Need Build to run CAD

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
C

cvnp52

Reputable
Dec 15, 2015
1
0
4,510
Approximate Purchase Date: This week

Budget Range: $800.00 USD or under.

System Usage from Most to Least Important: CAD, 3-D modeling

Are you buying a monitor: No

Parts to Upgrade: Its a new build.

Do you need to buy OS: Yes, 64 bit windows 7 or higher.

Preferred Website(s) for Parts: Not Sure. Just want quality parts or pre-built without a hassle.

Location: City, State/Region, Country - Canton Ohio or Cape Carteret North Carolina, United States

Overclocking: maybe

SLI or Crossfire: Maybe

Your Monitor Resolution: Not sure going to let her buy the monitor, mouse, keyboard, speakers

Additional Comments: She said to run the program she has to have: Core i7 or Xeon e3, 64 bit windows 7 or higher, 16 GB ram, at least 250 GB Disk Space (more is better), Direct 3D graphics card or equivalent, and DVD-ROM. I'm not sure whether building it or buying a built one is better. Is my price range adequate? I found Lenovo H30-50 - 90B8006HUS (http://shop.lenovo.com/us/en/desktops/lenovo/h-series/h30-50/) in my price range would it work?

I'm out of my element in buying a computer and any help, builds, advice, or product links you can provide are greatly appreciated.

Thank you,
cvnp52
 
Solution
Victorion
It´s always better to build it yourself. Even with the best deals, you are getting a bad deal.

Below:
- Fast Xeon CPU - recommended for workstations, comparable with i7 in performance.
- 16 GB fast DDR3-1600 Ram with CL9. I picked a mobo with 2 free ram slots, so it can upgrade to 32 GB ram if needed.
- 500 GB Fast SSD Drive
- Good alround videocard. GTX gives better price/performance ratio in CAD than Quadro. While Quadro cards have better performance for solidworks/maya.
- Solid PSU from Antec

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1231 V3 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($242.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-B85M-DS3H-A Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard...
Sort by date Sort by votes
It´s always better to build it yourself. Even with the best deals, you are getting a bad deal.

Below:
- Fast Xeon CPU - recommended for workstations, comparable with i7 in performance.
- 16 GB fast DDR3-1600 Ram with CL9. I picked a mobo with 2 free ram slots, so it can upgrade to 32 GB ram if needed.
- 500 GB Fast SSD Drive
- Good alround videocard. GTX gives better price/performance ratio in CAD than Quadro. While Quadro cards have better performance for solidworks/maya.
- Solid PSU from Antec

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1231 V3 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($242.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-B85M-DS3H-A Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($50.88 @ OutletPC)
Memory: G.Skill Sniper Gaming Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($62.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO-Series 500GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($147.88 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: Asus GeForce GTX 950 2GB Video Card ($128.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case: Cooler Master N200 MicroATX Mid Tower Case ($29.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Antec Basiq 430W 80+ Certified ATX Power Supply ($27.98 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: LG GH24NSC0 DVD/CD Writer ($13.89 @ OutletPC)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM (64-bit) ($89.88 @ OutletPC)
Total: $795.47
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-12-15 13:14 EST-0500
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution


thats a pretty weak graphics card for 3d modeling. next are you willing to build the computer yourself? how instinctive will the modeling be? and no that modal you linked will struggle. it only has a i5 max and uses integrated grapics
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
$800 is a bit tight for a CAD workstation. A differentiation must also be made between workstation usage and applications being used. AutoCAD 2D and 3D (vector graphics) work best on GTX cards. Modeling / rendering favors Quadro but some applications (Solidworks 2013)will run on nothing else, and drivers oft won't even install on gaming type motherboards.

AutoCAD 3D
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-workstation-graphics-card,3493-5.html

AutoCAD 2D
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-workstation-graphics-card,3493-3.html

Maya
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-workstation-graphics-card,3493-8.html

Solidworks 2013
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-workstation-graphics-card,3493-9.html

Given the above, I'd hesitate to offer specific hardware recommendations on MoBo / CPU / GFX but othewise, to get you started:

Case - Modeling / rendering oft take long time to complete so systems tend to be run long and hard. Avoid small cases. I'd use a mid to full tower case with plenty of cooling options.

PSU - Again, being driven long and hard puts a strain on the PSU. Avoid cheap PSUs with weak caps such as any "builder series" PSU like the Corsair CX / RM, Antec Basiq / Neo, most of EVGA B / B1 series. I'd look to a XFX Core / XTR series, Seasonic M12/S12, EVGA B2 / G2

Fans - You want air movement but you also want quiet as you'll be spending lotta time at this thing and fan noise can be distracting to both you and say a college roommate. Start at the top of the colored chart here:

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1345-page7.html

RAM - More is better, higher speed is better, lower CAS is better. Be careful about "I can always upgrade later" as this doesn't always go well. The likelihood of two different packages of RAM coexisting happily decreases significantly as speed increases and CAS decreases. Even when you use the exact same model number, you are not guaranteed success as vendors oft switch suppliers with successive version numbers. Even if you buy two sets of 2 x *GB on the same day from the same vendor that came of the line right behind one another, the manufacturer does not guarantee that the 4 sticks from 2 different packages will wok together. Only a pack of 2 or pack of 4 is guaranteed to work together. Again, low speed, average CAS, you should be fine ... high speed, low CAS, it gets iffy.

