# My new Photoshop Machine (mwuahahah...)



## manaheim (Aug 18, 2008)

I've been giving my Dad crap for years because he always is some bigwig at some cool company, and never gets me any cool toys from where he works... not even a fricken t-shirt.

He's been one of the Veeps over at Intel for about 5-6 years now, and I've been giving him a ton of crap about that... can't even get me a processor for god's sake. (though I recently discovered I can actually get processors for about 1/2 price, ok fair enough I guess.)

Anyway, my Dad gives me a call a couple months ago and says "Ok, I have something for you..."

See, Dad has recently taken control of the desktop and gaming division at Intel, and Intel has recently developed a series of gaming motherboards called "Skulltrail".  Turns out they had 12 prototype desktops.  Turns out they decided to send me one so I can be a field tester.  I'm using it now to type this message... which is kinda overkill. 

The critical specs:

- Skulltrail prototype motherboard (special modified server board with on-board hw raid accelerator and whatnot)
- Dual Quad-Core Xeon Server Class Processors 3GHz (very rare "unlocked" processors, overclockable to 5GHz under normal cooling, 6 GHz with nitrogen cooling)
- 4 gigs overclocked server RAM
- Dual Nvidia 8800 GTX 768 Video Cards (admittedly not the top of the line now, but was when the box was originally built)
- Ridiculously obnoxious liquid-cooled case setup

Here's a couple pictures...

==1==
The pallet that showed up and was sitting in my garage when I got home.  My wife called to say "Your retardedly huge stupid computer thing showed up."  I left work immediately. 







==2==
The computer out of the box next to my McDonald's diet coke to give you a sense of size.






Overall this thing is loud as hell, weighs 90ish pounds and probably is costing me $4 a minute to run due to the power consumption, but good LORD does it run Photoshop fast. 

Now I probably should actually go install a game on it. :lmao:

Anyway, figured you guys would get a kick out of it.  Thanks for listening.


----------



## maverickphoto (Aug 18, 2008)

manaheim said:


> -
> The computer out of the box next to my McDonald's diet coke to give you a sense of size.


 
Is that cup SUPERSIZED?  :lmao:


----------



## goodoneian (Aug 18, 2008)

photoshop loves 4 gigs of ram


----------



## icassell (Aug 18, 2008)

does he have another


----------



## Hawaii Five-O (Aug 19, 2008)

I'll take one I could be a field tester

are those spinner wheels on the bottom?


It would be funny if all you did with it was check you email and surf the internet hah.


----------



## RubyRed (Aug 19, 2008)

I just scratched off #4 of my life goals and changed it to..

"Buy a PC that arrives on a pallet"


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 19, 2008)

It is also just AWESOME when you can get a little high-end "backdoor" stuff, but it is uber-cool to get it for free! 

_"Your retardedly huge stupid computer thing showed up."_ 

ROFL!  She doesn't sound to sympathetic to your cause!  

When I lived in Texas, I had contacts at intel. Not so much for hardware, but first hand info. I was told of all what they were working on and back then in 2002, they were working on what will come to be known as the P7. This is when the P4s pretty much ruled. I had a chance to play with it, but I can tell you... as impressive as a freon cooled P7 processor in a quad processor motherboard sounds, in real life running at an *under*clocked 32Ghz each confused, it was not as fast as you would expect. Of course by now they may be working on things like something stupid like a P15 or something rediculous, but we will never see it until they have squeezed the marking juice out of each and every minor product until then.

As for me, I have the parts downstairs to build my own little new toy dediated strictly to my video and photo hobby (as if I did not have enough already with a 12 computer, 4 server, fiber optic gigabit and 802.11n wireless network with an 18TB SAN), but I will make due with a simple quad core 2.66 with 32gb of RAM 1gb of ram on the video card, dual 23" LCD monitors, running on 64-bit versions of XP Pro (I *loathe* Vista!), Lightroom 2.0 and so on.

New toys are fun!

Edit: Oh, about using that machine to type in messages on a forum using IE... be very careful, you don't want to strain those multiple CPUs too hard and blow. (LMAO!)


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 19, 2008)

goodoneian said:


> photoshop loves 4 gigs of ram


 
Too bad that the 32-bit versions of XP and Vista only see and can access a maximm of 3.25gb. :meh:  This is a stupid limitation that drives me nuts at times.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 19, 2008)

.







Eats Macs For Lunch!​



That's just about the same spec machine I have...  You are going to be VERY happy with it!

You should take more photos of it and post them.  I bet is looks awesome in a darkened room!

Congratz on your new 64-bit 8-core 3g monster dude! :thumbup:



PS: I bet there's a hardware or software speed dial for the fans somewhere if you want to reduce the noise. If it has watercooling on the procs and you're not trying to run 3 heavy games at once the fans don't need to be turned up. You want to keep the xeon procs at about 50C or below and the drives at 30c to 35c if you can. 40c on the drives isn't too bad but keeping them low means longer life.


----------



## Garbz (Aug 19, 2008)

JerryPH said:


> Too bad that the 32-bit versions of XP and Vista only see and can access a maximm of 3.25gb. :meh:  This is a stupid limitation that drives me nuts at times.



The people who saw me run Windows 2003 Server laughed. Well who's laughing now. It can address high-mem and it stays lean with service pack upgrades. Not like all the horridness (slowness) introduced with the XP service packs. I max out my 4gb regularly .

