Jump to content


Photo

Cosmos II 3960X Sandy Bridge-E Workstation


32 replies to this topic

#1 sonic_agamemnon

sonic_agamemnon

    New Member

  • Members
  • 48 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

Posted 17 August 2012 - 05:53 AM

This workstation is designed for heavy post-production editing and software engineering, with some occasional gaming.

This Preview video summarizes the chosen components and build design.

Here is the part list:

Cooler Master Cosmos II
Enermax MaxRevo 1350W power supply
MSI Big Bang-XPower II Intel LGA 2011 X79 maiboard
Intel Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition Sandy Bridge-E 3.3GHz LGA 2011 CPU
Corsair Dominator GT 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR3 1866Mhz (PC3 15000) 1.5v CAS 9-10-9-27 SDRAM
Two XFX Double Dissipation Black Edition Radeon HD 7970 in CrossFireX
Two Pioneer BDR-207DBKS Blu-ray optical drives
1TB RAID0 boot set: 2 x Samsung 830 Series 512GB solid state drives
4TB RAID0 data set: 2 x Western Digital RE4 2TB SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" 7200 RPM disk drives
4TB RAID0 data set: 2 x Western Digital RE4 2TB SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" 7200 RPM disk drives
6TB RAID5 archive set: 4 x Western Digital Green 2TB SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" 5400 RPM disk drives
Two CyberPower PP110 battery back-up power units
Windows 7 Professional (64-bit)



Here are the boxing photographs:


Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

#2 Black64

Black64

    Black It Out

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3274 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The internet

Posted 17 August 2012 - 07:15 AM

It's beautiful! But the cost is something outta this world! 5K+ I am guessing?

Current System

[CPU]Intel Xeon W3670 (i7-970) @3.20Ghz---[CPU Cooling]Thermalright Silver Arrow---[MOBO]ASUS Rampage Gene III---[RAM]G-Skill Rip Jaws (24GB)(6x4GB)---[GPU]ASUS GTX 780 OC---[PSU]KingWin Lazar LZ-1000---[CASE]Bitfenix Colossus Venom Edition---[HDDs]WD Dives(6.5TB total storage) and Samsung 250GB SSD(boot)---[Monitors] 3X NEC 24" LCD2490WUXi ISP Panels and 1X Seiki 39" 4K monitor

 

PC Audio System (Speakers) Triad InRoom Mini's --- (DAC) Schiit Modi --- (AMP) Emotiva MiniX-a-100 --- (Headphones) Sennheiser Momentums and Paradigm H15NC --- (Headphone AMP) --- Schitt Magni

 

 


#3 El_Capitan

El_Capitan

    Even the sun goes down

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6456 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somerville, MA

Posted 17 August 2012 - 08:02 AM

It's beautiful! But the cost is something outta this world! 5K+ I am guessing?

Not if you know where and how to buy the parts.

For example (my 2nd rig):
i7 3930K = $420
ASUS Rampage IV Extreme = $395
HD 7970 = $385
HD 7970 = $390
Corsair AX1200 = $235
4 x 4GB Samsung Extreme Low Voltage = $80

That's $1905 right there. The expensive stuff he has is the memory and all the SSD's and HDD's... with current HDD prices and his choice of SSD's.

My only advice is instead of two separate RAID 0's and a RAID 5, is to put all 8 in RAID 10 like I did with my server. Ungodly performance for HDD's.

Edited by El_Capitan, 17 August 2012 - 08:05 AM.


#4 Shurman292

Shurman292

    The Shurmanator

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 679 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana

Posted 17 August 2012 - 12:16 PM

I am surprised the OP did not choose a single 4gb GTX 680 considering he will be working with a lot of programs that can take advantage of an Nvidia GPU (e.g. the Mercury Playback Engine in Adobe). IIRC, the MPE does not support SLI (and definitely not CF) either.

Otherwise, wow, what a machine!

