zBrushe's ACTUALLY Recommended Requirements?

keres

Hey guys, my PC blows. My processor is a Pentium 4 @ 3.2ghz w/ 2mb L2, and my RAM is only 2gb DDR2 @ 266mhz. I'm running 32 bit XP and I'm sick of it. Render to Texture in 3ds Max (even on simple geometry) takes hours sometimes, and I get major performance issues when working with zBrush on any kind of highly tessellated mesh. Photoshop completely fails when working with images above 1024x1024.

So I'm building a new PC. I am quite familiar with the hardware out there, but I'm not super familiar with the kind that everyone else has. As a result I have a few questions:

1.) Phenom II X4 or X6? Are the extra two cores worth the extra money? Some X4's actually scored higher than some X6's according to FryRender's benchmarks. For reference, I'm considering the X6 1090T and the X4 955.

2.) 4gb or 8gb? I'm slapping DDR3 1600 in this new thing, and I don't know how much I will need.

3.) Heatsink? How many people here overclock so they get better performance? Both the 1090T and 955 are the "black edition" which allegedly appeals to overclockers. If so, what kind of HS&F do you use to all for such activities?

Please keep in mind that I am a full time student, and my income is limited to whatever contract programming / web design / etc that I perform (which isn't too much because of classes.)

Thanks for any help. It is much appreciated!

EarthQuake

Majority of people doing game dev will have some sort of intel/nvidia setup. I'm on a intel q6600 quad core machine, which is a few years old now but very capable. At the end of the day, Intel/nVidia combo seems to be the most stable, sure you can probably save a little and go the AMD/ATI route, but I wouldn't bother with a dev machine.

I'de suggest: Intel I7, whatever a reasonably priced one is, like 930 or 950. Either 6, 8 or 12 gigs of ram, depending on budget and CPU.Mobo type. The better I7's are tripple channel IIRC so getting 6 or 12(if you can afford it) would be the way to go. I've got 8 gigs with my Q6600, and its really nice.

At this sort of price range, you're going to be building a very capable system, be it intel or amd, so dont sweat small performance differences, a recent mid range quad core system, 6-12 gigs of ram, a decent($100-200) video card and you shouldn't have any performance worries for a long time.

Remember with multi-core CPUs, your programs have to actually support them. Luckily a lot more art tools are becoming properly multithreaded. However, a fast single/dual core will outperform a medium range quad/six core system running a single threaded app. Some apps like Maya 2008 run like dog shit on my Q6600(normal baking for instance) because its only single threaded, so certain apps wont even max out my ~3-4 year old Quad core cpu. Something to keep in mind.

Some multi-threaded apps will also be limited to only 2 or 4 cores as well.

Scruples

8gb and X4 955 BE, is what I would recommend ( and what I am using atm) but,

4gb if you want to save some money, right now zbrush isn't x64 so it wont use more than that. 8gb is still useful to run the OS and whatever other programs you have in the background so they aren't taking any memory that Zbrush would otherwise use, also nice to future-proof....make sure you are running a 64bit OS before you upgrade to 8gb otherwise windows will only use 3.2gb.

The X6 1090T is more of a luxury, because it will only be faster in some programs, I am uncertain about Zbrush.

PolyHertz

For ZBrush its all about the cpu (quad core), ram (8gb), and a fast hard drive (SSD).

8gb ram, because while as zbrush is 32bit (so a max of 4gb usable while on a 64bit os) you'll want some memory to spare for the OS itself and any other background apps you have running.

Intel cpus on the high end are more powerful in general then AMD. Nvidia is the most common for 3D work, but some people swear by ATI/Radeon.

Anytime you see zbrush saying "compacting memory" it means its writing to the hard drive. Having a slow hard drive (Or one that's nearly full) can be detrimental to performance even if you have a fast cpu and lots of ram.

keres

Why do you say that Intels are better than AMDs?

According to cpubenchmark.net the 1090T scores 6,055 which isn't bad at all. Sure, the i7 995X scores 10,795 but it is like over triple the cost.

