# Super Computer!!??



## ihavenoname (Nov 23, 2008)

I am working on building a super computer, lol.
Pretty much just had a few opinion questions.

For motherboards which one would you get?

Tyan or Supermicro

They are the only two company't, that I could find, that support quad socket, quad-core processors. (16 processor, 132GB ram) Help me decide please, thanks.


----------



## trickson (Nov 23, 2008)

Tyan is the best I have heard of .


----------



## ihavenoname (Nov 23, 2008)

Oh... and thats the other "possible issue" the Tyan boards have quad socket, quad-core, but they don't support Intel, unless its only dual socket, quad-core


----------



## Morgoth (Nov 23, 2008)

wait for beckton or gainstown


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Nov 23, 2008)

No offense, but seeing the old hardware you're currently using and the lack of knowledge it's foolish to throw thousands of your Canadian Dollars into a modern quad socket system. You clearly don't need such processing power, if you did you would be using a more modern system already. So I'm pretty none of the uses you can find for it would even support 16 threads. 
Besides, Tigerton boards tend not to have PEG slots, I'm not even sure if any model does. Surely you can start cutting in the motherboard to solve that, but that would just be retarded. Voiding warranty on a board that expensive.

Just get i7, 8 threads, great memory bandwidth and everyone here could support you. If you have issues with your "super computer" nearly nobody here would be able to help you out.


----------



## Fastmix (Nov 23, 2008)

Besides the cable management skills that you have...why did you install the dvd/cd drives so low, if you put them on the upper slots you will gain better airflow and more space to work with.

So instead of a super computer why don't you work on a decent computer?


----------



## modder (Nov 23, 2008)

or also cluster computer (parallel computing)


----------



## ihavenoname (Nov 26, 2008)

Fastmix said:


> Besides the cable management skills that you have...why did you install the dvd/cd drives so low, if you put them on the upper slots you will gain better airflow and more space to work with.
> 
> So instead of a super computer why don't you work on a decent computer?



First of all if you read the entire page about that computer, then you would of noticed that I mentioned a few times that in the picture, the computer is in the middle of me wiring the power for the xbox, and extra fans into it. And most of the wires you see there are for the lights, that have been recently re-wired. 
Second of all, the reason I am building a faster better computer, is because I have a computer that right now is bottom of the line. Its called upgrading, at the time that this computer was new, it was known as a pretty damn good computer.


----------



## ihavenoname (Nov 26, 2008)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> No offense, but seeing the old hardware you're currently using and the lack of knowledge it's foolish to throw thousands of your Canadian Dollars into a modern quad socket system. You clearly don't need such processing power, if you did you would be using a more modern system already. So I'm pretty none of the uses you can find for it would even support 16 threads.
> Besides, Tigerton boards tend not to have PEG slots, I'm not even sure if any model does. Surely you can start cutting in the motherboard to solve that, but that would just be retarded. Voiding warranty on a board that expensive.
> 
> Just get i7, 8 threads, great memory bandwidth and everyone here could support you. If you have issues with your "super computer" nearly nobody here would be able to help you out.



No offense Dan, but mind your own damn business, the reason I posted this was to get a yes or no answer from everyone, (Kinda like what Trickson there did.) not for some guy to give me his input, and opinion on what "I" choose to do with my "Canadian" money. (What does that even mean by the way.) Ya, it is un-necessary for me to use that much processing power but hey, I want to, and I will. The reason I don't already have a nicer system, is because the one I have runs fine, but it crashes, and freezes because i'm running huge programs like AutoCAD 2009, World of Warcraft, crysis, and tons of other home designing programs. I also like to have music running in the background, talk on msn, download huge files, and cruise the internet at the same time. Not to mention, that I am now running four monitors, off of two computers, and a laptop through a network. So don't tell me that I don't "need" that much power. I won't have a lot of "issues" with my "super-computer" cause I built it myself, and I know what i'm doing.  If I do, then I will be sure to ask someone that knows how a "server" works, not a “PC”. This computer will be extremely fast today, tomorrow, and for a very long time, that means I won't have to upgrade it. And I don't understand what you mean by "Lack of knowledge" I have been building, and diagnosing computers all my life. I own my own computer company, and have designed multiple websites.  Just because somebody has made 6,000 posts on a website, and is a senor moderator pretty much just proves that you know how to use a little thing called "Google", and that you have obviously dedicated too much time to making people think that you are smart.  So thank you soo much for your input, and congrats on reaching number 6000.