Seriously man you're 3 choices are XP-x64, Windows 2003 x-64, or Windows 2003. Everything else would just be a shame on that computer.  Either that or wait till they get photoshop CS3 running on linux. CS2 runs just the new one is all manner of hassles.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 19, 2008)

Hmmm Mac and Linux don't have a problem addressing 64 GB of ram. I heard even Amiga can do that now.   :lmao:


----------



## manaheim (Aug 19, 2008)

maverickphoto said:


> Is that cup SUPERSIZED? :lmao:


 
hahah... yes... yes it is. 



icassell said:


> does he have another


 
No!  All the other 11 are spoken for. 



C677T said:


> I'll take one I could be a field tester
> 
> are those spinner wheels on the bottom?
> 
> It would be funny if all you did with it was check you email and surf the internet hah.


 
Heh, that was most of what I did last night. I have to instal Crysis on it tonight and see what that will do. I also really need to get a better monitor on it. Running games on an aging 1280x1024 LCD with a vid card setup that is optimized for far higher resolutions is... shall we say... kinda stupid.



RubyRed said:


> I just scratched off #4 of my life goals and changed it to..
> 
> "Buy a PC that arrives on a pallet"


 




JerryPH said:


> It is also just AWESOME when you can get a little high-end "backdoor" stuff, but it is uber-cool to get it for free!
> 
> _"Your retardedly huge stupid computer thing showed up."_
> 
> ROFL! She doesn't sound to sympathetic to your cause!


 
I would describe my wife as "tolerant", which is really pretty good since a lot of women would probably murder their husbands for what I have done to the dining room with this thing. I should put up a picture of that. It's funny. 



JerryPH said:


> When I lived in Texas, I had contacts at intel. Not so much for hardware, but first hand info. I was told of all what they were working on and back then in 2002, they were working on what will come to be known as the P7. This is when the P4s pretty much ruled. I had a chance to play with it, but I can tell you... as impressive as a freon cooled P7 processor in a quad processor motherboard sounds, in real life running at an *under*clocked 32Ghz each confused, it was not as fast as you would expect. Of course by now they may be working on things like something stupid like a P15 or something rediculous, but we will never see it until they have squeezed the marking juice out of each and every minor product until then.


 
I'm pretty sure Intel has shifted most of their efforts to the multi-core thing. More cores on a single chip has more easy-to-aquire headroom than cranking the GHz and reducing the size of the core electronics (from what I understand...)



JerryPH said:


> As for me, I have the parts downstairs to build my own little new toy dediated strictly to my video and photo hobby (as if I did not have enough already with a 12 computer, 4 server, fiber optic gigabit and 802.11n wireless network with an 18TB SAN), but I will make due with a simple quad core 2.66 with 32gb of RAM 1gb of ram on the video card, dual 23" LCD monitors, running on 64-bit versions of XP Pro (I *loathe* Vista!), Lightroom 2.0 and so on.


 
Nice! Yeah. Vista is... interesting. 



Bifurcator said:


> .
> 
> Eats Macs For Lunch!​
> That's just about the same spec machine I have... You are going to be VERY happy with it!
> ...


 
hehe, thanks. It actually appears to have some temperature sensors wired into it for the fans, but the fans seem to be running at the same speed all the time. TBH, my guess is that right now they are running at low speed... it's just that there are TWELVE of them on the box. That panel of 4 is repeated on both sides, and then there are four on the inside.

Part of the problem is I didn't actually build this setup... it's basically a "home tuner rig" built by the guys at intel, then packed up and shipped to me. That's a little tweaky, esp. when you've never even had a liquid cooled machine before.

TBH there is a very VERY good chance that I'll move this thing out of this monstrosity of a case and put it into my normal desktop setup. I won't be able to overclock it much because my other case probably wouldn't be able to handle the heat output, but then I will be able to hear myself think, so it may be a reasonable trade-off. 



Garbz said:


> The people who saw me run Windows 2003 Server laughed. Well who's laughing now. It can address high-mem and it stays lean with service pack upgrades. Not like all the horridness (slowness) introduced with the XP service packs. I max out my 4gb regularly .
> 
> Seriously man you're 3 choices are XP-x64, Windows 2003 x-64, or Windows 2003. Everything else would just be a shame on that computer. Either that or wait till they get photoshop CS3 running on linux. CS2 runs just the new one is all manner of hassles.


 
Hm, you know, that's an interesting idea. Question is how does Server 2003 handle games? If at all? This is a gaming rig, after all.



Bifurcator said:


> Hmmm Mac and Linux don't have a problem addressing 64 GB of ram. I heard even Amiga can do that now.   :lmao:


 
Don't you start with me!


----------



## roadkill (Aug 19, 2008)

That's a heck of a porn machine there


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 19, 2008)

manaheim said:


> hehe, thanks. It actually appears to have some temperature sensors wired into it for the fans, but the fans seem to be running at the same speed all the time. TBH, my guess is that right now they are running at low speed... it's just that there are TWELVE of them on the box. That panel of 4 is repeated on both sides, and then there are four on the inside.
> 
> Part of the problem is I didn't actually build this setup... it's basically a "home tuner rig" built by the guys at intel, then packed up and shipped to me. That's a little tweaky, esp. when you've never even had a liquid cooled machine before.



