SolidWorks CAD Systems

[Not_Sean]

Hey guys,

Busy spec'ing up a system for a client for a few Solidworks apps, and everything I've read points towards SolidWorks not using many cores at all and how a i7-7700K is actually perfect as its faster once OC'd then anything else out there. 

 

Now wondering why whenever our client chats to Cad companies they want to try to sell him a Dual socket 2.5Ghz Xeon setup with ECC ram.

 

I'm not a noob with PC building or that, I've been working in IT for 6 years now so this isn't some Rate my build thread, but wondering besides the money grab why they keep trying to get him to buy basically a Server. 

 

and don't worry I'm not going to sell my guy a i7-7700K, I know the Xeons will destroy in rendering which they do do a fair bit of but they have no issues leaving the PC running for a long render, so I've spec'd them the i9 under an H110 as with that we'll be able to hit 4.5Ghz across all 10 Cores, and it'll Turbo boost even further using the two cores (Which is what Solidworks Uses) this to me in a nice balance of raw power and straight up speed. 

 

Anyone know why Guys recommend the Xeons? I mean an i9 is basically a Xeon without ECC.  

[ARikozuM]

Honestly, I can't really think of any reason for ECC unless you're using very tight dimensions or using stress simulations where an error could be catastrophic. The Xeons do allow more power for rendering or stressing projects, but at that point you're running into single-threaded slowdowns. 

 

If you're going to build a system, I'd go i7-8700K since it's easy to get 5.0GHz on air. You won't being getting ECC on the i7 or i9, but they are the best chips for the Solidworks suite. 

[Damascus]

https://www.pugetsystems.com/landing/SOLIDWORKS-World-2017-45

[Not_Sean]

4 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Honestly, I can't really think of any reason for ECC unless you're using very tight dimensions or using stress simulations where an error could be catastrophic. The Xeons do allow more power for rendering or stressing projects, but at that point you're running into single-threaded slowdowns. 

 

If you're going to build a system, I'd go i7-8700K since it's easy to get 5.0GHz on air. You won't being getting ECC on the i7 or i9, but they are the best chips for the Solidworks suite. 

Completely agree with the ECC, I also see it as pointless. 

 

Funny enough the main reason for going X299 over Z370 is the 8 ram slots, none of our suppliers can get me 32Gb sticks non-ECC so we going to use the 8 Slots filled with 16GB. the client wants 128GB so he's getting it. Going with Corsair Dominator Plat 3200+ and the new Asus Prime X299-A. Also throwing in a P5000 for good measure. 

[Not_Sean]

15 hours ago, Damascus said:

https://www.pugetsystems.com/landing/SOLIDWORKS-World-2017-45

Those dudes are useless, pretty much the same thing, Oh you doing design, here buy with Xeon with ECC ram! 

 

If you want to suggest a CAD system builder rather suggest boxx they at least seem to build systems a lot better and not selling you an ITX motherboard for CAD work where most of the time you will run multiple GPU's 

[Damascus]

Just now, Not_Sean said:

Those dudes are useless, pretty much the same thing, Oh you doing design, here buy with Xeon with ECC ram! 

EH, I like them for the research they do, bot the builds they make.  I haven't been able to find any other source of data as large

[bimmerman]

My thoughts, as a solidworks pro (i.e., I get paid a salary to use it)

 

Single core matters a lot, but it's not like Solidworks doesn't use multi core ever. When you start getting large assemblies with thousands of mates that need solving, or you are running simulations or animation work in Solidworks, then having more cores helps. That said, a 4 core or 6 core machine is plenty for most CAD. The i9 10 core is a pretty good option as well for more involved multitasking. Threadripper could be a good option but I don't know about their reliability and how Solidworks would interact with their multi-chip-on-one-chip architecture.

 

The multiple core Xeons will be most useful in Photoworks, the Solidworks rendering engine, for making client-facing images. I don't know how frequently that will be useful. What is much more likely is that the Solidworks computers will also be used for ANSYS/ABAQUS type FEA programs, likely Matlab as well. Those programs are significantly more multithreaded. It is very unlikely, IMO, that the Solidworks workstation will be used for only Solidworks, and it's likely they'll be doing lots at a single time (I tend to be running matlab and solidworks simultaneously).

 

What matters FAR more than CPU is a GPU. Buy a Quadro or Firepro with decent memory, depending on the assembly size the engineer tends to use and how often they will be doing GPU computation (FEA, rendering, matlab, for example). Whatever you do, do NOT overclock anything. Time is money, time spent dicking around with overclocked components is lost productivity, and time lost due to revoked warranties on failed components is utterly unacceptable in a professional environment. Stability and reliability matter more than outright clock speed.

[Not_Sean]

1 hour ago, bimmerman said:

*Snip

 

Thanks man, 

 

The client Uses cad and Revit mostly, they are a civil engineering firm and this is for their head designer, he's currently on an i7-6700, 24Gb ram and a K620. 

 

Their new project is using laser landscaping from a drone and designing with that using millions of points, so no mathlab as far as I know. there is very little rendering so that's why avoiding the higher cores, The main reason for the i9 over the new i7-8700k is I need the 8 ram slots of the X299 boards as the client has insisted for max ram so he's getting 128Gb, if I go Z370 can only do 64Gb as we can't get any 32Gb sticks. 

 

For GPU we are going with a Quadro P5000 with 16GB memory so not worried about that,

 

With regards to overclocking Its going to be me doing it not them, so will be taking it to a high stable point not pushing for top limits just that balance. Will prob just have turbo boost locked on, so CPU will be sitting around 4.3-4.4. Its going under a 280mm Rad with Push-pull config. 

[Not_Sean]

Here is the Link to the Planned build:

 

https://nz.pcpartpicker.com/list/QXZHYr

 

Added two extra top rated fans (We can't get Noctua from our supplier) as want to do Push-Pull on the Rad. 

 

The only issue is that is 4 fans just on there. would you recommend a fan controller, as the Motherboard does have enough but I'll be running on ports for the water-cooling pumps and stuff. Thinking a Corsair Commander might just be the cleaner solution.