Jump to content

Dell P4 or Xeon?


Recommended Posts

Hello all! I was hoping to get some feedback about which of these two computers would be a better all around computer.

 

Dell Workstations

 

I'm looking at base models of the 360 (with hyperthreading) or the 450. Can anyone tell me which computer would be a better buy, taking into consideration performance in VIZ, and of course the all important occasional first-person shooter! Cost is an issue, but for the base models (either one with probably 1Gig of RAM) their prices are pretty comparable.

 

Thanks, and I hope everyone has had a great start to the new year!

 

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First thing will be the cash. If you get the 450, go with duals (although you could buy a processor later on, as I did with my 530, but it's easier to get it all at once). So if you can afford it, it will make rendering much, much faster. It will also keep the machine fairly current longer (as in dual 2.8s won't have a P4, or any single chip, to compete with for a long time).

It's all about the dollars. Look at the refurbished ones, if money is tighter. I have a refurbished 530 and it came almost new. Same 3 year warranty, etc. I would highly recommend them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I going to see any noticeable increase in performance with the Xeon over the P4 with identical system setups, other than the xeon system being capable of having a future dual? So, is the Xeon going to actually be any faster than the same speed P4?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Buy the dual xeon with BOTH processors.

 

If you can't afford it yet...then wait. Or find another company selling a similar system for less money.

 

www.monarchcomputer.com

 

2) A Dual Xeon is extremely fast. They support hyperthreading just the same as the new pentium IV's, so you'd actually have 2 physical processors, and two logical processors...a psuedo quad processor system if you would.

 

If your planning on using 3rd party renders like vray/final render/mental ray/brazil, its definitely glorious to see 4 buckets flying across the screen.

 

A dual processor system is extremely responsive and very fast at multitasking. Generally with scanline renderers you'll see upwards of a 60-80% increase in performance. With 3rd party GI renders 75-95%. (If extrapolated over time).

 

Once you go dual (either dual screens, or dual cpu's) you'll never want to go back.

 

IMO the best configuration you can have is a dual processor machine, with dual displays.

 

Its extremely efficent, extremely fast, and you can do cool things like respond to cgarchitect posts on one monitor while rendering on the other :) .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious, but what is the reason for waiting till I can afford the dual? What's wrong with buying the system I can afford/justify to my wife right now that is setup for the dual, but only has one processor? Is there an issue with finding the correct processor down the road that works correctly with the processor that came with my system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eric - it's better to get the dual xeons at the same time. Something I remember reading about the chips having to match or something. I think Greg can better illuminate the subject. Run a search for "dual xeons" or something similiar - there wasa topic way back where a guy had problems with xeons that did not match up.

 

If you can not afford dual's go with a single hyper-threaded P4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The chips don't have to match persay...but the closer you are to the same chip dates, the more stable the system will be.

 

Intel has a habit of revamping chip lines through the release of various steppings.

 

If too many steppings pass by (lets say you want 2-3 years) then the chip you buy then, may have some issues with the one already in there.

 

Have you tried looking around at other manufacturers?

 

Realistically adding a second processor shouldn't be significantly higher on the overall system cost.

 

A 2.8B Xeon (boxed) goes for a little under 340 USD.

 

And I'm sure you can find them even cheaper then that.

 

Did you check www.monarchcomputer.com?

 

How bout boxxtech.com?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:) No problem. (trying to recall my previous post)

 

I can't say exactly if the 2.4 had the 800MHz FSB/Hyper Threading. However, I was planning on getting the minimum processor that came with (HT), which if that meant a 2.6, I'd get the 2.6. I think it's 2.4 though.

 

I figure the 64mb graphics card was okay, considering that I can stand to wait on the interactivity on the screen. While that delay does add up, it's not nearly as "progress-killing" to me as render speed. Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah yes,

 

I was just making sure you were at least getting a P4 with HT. Dell has a habit of throwing these awesome deals together...but then later you found out you bought an old machine, which is basically unupgradable.