There's probably a thump screw somewhere that adjusts fan-speed and if not there's a utility hiding (or downloadable) somewhere that will allow you to set min/max speeds for certain temperatures. 




> TBH there is a very VERY good chance that I'll move this thing out of this monstrosity of a case and put it into my normal desktop setup. I won't be able to overclock it much because my other case probably wouldn't be able to handle the heat output, but then I will be able to hear myself think, so it may be a reasonable trade-off.



Yeah, xeon processors do NOT need water cooling! It's one of the main design principals behind xeon. You can run them in an open case with no airflow and nothing but a passive heat-sync. The problem with doing something like that in a closed case is that the drives, RAM, and display adaptors overheat. Your 8800's and drives could actually benefit from water cooling...

Another thing you can do is get a realtime temperature monitoring utility and start unplugging the fans one at a time. Run a game for 10min. Check to see if everything is still good and repeat till you only have the actually affective ones plugged in.

Here's my system with passive cooling (no CPU fans), two slow exhaust fans out the back at 1321 RPM, one out the front at 1301 RPM, and the PSU fan running at 1709 RPM (So 4 total all at VERY slow speeds. These fans do 480 RPM ~ 10,000 RMP):

28.0&#8451;/82.4&#8457; ----- Ambient Air
33.0&#8451;/91.4&#8457; ----- CPU A Heatsink
34.0&#8451;/93.2&#8457; ----- CPU B Heatsink
34.0&#8451;/93.2&#8457; ----- Expansion Slots
32.0&#8451;/89.6&#8457; ----- Hard Drive Bay 1
31.0&#8451;/87.8&#8457; ----- Hard Drive Bay 2
32.0&#8451;/89.6&#8457; ----- Hard Drive Bay 3
32.0&#8451;/89.6&#8457; ----- Hard Drive Bay 4
32.0&#8451;/89.6&#8457; ----- SMART Disk 1
31.0&#8451;/87.8&#8457; ----- SMART Disk 2
35.0&#8451;/95.0&#8457; ----- SMART Disk 3
34.0&#8451;/93.2&#8457; ----- SMART Disk 4
42.0&#8451;/107.6&#8457; ---- Memory Module A1
48.0&#8451;/118.4&#8457; ---- Memory Module A2
46.0&#8451;/114.8&#8457; ---- Memory Module B1
48.0&#8451;/118.4&#8457; ---- Memory Module B2
33.0&#8451;/91.4&#8457; ----- Memory Riser Card A Position 1
35.0&#8451;/95.0&#8457; ----- Memory Riser Card A Position 2
33.0&#8451;/91.4&#8457; ----- Memory Riser Card A Position 3
33.0&#8451;/91.4&#8457; ----- Memory Riser Card B Position 1
35.0&#8451;/95.0&#8457; ----- Memory Riser Card B Position 2
35.0&#8451;/95.0&#8457; ----- Memory Riser Card B Position 3
46.0&#8451;/114.8&#8457; ---- Power Supply Location 1
43.0&#8451;/109.4&#8457; ---- Power Supply Location 2
46.0&#8451;/114.8&#8457; ---- Northbridge Heat Sink
31.0&#8451;/87.7&#8457; ----- CPU Core 1
30.0&#8451;/86.0&#8457; ----- CPU Core 2
31.0&#8451;/87.8&#8457; ----- CPU Core 3
28.0&#8451;/82.4&#8457; ----- CPU Core 4
28.0&#8451;/82.4&#8457; ----- CPU Core 5
24.0&#8451;/75.2&#8457; ----- CPU Core 6
20.0&#8451;/68.0&#8457; ----- CPU Core 7
29.0&#8451;/84.2&#8457; ----- CPU Core 8
63 % -------------- Processor Load (average)
131 ---------------- Number of Processes

I can't hear it running unless I get my ear a few inches from the case.


----------



## Overread (Aug 19, 2008)

That machine is -- 12 fans!!!!!
darn you might be able to run crisis as full spec -- without lag!
should last you at least 2 years without upgrade 


have fun!


----------



## Applefanboy (Aug 19, 2008)

DUDE!!! That is SICK! I want one. Seriously. I need one.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 19, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> There's probably a thump screw somewhere that adjusts fan-speed and if not there's a utility hiding (or downloadable) somewhere that will allow you to set min/max speeds for certain temperatures.


 
I'll have to look. 



Bifurcator said:


> Yeah, xeon processors do NOT need water cooling! It's one of the main design principals behind xeon. You can run them in an open case with no airflow and nothing but a passive heat-sync. The problem with doing something like that in a closed case is that the drives, RAM, and display adaptors overheat. Your 8800's and drives could actually benefit from water cooling...
> 
> Another thing you can do is get a realtime temperature monitoring utility and start unplugging the fans one at a time. Run a game for 10min. Check to see if everything is still good and repeat till you only have the actually affective ones plugged in.
> 
> Here's my system with passive cooling (no CPU fans), two slow exhaust fans out the back at 1321 RPM, one out the front at 1301 RPM, and the PSU fan running at 1709 RPM (So 4 total all at VERY slow speeds. These fans do 480 RPM ~ 10,000 RMP):


 
Oh hey... that's good information.