The Beast
CPU: i7 930 @ 4.01 ghz, 1.26v ||| Cooler: Corsair H100i
MB:ASUS P6X58D-E ||| RAM: G.Skill 6 x 2 GB @ 1528mhz/9-9-9-24/1.6v
Video: Nvidia GTX 480 @ 775mhz/1880mhz ||| Sound: ASUS Xonar D2X
SSD: Kingston HyperX 3K 240GB ||| HDDs: WD 1TB and 2TB Caviar Blacks
Optical: LG BD Writer ||| Case: CM Storm Trooper with Scythe side fans
Power: Corsair AX1200 Gold ||| OS: Windows 7 Ultimate x64


#5 Black64

Black64

    Black It Out

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3274 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The internet

Posted 17 August 2012 - 01:04 PM

I am surprised the OP did not choose a single 4gb GTX 680 considering he will be working with a lot of programs that can take advantage of an Nvidia GPU (e.g. the Mercury Playback Engine in Adobe). IIRC, the MPE does not support SLI (and definitely not CF) either.

Otherwise, wow, what a machine!


Same here, but I think 2 GTX680 would be a better option for performance.

Current System

[CPU]Intel Xeon W3670 (i7-970) @3.20Ghz---[CPU Cooling]Thermalright Silver Arrow---[MOBO]ASUS Rampage Gene III---[RAM]G-Skill Rip Jaws (24GB)(6x4GB)---[GPU]ASUS GTX 780 OC---[PSU]KingWin Lazar LZ-1000---[CASE]Bitfenix Colossus Venom Edition---[HDDs]WD Dives(6.5TB total storage) and Samsung 250GB SSD(boot)---[Monitors] 3X NEC 24" LCD2490WUXi ISP Panels and 1X Seiki 39" 4K monitor

 

PC Audio System (Speakers) Triad InRoom Mini's --- (DAC) Schiit Modi --- (AMP) Emotiva MiniX-a-100 --- (Headphones) Sennheiser Momentums and Paradigm H15NC --- (Headphone AMP) --- Schitt Magni

 

 


#6 Shurman292

Shurman292

    The Shurmanator

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 679 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana

Posted 17 August 2012 - 01:57 PM

Same here, but I think 2 GTX680 would be a better option for performance.

Agreed, but only for gaming performance. I am not aware of a professional program that takes advantage of SLI. CMIIW

The Beast
CPU: i7 930 @ 4.01 ghz, 1.26v ||| Cooler: Corsair H100i
MB:ASUS P6X58D-E ||| RAM: G.Skill 6 x 2 GB @ 1528mhz/9-9-9-24/1.6v
Video: Nvidia GTX 480 @ 775mhz/1880mhz ||| Sound: ASUS Xonar D2X
SSD: Kingston HyperX 3K 240GB ||| HDDs: WD 1TB and 2TB Caviar Blacks
Optical: LG BD Writer ||| Case: CM Storm Trooper with Scythe side fans
Power: Corsair AX1200 Gold ||| OS: Windows 7 Ultimate x64


#7 sonic_agamemnon

sonic_agamemnon

    New Member

  • Members
  • 48 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

Posted 17 August 2012 - 03:08 PM

Mercury Playback Engine in Adobe


I just spent a few hours researching Adobe AMD support (or the lack thereof) in their CS6 suite. This is a bummer for sure. I didn't realize that hardware playback acceleration in Premiere Pro is CUDA only.

My admittedly belated research today in Adobe's forums revealed:

  • Premiere Pro: There is no AMD GPU support for Mercury Engine hardware playback.
  • After Effects: On a somewhat brighter note, all 5.87GB of Radeon VRAM is recognized by After Affects, although only 4.5GB is actually usable for texturing. OpenGL and hardware-assisted shader modeling also recognizes and utilizes AMD GPUs. However, ray-tracing will use the CPU instead of the GPU, because that is also a CUDA-only hardware acceleration feature-- a minor bummer.
  • Photoshop: Better news here with full support for AMD GPUs in advanced drawing mode, including GPU acceleration, OpenCL and anti-alias guides/paths. Also, 3D OpenGL drawing will recognize and utilize up to 3GB of VRAM.
Perhaps a future release of Premiere Pro will add support for AMD GPU hardware playback, although I did not find anything at Adobe's support site promising that.

Regardless, if I would have known ahead of time that hardware support for up to 4x performance during playback in Premiere was only possible with CUDA, I would have gone with two 680s just for that reason.

Bummer.

#8 sonic_agamemnon

sonic_agamemnon

    New Member

  • Members
  • 48 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

Posted 17 August 2012 - 03:21 PM

Well, perhaps there is light at the end of the tunnel after all.

