workstation + more, planned build. All advice, suggestions, critisizms welcome.

[HiGhGuY]

Planned build for a 64 bit intel/nvidia machine primaraly for a workstation, autocad, revit architecture, maybe 3dsmax and maya.

Also would like it to be able to do 1080p stereoscopic 3d video editing. and play the latest games (doesn't necesarily have to be at absolute best settings) as i'm not huge into gaming, but there are a few i would wanna be able to run.

I'll list the major components I'm planning on using so far, but please feel free to comment, suggest alternatives, etc...

Mobo: Asus P6X58d Premium
CPU: XEON W3690 (single cpu setup only)
GPU: Nvidia Quadro 4000
RAM: probably 12GB corsair dominator ddr3-1600 ram
(ifcompatible) Idealy I'd max it out at 24gb, which is all the
mobo supports but budget constraints will probably hold me
to 12
PSU: 800w (or 1000 if needed) Ultra x4 psu
Storage: ideally I'd get a 128gb SSD for OS and the more demanding
programs, and (3) 1TB HDD 7200rpm in a raid setup for
redundancy but budget constraits will probably hold me to
either one smaller ssd or 1 of the 1tb hds
OS: Windows 7 ultimate 64 bit

and all ther other less important or easily upgradable stuff like a case, fans, keyboard/mouse, optical drives, etc.


a few questions I had in peticular.....

RAM:
as i said above (if compatible) because on the intel site it says that processor supports ddr3-800/1066/1333 BUT this processor (gulftown) is the same as the core i7 990 extreme (also gulftown) all the specs are exactly the same except the core 990 only says it supports ddr3-1066, yet i've seen numerous build reports where people are using ddr3-1600/even 2000. Do you have to do anything special or just plug it in and it works? I figure since the Xeon W3690 is basically the same as the i7 990 then it would also be able to run faster ram than is listed???

CPU's:
as far as multi core processors go, or for that matter multi cpu setups what matters most? the PHYSICAL ammount of cores/threads, or the total ammount of combined cores threads? for example.... would there be an advantage in either direction when comparing the 2 following setups (setup 1) 1 quad core cpu (setup2) 2 dual core cpu's. See what i'm saying? the total number of cores is the same (4) but those 4 cores are physically divided in differnet ways.

Reason i ask is because cpu listed above is a 3.47ghz hex core but if was benneficial to have 2 physical cpus, I could get 2 quad core cpus but lower FQ (2.5ghz) because of price difference. so there would be more cores, but slower running. not sure which would be best.


GPU:
First off comment on the quadro 4000, does anyone have one? Wondering if you can game with it and work with large full HD video files with ease? from what i understand workstation gpus are slower but more stable and have more onboard memory. But are the nicer ones like a quadro 4000 still fast enough to do some gaming.

Also as far as Nvidia graphic cards go, the ge-forces are aimed at gaming and quadro at workstations. which would be best for 1080p (regular and steroscopic 3d) viewing/editing?

Would appreciate any help/advice, thanks. The above listed components along with the rest of the bits n pieces needed for a complete build came in at a min of $2600 and max of about $3600 with everything. looking to stay under $3000 the less the better.

 

[Slaymate]

Yes, you can use the Dominator DDR3 1600 but you may have to manually set the speed and timings in the bios yourself.

The number of Cores is really dependent upon the software being utilized. If the software is coded to only use 2 cores then that is all that will be used and the extra cores will be useless. A single cpu with (4) cores is going to be a better choice than (2) cpus with (2) cores. Two cpu's will require a little more time to communicate and stay in sync, plus you have extra mobo circuitry to tie them together.

If your PC is going to be used mainly as a Workstation, with very little gaming, then a Quadro will be your best bet. If Gaming is going to be more than just a occasional distraction then I would go with a High-End Gaming card (GTX 580 or 590). If you want Multi-Monitor 3D Gaming then you'll need to go with a SLI setup. And Nvidia cards in general are better at Workstation Duties than a ATI card, so regardless of you ultimate decision, go Nvidia.

After looking through your selected Components the only serious problem I see is with the Power Supply. Ultra is the most unreliable Power Supply Company on the Planet. Buy a GOOD Power Supply like a Corsair, Antec, Enermax, PC Pwr & Clg., etc... The Power Supply is the most important choice you can make as it breathes life into every component in the System. If your body was a Computer then your Heart would be the Power Supply.

 

[HiGhGuY]

thanks for the reply Slay..

I'm completely aware that core usage is dependent on the wether or not the software is designed to use x amount of multiple cores. What i was getting at is (assuming the software can utilize multiple cores) is there any difference in how it "sees" the final ammount of cores. Which if i understand what you're saying basically go with one core if possible unless you need more then you will have no choice but to do a multi cpu setup. Reason i asked was because i read somewhere that it can be advantageous to have multi cpu's.


also aware that the PSU is not something to overlook. This will be my first build so not really familiar with all the different brand names out there... other than the really big ones.. Reason I chose ultra was cuz i read a bunch of good reviews on the x4 series (both professional and user) and seemed like it was exactly what you're saying its not, reliable. But thanks for the heads up, I'll recheck PSU's