New PC comparison

[DoTheBIM]

These two systems have a comparable price point. Is one better than the other for running Revit? Is there anything that you'd change if you could.

[Andre Carvalho]

Well they look very similar. I personally like the one with the Quadro graphics card. However, since these are desktops, why not going with Quad cores or Xeon Windows 64 to take full advantage of the 4gb and maybe expand it to 8gb in a near future? I bet Revit will be a 64 bit application very soon.

Andre Carvalho

[DoTheBIM]

why not going with ...

One word... Money. 1500 seems to be a defacto standard for new stations around here. I guess I should have added the type of work we do is primarily residential, single and multi-family... if it makes any difference.

[iru69]

They're pretty much essentially the same computer except for the video card. After experimenting with Dell's various lines for a couple years, for the last few years we've been buying the Precision line because of the video card options and because they just feel a tad more solid (though that's probably just my imagination). But unless you jump up to the dual CPU capable T5400, it's pretty much all the same.

I'd upgrade to the E8500 (3.16GHz). I believe that's the fastest Core 2 duo currently available - for less than a $200 upgrade from where you are now - a bargain.

Personally I would not spend the extra $150 on the extended 4 year service plan - the computer will be obsolete in three years.

I don't think a 19" monitor is a good value, particularly for Revit. 22" minimum and 24" much preferred. A 19" monitor can make a good 2nd monitor.

Anyone getting a computer in the near future should be aware that Intel is set to introduce a new chip architecture, code name Nehalem, in September. Pre-release benchmarking indicates that it will be fast.

[Comach]

However, since these are desktops, why not going with Quad cores or Xeon Windows 64 to take full advantage of the 4gb and maybe expand it to 8gb in a near future? I bet Revit will be a 64 bit application very soon.

Andre Carvalho

Thats what I would advise as well - might be better at this stage to consider 4GB SDRAM in 2 modules instead of 4 single modules - this will provide an option to add another 4GB later.

[iru69]

I also should have added that we always buy our Dell's with the minimum RAM configuration and then upgrade them with Crucial 2x2GB modules.

[Elmo]

Iru69 have you got any further info on the new processors by any chance?

I agree with Iru69 on his statement about the processor. Rather go for the higher ghz as that extra bit does help.

[drdesignz]

It's too bad most people/companies can not/do not build their own computers. For 1500 bucks I could build a comparable PC, or better, and still have enough money left over for two 22" monitors.

But, to answer your question, the only real difference, as already stated, is the video card. I'd go with the Quadro. I recommend going with XP Pro x64 instead of a 32-bit OS. Also, a 22" monitor is roughly $50 to $75 more than a 19", depending where you get it, and well worth it. 24" typically costs a lot more and you could get dual 19's for less instead.

[iru69]

Here's a couple of articles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(CPU_architecture)

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=3326

Iru69 have you got any further info on the new processors by any chance?

[Elmo]

Thanks Iru69!