*Good MB & Chip for a fast CAD machine

I'm reseaching parts for a good CAD PC. I would be running Autocad 2008,
SolidWorks 2008, and Autocad Mechanical. At least (2) 20" monitors. I would
start with one of the Core 2 processors. I'm not a gamer. I don't want to
spend a lot of money on uneeded speed/capability. Any ideas, opinions
would be appreciated.

TIA,

Dennis

Dennis Lubots wrote:
I'm reseaching parts for a good CAD PC. I would be running Autocad 2008,
SolidWorks 2008, and Autocad Mechanical. At least (2) 20" monitors. I would
start with one of the Core 2 processors. I'm not a gamer. I don't want to
spend a lot of money on uneeded speed/capability. Any ideas, opinions
would be appreciated.

TIA,

Dennis

E6850 $270 (make sure motherboard supports FSB1333) 65nm technology 65W
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115028

E8400 $240 or less (make sure motherboard supports FSB1333) 45nm technology 65W
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115037

Those are dual core processors. My assumption would be, that your software
is not multicore aware, and there is not a lot of parallel threads possible.
You'd need to check with the software vendor, to see if a quad core processor
makes better sense. The advantage of the above two processors, is they
run at 3GHz. A similarly priced quad, runs at 2.4GHz. It can do more
work, but only if the software knows how to use a quad well.

With regard to clock rate, the computing power of a processor is
related to: CPU_core_clock * IPC

The Core2 processors have a higher IPC than the previous generations
of P4 or Pentium D processors. The "3GHz" that the above processors
run at, is actually equivalent to 4.5GHz or more, of a P4 processor.
So don't assume, when seeing the 3GHz number, that it is the same
speed as the 3GHz P4 you already have. It is 50% or more faster.

The E8400 is a few percentage points faster than the E6850 (on real
work, not benchmarks). The problem right now, is supply of the processor.
Intel hopes to sell more of its inventory of 65nm processors. The E8400
is not available in North America. It seems to be more available, the
closer you get geographically, to the plants making them.

You can use this simple minded integer benchmark, as a way of comparing
old processors, to new ones. This benchmark is multicore aware, so
will favor the quad processors. To read this chart, you have to know your
processor model numbers pretty well :-) Some quads and some $1000 processors,
sit higher in the chart, than the two I picked above. If you live in
North America, chances are, today, you'd be buying an E6850.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_20...72&cha rt=410

For a motherboard, pick something with an X38 chipset. That will give
full bandwidth on two video card slots, if you need them. The X38 also
supports ECC on DDR2 memory only (doesn't handle ECC on DDR3). If you
select some DDR2 memory with ECC, and assuming the motherboard really
supports ECC, that might be a more reliable computing platform. So far,
I have not read any postings, of *demonstrated* working ECC operation
on an X38. One poster discovered that ECC didn't work on the X38 he
bought, so more research is required. (And who you'd ask, is a
mystery to me. I doubt anyone knows. Pre-sales support would just
read the crap on the advertisement to you, and you need proof.) The
capability is listed on the Intel site, but the BIOS and the OS also
play a part in whether it works.

You can probably get all the graphics performance you need via one
video card. The video cards come with two connectors for monitors.
But you probably know the software better than we do, as to how
best to equip the graphics capability. Perhaps the Autocad site
has some suggestions for graphics, and you can extrapolate from
there.

Paul

Paul wrote in :

Dennis Lubots wrote:
I'm reseaching parts for a good CAD PC. I would be running Autocad
2008, SolidWorks 2008, and Autocad Mechanical. At least (2) 20"
monitors. I would start with one of the Core 2 processors. I'm not a
gamer. I don't want to spend a lot of money on uneeded
speed/capability. Any ideas, opinions would be appreciated.

TIA,

Dennis

E6850 $270 (make sure motherboard supports FSB1333) 65nm technology
65W http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115028

E8400 $240 or less (make sure motherboard supports FSB1333) 45nm
technology 65W
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115037

Those are dual core processors. My assumption would be, that your
software is not multicore aware, and there is not a lot of parallel
threads possible. You'd need to check with the software vendor, to see
if a quad core processor makes better sense. The advantage of the
above two processors, is they run at 3GHz. A similarly priced quad,
runs at 2.4GHz. It can do more work, but only if the software knows
how to use a quad well.