So then most likely if I knock it down to 1 drive (instead of the 4) and take the second 8800 out, I'll probably be fine in my Antec P180 case.  I probably will pickup cooler/fans for the procs because I don't mind a LITTLE additional  noise... I just don't want a freaking wind turbine in my office. 

Thanks, Bi... you rock!

Unfortunately, I think I'm stuck running Vista on the stupid thing because of my need to play games.  I should try XP and see how that works out though... I would really PREFER XP.

BTW for those of you screaming in horror on my removing the second 8800... I'm running just fine on an 8800 GTS 320, which is a fair notch less powerful than a single 8800 GTX 768, so it will still be a big bump for me.  Taking it out cuts down power, heat and complexity.  All big wins in my book.  Esp. since the 8800s have been way outclassed by the current boards out there... so in 6 months I'll buy a new vidcard and have more than I had with the dual 8800 sli anyway.



Applefanboy said:


> DUDE!!! That is SICK! I want one. Seriously. I need one.


 
I would think with a name like yours that you would be picking on it. 



Overread said:


> That machine is -- 12 fans!!!!!
> darn you might be able to run crisis as full spec -- without lag!
> should last you at least 2 years without upgrade
> have fun!


 
Oh yes... to give you an idea, they ran Crysis full spec on it WHILE doing DVD encoding in the background and got 65 FPS sustained.  This machine is an absolute monster.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 19, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Oh hey... that's good information.
> 
> So then most likely if I knock it down to 1 drive (instead of the 4) and take the second 8800 out, I'll probably be fine in my Antec P180 case.  I probably will pickup cooler/fans for the procs because I don't mind a LITTLE additional  noise... I just don't want a freaking wind turbine in my office.
> 
> Thanks, Bi... you rock!



hehe... turbine.  I hear ya... And yup I honestly believe that even with everything in there as it is you only need one fan on each side. I have all 4 drive bays loaded, dual graphic cards, 4GB ram too, and you see the temps. A few cores are actually lower than the Ambient air temp.   With one card removed that would reduce system hear allot. Personally I would leave the drives in. A RAID0 or 5 array get's between 4 and 6 times speed increase. And with PS and the OS itself cacheing so much to the HDDs that boost actually affects system performance kind of allot. 

I agree about the dual display card thing maybe not being needed. Once removed you'll notice a few games not being as perky but all your photo-tools won't miss it much at all. And what does it draw at full load? 145 Watts? Kind of allot - even though the typical average is probably half that.

Also watts used directly relates into heat emitted. 



> Unfortunately, I think I'm stuck running Vista on the stupid thing because of my need to play games.  I should try XP and see how that works out though... I would really PREFER XP.



In spite of what everyone (including me ) says about Vista I think that unless you're spending allot of time in the OS itself that the only real difference is resource consumption. XP tends to be a little lighter.



> BTW for those of you screaming in horror on my removing the second 8800... I'm running just fine on an 8800 GTS 320, which is a fair notch less powerful than a single 8800 GTX 768, so it will still be a big bump for me.  Taking it out cuts down power, heat and complexity.  All big wins in my book.  Esp. since the 8800s have been way outclassed by the current boards out there... so in 6 months I'll buy a new vidcard and have more than I had with the dual 8800 sli anyway.



Really? I haven't checked in awhile... What's the speed daemon right now?


----------



## photo28 (Aug 19, 2008)

Wow! Thats awesome, like Overread said, you wont need an upgrade for quite a while.


----------



## Mike30D (Aug 19, 2008)

Nice machine, REAL nice machine. Some of these machines are now running upwards of $15,000.00 CPU (Computer Power User) Magazine and Maximum PC show a lot of this type of stuff. Most, if not all of these machines are built for those gamer types. The one I read about had basically a refrigeration system in it and before it booted up, it cools off the CPU to 0 degrees Fahrenheit


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 19, 2008)

Wow!  Mine cost about $3k fully stuffed with a few DIY additions on my part.  It's a media workstation though and not really a gamer box. That's funny about the mini-fridge! It's be way cool if it could keep my beer cold too!


----------



## F1addict (Aug 19, 2008)

someday I'll build a computer like that. If I ever have the money

But for now I just need to finish upgrading the HP I bought from a friend for $100. So far I've put about $160 into it and it runs twice as fast as before. Now I just need to spend another ~$250 and it should be about where I want it for now. 
But it will never come close to that beast. God I wish I had the money to get something like that


----------



## manaheim (Aug 19, 2008)

Bi... the 280 GTX is the mac daddy now.  Granted, I have 8800 Ultras in this thing... they still sell for about $500 each... so nothing to sneeze at.



Mike30D said:


> Nice machine, REAL nice machine. Some of these machines are now running upwards of $15,000.00 CPU (Computer Power User) Magazine and Maximum PC show a lot of this type of stuff. Most, if not all of these machines are built for those gamer types. The one I read about had basically a refrigeration system in it and before it booted up, it cools off the CPU to 0 degrees Fahrenheit


 
Yeah this box specs out at about $18,500.  Fricken insane.

It's especially insane because I'm annoyed at it.  Stupid water cooled nonsense. 

Anyone wanna buy 2 8800 Ultras?  $350 a piece!  (you'll need to buy a new fan, though... I don't have the original!)


----------



## Garbz (Aug 20, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Hm, you know, that's an interesting idea. Question is how does Server 2003 handle games? If at all? This is a gaming rig, after all.



