Computer Quote

[Morbid Angel]

The way I deal with my main workstations is, I fork over large chunk of cash on it, buy best I can get. And do that process every 6-7 years, this is what I expect my workstation to last me for. If you buy mid range parts, etc expect it to last less, not perform as well later in life etc. So you might be forced to build a new mid range workstation few years from today again.

[glorybound]

Would you consider this a mid-range computer?

The way I deal with my main workstations is, I fork over large chunk of cash on it, buy best I can get. And do that process every 6-7 years, this is what I expect my workstation to last me for. If you buy mid range parts, etc expect it to last less, not perform as well later in life etc. So you might be forced to build a new mid range workstation few years from today again.

[Donald2B]

Personally, I would consider that a mid-range computer...with the high-end being a dual Xeon setup. With that said, using Dmitry's 6 year upgrade cycle, financially it works out to being the same thing. You can either spend $3k every 3 years or $6k every 6 years...it works out to basically the same cost...at least with the machines that I've been building that fall with-in that criteria.

[Morbid Angel]

Personally, I would consider that a mid-range computer...with the high-end being a dual Xeon setup. With that said, using Dmitry's 6 year upgrade cycle, financially it works out to being the same thing. You can either spend $3k every 3 years or $6k every 6 years...it works out to basically the same cost...at least with the machines that I've been building that fall with-in that criteria.

That is exactly correct. However you get faster performance for first 3 years lets say, saves you time 3 years from now to have to build new system, migrate it, all the costs with new windows bla bla.

The downside, they come out with faster and faster chips every year so in 3 years you might have very spiffy system. Also towards 5th-6th year they start to fall apart, so maintenance costs a lot both $ and time.

[Donald2B]

You nailed it. I tend to follow the later and go for the large system once every 6-7 years and ride it out. Typically I also benefit from improved software performance too, so when I look at how much VRay improved over those 6 years! So it helps breath new life into aging hardware...the biggest problem is typically trying to gauge how much memory to get...because what is good now, may not be enough that far down the road. Once I get a machine setup...I hang onto it until the "wheels fall off"!

[glorybound]

I don't know, 6-7 years is a lifetime in computer years!

[Booska]

I also take the long view and just picked up the 5960x and an Asus Rampage V Extreme board, 64 GB GSkill DDR4 RAM, Corsair H110i cooler, a EVGA 1300W PSU, two SanDisk 980GB SSDs, and two 980Tis with whipped cream and nuts on top. The case I chose was the Cooler Master Cosmos II, a huge case that supports lots of fans and radiators for OC and still leaves enough room to grow.

The whole enchilada came in at just under $5k (ouch!), but I figure that this system will allow me to work faster (less time spent waiting on renders adds up to a big win over time!), produce more work, and thus enable this thing to pay for itself in a shorter amount of time. Plus, it will be able to hold its own longer than a cheaper system as all the new stuff starts hitting the shelves, as the others here have said.

I haven't had the time to get into OCing yet, but if you're interested in going that route this motherboard is designed specifically for that purpose as is the 5960x. If you have a look at the overclock.net site you will find lots of info on how to do this. As for the 5960x itself, they report an average OC result of around 4.4GHz with a few having gotten it up to 4.8GHz on a stable rig. A beast like that would be throwing out some serious heat, so an equally serious cooling scheme would be necessary.

By the way, does anyone know how OCing affects the longevity of the CPU? My gut tells me that it would shorten its life. Has anyone had one fail due to OC before the system is ready to be upgraded?

[Donald2B]

Regards to OC: running anything beyond the spec with which it was originally designed is going to put a lot of stress on that component. Heat is going to be your worst enemy, followed by stable / constant flow of good power. Watch your temps closely because there is almost NO room for failure when you are overclocking a 3GHz proc to over 4.2GHz...that's a significant OC!

Personally, I've had mixed results with OCing boards. But when things go wrong, there's almost always hardware casualties...so be safe and slowly work your way up the higher speeds. Watch temps and voltages.

I'm now on the Xeon path because once I get things setup and running stable, I feel confident that I can run a PhoenixFD, FumeFX, VRay or anything else for days on end without fear of burning up or having stability issues. So it's been great for me!