----------



## rizla1 (Nov 26, 2008)

ooooooooooooohhhh , na  but you should listen to that well some of it  get the cheapest i7 oc it 12 gb ram and the latest quadro  gpu  the are ment for autocad . or if you really want go dual soket intel i7 http://www.techradar.com/news/compu...socket-nehalem-ep-platform-benchmarked-487131 this  set up  suports 24 gb  of ram ,dont realy now how it works it says  server , so would this work with  vist/xp 64 bit  and quadro gpu and if you play games alot quadro arent ment for games so mite not dop as good as  280 gtx or watever  . but this is as much of a supercomputer you could ever need , 16 treads ,24gb ddr3 ram new quardo gpu's and a tb or t2 of hdd's in raid 0.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 26, 2008)

noname: it doesnt matter how 'intensive' your programs are, the fact that your PC crashes means that you dont know as much as you're claiming. a stable system is a stable system, they might chug/slow down under heavy load but if it crashes, that means something is wrong.

Try having a look at dans hardware a little more closely and realise that he has an octo core system here - he's the one who's good side you want to be on, because this is his field of expertise.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Nov 26, 2008)

I will agree with Dan here - there is no need for that much processing power. Get the new i7 and a 280. That will sort you out for a good few years.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Nov 26, 2008)

ihavenoname said:


> No offense Dan, but mind your own damn business, the reason I posted this was to get a yes or no answer from everyone, (Kinda like what Trickson there did.) not for some guy to give me his input, and opinion on what "I" choose to do with my "Canadian" money. (What does that even mean by the way.) Ya, it is un-necessary for me to use that much processing power but hey, I want to, and I will. The reason I don't already have a nicer system, is because the one I have runs fine, but it crashes, and freezes because i'm running huge programs like AutoCAD 2009, World of Warcraft, crysis, and tons of other home designing programs. I also like to have music running in the background, talk on msn, download huge files, and cruise the internet at the same time. Not to mention, that I am now running four monitors, off of two computers, and a laptop through a network. So don't tell me that I don't "need" that much power. I won't have a lot of "issues" with my "super-computer" cause I built it myself, and I know what i'm doing.  If I do, then I will be sure to ask someone that knows how a "server" works, not a “PC”. This computer will be extremely fast today, tomorrow, and for a very long time, that means I won't have to upgrade it. And I don't understand what you mean by "Lack of knowledge" I have been building, and diagnosing computers all my life. I own my own computer company, and have designed multiple websites.  Just because somebody has made 6,000 posts on a website, and is a senor moderator pretty much just proves that you know how to use a little thing called "Google", and that you have obviously dedicated too much time to making people think that you are smart.  So thank you soo much for your input, and congrats on reaching number 6000.




If you believe my opinion is worthless because I'm just some guy on a forum, don't ask for advice on a forum. I'm just trying to prevent you from wasting a lot of money. That being said, you're of course free to do so. 
Why wait several years to throw thousands of Dollars at something like this when you can upgrade to the latest every year and be off cheaper?

Though like I said, finding a quad socket board with PEG slots that supports 128GB of RAM will be a bitch, I don't know of any. They might not exist. This will leave you with crappy graphics cards to do your AutoCAD work. Any kid with his new i7 and gtx260 that daddy bought for him will get better performance than you do, in nearly every situation, not just CAD. Surely there are some x8 Quadro's, but they're not exactly the high end.
Then again, since you claim to be running Crysis on a Radeon 9600 you must not mind.


----------



## kyle2020 (Nov 26, 2008)

Im sure that a "simple" i7 setup with a 4870X2 or similar graphics power would tide you over nicely, save you money and quite a few headaches.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 26, 2008)

ihavenoname said:


> No offense Dan, but mind your own damn business, the reason I posted this was to get a yes or no answer from everyone, (Kinda like what Trickson there did.) not for some guy to give me his input, and opinion on what "I" choose to do with my "Canadian" money.
> 
> ...


Some things need to be understood first...
1) Multi-CPU platforms run games (World of Warcraft/Crysis) like shit because of the long delays for memory to respond (ECC registered).
2) The other tasks you listed can be handled very well by a modest dual-core processor.
3) "Super-computers" are enterprise cluster systems involving at least hundreds of teraflops in performance.  What you're talking about is merely server-class hardware.
4) Computers are only "fast" as long as their work load does not change.
5) I have a two-way server, like Dan, and yes, the hardware does tend to be far more picky than desktop parts.  For example, boot times are much longer, there's more quirks like VGA support being next to non-existent, and server-class operating systems are dense.  In design, they are similar but in function, they are a completely different ball game.

