Overclocking in Business PC's (drafting)

[Mitch01]

Is there a reason why you aren't using Xeon processors for Inventor??

We've got a client running 3D fire simulations on multistory buildings (it's crazy sh*t).

They've only got 1 machine running it, and it was NOT cheap. Circa $25k build.

Running dual Xeon 5690's on the ASUS Z8PE-D18 board, with 48GB of RAM (24GB to each processor). Optioned up with the ASUS SAS controller running 4 x Constellations in RAID 10

Sure it does the job, but cost vs performance is not great.

......

For smaller stuff in Revit/Inventor you can get away with the i7 2600's cranked up with RAM, but anything where it starts really pushing the boundaries or there are multiple components, the Xeons leave the i7's for dead.

Can't wait to get my hands on the new i7 Series 3 / E7 Xeon processors. Haven't seen them out here yet but on paper damn they look impressive.

=================

As for overclocking, I really wouldn't bother. If you are pushing the machine and memory hard as it is, last thing you need is a device already on the edge being pushed even harder.

[NSanity]

Originally Posted by Mitch01

Is there a reason why you aren't using Xeon processors for Inventor??

Because Inventor for drafting doesn't give a shit how many cores you have.

Autodesk Inventor - Support for Multicore Systems

Originally Posted by Mitch01

We've got a client running 3D fire simulations on multistory buildings (it's crazy sh*t).

What software is *actually* doing the lifting? Because its probably not inventor.

Originally Posted by Mitch01

Running dual Xeon 5690's on the ASUS Z8PE-D18 board, with 48GB of RAM (24GB to each processor). Optioned up with the ASUS SAS controller running 4 x Constellations in RAID 10

If you are using Inventor - 11 cores are doing nothing, the 1 Core that is, can only touch 24GB of that ram, and a single SATA2 ssd will kick the shit out of that IO System.

Did you think you actually got any performance for dollars there?

Originally Posted by Mitch01

For smaller stuff in Revit/Inventor you can get away with the i7 2600's cranked up with RAM, but anything where it starts really pushing the boundaries or there are multiple components, the Xeons leave the i7's for dead.

Revit is Multi-threaded. Inventor is not.

Originally Posted by Mitch01

As for overclocking, I really wouldn't bother. If you are pushing the machine and memory hard as it is, last thing you need is a device already on the edge being pushed even harder.

The CPU is doing nothing really besides maxing out turbo boost. Yeah, the memory is maxed out, but I need to do more testing to see if its actually being thrashed.

Originally Posted by Mitch01

Can't wait to get my hands on the new i7 Series 3 / E7 Xeon processors. Haven't seen them out here yet but on paper damn they look impressive.

A pair of E5-2690's with ~200+GB of ram will probably make you all moist (and smoke the shit out of your 5690's IF they are actually are doing something), IF you have the application capable of using 16 real cores. If your application only uses ONE core, then it probably doesn't excite you in the slightest.

[dr_deathy]

so really the only advantage of going 2011 is quad channel memory, may as well get the cheaper 3820 quadcore if its not going to use the cores.

I would also get a push down cooler, you really need to keep the VRM cool a massive mistake a lot of OCers make and its esp important with socket 2011.

[Mitch01]

Shit eh? I'm suprised by that because I always thought Inventor would be multi-threaded.

The big beast only does Revit processing with a few fluid and fire dynamic programs on it. It also acts as Revit Server for a few other workstations.

One thing though, if you are saying it's maxing out ram, it won't make a difference overclocking the machine. Whats the pagefile doing when they are crunching RAM? They aren't maxxing that out are they?

I'm not as au fait with Inventor as Revit, can you (like Revit) run it from a Server and have it do the brunt of the work for you (and therefore lessen the load on the workstations) ?

I've asked their software vendor for assistance in looking into Inventor performance bottlenecks, their answer is to buy Xeon workstations - but the Autodesk forums say its a good way to piss upto $10k up the wall for worse performance.

The problem is the software then. I'm *really* surprised about the fact it won't fully use multicores. Massive oversight.

[NSanity]

Originally Posted by dr_deathy

so really the only advantage of going 2011 is quad channel memory, may as well get the cheaper 3820 quadcore if its not going to use the cores.
.

I'm not even sure the bandwidth helps, I know the capacity does though.

3820 removes the ability to overclock doesn't it? Locked multi.