As a side note: Here is my new go to computer case. It's HUGE, but has great airflow if you want to go air-cooled, yet is fully setup to go all the way hard-core water cooling! Isolates the heat from the PSU from the rest of the system and is just a great design overall. Love it! http://www.phanteks.com/Enthoo-Primo.html

[Syclone1]

As a side note: Here is my new go to computer case. It's HUGE, but has great airflow if you want to go air-cooled, yet is fully setup to go all the way hard-core water cooling! Isolates the heat from the PSU from the rest of the system and is just a great design overall. Love it! http://www.phanteks.com/Enthoo-Primo.html

thats a sweet looking case, I ended up getting this one for mine, its a beast but everything is easily accessible and stays nice and cool http://www.corsair.com/en-us/graphit...-windowed-case

[Donald2B]

Corsair makes some great cases! I've got an Obsidian 800d and a 900d at the office for our two Xeon builds...but I much prefer the Phanteks case! My Corsair H80GT coolers fit a little better in the Phanteks case, since I need two of them.

Either way, those are some great cases.

[baastyan]

Look at benchmarks...if trying to keep to a budget...I would look at the 5930K processor...it's almost half the price and you may only sacrifice 10-15% at most...and due to the higher per core clock speed, the 5930K will be faster on any single threaded task. Just a thought to save about $500.

Did you test by yourself 5930K vs. 5690x?
I very much doubt that there is only 10-15% difference in performance.

Few months ago I started this thread:
http://forums.chaosgroup.com/showthr...INTERIOR-SCENE
You can clearly see that 5960x is much faster than 5930K.

Moreover, if your machine costs 2700$ in total and you are going to save 500$ by buying cheaper CPU it means you save 20-25% of total cost but you loose probably 30-35% of the power. Very bad deal IMO.

[Donald2B]

Yes, test myself. The average gap was 10-15%. In some cases that gap was much larger and in some cases the 5930 was faster, especially on the single threaded tasks. Now, both processors were a FACTORY settings...no OC! That's very important! Stock vs Stock.

I read through that thread and yes, the 5960X when OC'd to over 4GHz is impressive and I would expect it to extend the performance gap...but I am talking strictly stock CPU speeds as the OP stated he was uncomfortable with OCing. So my 10-15% numbers hold firm in my test. My point was that if you are NOT going to OC then you are wasting your money on the 5960x processor.

I agree with most of what you are saying...build the biggest and baddest machine you can!

[Morbid Angel]

Yes, test myself. The average gap was 10-15%. In some cases that gap was much larger and in some cases the 5930 was faster, especially on the single threaded tasks. Now, both processors were a FACTORY settings...no OC! That's very important! Stock vs Stock.

I read through that thread and yes, the 5960X when OC'd to over 4GHz is impressive and I would expect it to extend the performance gap...but I am talking strictly stock CPU speeds as the OP stated he was uncomfortable with OCing. So my 10-15% numbers hold firm in my test. My point was that if you are NOT going to OC then you are wasting your money on the 5960x processor.

I agree with most of what you are saying...build the biggest and baddest machine you can!

A friend of mine runs i7 2600k with 4.5 ghz oc and he says it still performs better then stock cpus to date especially on single threaded ops.

I got xeon e5-2680v3, and core to core its about same as cpu's 4-5 years ago (maybe a tad faster) During rendering I get about 2.5 times faster speed then xeon x5650, but that's because there is twice as many cores. So if there were equal amount of cores the calculation speed would only be 1.25 times faster meaning not that much faster

What we really need is less cores but much much faster core clocks, like 10 ghz single core would perform miracles

[Donald2B]

A friend of mine runs i7 2600k with 4.5 ghz oc and he says it still performs better then stock cpus to date especially on single threaded ops.

I got xeon e5-2680v3, and core to core its about same as cpu's 4-5 years ago (maybe a tad faster) During rendering I get about 2.5 times faster speed then xeon x5650, but that's because there is twice as many cores. So if there were equal amount of cores the calculation speed would only be 1.25 times faster meaning not that much faster

What we really need is less cores but much much faster core cpus, like 10 ghz single core would perform miracles

Yep! Higher per core GHz is definitely needed at this point! The only reason I jumped to a v3 Xeon was due to the number of cores I could get and it was the current generation when I was ready to upgrade.