Computer Build Review for 3D rendering/animation
Hi guys,
I just received the parts of all my orders for a new computer build:
i7 4770k intel processor
16 gigs Ram g.skill sniper (will upgrade to 32 gigs later on)
gigabyte gtx 780 3gb GPU
250 gb samsung evo ssd
650w 80+ gold S12 seasonic PSU
asus z87-A motherboard (got a cheaper one to save some money)
i'm a hobbyist who plans on using maya for 3d still images and animation with maybe arnold or vray as the rendering engine
For still images, i'm really not too worried since i can just let it render.. even if it takes many hours... but how long will a high quality render take (approximaetly) if i'm tprying to animate a character(1-3) within a simple scene (like the interior of a room for example) for a short 1-5 min long animation?
of course, this is also a computer for everyday usage so it's not completely built for 3d animation, but after some research, i just realized that my build is not even close compare to what some people are running:
for gpu render: 4x gtx 780ti
or
12-32 core processor through hyperthreading with intel xeon e5, etc
of course, these are like the computers that the true 3d professionals are using, so i'm nowhere close to that level yet, but is my build even capable of creating a professional looking animation? (just 1-5 min long demo reel)
I just received the parts of all my orders for a new computer build:
i7 4770k intel processor
16 gigs Ram g.skill sniper (will upgrade to 32 gigs later on)
gigabyte gtx 780 3gb GPU
250 gb samsung evo ssd
650w 80+ gold S12 seasonic PSU
asus z87-A motherboard (got a cheaper one to save some money)
i'm a hobbyist who plans on using maya for 3d still images and animation with maybe arnold or vray as the rendering engine
For still images, i'm really not too worried since i can just let it render.. even if it takes many hours... but how long will a high quality render take (approximaetly) if i'm tprying to animate a character(1-3) within a simple scene (like the interior of a room for example) for a short 1-5 min long animation?
of course, this is also a computer for everyday usage so it's not completely built for 3d animation, but after some research, i just realized that my build is not even close compare to what some people are running:
for gpu render: 4x gtx 780ti
or
12-32 core processor through hyperthreading with intel xeon e5, etc
of course, these are like the computers that the true 3d professionals are using, so i'm nowhere close to that level yet, but is my build even capable of creating a professional looking animation? (just 1-5 min long demo reel)
Replies
with some research you should of found that people will render on a separate computer - depending on what type of industry you're talking about..
If you're good at your craft you can create a professional animation with a less than ideal $1000 desktop so it doesn't really matter.
Sounds like you just need to research people in the field for answers to your questions and future questions and gauge from there.
Edit* Reread it and this sounded mean lol. Not what I'm trying to do! Good luck on your hobby!
Definitely agree with this, we have some settings at work that'll take about 18 hours for a frame in Vray
Indeed. Good production models using normal maps instead of displacement maps for ALL, can make a rendering very very fast.
BTW, GPU rendering is faster than rendering with a dual xeon with too many cores. The bad... some friends lost their expensive GTX videocards; with too much GPU stress is quite easy to see a DEAD videocard, burned (high rendering usage).
For example, a gtx 780 is aimed for gaming, not rendering. You can do some small renders but just that. For GPU rendering solutions nvidia has another products we all know.
Buy another HDD of 3TB, or 4TB. Seagate has one model at 5900rpm, very silent (24db) and with a great perfomance, reading/writing.
That build is a great PC for gaming, but with the new intels around the corner... i would wait, seriously. They are scheduled to appear in summer.
regards
Hmm I disagree with that. It seems that the only real advantage a Quadro has is support for AutoCAD (not applicable) and OpenGL performance (viewport).
With Viewport 2.0 DX11, a GTX becomes a great option. In addition, if a program is using CUDA (V-Ray, xNormal, etc), a GTX card will demolish a Quadro for the price.
In terms of stability, my 780 w/ ACX only hits 80C when doing a large RT scene in V-Ray. I'm not worried about the card dying, and if it does, EVGA has a great warranty.
By the way..
GTX 780: CUDA Cores 2304 : Price $529
Quadro K4000: Cuda Cores 768 : Price $759
__________________
I do agree about the CPU though. Although in the post all the parts are here already
I was talking about using the GTX 780 or a sli of GTXs just for rendering. EVGA may have a nice warranty, like other builders, but you'll suffer the nuisance and dissapointment of having burned cards and all the whole replacement.
We can use CUDA for some renderings, but just that. If you are going to use the gpu almost all the days, good luck and more with renders that will take several hours using Cuda. If you need to do a 6000px render that would take 13 hours, it's better to use the cpu because they are more reliable for that task, it's the recommend nowadays. And don't get me wrong, because when i need to encode something, i use CUDA, the gpu, but it's something i rarely do in a week and it's a task of 20 mins as much.
For all the common use (without surpassing its working limits), a nvidia GTX 660 is the best choice for the wallet, and more if you are not going to do professional work. Compared to a GTX 660, a GTX 780 will not improve your viewport perfomance and it's to waste money... (i own a GTX 680 SOC with 4GB and a GTX 660 TI SOC in a itx mini pc). ALL gaming cards are limited to an amount of polygons, some millions only. But if you want to play in ultra.. that's another case
A Quadro k2000 (400) is like a GeForce GTX 650 and offers more in terms of work, not CAD only. Solidworks, Catia, NS, etc. needs a Quadro.
And for example, for DCC, if you need to rig a ~200-500k subdiv character for production, believe me, the most expensive GTX videocard won't do the job
Every professional workstation has a Quadro, and the best choice is not to build a mid range Quadro like a k2000 or k4000. Most users won't need this because they barely will use their PC.
A quadro is for professionals who only use the computer for work: http://www.nvidia.com/object/gpu-accelerated-applications.html
And another fact is that for game art, we don't need such horse power. Zbrush for example is dependant of the cpu.
I would not waste more than 750 in a new PC (full tower).
I was in the same shoes with the GPU vs CPU rendering. I actually end up with 4 GTX 780 with 3gb RAM and even bought the Octane render for hopping the best result. And Bought an 1500w PSU of course.
But I missed the point there because no matter how hard I tried I just didn't like the way how the GPU rendering worked.
All my GPU worked very hard to do even a small animation and it was pretty noisy and very expensive (it ate up about 1400 w/h) too. They werent happy when I left them for a couple hours and even with water-cooling they started to being faulty.
There were two options:
1, buying a Quadro which is built for long term rendering but it has a pretty bad efficiency (much worst than a GTX780).
2, Or sending my staff for companies with render farms to render them.
After all these miseries I found an affordable solution from this company: http://www.3renderfarm.com and I just bought a small render farm for a little bit more than 4 and half grand.
My initial experience was very good. It has six i7 4770 with 16gb ram. Together it is 48 cores and 96GB ram. Nearly silent. I'm using them in network rendering and they doing an excellent job for me.
This simple configuration solved all my problem. Nothing difficult just a couple Intel 4770 and a good case.