PC for AutoCAD and Hobbyist Video Editing

• 

  spackbace on 06/01/2017 - 12:08

  +1

  keep to a budget of $1000 for the desktop tower!

  IMO that won't happen if you want to CAD/Video Edit/Render. Even that $1900 build you listed would be considered dated by building/architecture companies. They certainly wouldn't just have a GTX970 in their systems…

  • 

    whaddadeal on 06/01/2017 - 12:19

    Thanks for the reply!
    Perhaps in that case I am looking for the best performance possible for a budget of $1000. What would the difference between two such builds be anyways?

• 

  Adz81 on 06/01/2017 - 12:16

  How complex is the CAD work you're doing? I mean, I do some pretty basic drafting (using the word loosely) for my own interest/hobby, alternating between AutoCad & Sketchup and this dinosaur manages it for the most part:

  http://h20564.www2.hp.com/hpsc/doc/public/display?docId=c026…

  That said, I wouldn't even attempt to edit HD video with it, or CAD work with too many components to it.

  Or really much gaming, aside from for my GOG library.

  • 

    whaddadeal on 06/01/2017 - 12:20

    Hey Adz,
    I would say probably not very complex. I will be undertaking training to learn to use the programs essentially as a novice. This means its hard for me to gauge the amount of performance I will need in the long run, but it also means that i will definitely not be doing anything crazy.

    • 

      Adz81 on 06/01/2017 - 12:29

      My friend (who does a lot more CAD stuff than me) also uses a fairly basic laptop with it… Again, video editing would be like pulling teeth, but for the drafting stuff, it does the job.

      So as a stop-gap, you'd probably get away with something cheaper, but the enjoyment and long term value would be greatly diminished.

• 

  tio on 06/01/2017 - 13:32

  +1

  2c from a CAD draftee, start with the software that you focus on the most. Then work out which hardware features your software can utilise. Most important parts are CPU and GPU (graphic card)

  CPU: For example, most of Autocad process is single threaded, but it uses multithreads when doing 2D generation and/or rendering.

  So if your work involving a lot of rendering and/or actual 2D element generation from 3D model (not printing 3D model views onto a 2D sheet) then you'd want a CPU with the most cores.

  Otherwise, go for a CPU with the fastest base clock that you can get your hands on. Currently, it's the i7 7700K at 4.00Ghz, if you can get your hands on it, but it's not cheap. And you'll need a new motherboard as well.

  GPU: this is usually the most important/expensive of a CAD machine. Check if your software supports DirectX. If it does, then invest in the most powerful Geforce graphic card that your budget allows. I'll stick with EVGA card due to their good after sales warranty. You can go 2nd hand cards to save money, but I see Geforce cards cheap enough to justify buying brand new

  If the software favours OpenGL, then check the graphic card compatibility list of your software (any decent CAD software ought to have one). Get the best GPU that you can get your hands on, even if 2nd hands.

  For other bits, general consensus applies: SSD, good quality PSU etc. One think I would skim on is using value rams rather than performance RAM. I can't justify the cost/benefit of performance RAM when it comes to CAD works.

• 

  itbargainhunter on 06/01/2017 - 15:56

  +1

  2c from a hardware industry insider.

  1) Intel just released 7th gen desktop CPU today and soon 6th gen price may drop. With the same price you can get new and better performance gen 7th CPU soon.
  2) Agree with tio, no need to get fancy RAM.
  3) You may be able to trim the ssd to 256GB just for OS and CAD program if you really don't have the budget. 256GB is at sweet price point while 500GB is still a bit pricy. However you need to manage your free space well.
  4) CPU is less important than video card in CAD
  5) GTX class video card are optimised for game not CAD program. Nvidia has a video class called Quadro which most branded workstation uses. It is now in the progress to move from "K"->"M" gen to "M"->"P" Gen. You may be able to find some good 2nd hand K series or M series on ebay.

  I would suggest to study Dell and HP workstation range, then look for good bargain on ebay for 2nd hand workstation.

  Very often company will sell end of depreciation cycle workstation on ebay dirt cheap. Only little need to be upgraded and those become a beast again.

  i.e
  http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/HP-Z600-Workstation-PC-Desktop-Cu…

  or

  http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/HP-Z600-Workstation-Quad-Core-2-x…

  Keyword to look for: HP Z200/210/220/230 Z400/420/440 Z600/620/640 Workstation, Dell Precision 3000, 5000 Series. Nvidia K620, K1200, K2000, K2200 video card.

  Good luck.

  • 

    whaddadeal on 06/01/2017 - 16:23

    wow thank you for that! You live up to your name.

    I have a couple of questions:

    • Such units have USB2.0 - for my future use I think i'd benefit from having USB 3.0 because this will be also my own personal home computer. Is there a way around this for towers with only 2.0 installed?
    • Taking one of the linked workstations as an example; the graphics card is a Midrange 3D: NVIDIA Quadro 2000 (1 GB). Will this be enough to output 2 screens (minimum 1080p)? I dont know much, but I feel that 1gb is a little low considering I see consumer GPUs holding upwards of 4GB these days.
    • Are there any downfalls in a Xeon processor for everyday use? (i.e. why dont people usually go for such chips?)
    • Is there a system to easily tell how old a Xeon chip is? I know the current skylakes start with 6XXX and everything less is older my yearly increments. Is this the same for Xeon?

