Pure rendering machine for £500-600

[brisk]

Budget Range: 500-600 English pounds
System Usage from Most to Least Important: Pure rendering in 3ds max
Are you buying a monitor: No
Do you need to buy OS: No
Preferred Website(s) for Parts: UK sites
Location: London, UK
Overclocking: No
SLI or Crossfire: Maybe
Your Monitor Resolution: Full HD
Additional Comments: Just need to pure rendering, no games, doesn't need to look good, don't need a fancy mobo. Don't need Hard drives.

Not sure if this helps in any way but I'm really just going to be rendering to be images from 3ds max using vray as the engine...no animations really and no flash stuff etc.


I understand this might be a tight budget but please let me know if spending more is going to be much more worth it.

Thank you for any help

 

[lakedude]

Several different rendering options are available for 3ds max, which one will you be using and is it GPU hardware accelerated?

Looks like a couple use CUDA so that would seem to indicate an nVidia card, correct?

If you are not using GPU accelerated rendering you need to focus on the CPU.

 

[brisk]

Several different rendering options are available for 3ds max, which one will you be using and is it GPU hardware accelerated?

Looks like a couple use CUDA so that would seem to indicate an nVidia card, correct?

If you are not using GPU accelerated rendering you need to focus on the CPU.

Not sure if this helps in any way but I'm really just going to be rendering to be images from 3ds max using vray as the engine...no animations really and no flash stuff etc.

 

[lakedude]

V-ray system requirements:

• A computer with 3ds Max 9/3ds Max Design 9 or later (32- or 64- bit versions);
• Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, Windows 8, 32 or 64-bit versions (64-bit is recommended);
• Intel Pentium IV or compatible processor with SSE2 support (dual Pentium IV or AMD Opteron or later recommended);
• 128 MB RAM and 350 MB swap minimum - recommended 4 GB or more RAM, 4 GB or more swap file.

Notice that they don't even mention a video card. This makes me think that V-ray is not GPU hardware accelerated, meaning the CPU is going to be the critical item (I think).

Hopefully someone from your country who actually uses said software can chime in.

I tried to find a V-ray specific forum but the company sponsored site requires a signup process just to view posts. It might be worth signing up and asking over there:

http://forums.chaosgroup.com/

 

[brisk]

V-ray system requirements:

• A computer with 3ds Max 9/3ds Max Design 9 or later (32- or 64- bit versions);
• Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, Windows 8, 32 or 64-bit versions (64-bit is recommended);
• Intel Pentium IV or compatible processor with SSE2 support (dual Pentium IV or AMD Opteron or later recommended);
• 128 MB RAM and 350 MB swap minimum - recommended 4 GB or more RAM, 4 GB or more swap file.

Notice that they don't even mention a video card. This makes me think that V-ray is not GPU hardware accelerated, meaning the CPU is going to be the critical item (I think).

Hopefully someone from your country who actually uses said software can chime in.

I tried to find a V-ray specific forum but the company sponsored site requires a signup process just to view posts. It might be worth signing up and asking over there:

http://forums.chaosgroup.com/

Great thinking dude, checking the specs. Odd they don't mention GPU. But I'll research it more. I still dont really get why you need a GPU to render anyway but sounds encouraging, can maybe go for an i7 or xeon. What really is the difference between i7 and Xeon?

 

[lakedude]

My best guess is that Cine-bench CPU scores are going to be a relevant benchmark (unless someone that knows better says otherwise).

That being the case you want to pick the CPU with the highest render score that you can afford:

http://www.cbscores.com/

 

[lakedude]

Maybe some help here:

http://forum.gfxdomain.net/loft-room/253-vray-benchmark-page.html

 

[brisk]

Maybe some help here:

http://forum.gfxdomain.net/loft-room/253-vray-benchmark-page.html

Ok thanks

Think im gonna look at the Intel Core i7-4771 anyway. Seems to be the best CPU before you get into the pricey Xeon realm.

 

[brisk]

Maybe some help here:

http://forum.gfxdomain.net/loft-room/253-vray-benchmark-page.html

Looking at getting Intel Core i7-4771. Seems ,ost reasonable in price before going to the 4900 or xeon realm.

 

[lakedude]

Sounds good. You might look at the i7-4770k which is about the same thing but unlocked for overclocking.

 

[brisk]

Sounds good. You might look at the i7-4770k which is about the same thing but unlocked for overclocking.

is there actually any difference between the 4770k and 4770. Yeah I dont' want to mess around with overclocking as I have no previous experience with it and it's like a 250 quid chip ha. Plus gotta invest more into cooling.

No cursing in the technical forums.

mfenn
General Hardware Moderator

 

[lakedude]

If the i7 is too expensive you might also look at the i5-4670k which is basically the same thing but without hyper-threading.