Need to install the drivers, then go into the control panel and manually enable audio and video hardware acceleration, and then install directx. That is a bit of an extra hassle but not uncommon on any windows system really.

Modern games don't seem to have a problem at all. It's the older games that break first. I had couldn't run the original half-life (not source, that ran fine), but then that game is rather dated and has it's issues on XP too.
The only game that it didn't like was the Prince of Persia installer which claimed it was not compatible with windows 2003. But using the Microsoft Application Verifier you can simply set it to lie about which system you're running and the game ran just fine once installed.

A few other nitpicks, like needing to uninstall the IE security protection, disabling the shutdown event tracker in group policy, nothing a tech savy gamer can't figure out in 30 seconds on google, but something that is still expected when doing this kind of thing.

Once it's setup it's basically windows with a sleeker kernel, no crap (although you can enable themes if you wish), and all around what I think an OS should be, and that is out of my damn way.


----------



## DanPonjican (Aug 20, 2008)

Well you know your machine is BAD when it has to be shipped on a pallet!!!


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 20, 2008)

Garbz said:


> The people who saw me run Windows 2003 Server laughed. Well who's laughing now.



Let me tell you what I tried, my friend... I have the 64-bit versions of win2003 (obviously have to in my line of work), and I did not try with PS but with something a little heavier, rendering 6 hours of video... the 64-bit version was about 3 minutes faster in the end, than rendering that exact same job on a properly optimized WinXP PRO using 32-bit OS and software.

Though you may be able to access more ram, in the end, the operating system of a server is not optimized to run local applications at maximum speed, but to respond to client and network requests.  WinXP *is* better at running local applications better, and is limited to a maximum of 10 inbound connections (it sucks at responding to network and client requests).

I have to wonder about the differences on photoshop on a server OS.  I have not tried, so sincerely cannot tell you with any level of certainty, but my real life experiences with other apps tell me in the end, its so close as to not have a real impact in the end.

If course I always leave the disclaimer open that I did not try it myself... so do not know 100%.  :mrgreen:


----------



## CWA_JGEISINGER (Aug 24, 2008)

just one thing to say 

Too Bad It's Not A Mac Pro


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 24, 2008)

Well he can always download Hackintosh and install it if he wants to be a Mac guy. 

I wanna see more pictures of his machine.


----------



## fug.li (Aug 24, 2008)

I can't see the pictures...

P.S.: No way any windows machine could be cooler than a mac.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 24, 2008)

I dunno... I own top of the line Dell workstations and also have a MacPro with 8 cores. 

I think they both run about the same temperature. :lmao:


here's the image: http://www.wickedtiki.com/images/tpf/st1.jpg


----------



## manaheim (Aug 24, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> Well he can always download Hackintosh and install it if he wants to be a Mac guy.
> 
> I wanna see more pictures of his machine.


 
I'll get some pics up soon, but I need to first schedule the nude models to drape themselves all over the box while I take pictures. 

Actually the box is still in the dining room at the moment.  I need to order a KVM so I can run it in my office.

_Don't_ get me started on Apple.



fug.li said:


> I can't see the pictures...
> 
> P.S.: No way any windows machine could be cooler than a mac.


 
_Don't_ don't _don't _get me started on Apple.


----------



## nanny32 (Aug 24, 2008)

^_^

i like that green pipe


----------



## Ejazzle (Aug 24, 2008)

wow i am truely jealous of your computer! can i have one! 

ill give you a D40 as a trade


----------



## Garbz (Aug 25, 2008)

JerryPH said:


> Though you may be able to access more ram, in the end, the operating system of a server is not optimized to run local applications at maximum speed, but to respond to client and network requests.  WinXP *is* better at running local applications better, and is limited to a maximum of 10 inbound connections (it sucks at responding to network and client requests).



How did you draw that conclusion? I thought you just said windows server rendered the video 3 minutes faster?

I am well aware that 64bits and a fancy kernel will relate to little overall improved performance for heavy processing work. I'd hope most computers are actually very equal in this regard, otherwise there are some coding problems somewhere. What I was talking about was overall OS footprint. The rest of the "consumer" windows versions do nothing but impede the user here. Pretty graphics, animations, smooth sliding effects on menus, errr ugly looking resource intensive transparent windows.

That is what I was talking about faster. Not rendering a video, but being able to click the start button and have the start menu actually appear straight away while rendering a video. That all comes down to how the kernel schedules tasks and even if applications take a microscopic performance hit I'd prefer that while trying to multitask. As for high-mem support, well I still like editing panoramas knowing that my computer won't slow down when the RAM usage gets to 3.2gb. 

Admittedly that's what I do though, often 6 things at once. If you're just playing a game or just editing a photo it may be of no benefit that one app doesn't halt the rest of your system while it's working


----------



## manaheim (Aug 25, 2008)

Last I looked, the Server OSes were configured by default to be more balanced towards serving network needs than running local apps.  It was also configurable, however.  It's been a long time since I've looked...