What you are talking about (four-way server) will easily cost in excess of $10,000 and probably knock on the $20,000 door.  Are you open to spending that much?  A two-way server usually costs around $5000 when all said and done.

I went with Tyan because it had the features I required for the price I was looking for.  They tend to have more clout but seeing as I never used Supermicro, I really can't make any recommendation on which is better.  Tyan is good in most regards but I also see a lot of places they could improve (customer service, BIOS updates, etc.).


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Nov 26, 2008)

ECC and/or registered doesn't make games run like crap. Though memory bandwidth is a lot lower, so it "can" make a difference. Mostly in benchmarks though. And boottimes aren't that much of an issue either with most boards. I currently have three 771 boards and a 479 board in service, none of them have issues with boot times. They do all lack memory bandwidth. AMD is more efficient here, though Nehalem DP will probably change this.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 26, 2008)

Bandwidth isn't the problem with games, it's latency.  One-way systems have much lower latency than two- and four-way systems.  The more ways the system has, the more cumulative bandwidth the system has.  This is especially true for Opterons with effectively one FSB per memory cache.  What's been holding Intel back so far is by keeping to a single FSB.  They alleviated the saturation of the FSB through FB-DIMMs which allowed them to finally expand to four-way.  But, since QuickPath reinvents the FSB like HyperTransport did, they are also adding far more bandwidth with subsequent processors.  The common theme, however, is still comparatively high latency to their simpler brethren.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Nov 26, 2008)

i5000 en 5400 have a FSB per socket. And i875 based boards for example never had this issue. FB-DIMM's simply aren't that great for desktop/workstation use. The thing that gives the Opterons their bandwidth is NUMA.


----------



## Analog_Manner (Nov 26, 2008)

ihavenoname said:


> i'm running huge programs like AutoCAD 2009, World of Warcraft, crysis, and tons of other home designing programs. I also like to have music running in the background, talk on msn, download huge files, and cruise the internet at the same time. Not to mention, that I am now running four monitors, off of two computers, and a laptop through a network.



Wow.  Well you can do all of the things your are doing now twice over with a core 2 duo, never mind core i7 .  The only cause for a machine like that would be for Solidworks (or Pro Engineer, I know you people are around).  And even then it's only if your are plopping textures on all of your models or doing renders.  I have a few machines running AutoCAD and Bentley, and they only have Pentium D's & 3gb of RAM.  They seem to function fine, even with these silly 800mb .dwg files that I have to work with.  If you have a problem running CAD, then go pick up an Nvidia Quadro.  Worth Every penny, trust me.  You can even get two, and SLI them, and then run four monitors off of your kickass workstation.  Going that far multi-threaded doesn't seem like your ball of clay to be honest, you are thinking too big.


----------



## rizla1 (Nov 26, 2008)

any ,wat u should do is get  wat ever cpu/cpu's get a quadro  and a shit load of ram ,and youll be set autocad  takes advantage of quadro cards  i cant explain exacly but  the can handle mazive  cad models ,also skull trail would be a good option , alothogjh wat am sujestin is probably  is way off from wat you want .


----------



## stasdm (Nov 26, 2008)

ihavenoname said:


> quad socket, quad-core processors



Exellent for SQL server or some specially written software. Otherwise waste of money.


----------



## ihavenoname (Nov 26, 2008)

Mussels said:


> noname: it doesnt matter how 'intensive' your programs are, the fact that your PC crashes means that you dont know as much as you're claiming. a stable system is a stable system, they might chug/slow down under heavy load but if it crashes, that means something is wrong.
> 
> Try having a look at dans hardware a little more closely and realise that he has an octo core system here - he's the one who's good side you want to be on, because this is his field of expertise.



The computer "was" crashing before, the problem was actually fixed. I guess that it actually wasn't "crashes" just turning off. The reason for that was because the processor was getting put though too much work, and overheating.


----------



## Morgoth (Nov 26, 2008)

a core i7 does the job to


----------



## B1gg3stN00b (Nov 26, 2008)

Just build a bunch of smaller, weaker, single processor servers and use something like Condor to use the computing power of all 4 at once to accomplish your tasks.

Then if one fails you can still do the same processes, just slower.


