the topic. Expensive computers have their uses. The point Devin made, which I don't think anybody really paid attention to, is that if your time is too valuable to be spent on building PCs, or waiting for your computer to finish tasks, then it is economically prudent to buy a dual-quad from Boxx. You don't get the same price/performance out of the hardware alone, but price/performance is often not the controlling factor.

 

I used to work for somebody who was both a mayor and a partner in a law firm, in an area where you needed to drive everywhere. He had a driver on staff. This seemed odd to me, until I realized that it was good business - he was using all that time in the car when he was not driving to make phone calls and read documents. For him to have that extra time more than made up for the salary of a full-time driver. This is essentially the same thing, only with less money.

[tecton3d]

...Each company and individual has to make their own decisions; we decided long ago that buying $5K leading edge machines was the best way to go for us because sometimes it’s just better to have all that power under the hood. Having render nodes is great for rendering but for other things like video editing they don’t do you any good, it’s nice to have a fast system in cases like this.

i bought a boxx workstation 3 years ago for the exact reasons you mention.

[gfa2]

i bought a boxx workstation 3 years ago for the exact reasons you mention.

 

I agree, my last 4 computers have been from Boxx. Building my own PC is not an option in the company that I work for. Single source warranty and support are an absolute must.

[Ky Lane]

I agree, my last 4 computers have been from Boxx. Building my own PC is not an option in the company that I work for. Single source warranty and support are an absolute must.

 

 

Thats why I always buy Dell, despite people cringeing. Theyre great computers, fairly good priced and good support. My new XPS is such a dream machine and was less than 5K delivered to my door with a 24" screen, 4GB, 160Gb(10,000rpm)+500Gb(7200rpm), 8800GT, wireless surround sound etc.

 

Makes sitting behind a computer for 16hrs a day a pleasure - kinda.

[BrianKitts]

I've been reading through this whole thread thinking the whole time that this really is more a discussion seperating the freelance/small companies versus a corporate environment.

 

Yes my machine costs over 5000, and I could have built my own for less, but the company would rather invest the money and buy a mass produced system from dell or hp with a service guarentee. I used to build all my own machines, and every now an then they would have a glitch that I would just attribute to it being a homebuild. That's not acceptable in a corporate environment. Heck I don't even build systems for myself anymore because if you shop smart and wait for deals you can get great systems at resonable prices and have that support that means you have a service guarentee. And for that Dell computers can't be beat.

 

BOXX does not have 24/7 support, and they will no cross-ship if you have a problem. You tell Dell your machine died on you, if you are under service contact they will overnight you a new machine pack the old one up when the new one arrives and ship it back. Done

 

You could waste a day (or more) troubleshooting your homebuild if something goes wrong, or you could just know that the problem will be solved for you. And most the time if you are in a corporate environment there's extra systems available so you don't lose any time waiting that one day to get a fix on your system. And that to any large employer is worth spending the extra money upfront.

[tecton3d]

I've been reading through this whole thread thinking the whole time that this really is more a discussion seperating the freelance/small companies versus a corporate environment.

 

Yes my machine costs over 5000, and I could have built my own for less, but the company would rather invest the money and buy a mass produced system from dell or hp with a service guarentee. I used to build all my own machines, and every now an then they would have a glitch that I would just attribute to it being a homebuild. That's not acceptable in a corporate environment. Heck I don't even build systems for myself anymore because if you shop smart and wait for deals you can get great systems at resonable prices and have that support that means you have a service guarentee. And for that Dell computers can't be beat.

 

BOXX does not have 24/7 support, and they will no cross-ship if you have a problem. You tell Dell your machine died on you, if you are under service contact they will overnight you a new machine pack the old one up when the new one arrives and ship it back. Done

 

You could waste a day (or more) troubleshooting your homebuild if something goes wrong, or you could just know that the problem will be solved for you. And most the time if you are in a corporate environment there's extra systems available so you don't lose any time waiting that one day to get a fix on your system. And that to any large employer is worth spending the extra money upfront.

... all true but it comes down to who you want to throw your money at. I have no quams about dell (worth mentioning for fear of sounding like i'm flaming).

 

and true that boxx doesn't have 24/7 tech support but that is my ONLY gripe and I've told them this. I have heard of them cross-shipping but i guess it's a matter of circumstance. I would undoubtedly agree that they do push the upper threshold of what one can ask for a workstation/rendernode and since we can all build and spec our own machines, it comes down to whether or not saving nickels is worth the cost of a robust and tested workhorse. fully loaded dell or hp workstations aren't much cheaper than boxx's either... last i checked:p

 

a workstation is a workstation. I'm not concerned with surround sound, huge monitors (though I do enjoy my 24' apple) or sexy cases - and i actually like the sound of the fans sucking air into the case ~ i just want something i can pound on whenever i need something finished and for that peace of mind, i would easily go with boxx (or other) again if i wasn't buying just a personal computer. case in point: i'm looking to build a HTPC/gaming machine/server for my home and, although i have thought about a dell, i will spec my own parts, and for much less money, overclock parts comparable to a like-minded dell, and enjoy the fruits of my labor (...and fresh beer since the money saved is going toward a kegerator).

 

prost!