Anyone have any comments for the Crucial C300 CTFDDAC064MAG-1G1CCA

cpubenchmark.net scores it fairly high. It's tiny, so I'd have to connect my current 750gb as a backup of course.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148361

PolyHertz

Said more powerful, not more cost efficient. Intel will be releasing a new architecture (Sandy-bridge) on Jan9 though which AMD has nothing to compete with until they release Bulldozer. Once sandy-bridge comes out their current lineup will drop in price.

Scruples

About the Crucial SSD, its a good choice, it seems to outperform some more expensive ones.
But make sure you have more important components first, like a tablet....

Actually after looking at some benchmarks of that SSD, I think I might get one now. XD

keres

I am more of a programmer than an artist, but I still enjoy art. Upgrading my system is a much higher priority than a tablet right now Thanks for the advice guys. I'll try to save up for such things in the near future

EarthQuake

Intel/Nvidia tend to be a little more expensive, with better performance(get what you pay for etc), and better drivers/stability. AMD/ATI can offer some very good value hardware, but generally you're sacrificing stability, AMD/ATI is more common for gamer builds and such, but Intel/Nvidia is more common in game development.

Pretty much every studio i've worked at has had bad compatibility/driver/stability issues with AMD and ATI hardware.

These are pretty broad generalizations, and i'm not saying its dumb to get ATI/AMD, but if you were to poll game artists about their hardware, you would see Intel/Nvidia as the majority.

For me personally, stability is huge, much moreso than squeezing an extra couple FPS out of games. I used to be a big AMD guy, but have switched over to Intel for all of my builds in the last few years, to much rejoice. AMD cost/performance is usually better, but again, if i'm doing serious work I want the stable route.



SSDs are really cool, a bit too expensive for me but I just put one in a build for someone else, really impressed with the performance. You'll see improvement in:
Boot up time
Loading multiple/large files
Game loads
Scratch disk/virtual memory usage

So if you're not restarting your computer constantly, and not accessing large files, you wont notice a *huge* difference with a SSD. If you are, then they are highly recommended. For someone working in mudbox/zbrush, I imagine it would make a huge difference, in loading/saving.

HOWEVER, if you're really working with a lot of large files, chances are you're going to run out of space on your SSD fairly quickly, So if you've gotta store all your 2gb zbrush files on a separate larger/slower drive, you're losing out on some portion of that performance benefit.


It would help to hear what your overall budget is too.

[edit] Also general note on OC'ing, if you buy decent hardware you'll get very good performance these days, recent hardware is *fast as hell*, so I wouldn't worry about voiding waranties/reducing life expectancy and stability of your system just to get slightly better performance. What funniest of all is the people who spend mad money on cooling and shit to OC... just buy good hardware in the first place, jeez. If you're not ocing, stock heatsink/fans that come with your CPU will be just fine.

Also, I7's adjust clock speed automatically, so its really just redundant.

I would only consider a custom heatsink if noise is a big concern, and I mean like a really big concern, you have problems or get headaches from slight noises from your PC. I have the stock intel fan for my Q6600 is its fairly quiet, certainly not lout enough to fus over(hard drives are louder in my system than the CPU fan). Or if you're doing a very small build where size/airflow/etc are concerns. Otherwise its just a waste of effort and money IMO.

I always suggest that, if you're thinking about a custom CPU fan, wait until you put your build together, and see if it is still something you want, then get one if it is!

Calabi

I dont see a point in more than four cores at the moment, unless you are doing things like rendering then you wont find many things that use more than that or even the four cores fully.

I wouldnt get an i7 unless are you are using software that specifically takes advantage of the hyperthreading it uses, which is about the only thing it has going for it over the i5 760.

8gb of ram because its a bigger number than 4.

I've got the Titan Fenrir heatsink its very good for overclocking although I have not done so it still keeps the temps(40 -55C) cool and I dont hear it at all.

And dont forget Windows 7 64 bit. It runs good with no problems(mostly).