----------



## Solaris17 (Nov 26, 2008)

tyan is deff the way to go...and dont get quatros you can pull off cards from the 9800 series they will do good graphics work


----------



## stasdm (Nov 26, 2008)

ihavenoname said:


> i'm running huge programs like AutoCAD 2009, World of Warcraft, crysis, and tons of other home designing programs.



Have a look at workstation layout at My dream computer, though I'd wait a bit for dual-processor system (seem to come out in 2-3 months). The chipset will be the same (or nearly the same). You would not need more than 8 cores (really most Windows software cannot use even two).

Two-core system will also allow bigger (ECC!) memory per processor and will allow creating ram-drive (quite helpful for ACAD) - 4GB DDR3 ECC already exist.


----------



## ihavenoname (Nov 26, 2008)

http://www.tyan.com/product_board_detail.aspx?pid=631

this motherboard, but I will have to use AMD, I don't see how that would not work.


----------



## ihavenoname (Nov 26, 2008)

It supports (4) 8300 series AMD Opteron™ 45nm Quad-core Processors


----------



## Solaris17 (Nov 26, 2008)

ihavenoname said:


> http://www.tyan.com/product_board_detail.aspx?pid=631
> 
> this motherboard, but I will have to use AMD, I don't see how that would not work.



how would it not work? just get some AMD procs


----------



## ihavenoname (Nov 26, 2008)

Well everyone else on the thread was saying it was a stupid idea, lol. and that it wouldn't work.


----------



## Solaris17 (Nov 26, 2008)

ihavenoname said:


> Well everyone else on the thread was saying it was a stupid idea, lol. and that it wouldn't work.



well people give their opinions but you dont need to listen everyone will tell you intel everyone will tell you i7 or core2 but if i read your post right you want this right? so go for it w/e its your system. people wanted my to get 4870X2's but i didnt listen i like nvidia atm


----------



## Morgoth (Nov 26, 2008)

yes it does work, but its a waste of money


----------



## ihavenoname (Nov 26, 2008)

How long do you think before a dual socket i7 board comes out?


----------



## Solaris17 (Nov 26, 2008)

Morgoth said:


> yes it does work, but its a waste of money



im sorry he asked tyan or supermicro not what you thought of his spending habits go play with your i7 before you start to troll.

here is a list of procs that will work with that board

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010340727%2050001028%201652741693&bop=And&Order=PRICE

and the ram

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010170541%201052121731%201052408745&name=DDR2%20667%20%28PC2%205300%29


----------



## stasdm (Nov 26, 2008)

ihavenoname said:


> How long do you think before a dual socket i7 board comes out?



Intel roadmap says 1st quarter 2009


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 26, 2008)

That particular board might not be for sale yet.  I can't find any prices on it.  They all just say that it is coming out Q1 2009.  I suspect it would cost well over $1000 USD and it doesn't look like an ATX Extended board either... too tall.  It is probably a CEB something or other board.  As such, I'm not aware of any cases that can fit it...


----------



## Solaris17 (Nov 26, 2008)

FordGT90Concept said:


> That particular board might not be for sale yet.  I can't find any prices on it.  They all just say that it is coming out Q1 2009.  I suspect it would cost well over $1000 USD and it doesn't look like an ATX Extended board either... too tall.  It is probably a CEB something or other board.  As such, I'm not aware of any cases that can fit it...



maybe a super tower?


----------



## Morgoth (Nov 26, 2008)

some where in 2009 

2009 q 1 Nehalem-EP (Gainestown) 4 (8) cores 	LGA-1366

2009 q3/q4 Nehalem-EX (Beckton) 	MP server 	8 (16) coresLGA-1567


----------



## ihavenoname (Nov 26, 2008)

I could probably make it work in mine, its pretty big already. I could just put the power supply outside.


----------



## Solaris17 (Nov 26, 2008)

ihavenoname said:


> I could probably make it work in mine, its pretty big already. I could just put the power supply outside.



just make sure you put some type of feet on it.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 26, 2008)

Solaris17 said:


> here is a list of procs that will work with that board
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010340727%2050001028%201652741693&bop=And&Order=PRICE


I'm pretty sure only 8-way Opteron processors will work (8### series).


----------



## ihavenoname (Nov 26, 2008)

Well thanks alot guys for some actual help, and positive feedback.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 26, 2008)

I should bring this up now because it could have a major impact on your decision.  "Workstation" operating systems (Windows XP/Windows Vista) are limited to two sockets.  If you want more than two sockets, you'll have to get Windows Server 2003 (Standard Edition or better) or Windows Server 2008 (any edition).