[Luke212]

nsanity look at fusion iodrives. they will make a bigger difference than anything if youre looking for io. they bypass all the bridges onboard most (all?) other pcie cards. depends on how much size you need because they are expensive per gb. but your workstation will be cheaper and faster than any 30k pre packaged job.

as far as the rest, up to your discression. when a single WS dies it is not the same as a server with 100 users on it. thats all i will say

[BoutS]

Maybe work on a custom setup, ninja replace some employees boxen and monitor feedback without them necessarily knowing (if you dont want to roll out alot at the start due to not knowing), and possibly crank it up slowly over a few days.

Could start with a modest 20% and work up, although if it's iops thats more of a concern also throw ssd's at that issue.

Being a specialist application, i cant see any harm of doing what youve suggested so long as like you said, will keep spares available, possibly standby boxes that you could image up quickly as replacements as well as spare boards/ssd's.

If the cost of dedicated OEM workstations are crap in performance and 3-4 times the cost of suggested hardware, i think its a no brainer if you can get stability without pushing it to hard.

[Renza]

Not sure if its just me, but Inventor 2013 is horribly unstable and just randomly quits. That and its a massive resource hog as you've mentioned...

I've recently being using PTC's line of products Pro/E (now Creo) is far better in my opinion, uses far less resources for the work i've been doing, and it feels snappy all the time. Maybe you need to toss inventor PTC Creo is also multithread!

As unstable as Inventor 2103 is for me, I wouldn't be running them on overclocked systems at all... I've lost many hours of work due to random crashes.

[self_slaughter]

Originally Posted by NSanity

I'm not even sure the bandwidth helps, I know the capacity does though.

3820 removes the ability to overclock doesn't it? Locked multi.

You can still O/C the 3820. You can adjust the divider for the bclock for just the cpu/ram without affecting other components.

First step up takes it to 125Mhz which with stock multi is 4.5Ghz (also pushes ram up slightly, closest option I had to my 1600Mhz ram was 1666Mhz or 13xx)

[NSanity]

So the X79 system ( 3930K, 64GB ram, Intel 520 240GB ssd) is built and i had a play with some *large* designs (a 122x60x55m fully automated factory) - whilst monitoring things with ProcMon and Procexp.

First of all, Inventor is *awful* when it comes to IO.

Opening this project (i must stress its stupendously huge) with an "All On" view, over the 17 minute load time it hit an image file over 12,000 times, and had around 500,000 operations - only hit about 14GB of memory, and moved through about 3GB of file data.

Moving and Panning through the complete model was smooth, but still that horrendous load time - really need to compare a stupidly fast PCIE SSD, as Inventor pounds the user temp locations (I guess I could junction it to a RAMDrive?) as well as the project files.

[Diode]

I'm just thinking outside the box here...

Rather than ploughing more money into desktop hardware and potentially causing issues with overclocking. It seem Autodesk have a cloud rendering service. Autodesk 360.
https://360.autodesk.com/features

Perhaps their cloud render farm is significantly faster than the desktops you're building. Perhaps do some research on this and get some costs?

[Renza]

Originally Posted by Diode

I'm just thinking outside the box here...

Rather than ploughing more money into desktop hardware and potentially causing issues with overclocking. It seem Autodesk have a cloud rendering service. Autodesk 360.
https://360.autodesk.com/features

Perhaps their cloud render farm is significantly faster than the desktops you're building. Perhaps do some research on this and get some costs?

It's not the rendering thats the issue, building models in inventor itself is pretty cpu intensive, especially when the models get to what the OP is doing.

[NSanity]

Yeah, even a *heavy* citrix box wouldn't help - its mostly raw clockspeed we're chasing, with a side of ram and huge helpings of IO.

That said, so long as you could get the IO into a box, i'd totally put it on a terminal server.

[Renza]

Originally Posted by NSanity

That said, so long as you could get the IO into a box, i'd totally put it on a terminal server.

but graphics performance would be pretty poor, wouldnt it?

[LostBenji]

OP, No offence but I doubt you have done IT support long enough. Leave the OCing for domestic and enthusiasts. The headaches with keeping things stable is not worth it.


Workstations have the name for a reason, they have balls and are not for DLing porn or watching U-flog. Workstations for any decent CAD or the likes usually pack DP and a shite load of RAM, then add in the other niceties like Quadro/Firepro, PCI-e SSD, RAID storage packed into a case that is designed to work rather than a bling comp.

I am not saying OCing is bad, just that it has it's place, enterprise is not it.