Storage - At $800, I'd have to rule out an SSD as money is needed elsewhere; you'd need at least a 500 GB and that eats up too large a % of budget. If 250 GB of disk space is needed for the programs and, presumably, CAD data files, still need room for OS, personal files, other uses and maybe games. So that's tight for 500 GB and you'd wind up needing a mechanical drive for that extra storage

If that's the case, then I'd recommend an SSHD.... An SSD boots in about 15.6 seconds whereas the SSHD boots in 16.5. The SSHD is a combination SSD and HD whereby built in algorithms store the most frequently used files on the SSD portion.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5748/seagate-desktop-2tb-sshd-st2000dx001-review/index9.html

With the increasing market penetration of the SSD, a lot of users have now had the chance to upgrade their PCs. Now we all know while SSDs offer massive benefits in terms of performance, they have always lacked in one area - capacity.

A situation like this left most power users using an SSD for their operating system, while still running a secondary mechanical drive for storage and games. A typical setup such as this would allow the OS to load very quickly, while leaving you stunned at how long it took to load a game [or in your case CAD file]. With the introduction of the Desktop SSHD, Seagate has again switched up the game, offering a substantial performance boost to those of you in this situation.

Now, if you are one that chooses to use a single drive for your operating system, and have held onto your standard desktop HDD for the benefit of capacity, the Desktop SSHD is calling your name. The 8GB of NAND cache in conjunction with Seagate's application optimized algorithms should offer a tremendous performance boost, and again the more you use, it the faster the drive will get, as it learns how you use your system.

In every case seen here today, the Seagate Desktop SSHD excels, whether it be a synthetic point and click benchmark like HD Tune or ATTO, or even application traces via PCMark 8, the drive just performs.
Click to expand...

If you could list the apps that will be used, as well as what other uses the PC will be expected to perform, I could offer more specifc advice on remaining components.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Workstations don't use gaming GPUs, they use Quadro GPUs.
Something like Revit will work much better on a Quadro than even a high end gaming card.
You can get a pretty good entry level Quadro K620 for about £160. Prices go up to £4000 - presumably for people designing jet airplanes etc.
An i7 or a Xeon is ideal for CAD or 3D modeling. An i5 will work if you are low on budget, but is 30% slower and less responsive.
Big CAD models use lots and lots of memory, so either 16GB or 32GB are necessary. Crucial Ballistix sport is £60 for 16Gb, which is good price in UK. Gskill memory is good too.
You might not need a 500Gb SSD, check how big your models are going to be.. 250Gb SSD is half the price
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


a gaming gpu will work fine in the majority of cases and can save a bit. their is no way i would throw a i5 in a cad pc if its used under any moderate load. a xeon or i7 will preform significantly better
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think Victorion is very much on the right track for value . Yes a gamer card is not ideal for renders but in terms of performance in renders per dollar spent its probably still going to work better than an equivalently priced work station card from either nVidia or AMD .
In a professional situation you would pay for the fastest possible performance . When you have a budget of $800 then the priorities change .

Heres how I would spend the money , and yes its a tweak of Victorions build

Slightly better motherboard
Two conventional hard drives . One will be for OS , software and source files . The other is used to output to . This means that data is not travelling both ways up the same SATA cable when you are rendering . That may speed things up , but its probably too close to call . What you do get is 4 times as much storage for about 30% less
I also changed the psu . The corsair is not brilliant but it is better than the antec basiq and at 500 watts its so over specced it wont be under any stress .
Since the graphics card wont be as useful as a professional card would be its best , IMO , to cut a little from the budget here

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Xeon E3-1231 V3 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($242.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Motherboard: ASRock H97M PRO4 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($79.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: G.Skill Sniper Gaming Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($62.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($45.88 @ OutletPC)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($45.88 @ OutletPC)
Video Card: Asus GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB Video Card ($106.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Case: Cooler Master N200 MicroATX Mid Tower Case ($29.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair CX 500W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($34.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: LG GH24NSC0 DVD/CD Writer ($13.89 @ OutletPC)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Home OEM (64-bit) ($89.88 @ OutletPC)
Total: $753.47
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-12-15 14:58 EST-0500
 