The Mercury Playback Engine in Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 already supports AMD GPUs, but only for certain Apple MacBook platforms at this time, not full desktop Radeon cards.

Maybe Santa will bring Mercury by Christmas, although you can bet Adobe will force AMD owners to pay-up for an upgrade to get it.

Source is this AMD press release in April:

"AMD has been a vital partner in helping us bring GPU-acceleration through OpenCL™ to Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 on current generation MacBooks everywhere. I think our customers will find the enhanced Mercury Playback Engine to be a dramatic improvement and a great benefit to users who will experience an immediate dramatic performance increase with this new release software release. We couldn’t be more excited about the results of our work with AMD on Adobe Premiere Pro CS6. We’re definitely looking forward to continuing our work with AMD on future enhancements to Adobe Premiere Pro."
– Bill Roberts, Director of Video Product Management, Adobe

#9 sonic_agamemnon

sonic_agamemnon

    New Member

  • Members
  • 48 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

Posted 17 August 2012 - 03:29 PM

It's hard to come to any firm conclusion on future additional AMD GPU support in Adobe Premiere Pro, based on this Adobe blog:


What are the system requirements for Premiere Pro CS6 OpenCL processing?
AMD Radeon HD 6750M and AMD Radeon HD 6770M graphics card with 1GB VRAM in MacBook Pro computers running Mac OSX v10.7


Why only those two cards?
We are very firmly committed to making Premiere Pro a stable, reliable, high-performance NLE. This involves thoroughly testing the configurations that we recommend and support. We needed to make sure that we could get the best possible performance and stability with these two very common systems before we could consider broadening our support to other systems.

Will you add more cards later?
We can’t talk about what we’ll do in the future, but I can ask that you look at how few cards Premiere Pro CS5 could use for GPU acceleration when it was first released, and then note how we’ve added cards to the supported list with several updates and upgrades. We make no promises about our future plans, but you may be able to determine something about our thought process by looking to past behavior.

#10 Waco

Waco

    Lab Rat 2

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Alamos, NM

Posted 17 August 2012 - 03:30 PM

Why a single 6 core instead of dual 6 cores or dual quads? Seems like that'd be better, at least from a number-crunching point of view.

Posted Image

Booyah.


#11 sonic_agamemnon

sonic_agamemnon

    New Member

  • Members
  • 48 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

Posted 17 August 2012 - 04:26 PM

Why a single 6 core instead of dual 6 cores or dual quads? Seems like that'd be better, at least from a number-crunching point of view.


My workflow is not CPU bound. I rarely pegged four cores for any length of time with my prior workstation, mainly because the bus, I/O channel and disk drives are always the primary bottleneck in my work. Slow I/O causes frequent latent periods where the CPU does nothing while waiting for I/O to unblock. Reading, encoding and then writing hours of video content back to disk is an extremely I/O bound process. This is why I invested heavily in high-capacity, fast storage.

The next biggest bottleneck is memory, as in not enough to load all desired applications at once, each having their own appropriate caching in place for ideal performance. Invariably, things quickly begin to swap to slow scratch storage. Therefore, I again invested heavily in high-density, high-speed DRAM, leaving open slots to double down again if necessary.

When editing video, the third worst bottleneck is the CPU, as the encoding step does take advantage of all available cores. With the upcoming increase in storage and memory performance, there should also be fewer latent periods, but I don't think encoding will peg all 12 virtual cores. To hedge my bet, I did invest in the fastest 6-core processor available, and I am willing to take advantage of its unlocked crystal to over-clock a bit, but only if necessary.

When playing games, these bottlenecks change in importance rather radically. The GPU suddenly becomes the most critical component to maximize frame rates at high resolution pixel densities. Very few games require more than two CPU cores during game play, so the CPU is a distant second or third-place bottleneck when gaming.

It's a calculated risk, but instead of funding a more expensive 8 or 16-core Xeon platform, I decided to invest more heavily in faster storage, greater memory capacity and strong gaming GPU hardware.

#12 Waco

Waco

    Lab Rat 2

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15211 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Alamos, NM

Posted 17 August 2012 - 05:01 PM

Ah, gotcha. I was thinking this was a production only rig for some reason. If gaming, the faster 6 core will be better than dual quads by a lot...especially if you OC.

Posted Image

Booyah.




Reply to this topic