----------



## goodoneian (Aug 25, 2008)

JerryPH said:


> Too bad that the 32-bit versions of XP and Vista only see and can access a maximm of 3.25gb. :meh:  This is a stupid limitation that drives me nuts at times.



that's why i have 64 bit


----------



## Sandspur (Aug 25, 2008)

I'm nominating your wife's comment - "Your retardedly huge stupid computer thing showed up" - as the the most insightful comment of the decade.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 25, 2008)

Sandspur said:


> I'm nominating your wife's comment - "Your retardedly huge stupid computer thing showed up" - as the the most insightful comment of the decade.


 
hahah... yeah, my wife is good for that.  Razor-like insight that cuts right to the bone.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 25, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Last I looked, the Server OSes were configured by default to be more balanced towards serving network needs than running local apps.  It was also configurable, however.  It's been a long time since I've looked...



Well, maybe in the defaults. They are configurable tho. You can control the balance. 

@Garbz,
Hardware optimization makes a pretty huge difference too. It's not uniform across all machines. Even Mac modifies their physical  server and workstations every time they make significant headway implementing 64 bit into their OS. The Mac Pro for example, is on it's forth revision all related to 64 bit optimizations. I believe it's the same case with the mac blade server too.


----------



## Sandspur (Aug 25, 2008)

manaheim said:


> hahah... yeah, my wife is good for that.  Razor-like insight that cuts right to the bone.




I'm married to a woman like that myself.

So was my first wife.

So was my second wife.

Are we seeing a pattern here?:er:


----------



## RockDawg (Aug 26, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> Well he can always download Hackintosh and install it if he wants to be a Mac guy.



No to hijack this thread, but does that really work?  I looked into it once wanting to try out the Apple OS, but most reviews said it was really hit or miss and even the hits had issues.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 26, 2008)

Yeah, I installed it on a Dell Precision Workstation 650 and everything worked great except a few special keys on the kewboard.  The Eject CD/DVD and the Dell KB didn't support up to F16 on the f keys. But other than that it was perfect. That was back around 10.4.2 or so. I hear 10.5.x is even better but I didn't find anything wrong with the old one so... <shrug>  

I used it for about a month in order to determine if I really wanted to go mac or if I should go for linux. I loved IRIX in the past and DEC Unix on my DEC Alphas was nice (So was Solaris on my SunUltra workstation too) but when I played with Mac OSX there was no question about it. OSX was just a more professional highly polished system. It wasn't fully 64-bit when I bought it - and it still isn't but most of the important parts are and by 10.6 it will be. So I'm very happy with it.  I bought the Mac Pro 1.1 on an educator discount (just by asking for it ) 2.66 dual dual-core xeon, 4 gigs RAM for $2,100 and then upgraded on my own to 2.66 dual quad-core xeon, and several terabytes of RAID for a little under $1k. So I ended up with a really nice 8 core monster for about $3k.  At the time the nearest speced roll-your-own system with the VERY cheapest parts was $4k in a PeeCee form and BoXX wanted $10K for the same, so I felt like I got a pretty good deal too.


----------



## Hawaii Five-O (Aug 27, 2008)

manaheim said:


> hahah... yeah, my wife is good for that.  Razor-like insight that cuts right to the bone.


  haha yeah, wifes are great, I wish I had one.


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Aug 27, 2008)

Pfft. how much does that cost and it only has 4 gigs of ram?


----------



## manaheim (Aug 27, 2008)

C677T said:


> haha yeah, wifes are great, I wish I had one.


 
Careful what you wish for. 



prodigy2k7 said:


> Pfft. how much does that cost and it only has 4 gigs of ram?


 
You're scoffing at my 4 gigs of server-class overclocked RAM? 

The machine costs about ~$18K.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 27, 2008)

Hey, what's it upgradable to? 16gb or 32gb?


----------



## Garbz (Aug 27, 2008)

Never had a crash here that could have been prevented by ECC  8 gigs or bust!


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Aug 27, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Careful what you wish for.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Exactly my point. Your whole machine cost that much, you should have more than 4 gigs


----------



## manaheim (Aug 27, 2008)

prodigy2k7 said:


> Exactly my point. Your whole machine cost that much, you should have more than 4 gigs


 
Ah, well the ram that is in there is expensive... I can't recall exactly, but it was either $2k or $4k just for the ram itself.  It's ridiculously fast RAM.


----------



## Overread (Aug 27, 2008)

might have missed it - but if he is running vista then 4GB is actually more than it can support (3.5GB is its limit or there abouts) for RAM
Unless you go 64bit vista then its unlimited (of course its also far more buggy )


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Aug 27, 2008)

IDC how fast is it if you only have 4 gigs, id go 8 minimum for that type of machine


----------



## jvgig (Aug 27, 2008)

I'm sorry, but unless you got some insanely expensive monitors and have an extensive raid array there is no way it costs that much.  The only way one could even possibly approach that price is if you go to the store and pick the most expensive everything.  I just did that and came just shy of 20k, but the specs would blow yours away, even if it is all next gen technology.  

For something in the 18-20k spectrum you should be looking at 
2 2.93ghz tigerton intel quad core processors, 32gb of the highest spec sever ram i can find, paired with a 16tb raid array with dedicated raid controller with an additional 5+ 300gb raptors, dual bluray burners, dual $2000 workstation gfx cards, and a $700 motherboard to stick it all together.  Then I will give you 2500 for a case and a dual phase change cooling system.  