 

[lakedude]

If you are sure you are not going to OC you can save a little by dropping the "k".

Say the i7-4771, i7-4770 or the i5-4670

 

[lakedude]

I'm happy with this last list provided you are running a non-accelerated render engine and provided you are sure you are not going to OC.

The big can of worms is going to be if maybe you should look into one of the accelerated render engines and maybe spending less on the CPU in favor of getting a GPU. Unfortunately I have no specific modern experience in this.

If you care my experience comes from games and from the very old DCTV and Opal-Vision on the Amiga. Accelerated rendering is much faster than letting the CPU take all the load.

Hopefully you will find someone more up to date to help guide you further (farther?).

 

[brisk]

I'm happy with this last list provided you are running a non-accelerated render engine and provided you are sure you are not going to OC.

The big can of worms is going to be if maybe you should look into one of the accelerated render engines and maybe spending less on the CPU in favor of getting a GPU. Unfortunately I have no specific modern experience in this.

If you care my experience comes from games and from the very old DCTV and Opal-Vision on the Amiga. Accelerated rendering is much faster than letting the CPU take all the load.

Hopefully you will find someone more up to date to help guide you further (farther?).

Thank you for all your help.

I really tried to research if vray in 3ds max uses GPU or CPU but there is very little info and some say it's all about CPU. Seems there is something to do with Nvidia and Cuda cores.

 

[lakedude]

You are welcome.

If this was free software I could bench it for you and show you the difference. I've got hardware but no software...

The good thing is you can always add a video card later.

 

[lakedude]

I might be able to show you what a video card can do via 3dmark-05. In 3dmark-05 they ran the same benchmark 2 different ways, one with the CPU only and the other using both the CPU and the video card.

The CPU "render" is all blocky and choppy because the CPU can only do so much by itself. The GPU version is much smoother in appearance and temporally as well.

It will take me some time to come up with all the software I need to pull this off, maybe late tonight if I get time.

 

[mfenn]

It looks like V-ray 1.0 is CPU-only but V-ray 2.0 uses the GPU. Which version do you have?

 

[lakedude]

Oooh! It looks like "Blender" can import 3ds files and Blender is free!

If I can get Blender up and running maybe you can email me a test scene to render?

 

[brisk]

It looks like V-ray 1.0 is CPU-only but V-ray 2.0 uses the GPU. Which version do you have?

I have the latest version so 2.0. So I don't know which would be better to have for this spec:

http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/2EERA

My research shows the 660 isn't really much different from entry level Quadro 600.

 

[mfenn]

I have the latest version so 2.0. So I don't know which would be better to have for this spec:

http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/2EERA

My research shows the 660 isn't really much different from entry level Quadro 600.

A GTX 660 is overwhelmingly more powerful than a Quadro 600. The GTX 660 is 1344 Kepler cores running at 915 MHz whereas a Quadro 600 is only 96 Fermi cores running at 650 MHz. One Fermi core is equivalent to ~1.5 Kepler cores if they're both running at the same clock speed. So yeah, the GTX 660 is on the order of 10 times more powerful than the Quadro 600.

The build you've posted looks reasonable to me. Some comments:

- You can save some money by going with the Xeon E3-1240 V3 for £211 rather than the i7 4771. Xeon E3's are basically just rebadged i7's.
- You also don't need to get such an expensive GTX 660. This Gigabyte version is £133

 

[brisk]

A GTX 660 is overwhelmingly more powerful than a Quadro 600. The GTX 660 is 1344 Kepler cores running at 915 MHz whereas a Quadro 600 is only 96 Fermi cores running at 650 MHz. One Fermi core is equivalent to ~1.5 Kepler cores if they're both running at the same clock speed. So yeah, the GTX 660 is on the order of 10 times more powerful than the Quadro 600.

The build you've posted looks reasonable to me. Some comments:

- You can save some money by going with the Xeon E3-1240 V3 for £211 rather than the i7 4771. Xeon E3's are basically just rebadged i7's.
- You also don't need to get such an expensive GTX 660. This Gigabyte version is £133

Wow priceless information, thank you! Appears that site doesn't have every price hmm.

I saw the leap up to a 660 ti or 670 is very expensive and not worth it?

 

[brisk]

Or 206 for the Xeon! And 132 for gtx 660

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/inte...e-34ghz-base-38ghz-turbo-8mb-cache-80w-retail

http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/part/msi-video-card-n6602gd5oc


http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/2EGFa

 

[lakedude]

That latest parts list looks terrific! Thanks mfenn!

 

[brisk]

Also fans on top of the case? yay or nay??

Compared to regular back of case or side.