Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in
  • Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

PC vs Workstation 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
deek05

deek05

Mechanical
Jan 11, 2002
48
0
0
I'm trying to convince management to purchase new computers. In the past we were using VersaCad and AutoCad and regular PC's were fine. I need some info to show management the difference between a PC and a Workstation. Any takers?

Thanks,
DT
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Sort by date Sort by votes
Hardware is Hardware IMO - it's going to vary in what type of hardware you get.

faq559-974

FYI - Workstation RAM from Dell is sooooo expensive that I bought a 2nd computer (PC) for the cost of the RAM. And the Computer out performs the Workstation (Dell Precision 220). Plus I have more RAM than my Workstation does. My workstation is my backup computer and it's good backup. But that's all it is now. My PC rocks! It's fast and reliable when it comes to SW. When the Workstation is new it will run and perform great... but when it becomes outdated. The question is... are you willing to pay the price for upgrades to keep that computer running top notch?

A single 512 stick of RAM cost around $3-400 (at the time). I needed 2 sticks. I tried lokoing for third party but I couldn't get below $300 apiece.

Are you willing to pay then I would say go with a workstation. You won't regret it in the beginning I know that much.

Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP [borg2]
CSWP.jpg

faq731-376
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Upvote 0 Downvote
A workstation is not a PC, though it may run Windows OS. If you are comparing prices you must consider the disk controller and/or array, robust oversized powersupply, optimum cooling system and other items. Does your managment run their web server, accounting software, etc. on a plain PC too...no they buy server hardware.

I have had one WS class machines (dual processors, RAID 0 hard disk array, professional graphics) which I used for six years...the only changes were graphics card and memory as the prices dropped on these items (and new OS, but thats for IT department reasons.) That dual P900 Xeon still runs rings around the P2.4's they bought last year (1MB L2 not 256kB, 2x 10,000rpm UW3 SCSI in Raid 0 disk not 7,200 rpm ATA.)

Spend 2000 every year for six years keeping your PC at top performance, or spent 6000 once in the same timeframe and maybe another 1000 after 5 years to boost it...thats how management needs to see it...its NOT a PC, its a WS.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I agree with the Workstation crowd. I convinced my boss to spring for the dual hyperthreading Xeons at 2.5 GHz, 2 GB RAM, caching RAID 0 controller, and a FireGL X1 Pro video card and it is so much faster than the PC with the Pentium 4 at 3.2 GHz, comparable RAM and regular high end desktop video adapter that it's not even funny. Rebuild times went from over a minute and a half on some of my models to under 15 seconds. Of course, I work for a computer company, so it's easier to convince them to buy the high end stuff because we see the OEM cost, not end user, but still...

Oh yeah, while it is a known fact that SolidWorks will NOT benefit from multiple processors (its basic coding doesn't allow multiple processors), I HIGHLY recommend dual processors if you think for a second that you'll be running any other types of intensive packages (say your company maintains AutoCAD files as well and you have to have both CAD packages open at once...) or if you'll have several other programs running at once. The hyperthreaded Xeons keep SolidWorks clocking along happily while AutoCAD is running with several other packages in the background, and each of the 4 virtual hyperthreaded processors is pegging along at only about 60% usage. One day I turned just the hyperthreading off, and this machine came to a crawl. I shudder to think what performance would be on one processor with everything running.

Just my thoughts...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I agree with Istre, if you are going to be running any other apps along with SW, go with dual processor. We recently bought Dual 3.0 Xeons they are great for when you need to do anything while SW is running in the backgrond. Although we haven't tried the hyperthreading. The only thing we'll do over the next 3-4 years is upgrade RAM (only 1 GIG) and possibly move to a RAID 0 config as budget allows.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
SBaugh brought up a good point that I failed to bring up. SW will work better on its own with hypertheading disabled because you give it all the power of one processor to work with.

In my case, hyperthreading is a benefit not because SW runs faster, but simply because it gives my other applications more virtual processors to work with. Even though SW does run slower than it could, given my other processes and their clamoring for CPU time, the net result is a faster machine than if the OS thought it only had two processors. Things to think about when you're building up your machine.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
There was some good info on this thread, so I decided to go ahead and make a FAQ based on it.

faq559-986

Ray Reynolds
"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

CAD2015
  • Locked
  • Question
Moving objects vs mating conditions...........
Replies
5
Views
26
drawoh
drawoh
drawoh
  • Locked
  • Question
Importing PCBAs
Replies
4
Views
18
3DDave
3DDave
CAD2015
  • Locked
  • Question
SOLIDWORKS PCB Wiewer.................. 1
Replies
5
Views
13
CAD2015
CAD2015
ctopher
  • Locked
  • Question
SolidWorks PCB ending support
Replies
3
Views
4
drawoh
drawoh
tz101
  • Locked
  • Question
SolidWorks vs. Inventor 5
Replies
16
Views
44
SBaugh
SBaugh
Back
Top