Except Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition, Windows Server *does not have 3D graphic support*.  That is, you can't even install a FireGL or Quadro (it'll be running off of default Microsoft display drivers).  Because AutoCAD is a priority for you, bigger is not better.

If you're thinking Linux or some other OS then don't mind me.


Windows Server Standard usually goes for around $700 USD w/ 5 CAL packaged as OEM.  Vista/XP obviously go for much less.


----------



## rangerone766 (Nov 26, 2008)

i just want to give my opinion on this subject.

first off, i have no experience with server or workstation hardware. all i've ever dealt with are desktops and laptops.

with my desktop, i've done all the things you plan to do with your supercomputer, on a lowly q6600. never had it slow down, or even max all 4 cores at 100% usage.

if you just want to spend money on the best/fastest. build normal with desktop hardware. just buy the top of the line every thing. get 3 gtx280x2's(if ever released) an extreme edition cpu, the best ram and motherboard.

unless you have an actual need for server/industry class hardware your just wasting money to grow a bigger e-penis. i can almost guarantee a top end core i7 rig would pwn it in any game or normal usage.

i dont want to rant or belittle you, you've already gotten enough of that. but i think what your asking for is just not realistic.


----------



## kyle2020 (Nov 26, 2008)

^ +1 on that.


----------



## B1gg3stN00b (Nov 26, 2008)

I use this for my AutoCAD needs, very powerful:


----------



## PVTCaboose1337 (Nov 26, 2008)

I'm gonna give my input here:

I always have music running, along with Firefox, and files constantly being downloaded while playing L4D.  My poor little AMD Athlon 3800+ single core (OC'd to 2.7ghz) runs all those things AT ONCE just fine.  How would you need anymore power than that?  4 monitors is different, but I do have 2 running, and my single core processor handles all the things at one adequately.  If you got a quad core you would be MORE THAN HAPPY.  Don't waste money on a "super computer" that will be super until 1 month later and octal core processors are released or some shit like that.  Don't fail it, just go i7 like all the wise people above have said.  (mainly dan).


----------



## 3870x2 (Nov 26, 2008)

We all respect danthebanjoman not because he is the Señor Moderator, but because he is knowledgeable.  You would do well to listen to what he has to say no matter how blunt.  I guarantee you, with less cost, the i7 965 will outperform any dream you have of running a "supercomputer".
However if you are serious, and i indeed have no idea what im talking about, please feel free to go to http://www.nvidia.com/tesla.
EDIT: BTW welcome to TPU. we are of course glad to have you.


----------



## Morgoth (Nov 26, 2008)

B1gg3stN00b said:


> I use this for my AutoCAD needs, very powerful:



omg how mutch did that cost?


----------



## 3870x2 (Nov 26, 2008)

Morgoth said:


> omg how mutch did that cost?



$4 at petsmart.
Then another $250 for the rotary-to-electric power converter.
produces 1 milliwatt per hour, very efficient.


----------



## Darren (Nov 26, 2008)

Sorry, I agree with DanTheBanjoman, 



ihavenoname said:


> No offense Dan, but mind your own damn business, the reason I posted this was to get a yes or no answer from everyone, (Kinda like what Trickson there did.) not for some guy to give me his input, and opinion on what "I" choose to do with my "Canadian" money..



Well, when you ask a forum for advice it automatically becomes their business, you cannot ask for other peoples opinions and not expect them to express it.



ihavenoname said:


> The reason I don't already have a nicer system, is because the one I have runs fine, but it crashes, and freezes because i'm running huge programs like AutoCAD 2009, World of Warcraft, crysis, and tons of other home designing programs.



If your current system crashes then evidentlly it doesn't run fine.



ihavenoname said:


> i'm running huge programs like AutoCAD 2009, World of Warcraft, crysis, and tons of other home designing programs. I also like to have music running in the background, talk on msn, download huge files, and cruise the internet at the same time.



