Office set up help!

[junglee]

Hi all,

 

I'm currently planning on office expansion and my goal is to creating a set up for 3 people and few render nodes. We do about 100~120 renderings per year and we only use 3dmax/vray/photoshop. We do mostly interiors with heavy details but our current machines delivers the job without a problem so far.

 

Current office set up is 2 of

i7-3930k

32GB memory

Windows 7

Geforce GTX 660

 

Current set up is fine for all our work and there's no complaints at all but since I'm expanding, I would like to purchase all new machines and leave older ones for freelancers.

 

My budget isn't glamorous and I'm not looking for the greatest or fastest computer but I would appreciate the increase of efficiency if it can be had.

I honestly don't know much about computers and how render node exactly work so please guide me to set up an efficient office.

 

How does render node work anyways? Can you use your workstation while 3dmax server renders through render nodes?

 

If budget has to be given, I'm thinking of less than $10k for 3 workstations, 6 monitors, and any left over for the render nodes. And of course, lower price the better if increase on spec doesn't necessarily return workflow efficiency noticeably.

 

Thanks for your help in advance.

 

Jung

[SkylineArch]

I just bought a Dell XPS 8910. i7-6700K, Nvidia GTX 1070, 16GB for $1,200 and it works great. So 3 of those, $500-600 for each station for monitors, maybe another $100 each for another 16GB of RAM, and you'll still have $4,000-5,000 left over for a small farm.

[junglee]

I just bought a Dell XPS 8910. i7-6700K, Nvidia GTX 1070, 16GB for $1,200 and it works great. So 3 of those, $500-600 for each station for monitors, maybe another $100 each for another 16GB of RAM, and you'll still have $4,000-5,000 left over for a small farm.

 

Thanks for the input. I always used Dell XPS or Alienwares but I wanted to find out if custom computer can benefit on better spec for the money. If not, I think dell is the solid choice to go.

[Nikolaos M]

Just another thought:

 

Main WS: 3 of these PCPartPicker part list. Total cost ~4700$.

 

Monitors: 6 of these: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/QpH48d/dell-monitor-u2717d. Total cost ~ 2820$,

or 3 of them and 3 of these https://pcpartpicker.com/product/T8dFf7/dell-monitor-u2515h as secondary monitors, with a total cost of ~ 2380$.

 

Grand total is 7520$ with 6x27" monitors, or 7080$ with 3x27" and 3x25" monitors.

 

I would personally use the old rigs as render nodes. Depending on the X79 motherboards you have, you could install multi-core Xeons to improve rendering times, ex. two of these http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-E5-2697-V2-QS-2-7GHz-30MB-12-Core-Max-Turbo-3-5GHz-130W-Processor-/272483964167?hash=item3f714f5507:g:JXsAAOSwOtdYT02W

[joelmcwilliam]

"Current set up is fine for all our work and there's no complaints at all but since I'm expanding"

 

and

 

"My budget isn't glamorous and I'm not looking for the greatest or fastest computer"

 

Why don't you go buy more of the same machines you already have? You already know the in and outs of those machines and you can get them for acceptable prices if you buy them used.

[junglee]

Just another thought:

 

Main WS: 3 of these PCPartPicker part list. Total cost ~4700$.

 

Monitors: 6 of these: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/QpH48d/dell-monitor-u2717d. Total cost ~ 2820$,

or 3 of them and 3 of these https://pcpartpicker.com/product/T8dFf7/dell-monitor-u2515h as secondary monitors, with a total cost of ~ 2380$.

 

Grand total is 7520$ with 6x27" monitors, or 7080$ with 3x27" and 3x25" monitors.

 

I would personally use the old rigs as render nodes. Depending on the X79 motherboards you have, you could install multi-core Xeons to improve rendering times, ex. two of these http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-E5-2697-V2-QS-2-7GHz-30MB-12-Core-Max-Turbo-3-5GHz-130W-Processor-/272483964167?hash=item3f714f5507:g:JXsAAOSwOtdYT02W

 

Thank you for the input!

[junglee]

"Current set up is fine for all our work and there's no complaints at all but since I'm expanding"

 

and

 

"My budget isn't glamorous and I'm not looking for the greatest or fastest computer"

 

Why don't you go buy more of the same machines you already have? You already know the in and outs of those machines and you can get them for acceptable prices if you buy them used.

 

Because those are three years old already and i am looking for the replacement for better efficiency.

[junglee]

Just another thought:

 

Main WS: 3 of these PCPartPicker part list. Total cost ~4700$.

 

Monitors: 6 of these: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/QpH48d/dell-monitor-u2717d. Total cost ~ 2820$,

or 3 of them and 3 of these https://pcpartpicker.com/product/T8dFf7/dell-monitor-u2515h as secondary monitors, with a total cost of ~ 2380$.