    Thank you in advance for your help! :)

    • 

      itbargainhunter on 06/01/2017 - 16:45

      +1

      Thanks. Forgot the mention, the downside of 2nd workstation is obvioulsy the lack of warranty and support.

      Having say that, these workstation were $2000+ and some were even $4000+ when they orginally sold. Material used were soooo good and they are very hard to break.

      Also these old branded machines have many white papers, service guides and youtube video available online.

      The main thing to choose is to select one with good PSU, DDR3 ECC/REG Memory (which is barely still available right for upgrade. You will want 16/32GB for good CAD performance), room for a SATA SSD (they usually does), room for a good new video card (PCIe X16 slot, if is doesn't already come with a good one)

      If you are luck you can get one below $500 (with proper Win7 OEM OS lic), add a new SSD and max its RAM to bring it back to its former glory and still meet you 1K budget.

      • 

        stumo on 04/02/2017 - 19:02

        I just bought a couple of identical z600's off ebay. $300 each shipped. It is important to get the rev c1 version because it supports the Xeon 5600 series CPU, including 6 core models. It also means they can take proper server registered 8gb dimms, which are extremely good bang for buck on eBay these days. Easiest way to tell on ebay is if it already has a 5600 CPU.

        Mine are E5620 with 4GB and a quadro fx 4800 and win7x64 pro label. Will be upgrading them to dual x56xx and have already got 48GB of ram on its way. I will be downgrading the GPUs to NVS295 because I just don't need the grunt of the 4800 for my application. But these workstations are very well made with quality components, so they last a long time after warranty. These were $5k plus machines each 5 years ago.

  • 

    tio on 06/01/2017 - 16:45

    +1

    4) CPU is less important than video card in CAD:

    From my experience, and with respect to AutoCAD. It depends. If majority of your CAD time involves 3D modeling, while time for drawing/render/deliverable creation is minimum (which fits the use profile of a well established drafting office, or that of a new user), you want a really decent CPU, i.e. fast base clock.

    Reason being when a 3D model being put together, GPU involvement is minimum compared to CPU. When you rotate/zoom a 3D model, CPU does most of the heavy lifting to update the screen to follow your cursor.

    Good GPU helps when you need to cut down rendering/2D generation time.

    5) GTX class video card are optimised for game not CAD program.

    That is correct. However, on note of cost/benefit, GTX card are better. Between comparable Quadro and GTX, the underlying hardware is the same. The most prominent feature, number of CUDA cores, is the same. And in real world usage, GTX sometimes beats Quadro, source:

    http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-2392232/quadro-gtx-work…

    Going back to Autocad, since it supports DirectX, there's no loss to go with a GTX card.

    To put it simply, why spend $1mil to get a Bentley, when a $13k Proton can get you to the supermarket.

    • 

      whaddadeal on 06/01/2017 - 17:02

      Thanks TIO, do you recommend any GTX cards for my budget? Im thinking $250-300 max but would prefer less.

      • 

        tio on 06/01/2017 - 17:06

        Any GTX that you're comfortable with really.

        Even this one:

        https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/285781

        Since you mentioned Quadro 2000 previously, here's a side by side comparison of the 2:

        https://versus.com/en/nvidia-quadro-2000-vs-gigabyte-geforce…

        the 960 Xtreme Gaming is shown which is slightly better than standard GTX 960, but you get the gist.

        Edit note: wrong cards mentioned

    • 

      itbargainhunter on 06/01/2017 - 17:25

      I do agree actually.

      GTX card are in general faster than equivalent Quadro card. It is just AutoCad and many design software are poorly optimised for GTX card.

      On the other hand Quadro are more popular in commercial world as they are known for stability.
      Quadro are also certified with many software.

      Quadro card are "controlled manufactured" by Nvidia themselves and then repacked by regional brand (Leadtek, PNY) for resale only. That's why you don't see any sub brand variations.
      This helps to provide stability to hardware. Also stops manufacturer cut corners and use cheaper material that put performance over life time of the card.

      What to use really depends on who is paying for it (Company or yourself) and what is it for (leisure or to make money) I think.

      • 

        tio on 06/01/2017 - 17:42

        I think you mean "I don't."

        As I said, if one does a lot of rendering work, Quadro is the way to go. That's where it excels. However, just for minimum-rendering CAD works, I can't see Quadro win over GTX.

        My suggestions is with respect to OP's situation: engineering minimum-rendering CAD work with hobbyist video editing capability, 4-5yrs upgrade cycle.

        And I wouldn't spend $500 on obsolete tech just because it's proper

      • 

        itbargainhunter on 07/01/2017 - 10:50

        @tio:

        No I meant I DO agree with you and i am not here to change your mind.

        But I also stand by my points.

        GTX is cheaper and has better CP ratio but not without its trade offs. It is up to buyer to decide what is more important.

        And there are logical reasons why most commercial machine use Quadro not GTX even unit cost are higher.

• 

  whaddadeal on 06/01/2017 - 17:02

  edit