Buying A Computer Need Help

Jason

Hay all IA’m about to buy a computer, IA’m mainly getting into 3d animation and would just like to know about anything that you think that I should look out for in terms of parts whatA’s best or even tell me what you got what you use it for so I could look around for parts like a system that you would beat on cheers.

Jason

Samurai

Apple MacPro

Thats about all you'll need- the best 3D workstation on the planet for anyone operating on less than a lottery win. Dont forget to add a monitor to the end price though.

If you simply must go down the Pc route however, get as close as you can to that spec- Core2 Duo or Xeon duo CPU, at least 2GB DDR2 RAM and a decent video card for viewport performance (i.e: what you see while you're working in your apps- note that the GPU does not affect rendering)

Do NOT get a Windows Vista based machine, under any circumstances- they do not support OpenGL natively, and must run an emulator- which has a serious impact on application performance.

Windows XP is an acceptable 3D operating system, but you'll struggle to find one. a MacPro is ideal if you really want to get into the industry, and it'll return the investment. If its just a hobby, the 20" iMac would do the job nicely, without the mind-bending speed.

Freak

I can't stand Mac.
I guess I will have to wait until Vista can run openGL, thats going to be a long wait!

al3d

for a serious 3D worstation, anything under 4gigs or ram is useless, so if you go the PC route, you will need a 64bit machine running WinXp 64

fluxfire

I would have to agree with them i am running a system with only a gig of ram and it takes forever to render longer scenes. If your going for a 3D animation system then you are gonna need at least

3.0ghz CPU amd or intel Duel core on either
4gigs ddr or 2 gigs ddr2
512mb video card 8xagp or pciX(express card is the better)
200gig sataII
and what ever else you want in the manchine.

This is just my thoughts on a pc from a person that builds them for a living.

Samurai

hmm, hard drive size isn't that important, but a good sustained transfer rate and seek time are. A smaller hard drive just means more backups, but thats not always a bad thing.

Lonewriter

The more RAM, the better. I can only use 1 gig of RAM so right now, I'm stuck until I buy a new PC (Macs are too expensive plus I can NOT affort to replace all my programs) I would also recomend an external hard drive of at least 200 gig (mine is 500 gig) If you build it yourself or have it built, have XP Pro installed (stay away from Vista, it's unreliable)

efritsch

I'm running Max 9 on the following setup.

AMD 3400 Single Core
1.5GB of DDR2 Ram
Radeon x850 pro 256mb
250GB SataI HDD

and it runs things fairly well, but I want a better system.

If I could, I'd get the following,

ATI Radeon X1950 XTX Uber Edition (2x512MB GDDR4)
AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+
Asus Crosshair MB
OCZ Dual Channel Gold XTC 2048MB PC8000 DDR2 1000MHz Memory (2 x 1024MB)
and 2 Maxtor / MaXLine Pro 500 / 500GB / 7200 / 16MB / Serial ATA-300 drives

But that would cost well over $3000 CAD.

Samurai

Lonewriter:

A new mac can run windows too- this would let you get the hardware you want now, and allow you to upgrade/renew your programs at your own pace.

Lonewriter

Samurai wrote: »

Lonewriter:

A new mac can run windows too- this would let you get the hardware you want now, and allow you to upgrade/renew your programs at your own pace.

I didn't know that, thanks but they are more expensive. For the price of a Mac Pro, I can build an excellant PC. As a matter of fact, I will build my next pc myself.

bsg recon

Samurai

What applications are you running on your MAC? Would appreciate help.

Samurai

Right now, LightWave 9.2 UB Beta, with a Wacom Intuos 3 + Painter Essentials (looking to upgrade that to either Painter X or Adobe Photoshop CS 3 before the ed of the year) I tend to only use it for the odd bit of modelling as it stands, seeing as it's a laptop. I'd like to say the MacBook is powerful enough to replace my PC for all my modelling and rendering needs, but unfortunately it's not- to be fair it's not what I got the laptop for though.

I do have access to a MacPro at work though, as well as a 24" iMac, and I've installed the demo version of LW 9.0 (NOT the Universal Binary) on both- I can confirm that they are both screamers, and the MacPro quite simply blows every other computer I've ever used clean into the middle of next week. Speaking not only as a Mac owner but also a PC salesman, I cant understand why there's not been an enormous boom in Mac sales- since the switch to Intel architecture, you effectively get two computers for the price of one.

efritsch

Samurai wrote: »

Speaking not only as a Mac owner but also a PC salesman, I cant understand why there's not been an enormous boom in Mac sales- since the switch to Intel architecture, you effectively get two computers for the price of one.

I think it is because a vast majority of people out there, still think of the Mac as "The one with the Apple logo that you can't get any software on."

Apple, while making commercials about the Intel switch, hasn't really made it clear that it will now run a Windows OS as well. So based on those two things, most people don't know.

Lonewriter

efritsch wrote: »

I think it is because a vast majority of people out there, still think of the Mac as "The one with the Apple logo that you can't get any software on."

Apple, while making commercials about the Intel switch, hasn't really made it clear that it will now run a Windows OS as well. So based on those two things, most people don't know.

that's true, I had no idea until today.