 

Grand total is 7520$ with 6x27" monitors, or 7080$ with 3x27" and 3x25" monitors.

 

I would personally use the old rigs as render nodes. Depending on the X79 motherboards you have, you could install multi-core Xeons to improve rendering times, ex. two of these http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-E5-2697-V2-QS-2-7GHz-30MB-12-Core-Max-Turbo-3-5GHz-130W-Processor-/272483964167?hash=item3f714f5507:g:JXsAAOSwOtdYT02W

 

Nikolaos, I just looked at other thread where you recommended $3,000 build. Do you think workflow of interior visualization will benefit from 2x more expensive systems significantly? You can see our worksamples from here to see if our work range can benefit from higher end computers. http://www.FPSCreative.com

 

If 2x more expensive system will deliver 2x more efficiency, I would like to purchase that set up for me at least.

I think our project range is somewhat like driving around small downtowns where you can't speed much at all and more expensive computer is like buying a Ferrari to only go in style not in speeed.

I'm a computer dummy, so I'm purely relying on you for my set up.

Thank you in advance.

Edited February 1, 2017 by junglee

[Nikolaos M]

Well, a single 3K$ WS would be another story. You want to fit 3xWS and as many rendering nodes you can afford inside a 10K$ budget. So, you have more options configuring this setup.

 

The 7700K based systems are the best you can buy right now for modeling/editing tasks. The i7 7700k has the highest per core performance at the moment we talk.

 

On the other hand, render nodes take advantage of more cores. If you manage to find second-hand v1-v2 Xeons for a good price, it would be ideal, because you already have a base to work on, i.e. your old X79 platforms.

 

That's the logic behind my suggestions. So, no, 2x systems won't deliver better performance vs 3x in your case, because you want to have separate render nodes (and that's a good tactic imo). If you wanted 3x all-in-one systems for modeling and rendering at the same time, then my suggestion would be different of course.

 

Edit: By the way, nice renderings. I like your work!

Edited February 1, 2017 by nikolaosm

[junglee]

Thanks Nikolaos, your help is very much appreciated.

 

Since your knowledge is so extensive, I would like to formally ask my questions again in details.

 

1. how does the render nodes work?

Do they work off of main workstations as background machines and you still have to dedicate some power to render from you main WS or do you just send the files remotely to the nodes and have them render separately?

 

2. I was thinking to use my existing machines for freelancers who are not bound to contract in time/hours, so I would reserve these form them rather than using these to upgrade to xeon machines as nodes.

 

3. I'm a true believer of spending money on tools for better efficiency to a certain extent. And I would like to get your advice on 6900k CPU set up you created in other thread. I see that 6900K is an octa core and I'm very curious to see how much more power would it deliver upgrading from a hexa core. My previous jump from quad to hexa yielded in pretty strong working experience throughout. But as you know, until you use the better machine, you never know what you are missing out. Only reason I say my current machines are serving well is because after 10 yrs of visualization, I know how to make files lighter and render faster. But of course, I have some projects where material slots would take several seconds to load up and entire model is just too heavy to navigate. I just take them casually as a working experience and never cared to upgrade.

 

With above being said, would you suggest a better build? I notice your other part list

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/MBkNYr is showing slightly better specification parts (excluding CPU) and I would like to know if that sort of jump would make the difference for my work.

Basically, I want the good working horse without luxury, because I find that luxury should be within the 3dmax file set up.

 

So if you would like to suggest a different build, please suggest your recommendation for 3eq WS (or 1 good, 2 eq WS) with cheap render nodes. (I think I saw a thread where someone suggested a $600 render nodes. do you think they worth it at all? http://pcfoo.com/2016/08/the-less-than-600-render-node-q3-2016/)

 

 

Thank you so much!!!!

Edited February 1, 2017 by junglee

[Nikolaos M]

My knowledge is not so extensive, I'm just trying to help out. I'm not a pro. I'm just a CG hobbyist and I like to spend time learning about hardware and trying out new things with my rigs. Other guys here are much more experienced than me, I assure you:).

 

1. There is a lot of feedback online on how to setup a render farm. Just google it and you'll find various articles with step by step instructions and explanatory images and for all types of Operating Systems too (I recall some detailed posts here in the forums too). When a node is rendering, you can continue working with your main WS's.

 

2. Ok, if you keep the old rigs for freelancers, then you're left with around 2-2.5K$ for render node(-s) (if you choose the setups and monitors I recommended in previous posts). Pcfoo.com is a good place to get advices and ideas about cheap but vfm render nodes. You can also visit this site http://talcikdemovicova.com/32-thread-build-on-budget/. Both Dimitris (dtolios, owner of pcfoo) and Juraj are members of this forum. You could seek advice from them too.