Please tell me that at least 8k of that was put towards accessories and that is only because it is a prototype.  Also, those specs about the overclockability are completely unrealistic on a server board.  They may be taken from what has been done on a high end gaming rig and they probably cannot be duplicated with most processors.  No, it is not rare to have an unlocked multiplier.  And no, 4gb of memory did not cost 2-4k, 32gb of high spec server ram costs 2800.  considering the fact that there is not even enough space in that case to fit all of those things, I am going to say that the 18k figure is not even close.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 27, 2008)

prodigy2k7 said:


> IDC how fast is it if you only have 4 gigs, id go 8 minimum for that type of machine


 


jvgig said:


> I'm sorry, but unless you got some insanely expensive monitors and have an extensive raid array there is no way it costs that much. The only way one could even possibly approach that price is if you go to the store and pick the most expensive everything. I just did that and came just shy of 20k, but the specs would blow yours away, even if it is all next gen technology.
> 
> For something in the 18-20k spectrum you should be looking at
> 2 2.93ghz tigerton intel quad core processors, 32gb of the highest spec sever ram i can find, paired with a 16tb raid array with dedicated raid controller with an additional 5+ 300gb raptors, dual bluray burners, dual $2000 workstation gfx cards, and a $700 motherboard to stick it all together. Then I will give you 2500 for a case and a dual phase change cooling system.
> ...


 
You guys are both right.

First off, I'm lying.  It's actually a 486/33 and I taped a big Walmart price card to the front and wrote "*SUPER FAZT ZZZEEEON COMPOOTOR* *$18,500!!"* on it in red crayon.

It actually doesn't have 4 gigs, it's only running 4 meg.  I just like to call it gigs to make myself feel better.  I couldn't afford the 8 meg.  In fact, I'm running Windows 3.1 and I'm not sure it can even address the 4 meg I have.

I have it overclocked to 66 MHz and smoke is pouring out from the sides like wild.  I can barely see.  Help!  Someone call the fire department!

Thank god you are both here to identify my lies and technical abominations.  Obviously I have nothing better to do with my time than to steer the TPF crowd wildly astray with my foolishness.

I'm sure they're all very thankful they have you here to save them.

I know I am!

:thumbup:


----------



## jvgig (Aug 27, 2008)

if you can show us how your machine is special then it may be easier for us computer illiterate to understand how a machine with the specs you gave can give the power you claim.  maybe some benchmarks with comparisons to normal workstations with 32gb of ram since yours is equal in cost or even more expensive (or even just 4gb since it may be hard to track down those supercomputer scores)?  maybe some photos of these special pieces like your 2-4k 4gb ram when the most expensive I can currently find is under $500.

I'm very sorry if your machine is some super ground breaking technology, but unless you can provide some sort of empirical data backing up your claims, very few will believe your extreme specs.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 27, 2008)

Awe...  too bad the thread has come to something like this. I loved your post manaheim, and I really appreciated you sharing it with us! Especially as it was a present from your Dad! :thumbup: 

I've priced very moderate 4 core BoXX machines at around $15k and HP servers with similar specs at almost twice that. Additionally 4gigs is pretty massive and I've only wished for more a few times in the year I've had the machine. And those were massive 3D scenes with BILLIONS (over 2 billion to be more specific) of textured, shaded, polygons. last point. If I go to the Apple site and configure my machine to it's current spec (but with your xeon procs - mine are 2.66gHz) it comes up with $11,125.000 and Apple is by FAR not the most expensive vendor out there! Like I said HP and BoXX are both right around double so from them it would be right about $20,000.00


----------



## manaheim (Aug 27, 2008)

jvgig said:


> if you can show us how your machine is special then it may be easier for us computer illiterate to understand how a machine with the specs you gave can give the power you claim. maybe some benchmarks with comparisons to normal workstations with 32gb of ram since yours is equal in cost or even more expensive (or even just 4gb since it may be hard to track down those supercomputer scores)? maybe some photos of these special pieces like your 2-4k 4gb ram when the most expensive I can currently find is under $500.
> 
> I'm very sorry if your machine is some super ground breaking technology, but unless you can provide some sort of empirical data backing up your claims, very few will believe your extreme specs.


 


Dude, I have a _way_ better idea. Let's just have you assume I'm totally lying. It will make you feel better, and I frankly couldn't possibly care what you think anyway.

Win/win!

Sound good?


----------



## manaheim (Aug 27, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> Awe... too bad the thread has come to something like this. I loved your post manaheim, and I really appreciated you sharing it with us! Especially as it was a present from your Dad! :thumbup:


 
Yeah, I know.  I was thinking the same thing.  Some great discussion between Garbz, you, Jerry, etc. too.  All good stuff.  There's a spoiler in every crowd.   Sorry about the mess. 



Bifurcator said:


> I've priced very moderate 4 core BoXX machines at around $15k and HP servers with similar specs at almost twice that. Additionally 4gigs is pretty massive and I've only wished for more a few times in the year I've had the machine. And those were massive 3D scenes with BILLIONS (over 2 billion to be more specific) of textured, shaded, polygons. last point. If I go to the Apple site and configure my machine to it's current spec (but with your xeon procs - mine are 2.66gHz) it comes up with $11,125.000 and Apple is by FAR not the most expensive vendor out there! Like I said HP and BoXX are both right around double so from them it would be right about $20,000.00


 
Actually, I went and re-priced everything.  One thing I didn't realize was that the $18K was the pricetag for this box in October when it was built... I came up with about $12K for it now.  So, definitely a bit cheaper.  Amazing what you pay for bleeding edge... I bet you at least $3K of that difference is in those video cards.  They're essentially kinda old now.  Vid card market is messed up.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 27, 2008)

Yup!  And if you go with something like Quadro FX5700 cards you can add $5,000 for the pair _*if* you get them discounted_.   Server grade SAS drives are $600~$700 a pop for 300 GB... etc. etc.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 27, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> Yup! And if you go with something like Quadro FX5700 cards you can add $5,000 for the pair _*if* you get them discounted_.  Server grade SAS drives are $600~$700 a pop for 300 GB... etc. etc.