[Deleted User]

clearly for the price of a mac u can build a supercomputer of a pc. But really as far as performance for price goes you are pretty much stuck with intel/nvidia until amd/ati can produce something competative. Core 2 duo with GeForce 8 series card (8800GTS with 600 n sumthing ram) would do great. Also most motherboards that support this set up can hold 2gb sticks of ram so u can get 2x2gb ddr2 and have enough ram to work with uuber 2048x2048 textures on pretty much anything. Would be relatively cheap, much more reliable, and VERY much more compatible than a mac alternative. That and u dont have to worry about backword os layout. (But if u got the money go for a mac just so u know better 4 next time)

[Deleted User]

Samurai wrote: »

I cant understand why there's not been an enormous boom in Mac sales- since the switch to Intel architecture, you effectively get two computers for the price of one.

That might also be because you cant upgrade iMac's very easily, and they're expensive of course.

I'm going to have to upgrade soon too, although I know I'm going to have to spend a lot because I need a powerful machine that I don't have to upgrade for a while

darthviper107

For the average person it's not all that great of an advantage to be able to run Windows on a Mac, you either have to switch to each OS or you can run Windows in an emulator but then both run slow so there isn't really a point of doing that. So the only reason to get a Mac is if you like the OS.

And personally, I'd rather have a faster computer than for what it costs to have a Mac.

If you do get a PC, just build it yourself, it saves a lot of money and you can generally keep the computer running better anyway.

And definitely stay away from Vista for now if you are doing 3D stuff. For instance, 3ds Max can't run on Vista correctly (at least until the update later this month) and I have no idea about Maya or Lightwave. And remember, if you've got Windows XP x64 you can use unlimited amounts of RAM and Virtual Memory, so be sure to get a 64-bit processor (as if you wouldn't). Prices are pretty good now though. I bought my computer last summer and my AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ processor was $632, now you can get the 6000+ for $460.

[Deleted User]

from what ive been hearing ddr3 is coming out "soon" as well as an octacore processor (dont recall the make). ofcourse soon is relative and probably more later than sooner and painfully expensive on top of that

[Deleted User]

Anyone know anything about quad core's?
Are they out yet, how much are they?

Sorry hardware noob :shiner:

[Deleted User]

quad cores are out by intel, fairly expensive but wicked fast!:p 2.6Ghz a core 2.6 X 4 = 10.4 Ghz:eek: but costs $1500 US. So unless you won the lottery recently this revelation in speed doesn't do much for us.

[EDIT] : This may be wrong, so don't count on it. I read about it while browsing a computer magazine on the internet. Don't remember the site, try a Google for : "Quad Core Processor"

Samurai

darkprince wrote:

Would be relatively cheap, much more reliable, and VERY much more compatible than a mac alternative. That and u dont have to worry about backword os layout. (But if u got the money go for a mac just so u know better 4 next time)

haha- as someone who operates a PC sales/repair service, I know what I see more of, and it don't have an Apple logo on it...

I also know what all the main design centres and organisations in the area use- care to hazard a guess?

Apple Macs aren't perfect, but at least Hardware and Software OpenGL is supported from the off- this should be a HUGE consideration for anyone looking into 3D. Anyone who thinks Microsoft isn't going to try and strangle the market and effectively over time force people towards the (inferior) DirectX system are fooling only themselves. Problem is, too many companies have too much invested in OpenGL. Someone is heading for a fall. Apart from 3DS MAX, every major 3D app out there uses OpenGL- incidentally, that also means your posh 8800 GT makes bugger all difference outside the latest game. Get a 7xxx series, and spend the money saved on another couple of gigs of RAM, or the next CPU up in the range if you do decide on a PC. You'll see better performance for 3D, and unless you're playing one of about two DX10 games out there, there wont be a signifigant performance drop outside of "work" either.

[Deleted User]

Stupid Microsoft, why can't they just make OpenGL fully integrated into windows.

It almost seems like with Vista they're actually trying to force everyone in the multimedia industry to switch to Mac's

The main reason I'm staying with windows is that I like to use my computer for things other than work sometimes, and there ain't too many games at all on Mac. That and I understand how to get around problems in windows alot better than I know how to fix stuff on Mac's.

Samurai

haha- basically the opposite of me and a Mac.

The choice to go mac was a lot easier seeing as I use my xBox360 for games. (just to prove I'm not one of these anti-micro$oft fanboiz :shiner: )

[Deleted User]

Yea I'm actually a PS2 gamer, but I'd like to get into EVE online
And my 3D software is for windows so I can't be bothered paying extra to change over to Mac after just buying it for windows

Samurai

haha, thats the problem with C4D, and ultimately one reason I switched away from the app- wanting people to pay twice for the same product with a different installer script is outrageous in this day and age- Modo and LW have got the right idea.

[Deleted User]

Yea, it's actually only about 10% of the full price to switch between platforms but it's still kind of ridiculous, but I'm sticking with windows for now so I don't really care

Samurai

^yeah, I know they've got the "switching charge" but that assumes you're not mixing platforms.

count23

If you get 4 gigs of ram, to get it working in windows XP 32bit, download the "Physical Address Extension" update from windows update and you can have up to 6gigs in your 32bit windows xp system.

fluxfire

hum 6gigs of ram is kinda useless unless you have a dual core cpu. But i am still interested in this quad core. Too bad its and intel product i am very much and AMD fan.

[Deleted User]

AMD's got one too
here Multi-Core Worldwide

Jason

well at the moment i have a laptop with intel core 2 duo T7200 @ 2.0ghz 1 gig of ram 256 nvidia geforce go 7600 im upgrading to 2 gig in a few weeks

i like AMD 64bit but the intel isnt to bad is the intel Xeon realy that good that a few people say