 

3. Spending more money on hardware doesn't always give you the best performance, at least not in all computer tasks and certainly not always accordingly to what you spend for it. A 6900K based system would be much faster for rendering, but slower in single-threaded tasks compared to a 7700K. But you are not going to use your main WS for rendering, if I understood correctly. So, the 7700K is the best cpu you can buy for main modeling tasks if you use discrete render nodes, while the 6900K would be a better all-around solution if you had to use a single rig for modeling and rendering.

 

I think you should wait for more opinions before making your final decisions.

[Dimitris Tolios]

1. The Rendering process is still initiated in the WS afaik (e.g. the model being prepped for VRay), but the WS (aka "local machine") doesn't have to participate in the actual rendering process, it can be completely or nearly completely (very small CPU % used) off-loaded to the nodes once started.

 

2. There is nothing special in a "node" that stops it from being a WS too. You just set the VRay Spawner to launch / wait for orders as a background service. Many offices have all their WS rigged this way and if they know certain people are away from their desk for the day or for as long as the render will last, they take over those CPU resources. EDIT: the rendering process can be set to be at "low priority" for the OS. This actually allows simple tasks to be performed simultaneously with the rendering process in the background: e.g. casual browsing, youtube, 2D CAD drafting etc, can happen without issues or obvious delays for the user that sat infront of the "node".

 

3. Moves from Quad to Hex to Octa etc, dont say much in themselves. It is a balance between the generation of core architecture, maximum clock on single threaded tasks and maximum sustained clock when all cores are working that makes up the performance experience.

The 7700K Quad core for example, has massive IPC and clock advantages over older hex-cores, making it much faster out of the box for modeling (that mostly uses only one core/thread), but also rendering tasks. The 6900K would catch up eventually after the rendering process was started, but complex modeling / forming / sculpting and also rendering initiation (all single core / thread heavy tasks) will be much faster with the "humble" quad 7700K vs. slower clocked and older architecture 8C and even 10C machines.

 

Thus fast clocked quad and hex cores are the best WS oriented CPUs (turbo clock * 1~2 cores = what counts), and multicore CPUs with "ok" clocks but massive CPU clock aggregates (base clock * # of CPUs = what counts). A usefull over-simplification would be: if you are actively clicking for your workflow, 7700K will be better.

 

Most if not all 3DS modeling, most if not all PS, most LR, all AI, all Sketchup, all Revit work etc. = will prefer the 7700K.

 

If you are passively waiting doing nothing, not seconds, but minutes / hours, say rendering, video transcoding, exporting lots of final images from LR = the multi core CPUs with GOOD aggregate (not those $300 low clock Xeons, the $1000-3000+ ones and the $1000+ extreme i7s) will do better.

Edited February 1, 2017 by dtolios

[junglee]

Wow thank you for the clear explanation guys.

 

So since my application is typically modeling and viewing through viewport, and all our renderings usually lasts less than 4hrs per view, it would be the best to buy 5 of $1,500 7700k set up instead of 3 of $3,000 6900k set up. Then I could use 3 as full time WS and leave 2 for part time nodes and part time WS for extra people, and save $1,500 on top of it to invest in something else - perhaps extra 7700k machine for larger rendering farm! And on top it, we should yield in better working experience from what I'm understanding.

 

And is there anything else to fix on 7700k set up Nikolaos recommended since I have some money left?

 

Here's the set up list:

 

i7-7700

Cryorig A40 83.0 CFM Liquid cooler

Asus TUF z270 Mark 2 ATX LGA1151 Mobo

G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB DDR4-2800 Memory

Crucial MX300 525 GB 2.5" SSD

Hitachi Ultrastar 7k3000 3TB HDD

Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1070 8 GB Windforce

Phanteks Eclipse P400 ATX Tower

EVGA SuperNOVA NEX 650W PSU

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/MFQTtJ

[Dimitris Tolios]

CPU Cooler: The CPU cooler might be overkill if you don't care about overclocking. An yes, it is uber-anal to have your CPU "over-cooled", no you won't really prolong its life etc...I like CLCs, I have one in one of my rigs (i7-6700K @ 4.6GHz in a Cougar QBX) and used them even in office systems I've build (i7-4790K but pushed to 4.5GHz), but both those scenarios have overclocked CPUs, and in the QBX case, I could not really fit an air-cooler that I would like as it is too small.

 

In a big midi-case like the Phanteks Eclipse P400, there are no space issues, and a CLC just adds complexity and failure points without any real benefits.

 

I would opt for a simpler air-cooling solution, and perhaps save some $ in the process:

 

Noctua NH-U12S

Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO

CRYORIG H7

 

All of the above will cool the 7700K just fine, even allow for a little overclocking.

 

HDD: I would personally also take a look at the HDD requirement...you already have a decent 500GB class SSD in each. Do you need 3TB HDD too? Maybe you need to re-invest the monies saved here and there in a decent NAS or a small file server to keep your assets / models centralized and also better protected with at least a RAID-1, if not RAID-5 HDD array.

