iBuyPower P500X And P900DX Workstations, Reviewed

[Draven35]

Armed with updated workstation benchmarks, we have two systems from iBuyPower in the lab today: a $2,000 quad-core entry-level rig, and an $8,000 sixteen-core behemoth. With $6,000 separating the two, is the performance spread really what you'd expect?

iBuyPower P500X And P900DX Workstations, Reviewed : Read more

 

[sprucegroose]

The P900DX would be about $6500 for the parts alone. It also comes with warranty, and if you are the type of person using it, the time building it and repairing it might offset the price difference. On the other hand, you could put in better components for the same price.

 

[Draven35]

Pretty much right on all counts, there

 

[manitoublack]

We've got the Quadro 4000's at work and they're junk. GTX280 is faster and they were released in 2008. I pulled mine and installed my old GTX295, made a huge difference using the mine modelling software.

Quadrao 4000 was all stutters, GTX 295 is buttery smooth.

 

[samuelspark]

Is it the new H60i or the old H60?

 

[Draven35]

Its the old H60.

 

[csf60]

[citation][nom]manitoublack[/nom]We've got the Quadro 4000's at work and they're junk. GTX280 is faster and they were released in 2008. I pulled mine and installed my old GTX295, made a huge difference using the mine modelling software.Quadrao 4000 was all stutters, GTX 295 is buttery smooth.[/citation]
that's because workstation cards are not meant to be fast at rendering frames. They are fast at doing many simple batch calculations like ray tracing, fluid movement or video editing.

 

[j2j663]

[citation][nom]manitoublack[/nom]We've got the Quadro 4000's at work and they're junk. GTX280 is faster and they were released in 2008. I pulled mine and installed my old GTX295, made a huge difference using the mine modelling software.Quadrao 4000 was all stutters, GTX 295 is buttery smooth.[/citation]

This is like someone complaining that a screwdriver is really bad at pounding in nails. Learn to use the right tools for the job at hand.

 

[Guest]

I'm curious about the After Effects performance. What were your memory settings when rendering multiple frames simultaneously?

 

[Draven35]

they varied, I had to set them between 3gb and the minimum in order to the the maximum number of cores. I have a working theory on the AE problem that i will test next opportunity.

 

[Guest]

Wow, odd. Anywhere I could get an update on your progress once you test your hypothesis? I'd love to figure out what is causing that result. It should be destroying that benchmark.

 

[Draven35]

Yes, I'll post it somewhere, likely here...

 

[WyomingKnott]

The P900DX demonstrates a 3.17x increase over the P500X.

The numbers are 5.06 and 16.09. That's a 2.17x increase, unless you are going to argue that 5.06 is a 1x increase over 5.06. Three times more, four times as much.

Good heavens, the language has gotten sloppy.

 

[xelliz]

I have to say that my experience with my brothers two ibuypower systems has been less then inspiring. I personally wouldn't recommend their systems for home use much less in the business world. Of course this is just my opinion, based on my experience...but since I'm talking about me, my personally experience is whats most important.

 

[Guest]

Please Please Tell us About Lightwaves VPR (virtual progressive render)
a its screen res times, you gotta ask Newtek for a reconconstruction test.
The grail is human real time reconconstruction when eyeballed.

 

[Draven35]

[citation][nom]VPR runner[/nom]Please Please Tell us About Lightwaves VPR (virtual progressive render)a its screen res times, you gotta ask Newtek for a reconconstruction test.The grail is human real time reconconstruction when eyeballed.[/citation]

VPR is totally CPU-based, so adding it would just add yet another CPU-based renderer to the collection we already have. Keep in mind the Lightwave tests we're using were not created or supplied by Newtek, I made the tests, I've been using Lightwave since version 4.0 on the Amiga.