 

Basically it all comes down to time. Having a fast video card isn't absolutely critical. Having a "working" video card is.

 

All programs have tricks and such to hide poly's, reduce polygon counts, freeze objects, etc etc.

 

Of course its annoying to have to go through extra steps...but really its good training. If someone ever hands you an 11 million polygon scene...I don't care what video card you have, its gonna kill the system without using tricks :) .

 

Renderings can also be kept to low resolutions for test renders, with final renders done overnight.

 

Sounds to me that your system is much more constrained budget wise, and saving a few hundred bucks is of particular importance.

 

With this in mine a 2.4C or 2.6C single P4 system would be fine. If you did need more power in a year or so, you could always plop a 3.2 or 3.4C Pentium IV in the system. (That'll be about the max speed chip though).

 

Maybe spec out the system again and post a quote link?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greg, thanks for the info! Added them to my bookmarks. Here are a few of the system specs. Which one looks the best? I think I could buy any of these systems and upgrade down the road with more memory and a better graphics card.

 

 

Intel® Xeon™ Processor, 2.40GHz, 512K Cache

Intel® Xeon™ Processor, 2.40GHz, 512K Cache

Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional, SP1 with Media and NTFS

Hyper-Threading feature preset to "ON."

FREE UPGRADE! 512MB (2x256) DDR266 SDRAM for the price of 256MB

nVidia, Quadro NVS 280, 64MB, dual monitor VGA capable

Dell Precision Workstation

48X/32X/48X CDRW with Roxio® Easy CD Creator

40GB ATA-100 IDE, 1 inch (7200 rpm)

1.44MB FDD,Full-size,no-bezel,F3 bay-1ST SOURCE

3Yr Parts + Onsite Labor (Next Business Day)

$1,376

 

Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor, 2.60GHz, 512K / 800 Front Side Bus

Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional, SP1 with Media and NTFS

Hyper-Threading feature preset to "ON."

FREE UPGRADE! 512MB,DDR400 SDRAM,ECC (2x256) for the price of 256MB

nVidia, Quadro NVS 280, 64MB, dual monitor VGA capable

Dell Precision Workstation

40GB ATA-100 IDE, 1 inch (7200 rpm)

48X/32X/48X CDRW with Roxio® Easy CD Creator

No Floppy Drive

3Yr Parts + Onsite Labor (Next Business Day)

$847

 

Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor, 3.00GHz, 512K / 800 Front Side Bus

Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional, SP1 with Media and NTFS

Hyper-Threading feature preset to "ON."

FREE UPGRADE! 512MB,DDR400 SDRAM,ECC (2x256) for the price of 256MB

nVidia, QuadroFX 500, 128MB, dual monitor VGA or DVI/VGA capable

Dell Precision Workstation

40GB ATA-100 IDE, 1 inch (7200 rpm)

48X/32X/48X CDRW with Roxio® Easy CD Creator

No Floppy Drive

3Yr Parts + Onsite Labor (Next Business Day)

$1,096

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eric,

 

All three of these systems are close in price.

 

With that in mind...I'd probably still lean a bit towards the xeon's.

 

If I wasn't going to get xeon's, then I'd go for the fastest single processor I could get. Which in this case would be the p4 3.0.

 

But then of course I don't really know your budget...I mean I do, but I don't know how important it is to save $$.

 

How much more is a Xeon 2.6? A xeon 2.8?

 

Are they signficantly more? Or just another 100 bucks?

 

General rule of thumb is...you buy the fastest processor available BEFORE the jump in price.

 

Intel/AMD always generally has 3 main top tiers.

 

The top one is usually twice as much as the one before it. The 2nd one is usually twice as much as the one before that...the third is usually like 50-100 bucks more expensive then the one before that...etc.

 

You want to usually buy the 3rd or 4th chip so you get the best bang for the buck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From 2.4GHz, each processor above the 2.4 is an additional $200 more than the one below it. So, the 2.6 is an additional $200, while the 3.2 is an additional $1000.