 
Yeah, that makes sense.  We need like a deja-Newegg so we can go back in time and check prices.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 27, 2008)

And I just looked... Wow, prices have dropped allot!  This was $900 last I looked:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_8800gt_for_mac.html

Now it's $279   I'm getting me a pair right now!


----------



## pez (Aug 28, 2008)

Nice box! A good example of overkill, lol. BTW, I don't believe you could ever get 5 Ghz out of those procs without liquid N and even then it likely wouldn't be stable. How's the electric bill?


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 28, 2008)

pez said:


> How's the electric bill?



I can speak for my electric bill. 

No change over a Pentium Pro 100 mHz. with a few cards in it.
Cheaper than or about half of an Amiga 4000 (with Video Toaster and WFM).

Since 1990 or so I've always had my machine(s) each running through an amp meter just in front of the mains. My 8 core mac with 4GB ram, 4 large drives, dual video, buttloads of USB devices, etc. draws about the same as machines from 1990. Actually it's far less when idle and far more when all procs are 100% and the drives are going hard but just browsing the web and editing/displaying images it averages out to about the same as an Amiga or ancient Pentium system with the equivalent components (sound, video, etc.).


----------



## manaheim (Aug 28, 2008)

pez said:


> Nice box! A good example of overkill, lol. BTW, I don't believe you could ever get 5 Ghz out of those procs without liquid N and even then it likely wouldn't be stable. How's the electric bill?


 
It's running 5GHz now, no problem.

The guys at Intel had it up to 6GHz but they had to nitrogen cool it I guess.  I'm not doing that.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 28, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> And I just looked... Wow, prices have dropped allot! This was $900 last I looked:
> 
> http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_8800gt_for_mac.html
> 
> Now it's $279  I'm getting me a pair right now!


 
It's reeeeeeeally amazing how volitile that market is.  The mere fact that NVidia has held on so long is damned impressive.  I remember, back in the day when Diamond was king... they made ONE screwup, and 6 months later... poof.


----------



## jvgig (Aug 28, 2008)

nvidia has been very successful over the past few years with their release of dx10 cards.  it took ati over a year to catch up.


----------



## usayit (Aug 28, 2008)

hahaha... just had a memory flash of my old machine with a 3dfx monster card paired to an ATI  all in wonder (my comp was also my TV in my dorm).

Waisted good college study time on Quake 1.


----------



## Bifurcator (Aug 28, 2008)

I was a Q3a freak. I maintained a ranking of #4 world-wide for a solid month!  

Tricking is a blast in Quake III Arena!


----------



## manaheim (Aug 28, 2008)

I missed the first Quake and got started on Quake2, really.  I couldn't afford a game machine of any real power when I was in college. <sniff>

I'm sure some people will claim I'm LYING,  but I bought a PII 450 Xeon with dual Diamond Monster II SLIs.  (this is back in the time when SLI meant 2 cards = 2x the performance)  God that thing was a bear to get working right but MAN it was fast.

I used to run the original Unreal and just let the intro fly-around run for hours.  My wife thought I was insane for just staring at it, but MAN it was cool. 

That was the same time I bought my 21" Viewsonic Pro monitor for $1000... that whole machine cost me like $3000.  Craaaaaaaazy.


----------



## pez (Aug 29, 2008)

Bifurcator said:


> I was a Q3a freak. I maintained a ranking of #4 world-wide for a solid month!
> 
> Tricking is a blast in Quake III Arena!


 Ha, I played Q3 endlessly, and was in a clan (^iX^) that played Q3X. We did well on the PG ladder. Oddly, we all still chat on Team Speak and still play some games, although not competitively, lol. Mostly TF2 and CoD4 MP lately. The new FarCry2 looks promising, although the original Farcrap was a pain- as soon as the armed monkeys came out, that is.


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Oct 4, 2008)

Totally overpriced machine. Not even worth it, what are you going to do with 8 cores? I dont think photoshop can utilize 8 cores, only 4, even then, only on certain tasks...


----------



## Bifurcator (Oct 4, 2008)

pez said:


> Ha, I played Q3 endlessly, and was in a clan (^iX^) that played Q3X. We did well on the PG ladder. Oddly, we all still chat on Team Speak and still play some games, although not competitively, lol. Mostly TF2 and CoD4 MP lately. The new FarCry2 looks promising, although the original Farcrap was a pain- as soon as the armed monkeys came out, that is.



Kewl! I dunno that clan. I was in [OFX]. "Old Farts eXtreme". 

I got my title playing 1v1 insta-gib Freeze Tag tho.  Later I came to play ThreeWave and RA3 (Rocket Arena 3) mods a lot. 

Team Speak is good. I carried it over from gaming into the developer projects I was involved in. It's worked great!

What's CoD4? The mod name isn't clicking.


----------