Nothing special. My system is no super computer plays high end games too, COD: World at war at 50-70 FPS @ 1440x900 4x AA 16 AF, GRID 40-65 FPS @1400x900 4x AA, etc. I oh I play with music in the background, Skype, MSN, antivirus etc as well. Your list of games/software nothing special, any cheap dual-core ranging from £30-70 would handle those games and next year's games with little effort. I'm not sure about Auto CAD's requirement I'm sure a cheap Quad Q6600 or Phenom 9950 for £130-150 would be overkill for CAD, coupled with 8  GBs of PC6400 DDR2 ram for £100 and you're sorted. My point is all the hardware which I mentioned is cheap and is over kill for both high end gaming and CAD work. Asking for a server type specification for doing "regular tasks" isn't wise and because of the nature of the hardware you're asking your going to be stuck with an operating system which may not support the games you intend on playing the applications you run in the background, lack of driver support might make those crashes you're getting on your current rig look like paradise.




ihavenoname said:


> This computer will be extremely fast today, tomorrow, and for a very long time, that means I won't have to upgrade it.



It doesn't work like that. Technology is never stationary, just because you build a server it doesn't mean it will have any longevity in comparison to a regular desktop, especially if you are running regular applications. Like a few people have said already there is more chance of the Intel's i7 or amd's Phenom II's performing just as well, maybe better than your server in normal every day applications and games.



ihavenoname said:


> Just because somebody has made 6,000 posts on a website, and is a senor moderator pretty much just proves that you know how to use a little thing called "Google".



He probably has 6,000 posts because he spends a lot of time helping people like you who ask for advice but do not take it. Actually why don't you take your own advice and use "Google".


----------



## Dia01 (Nov 26, 2008)

You've gotten a bit of a hammering mate, but I agree go the Intel i7 and a buy some decent hardware to go with.  Any which way though, good luck.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Nov 26, 2008)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I should bring this up now because it could have a major impact on your decision.  "Workstation" operating systems (Windows XP/Windows Vista) are limited to two sockets.  If you want more than two sockets, you'll have to get Windows Server 2003 (Standard Edition or better) or Windows Server 2008 (any edition).
> 
> Except Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition, Windows Server *does not have 3D graphic support*.  That is, you can't even install a FireGL or Quadro (it'll be running off of default Microsoft display drivers).  Because AutoCAD is a priority for you, bigger is not better.
> 
> ...



Windows server has no limitation on 3D acceleration. That goes for 2003 and 2008. You can install basically anything tou can install on XP/Vista. On the other hand, if you want a quad socket system, XP/Vista won't use more than two.

I probably shouldn't be saying this, but you can "try out" 2008 for 8 months before you need to reinstall. This is basically enough to use it for free. MS licensing isn't that bad 

Either way, apart from a few programs that specifically check for your Windows version (mainly firewalls, antivirus and the likes) there is no software limit to what you can run.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 27, 2008)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Windows server has no limitation on 3D acceleration.


NVIDIA (GeForce) and AMD (Fire and Radeon) disagrees.  Windows Server 2003 (non-x64 Edition) and Windows Server 2008 drivers are available for Quadro cards only.  So, you go with quad-socket, Quadro is about your only option for graphics cards.


Personally, I'd get Windows Vista x64 on a dual-socket system and call it good.  It keeps your options open for video cards.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Nov 27, 2008)

FordGT90Concept said:


> NVIDIA (GeForce) and AMD (Fire and Radeon) disagrees.  Windows Server 2003 (non-x64 Edition) and Windows Server 2008 drivers are available for Quadro cards only.  So, you go with quad-socket, Quadro is about your only option for graphics cards.
> 
> 
> Personally, I'd get Windows Vista x64 on a dual-socket system and call it good.  It keeps your options open for video cards.



Server 2003 uses the same drivers as XP and 2000. 2008 uses the same drivers as Vista. I run 2008 at home with my 8800, I've used 2003 for years on various systems and various cards, never had issues with any drivers.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 27, 2008)

Then consider yourself lucky.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Nov 27, 2008)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Then consider yourself lucky.



It's not a matter of luck, it's how it works.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 27, 2008)

For you, maybe.  NVIDIA has explicitly stated to me that only Server 2003 x64 Edition has GeForce drivers because it is the only Server OS that has 3D Acceleration support (probably preserved from the merger of XP x64 and Server 2003).  If you got legacy drivers to work with it, more power to you.  Just don't expect NVIDIA to lift a finger to help.  So...buyer beware on Server.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Nov 27, 2008)

FordGT90Concept said:


> For you, maybe.  NVIDIA has explicitly stated to me that only Server 2003 x64 Edition has GeForce drivers because it is the only Server OS that has 3D Acceleration support (probably preserved from the merger of XP x64 and Server 2003).  If you got legacy drivers to work with it, more power to you.  Just don't expect NVIDIA to lift a finger to help.  So...buyer beware on Server.



All server editions have full 3D acceleration support, I'm not sure where you're getting your information from. You don't require any legacy or modified drivers, any version you download from nvidia.com or amd.com work fine.
Any feature found in XP/Vista can be enabled in the server editions, including Aero, superfetch, happy sidebars, themes, etc. They are essentially the same OS's.


----------



## _jM (Nov 27, 2008)

lol@this thread 

All i can say bro, is its your dream..so follow it. If you need advice then we(TPU) will try our best to help.

 But i also agree with dan on the i7's, or if you want a server based mobo and can wait till early 2009 go with the dual i7 boards. Im sure that will be more than enough for ya. Good Luck


----------



## Darren (Nov 27, 2008)

FordGT90Concept said:


> NVIDIA (GeForce) and AMD (Fire and Radeon) disagrees.  Windows Server 2003 (non-x64 Edition) and Windows Server 2008 drivers are available for Quadro cards only.  So, you go with quad-socket, Quadro is about your only option for graphics cards.
> 
> 
> Personally, I'd get Windows Vista x64 on a dual-socket system and call it good.  It keeps your options open for video cards.



I've got two friends using Server 2008, one is using an ATI 4850 and the other is using an ATI 3850.

PS. 

lol. I think the threadstarter has realised how expensive this upgade may be, I dont think he is going to return lol


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 27, 2008)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> I'm not sure where you're getting your information from.


NVIDIA.  I phoned them up some time ago inquiring about the GeForce 8500 GT and why they listed drivers exclusively for Server 2003 x64 Edition and that was her answer: Server 2003 does not have 3D acceleration support so they don't publish drivers for it.

Here's a KB Article they wrote on it:


> Microsoft Windows Server 2003 is positioned as an enterprise server operating system.  Because of this, Microsoft has disabled hardware 3d acceleration from the operating system.  To re-enable this, go into your Display Properties -> click on the Settings tab -> click on the Advanced button -> click on the Troubleshoot tab -> move the slider all the way to "Full" -> click on the OK button to confirm this change.
> 
> 
> 
> If you would like to run multimedia applications, it is recommended that you install Windows XP Professional or Home instead of Windows Server 2003. As an alternative you can use a dual boot configuration so that you can have one operating system for your multimedia applications entirely separate from Microsoft Windows Server 2003.  Due to this positioning  NVIDIA *does not support accelerated graphics*  in Windows Server 2003.



I do believe this stance changed in Server 2008 but only for Quadro cards.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 27, 2008)

FordGT90Concept said:


> NVIDIA.  I phoned them up some time ago inquiring about the GeForce 8500 GT and why they listed drivers exclusively for Server 2003 x64 Edition and that was her answer: Server 2003 does not have 3D acceleration support so they don't publish drivers for it.
> 
> Here's a KB Article they wrote on it:
> 
> ...



the server OS's disable hardware acceleration by default. you can just go into DXdiag and turn it on, if its disabled.

In this case, nvidia is definately wrong... lots of people here on TPU are gaming on these OS's, i hardly think they'd make it up.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Nov 27, 2008)

FordGT90Concept said:


> NVIDIA.  I phoned them up some time ago inquiring about the GeForce 8500 GT and why they listed drivers exclusively for Server 2003 x64 Edition and that was her answer: Server 2003 does not have 3D acceleration support so they don't publish drivers for it.
> 
> Here's a KB Article they wrote on it:
> 
> ...



Then the kind lady was wrong or just gave you an answer to get rid of you. The fact that NV doesn't list it as supported doesn't change anything to the fact that Microsoft in no way limits the way you use their server OS's. If you really don't want to take my word for it download a trial of any edition and install it. 

Also, if you just read the linky you gave yourself you'd see that it's just disabled by default, it's a setting. You can enable it, it's not hidden or anything.


----------



## btarunr (Nov 27, 2008)

ihavenoname said:


> i'm running huge programs like AutoCAD 2009, World of Warcraft, crysis, and tons of other home designing programs. I also like to have music running in the background, talk on msn, download huge files, and cruise the internet at the same time. Not to mention, that I am now running four monitors, off of two computers, and a laptop through a network.



IMHO, you really don't need a quad-socket machine for that. Realistically my lowly Phenom would be comfortable with all of those, unless you're talking about WoW, Crysis, CAD and misc. all running at the same time. Even then an i7 sounds sufficient.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 27, 2008)

I will repeat:
"NVIDIA does not support accelerated graphics in Windows Server 2003."

If you work around it by installing other drivers, that's your own ordeal.  The statement above still stands.  And no, she wasn't trying to get rid of me.  Everything NVIDIA has published on the subject collaborates her story.  If you want to install an NVIDIA graphics card on Windows Server 2003 and NVIDIA support it, you must get Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition.  Call them up yourself if you wish.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 27, 2008)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I will repeat:
> "NVIDIA does not support accelerated graphics in Windows Server 2003."
> 
> If you work around it by installing other drivers, that's your own ordeal.  The statement above still stands.  And no, she wasn't trying to get rid of me.  Everything NVIDIA has published on the subject collaborates her story.  If you want to install an NVIDIA graphics card on Windows Server 2003 and NVIDIA support it, you must get Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition.  Call them up yourself if you wish.



or, you can just enable it in DXdiag and install a driver anyway... we're telling you that while they dont 'support' it, it works just damned fine. i even did it once, a year or two ago.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Nov 27, 2008)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I will repeat:
> "NVIDIA does not support accelerated graphics in Windows Server 2003."
> 
> If you work around it by installing other drivers, that's your own ordeal.  The statement above still stands.  And no, she wasn't trying to get rid of me.  Everything NVIDIA has published on the subject collaborates her story.  If you want to install an NVIDIA graphics card on Windows Server 2003 and NVIDIA support it, you must get Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition.  Call them up yourself if you wish.



The fact that Nvidia won't support it doesn't mean you "work around" something or that it doesn't work. It works fine, you double click the driver package (downloaded from nvidia.com), click next a few times and you're done. Nvidia not supporting it means they can tell you to piss off when you have problems, their supportdesk isn't trained with Windows servers. It has nothing to do with it working or not.
In fact, NV is nice enough to write the KB article you linked to, which explains how to enable it. So they basically say "it works, but don't bug us about it".

Besides, you were claiming the other way around, Windows servers not supporting 3D graphics. Which they clearly do.


----------



## blobster21 (Nov 27, 2008)

+1 Dan

nvidia position on 2003 driver support is clearly dumb, since 2003 server and xp are one and the same architecture


----------



## CDdude55 (Nov 27, 2008)

If your that rich, a Core i7 965 and maybe OC it to a good speed, with a 4870 X2(or maybe 2), that should be well for what you need to do.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 27, 2008)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> Besides, you were claiming the other way around, Windows servers not supporting 3D graphics. Which they clearly do.


Not out of the box.  You have to enable it.  Microsoft doesn't want you putting 3D graphics cards in there and graphic card manufacturers don't want you to bug them about it.  I said they don't support it and they don't support it.  You can do it otherwise should you choose to but don't expect anything from them.  That includes stable drivers.  The only reason why XP/Vista drivers work is because their architecture is similar, as stated.  Just because they work doesn't mean they support it because they don't.  If the next release of drivers, for instance, doesn't work on Server 2003, they won't care.  Why should they?  They don't support it.

I'm done with that topic.


----------



## DrPepper (Nov 27, 2008)

if he's won the lottery or money isn't a problem, I personally would do the same thing just to learn about it if I had the money. Anyway if your properly serious why not a dual socket board with a couple xeons or core 2's vista ultimate and a couple of 4870X2's although there would be crossfire issues.


----------



## Disparia (Nov 27, 2008)

Heh, I think we get it by now 

Now if only I could get a rebate from nVidia or ATI as I've never used their support (and can't if I use an unsupported OS).


----------



## fryup (Nov 27, 2008)

btarunr said:


> IMHO, you really don't need a quad-socket machine for that. Realistically my lowly Phenom would be comfortable with all of those, unless you're talking about WoW, Crysis, CAD and misc. all running at the same time. Even then an i7 sounds sufficient.



Have to strongly agree with that, not to put a dampener on your plan, if you really want to build this super computer then your obviously more than free to so. however i run all those programs as well, imo autocad is not a huge program( a pretty simple one actually), i also run 3ds max, photshop,illustrator and video editing and my system copes with it all without a problem. 
i'd have thought you could build an absolutley badass comp with all the latest cpu/ram/mobo/ duel gpu etc that could easily cope with all your programs for a couple of grand £.
but as i said dont take this as criticism for your plan, just that i dont know how your ever gonna be using even half of its power and by the time programs come out that would use it, the hardware needed for running it will be far more affordable.


----------