 

Of course, with the dual, double the above amounts to get the second processor.

 

Looking back at the Dell website, it appears that I missed the boat. The same system, though now with a "free upgrade" to 1gb (4 sticks) is now $1576. Guess that free upgrade is gonna' cost me an additional $200. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In case you're interested in seing the current config, here it is:

 

Intel® Xeon™ Processor, 2.40GHz, 512K Cache

Intel® Xeon™ Processor, 2.40GHz, 512K Cache

Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional, SP1 with Media and NTFS

Hyper-Threading

512MB,DDR266 SDRAM Memory,NECC (2 DIMMS)

$200 MAIL IN REBATE. Rebate not valid with memory FREE UPGRADE offer.

nVidia, Quadro NVS 280, 64MB, dual monitor VGA capable

Dell Precision Workstation

48X/32X/48X CDRW with Roxio® Easy CD Creator

Special Offer: 80GB ATA-100 IDE (7200 rpm) Hard Drive for the price of 40GB

1.44MB FDD

3Yr Parts + Onsite Labor (Next Business Day)

$1,665 before the $200 mail in rebate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hah!! that's exactly what my wife said. I think the current deals end on the 14th. I'm going to look again at that point and see what the prices have gone to.

 

Still on the fence as to whether a dual xeon or the fastest P4. I just haven't found any benchmarks comparing the two.

 

I'm not in a big rush, unless a good "deal" comes along from Dell. The other computer sources I've looked at just don't seem to compare in terms of price. Dell has a lot of buying power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey all,

 

I've been looking around at upgrading to a new system too. After reading through the threads and shopping around, I'm a bit fuzzy on the DDR ram specs. Some sites tout "Dual DDR", others state "DDR Reg ECC", some with ECC and some with Non-ECC.

I kind of understand that ECC is Error correcting, but does it really make a difference when modeling, rendering or compositing?

Also if a dual Xeon set up states that it has 533 FSB what type of ram should we expect to have in it or what should we specify? On Dell's site it just says DDR ram, on Monarch's site you have a huge selction but my eyes glaze over.

 

Thanks for info.

 

Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dan,

 

Here's some important things to note about ram.

 

First off unbuffered vs registered.

 

These are two differently designed dimms. Some systems require one, some require the other, and some can use both.

 

One important thing to note though...if the system REQUIRES one or the other, make sure to get the one it REQUIRES.

 

Basically registered memory has an additional 9th chip underneath the bank of 8 which does some level of error correction. Or something to that effect. You'll usually see registered ram (which generally is also ECC) required in server boards.

 

Depending on what Xeon you buy, it'll either...

 

1) Require PC2100 Registered ECC

2) Either use PC2100 unbuffered, or PC2100 Registered ECC

3) Use PC2700 unbuffered.

 

You'll need to find out the motherboard to get specific information.

 

Generally speaking though...if the ram's rediculously inexpensive, then its probably pc2100 unbuffered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've order Dell Precision 450 with single Xeon's 2.6GHz with 512K cache and 2GB RAM. I mostly use ADT2004 and VIZ. Is that ok? I mean I always use one software to work not like VIZ and Photoshop at the same time which is you must have dual xeon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can add some vague benchmarks to the discussion. I used Max 6 and the MR_LightGallery_Max6.max example file as the test.

 

My work computer is a (once upon a time top of the line) IBM M Pro Intellistation

Dual Xeon 2.4GHz P4(HT off because I'm on Windows2K)

1Gb ECC Ram

 

My new computer for home that I purchused at the Dell out let is a Precision 8300

Singe 3.0Ghz P4 w/ HT on

800mz front side buss

WinXP Home

512Mb DDR400 RAM

 

Work computer = 9:43

Home computer = 11:10 = ~13%

 

Keep in mind that my work computer is also bogged down with lots of use and extra programs, while the new home computer is a clean install.

 

This is also a Mental Ray scene, I'm also going to benchmark a radiosity scene later and I can post that if you're interested.

 

Colin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...