Edited February 2, 2017 by dtolios

[junglee]

I already have a brand new NAS to be installed and yes, it is a great idea to have more HDD for it rather than using it for the WS.

 

For CPU, would I have the real benefit of having it overclocked for my application? If so, is it something computer dummy like me can do?

And would overclocking shorten life of the CPU?

 

Thank you so much for your quick response.

[junglee]

Also for the node, I looked at your website for some tips and saw $500 and $600 options.

Which one would you prefer? 2 nodes consist of 7700k system for $3,000 or 5~6 nodes consist of your $500/$600 system? Of course, since our office space is limited, I would end up with maximum of 2~3 nodes.

[Dimitris Tolios]

There are easy to follow guides online for overclocking, sometimes step by step. Asus makes very popular Mobos and their BIOS interface is pretty much interchangeable between models, so chances are you will figure it out if you want to try it.

 

Mild overclocks pose no threat to the CPU, given proper cooling.

 

Moreso, what "hurts" the CPU is excessive over-voltage, not overheating. CPUs have thermal monitors that will limit voltage or power the CPU down if excessive temperatures are reached, and that thresshold is set to 100oC, which means Intel themselves are pretty confident on the durability of the CPU. Many users go "nuts" for temps going over 70-75oC, but they are simply over-reacting - in my opinion that is.

 

$500/600 nodes: These configurations are exercises in frugality: how can I have a "render speed multiplier" with the least $ spend, while remaining realistic and reliable. As disclaimed in the blog itself, it is there to provoke & educate you a bit, for you to make your own decisions. Yes, those $600 nodes are great value for $, but remember that after you exceed the critical mass of allowable nodes your Vray licence provides, you have to spend extra just to licence extra nodes. So there is a balance to be kept based on how many licenses you have and how you want to structure your office: 3 workstations with a WS licence each and couple of nodes for each exclusively, without additional licensing?

3 Workstations with a WS licence each and additional floating node licenses so that each WS can use more than 2 nodes (and itself) at a given moment rendering?

Etc.

 

 

Does overclocking lower the life expectancy of the CPU?

Well to an extend, yes, it does. But the % of overclock and more importantly the % of over-voltage makes that deterioration vary HUGELY.

At the end of the day, if I can tap into 15-20 or even 30% more performance for the cost of $50-100 or so (typically better cooling and/or perhaps a better motherboard), risking that my CPU will become unstable in the overclocked speed 6-7 or more years down the road...well, I call that a fair exchange, as I would consider a CPU "expired" by that time - at least in a demanding professional or enthusiast environment. Meanwhile, I was experiencing performance benefits unavailable to off-the-shelf products. Before I got my current 6700K, I had a 3930K clocked to 4.8GHz which I was using for a few years (overclocked from day 1 I think). This was a 50% over base speed overclock. It took years for Intel to release a CPU that was out-of-the-box faster than what I had in early 2012...

 

I would think 4.6~4.8GHz a mild/safe overclock for the 7700K.

Note that this is a very fast clocked CPU out of the box, so 4.8GHz is "just" 15% more than the default base speed of 4.2GHz and ~7% over the 4.5GHz turbo, but it is not bad for a nearly "free" upgrade.

 

You could go for 5+GHz but that perhaps starts pushing your luck a bit - not for hurting the CPU, but because you are more prone to the "cpu lottery" thing: not all CPUs overclock the same, so you have to be lucky, aka get a golden ticket/chip, that will allow you to push the clock a lot without too much Vcore increase. If you have the time to invest, by all means, try going for more, I just thing the 4.8GHz will be the "easy to achieve for pretty much all 7700K chips with minimal effort" goal.

Edited February 2, 2017 by dtolios

[junglee]

Thank you so much for your fast and thorough explanation.

 

I did not know that nodes needed a vray license as I thought they were considered as slaves of WS. Since we only have 4 licenses, I'll have to just get 4 equally spec'd 7700k machines and do a slight overclock on them. Yes I agree that trade off for life expectancy of CPU for even slightly better performance is okay since most we use out of our computers are usually less than 4~5 yrs.

But since we are slightly overclocking them, do you think I should upgrade to CLC or is air cooled cooler still good enough?

[joelmcwilliam]

Because those are three years old already and i am looking for the replacement for better efficiency.

 

Nothing wrong rendering on older hardware. Those are still good machines and perform the same as a brand new i7 7700k machine.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/1029

 

What do you mean with better efficiency? Is that energy consumption saving? How long do you render every day and how many machines are rendering?

 

But since we are slightly overclocking them, do you think I should upgrade to CLC or is air cooled cooler still good enough?

 

Go for a beefy air cooler. Look at Noctua's. It will always work without making sound.