With regard to clock rate, the computing power of a processor is
related to: CPU_core_clock * IPC

The Core2 processors have a higher IPC than the previous generations
of P4 or Pentium D processors. The "3GHz" that the above processors
run at, is actually equivalent to 4.5GHz or more, of a P4 processor.
So don't assume, when seeing the 3GHz number, that it is the same
speed as the 3GHz P4 you already have. It is 50% or more faster.

The E8400 is a few percentage points faster than the E6850 (on real
work, not benchmarks). The problem right now, is supply of the
processor. Intel hopes to sell more of its inventory of 65nm
processors. The E8400 is not available in North America. It seems to
be more available, the closer you get geographically, to the plants
making them.

You can use this simple minded integer benchmark, as a way of
comparing old processors, to new ones. This benchmark is multicore
aware, so will favor the quad processors. To read this chart, you have
to know your processor model numbers pretty well :-) Some quads and
some $1000 processors, sit higher in the chart, than the two I picked
above. If you live in North America, chances are, today, you'd be
buying an E6850.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_20...el1=1096&model
2=872&chart=410

For a motherboard, pick something with an X38 chipset. That will give
full bandwidth on two video card slots, if you need them. The X38 also
supports ECC on DDR2 memory only (doesn't handle ECC on DDR3). If you
select some DDR2 memory with ECC, and assuming the motherboard really
supports ECC, that might be a more reliable computing platform. So
far, I have not read any postings, of *demonstrated* working ECC
operation on an X38. One poster discovered that ECC didn't work on the
X38 he bought, so more research is required. (And who you'd ask, is a
mystery to me. I doubt anyone knows. Pre-sales support would just
read the crap on the advertisement to you, and you need proof.) The
capability is listed on the Intel site, but the BIOS and the OS also
play a part in whether it works.

You can probably get all the graphics performance you need via one
video card. The video cards come with two connectors for monitors.
But you probably know the software better than we do, as to how
best to equip the graphics capability. Perhaps the Autocad site
has some suggestions for graphics, and you can extrapolate from
there.

Paul

Great info Paul. There are too many choices out there. It really
helps to get some help, to narrow things down a bit.

thnaks alot,

Dennis

Dennis Lubots wrote:
I'm reseaching parts for a good CAD PC. I would be running Autocad 2008,
SolidWorks 2008, and Autocad Mechanical. At least (2) 20" monitors. I would
start with one of the Core 2 processors. I'm not a gamer. I don't want to
spend a lot of money on uneeded speed/capability. Any ideas, opinions
would be appreciated.

TIA,

Dennis

Greetings,
I am running a setup similar to what you are describing. I run Carlson Civil
Suite within Autodesk Map3D 2008. I also have two monitors connected to one
video card. Often, I have images running on one monitor and Map3D on the
other, drawing/contouring while checking with the images. Other times, I may
have ArcView also running at the same time. I'm not a gamer, either.

At home, my setup is an Asus P5K-E, Intel E6750, 3 GB DDR2, one PNY 8600GS
card, and the E6750 is slightly overclocked with air cooling. Works like a
charm. The E6750 is the best chip I've worked with.

At office, my setup was Asus P5B, Intel E4300, 3 GB DDR2, one Techtronix ATI
1550X card, two monitors, and the E4300 was greatly overclocked. I state 'was'
because the P5B board decided to die and I replaced it with an Intel DQ35JO
board which I do not like but had no choice (only thing available in town and I
could not wait). The Intel board is plain vanilla and you cannot tweak much
of anything. But it is a good board.

With the P5B, the E4300 was overclocked to 3.0 GZ and after quite a bit of
various tweaks/tests, I believe that the only way you can destroy an E4300 is
with a hammer. In fact, the E6750 outperforms it mainly due to the L2 cache in
my opinion.

At home, I run Vista Home Premium and at the office I have XP Home. On another
box I have XP Pro. Autodesk does not include Home Premium as a supported OS
but it works fine.

I would recommend not buying the E6850 and get the E6750 instead. The reason
is about $100.00 more for the E6850 when you are only gaining not much more in
speed. The difference in cost can go towards one of the newer 45nm chips once
they are more available. So make sure your board supports FSB1333 and has the
X38 chip but I am fine with the P35 at home.

Good luck,
Crew