Upvote 1 Downvote


Mate, I suggest you google a youtube video for a performance comparison between a quadro and a gaming card on 3D CAD.
The gaming card is terrible, even though it is more expensive than the quadro.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


my daughter uses her i5 PC for CAD - she is a Civil engineer.
Like I said, an i5 is about 30% slower than an i7. Main time penalty for an i5 is when 3D rendering your project, but for editing, it works OK.
A gaming GPU is far slower than a quadro AT THE SAME PRICE - I suggest you google it. Gaming GPU for gaming, CAD GPU for CAD
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


I look forward to you providing the link . And another one to the quaddro or firepro you recommend that costs less than $106
You might also consider how much time is spent rendering vs how much time is spend drafting
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ok here is a possible build for you. note this build will be a bit more difficult to assemble then any of the ones above. i also listed used parts for things that have a very small chance of failing.

dual x5687's -168$ (3.6ghz quad core each)
z800 motherboard -90$
6*4gig ram -48$
r9 280x- 150$
Rise ATX Full Tower case- 80$
XFX TS850 850w- 80$
windows -90$
optical drive 14$
dual seagate barracuda 1tb

this build comes to 810$
as far a hardware the dual x5687's will outperform a e3 1231 on applications that benefit from the large core count. a r9 280x is much better than a 750ti and you get 24 gigs of ram instead of the 16
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Then we are all still waiting for you to show us how to improve performance of this machine with a quadro or firepro costing $106 [ or less]
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Glad you agree with me overall. I also agree 2 drives would be better than 1. I opted for a big SSD drive till the person could afford another drive, that would make the more ideal build imo, having 1 SSD and then adding another SSD or SSHD/HDD on a later time. I don´t believe storage issues are going to be a huge problem though, since the op was asking for a mere 250 GB.

About the PSU, i opted for a antec basiq psu, since it´s a little more sturdy than the corsair cx series that is recommended at 30c - even under full load. That´s an for office/shop pc imo, not workstation or gaming/overclocked pc.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Depends on the apps used.... the numbers are the numbers and Quadro simply is not the tool used by for example engineers in the construction industry. Not unless you wanna pay up to 8 times as much go slower. It's all a matter of purchase cost versus the cost assigned to the amount of time saved. When used in a production environment where a CAD workstation bills out at $120 or more an hour, that's a very different evaluation than a student looking at a couple of years, where the main diet stable is Ramen Chicken Noodle Soup and Kraft Macaroni and Cheese.

We build all of our engineering workstations in house and also build for other engineering firms. What performs best is dependent on what apps you use. Not only in performance per dollar but in head to head performance, the GTX cards beat all comers in AutoCAD 2D and 3D. Some modeling / rendering programs Maya work better on *workstation* cards, some like Solidworks work only on workstation cards. But 95+% of all construction documents put out by engineering consulting firms use AutoCAD 2D / 3D (vector based graphics) and the far greater margin of those are 2D in which performance of all cards varies little. In the 2D Graphics index, the difference between a 680 and Quadro 4000 is 0.6%

However in 3D AutoCAD, GTX kicks some tail (8%, 11%, 19% faster then the 5000 depending on test .... and 3 times as fast as comparably priced Quadro cards) over the hugely more expensive Quadro 500

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-workstation-graphics-card,3493-5.html

AutoCAD is what engineers and contractors building the projects require nothing else but those that get involved on public presentations on large projects who want to do the "dog and pony show" for politicos and the public and create something "pretty" complete with people walking around. shady trees and maybe even a gal walking a puppy :). Here, you will need modeling / rendering / light ray capabilities where the Quadro and oodles of RAM will serve well.



Let's look at some test results instead. Again, workstations do many thing and how each card performs relative to the other depends upon the specific application being used and even the generation of cards in question. In many graphics workstations using Adobe Suites, I recall the 580's were better than the 680s using CUDA.

A gaming GPU is far slower than a quadro AT THE SAME PRICE - I suggest you google it. Gaming GPU for gaming, CAD GPU for CAD
Click to expand...

Look at the images below ... GTX 680 or Quadro 2000 ?
.


01-AutoCAD-2013-3D-05-Summaryc.png


01-AutoCAD-2013-3D-01-Rotate-Wireframe.png


01-AutoCAD-2013-3D-04-Rotate-Realistic.png


So if you are building a workstation to run AutoCAD 3D, ya want the $500 680 or the slower $2,300 Quadro 5000 ? .... or on a comparative price the 680 or painfully slow Quadro 2000 ?

Again, of critical importance to this question is what else the machine will be used for. Workstation cards are ideally suited to dedicated workstations using workstation apps in which they excel. They are very poorly suited to all purpose usage.

From the composition of the OP, I inferred that this will be a student box, and given the budget, I gotta assume that the box will also be used for other activities besides the core CAD curriculum. Without knowing what, if any, other activities will be undertaken I see answering this question as like answering what oil one should use in in an engine w/o knowing what it's in, make, model, age, mileage / hours, climate, etc.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom