PC upgrade advice

[spiff]

Hi guys

I have an old pc at work (2007) that is starting to pack up. problem is for us to upgrade the pc to current pc specs(64bit) means we will have to upgrade our old 2007 32bit CAM (computer aided machining) package which is not an option at present due to the cost = R100k!

the pc has the following components:

Elitegroup Black Series P45T-A mother board

core duo processors @ 2.6Ghz each (LGA775 socket)

Nvidia GT8800 graphic card

4Gb kingston ram (new)

800w power supply

SSD Hdd (new - this improved the boot up time considerably! old optical used to take 2-3min!!)

win XP 2002 SP3 (this version of CAM package cannot run with anything higher than this)

Our IT guy installed a SSD Hdd / new 4Gb kingston ram to help. but it appears that one of the processors is not operating properly. when I dedicate processor 0 for this CAM package it will do the job, but takes extremely long to do. if I dedicate both processor's for the same task - it crashes after a while or the task gets to 99% and both processors show zero activity! also our IT guy had problems installing the new ram in the primary slots?

what I want to know is what my options are? what motherboard / chip sets are out there that will still work with win XP 2002 SP3 / microsoft dot net 2 etc for under R5k? I need to keep this pc alive for a couple of months till we can upgrade both pc & CAM package.

bear in mind I'm not a pc guru and this CAM package is processor intensive!

thanks

 

[CataclysmZA]

You can buy new hardware and stick to 32-bit Windows for compatibility purposes. XP still enjoys a lot of driver support so you're covered there. Any of the new hardware made in the last few years will work with all the software you want.

As for your current issues, the crashing could be temperature related or a cache issue but its difficult to say without actually having the hardware on hand to make sure. ECS' earlier boards also had quite a few quality control issues, especially back when Intel was first specifying that manufacturers use their chipsets (P35, P45, etc.). I'd normally suggest getting a spare P45 board to test, but this is 2013 and they're as rare as hen's teeth. I know how expensive and involved CAM packages can be, so perhaps you can upgrade the PC itself in the meantime:

Intel Core i5 3570 @ R2150
Intel DB75EN Elkhorn Creek @ R828
Transcend JetRAM DDR3-1333 @ R212
Total: R3190

You'd have to re-install everything, but seeing as you're already looking at replacing the PC this is the best way forward. The board still has certified drivers for XP directly from Intel, so there's zero compatibility issues as far as that's concerned. Drivers are 32-bit as well.

 

[spiff]

You can buy new hardware and stick to 32-bit Windows for compatibility purposes. XP still enjoys a lot of driver support so you're covered there. Any of the new hardware made in the last few years will work with all the software you want.

As for your current issues, the crashing could be temperature related or a cache issue but its difficult to say without actually having the hardware on hand to make sure. ECS' earlier boards also had quite a few quality control issues, especially back when Intel was first specifying that manufacturers use their chipsets (P35, P45, etc.). I'd normally suggest getting a spare P45 board to test, but this is 2012 and they're as rare as hen's teeth. I know how expensive and involved CAM packages can be, so perhaps you can upgrade the PC itself in the meantime:

Intel Core i5 3570 @ R2150
Intel DB75EN Elkhorn Creek @ R828
Transcend JetRAM DDR3-1333 @ R212
Total: R3190

You'd have to re-install everything, but seeing as you're already looking at replacing the PC this is the best way forward. The board still has certified drivers for XP directly from Intel, so there's zero compatibility issues as far as that's concerned. Drivers are 32-bit as well.

thanks NAG-Wesley will look at that hardware tonight.

after it crashes I switch off and unplug the mains and leave it off for a few minutes then it seems to be ok again?

 

[CataclysmZA]

I can't be sure of the reason myself because I'm not on-site. After you unplug the mains, can you trigger the crash again on demand?

 

[spiff]

I can't be sure of the reason myself because I'm not on-site. After you unplug the mains, can you trigger the crash again on demand?

no not on demand, its seems to crash over night when I leave it on to do calculations.

I've got a quote from a pc shop which I want to run by you.

kingston DDR3 2Gb 1333FSB CL9 DIM MEMORY @ R169.00

INTEL Z77 SPUR LAKE LGA1155 DDR3, RAID @ R1429.00

INTEL i7 3770 3.4Ghz 8Mb LGA1155 @ R3599.00

is this any good? that ram seems pretty damn cheap? real or fake?

thanks

 

[ponder]

when I dedicate processor 0 for this CAM package it will do the job, but takes extremely long to do. if I dedicate both processor's for the same task - it crashes after a while or the task gets to 99% and both processors show zero activity!

Maybe the application simply does not work in a multicore environment?

What make/version of CAM software are you using?

 

[CataclysmZA]

That's not a bad setup, but there's nothing to be gained for you by using the Z77 chipset. You can save more money by bumping down to B75, which is business-orientated and includes some very useful software-based options that can also help monitor and administer the PC remotely, or have it notify you should there be any issues with the hardware. I'd also drop to a Core i5 and upgrade the memory to 4GB, you never know when you may want it to do more than one thing at a time.

As Pada pointed out and something which I was going to address later, its possible that your software simply wasn't designed for multi-core environments. That's why I suggested a Core i5 instead of the i7, because I have no idea how it would handle Hyper-threading. Although Windows does the job of assigning and handling core allocations for workloads, some software can recognise if its a physical core (integer-based, which is the same way AMD's FX CPUs are seen) or a virtual one (relying on various tricks designed by Intel, the details of which are out of scope for this thread). If it works properly when assigned to a single core, its possible that it relies on per-core performance and isn't multi-threaded, which is why a faster processor with better single-thread performance (and no hyper-threading) would help here.

 

[spiff]

Maybe the application simply does not work in a multicore environment?

What make/version of CAM software are you using?

the pc was built specifically for this software by the software vendor back in 2007 and was extremely fast - able to handle 2 sessions of PM with ease. at the time it cost the company R25k.

I'm still using it, with the same software that I used back in 2007 but its slowly dying, I'm just looking for a short term fix till the company can finance the complete upgrade.

lastest 2013 Delcam 64bit Powermill = R90k

new custom built 64bit pc = R16k

 

[spiff]

That's not a bad setup, but there's nothing to be gained for you by using the Z77 chipset. You can save more money by bumping down to B75, which is business-orientated and includes some very useful software-based options that can also help monitor and administer the PC remotely, or have it notify you should there be any issues with the hardware. I'd also drop to a Core i5 and upgrade the memory to 4GB, you never know when you may want it to do more than one thing at a time.

As Pada pointed out and something which I was going to address later, its possible that your software simply wasn't designed for multi-core environments. That's why I suggested a Core i5 instead of the i7, because I have no idea how it would handle Hyper-threading. Although Windows does the job of assigning and handling core allocations for workloads, some software can recognise if its a physical core (integer-based, which is the same way AMD's FX CPUs are seen) or a virtual one (relying on various tricks designed by Intel, the details of which are out of scope for this thread). If it works properly when assigned to a single core, its possible that it relies on per-core performance and isn't multi-threaded, which is why a faster processor with better single-thread performance (and no hyper-threading) would help here.

as I mentioned above the pc was custom built by the software vendor. when the pc was new I could run 2 sessions of Delcam's PowerMill, both processor intensive and the pc handled it extremely well. I was told by the software vendor at the time that I could assign a processor to each PM session.

I just don't want to over spend when its not going to help.

Also the company stopped maintenance on the software in 2008 so the vendor's not that keen on support. The big issue is that Delcam moved over to win7 64bit and stopped supporting old winXP 32bit software back in 2010.

 

[CataclysmZA]

Also the company stopped maintenance on the software in 2008 so the vendor's not that keen on support. The big issue is that Delcam moved over to win7 64bit and stopped supporting old winXP 32bit software back in 2010.

Meh, I feel your pain, that's a terrible way to handle customer support. Well, either of the builds mentioned here would do fine in most environments for business use, honestly. I'd still prefer my route because its cheaper, but if your company wants to spend the extra on an i7 build they're welcome to - once again, I'm just not sure how the software would handle Hyper-Threading (probably wouldn't help speed it up either). As you've said, you don't want to over-spend and that's what we're trying to help you with here

 

[spiff]

Meh, I feel your pain, that's a terrible way to handle customer support. Well, either of the builds mentioned here would do fine in most environments for business use, honestly. I'd still prefer my route because its cheaper, but if your company wants to spend the extra on an i7 build they're welcome to - once again, I'm just not sure how the software would handle Hyper-Threading (probably wouldn't help speed it up either). As you've said, you don't want to over-spend and that's what we're trying to help you with here

Nag-wesley and others

thanks for all the advice. I made contacted with the software vendor and he confirmed that that version of cam package did not handel hyper threading, hence his advice at the time, to assign 1 processor to 1 session of the cam package. so you guys were on the right track about not hyper threading!

I see you not in favour of the i7? won't the faster processor help? as opposed to the i5?


thanks

 

[CataclysmZA]

I see you not in favour of the i7? won't the faster processor help? as opposed to the i5?

I'm glad you finally got something concrete out of them! So we know now about the hyper-threading, but still not what exactly is causing the crashes. Still, progress made.

The benefit of the i7 is the Hyper-threading, that's it. The four extra virtual cores work well with programs that are designed to take advantage of tech like this but in your case, you'd be getting the chip and disabling HT anyway - hence, an i5 is the best foot forward. There's also a small amount of i7 chips to choose from and they're all a little too expensive, whereas there are some real bargains on the i5 side and more SKUs to choose from to suit your budget.

Also, single-threaded programs will be sped up on a i5/i7 chip due to Turbo Boost, Intel's auto-overclocking mode that runs the CPU at a set speed when an application is using a single core. Turbo boost normally peaks at 400MHz above stock speeds, so a 3.4GHz i5 running your program in a single thread will speed that core up to 3.8GHz and will, in most cases, perform identically to a i7 chip at the same speed. A quad-core with all four cores active will be sped up 100MHz over stock, in my experience.

 

[spiff]

I'm glad you finally got something concrete out of them! So we know now about the hyper-threading, but still not what exactly is causing the crashes. Still, progress made.

The benefit of the i7 is the Hyper-threading, that's it. The four extra virtual cores work well with programs that are designed to take advantage of tech like this but in your case, you'd be getting the chip and disabling HT anyway - hence, an i5 is the best foot forward. There's also a small amount of i7 chips to choose from and they're all a little too expensive, whereas there are some real bargains on the i5 side and more SKUs to choose from to suit your budget.

Also, single-threaded programs will be sped up on a i5/i7 chip due to Turbo Boost, Intel's auto-overclocking mode that runs the CPU at a set speed when an application is using a single core. Turbo boost normally peaks at 400MHz above stock speeds, so a 3.4GHz i5 running your program in a single thread will speed that core up to 3.8GHz and will, in most cases, perform identically to a i7 chip at the same speed. A quad-core with all four cores active will be sped up 100MHz over stock, in my experience.

ok makes sense, i5 it is. strange that they still turbo boost the chip. my original 286 AT had a turbo button, not that it did much

how does the graphic card effect performance?

thanks Nag - Wesley

 

[CataclysmZA]

ok makes sense, i5 it is. strange that they still turbo boost the chip.

Helps Intel in the processor benchmarks, since many reviewers don't turn the bloody thing off (many more don't record what speeds the CPU is running at during those benchies). They then claim its "because they want to test out-of-the-box performance" when its really just letting Intel and others cheat away. A lot of companies do things of a similar nature to get some kind of lead in benchmarks and reviews, since they can no longer doctor benchmarks using driver optimisations or some other voodoo magic.

how does the graphic card effect performance?

I don't know, really. That's the same answer you'd get if you asked me what happens when you poke a camel with a stick - that's anyone's guess If you can fill out your question as to what you'd expect to be negatively affected by the GPU, then I might be able to answer more directly.

I'm not sure if your GPU will hinder anything with your program, however. If it was designed to work with it or similar GPUs, then graphical performance will remain largely the same, but the CPU performance will more or less shoot through the roof compared to your current rig.

 

[spiff]

Helps Intel in the processor benchmarks, since many reviewers don't turn the bloody thing off (many more don't record what speeds the CPU is running at during those benchies). They then claim its "because they want to test out-of-the-box performance" when its really just letting Intel and others cheat away. A lot of companies do things of a similar nature to get some kind of lead in benchmarks and reviews, since they can no longer doctor benchmarks using driver optimisations or some other voodoo magic.



I don't know, really. That's the same answer you'd get if you asked me what happens when you poke a camel with a stick - that's anyone's guess If you can fill out your question as to what you'd expect to be negatively affected by the GPU, then I might be able to answer more directly.

I'm not sure if your GPU will hinder anything with your program, however. If it was designed to work with it or similar GPUs, then graphical performance will remain largely the same, but the CPU performance will more or less shoot through the roof compared to your current rig.

Just a thought? how would the i5 perform against the i7 when we eventually upgrade to 64bit software(full hyper threading)later on this year?

 

[ponder]

Just a thought? how would the i5 perform against the i7 when we eventually upgrade to 64bit software(full hyper threading)later on this year?

Think that will be hard to answer and depends very much on how well the application is optimised for hyper-threading. Only way to know for sure is real world benchmarks with the application. Maybe ask the supplier if they have done benchmarks and to supply you with the info.

Hyper-threading in some cases can even lead to a performance decrease. In audio/video encoding it usually makes a significant difference, other functions not so much.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Intel-Core-i7-Nehalem,2057-12.html

 

[spiff]

Just a thought? how would the i5 perform against the i7 when we eventually upgrade to 64bit software(full hyper threading)later on this year?

Think that will be hard to answer and depends very much on how well the application is optimised for hyper-threading. Only way to know for sure is real world benchmarks with the application. Maybe ask the supplier if they have done benchmarks and to supply you with the info.

Hyper-threading in some cases can even lead to a performance decrease. In audio/video encoding it usually makes a significant difference, other functions not so much.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Intel-Core-i7-Nehalem,2057-12.html

Thanks ponder. I will try dangle the carrot in front of the suplier.

 

[spiff]

Ok guys the vendor says the new version of PM works well with hyper threading, but also says that the i5 is more than adequate.

now I hope to get the chip & MB this week so is there any issues when installing a new MB/chip using an existing SSD already loaded with XP?

I'm hoping its just plug and play after new drivers have been installed?

this shouldn't effect the network settings?

 

[ponder]

now I hope to get the chip & MB this week so is there any issues when installing a new MB/chip using an existing SSD already loaded with XP?

You can try but I suspect it won't boot or you will get a BSOD due to chipset & driver related issues. Your best bet is a fresh install.

 

[spiff]

Dammit! The PC also doubles as our server for the machines. Getting that set up is a mission! Will have to get someone more knowledge. :-(