Proofreading my computer design and building a server rack station.

[Lizzie_Jo_Computers_11]

To anyone just joining in, ignore this first post as it is basically irrelevant now. I would skip to around page 8-9 upwards...


I am trying to build a high-end computer system for my business. I've selected all of the components I would like to use and checked them all for compatibility, and everything seems to be in working order (except for the case, which I'll explain afterward), but I would like another set of eyes to go over it.

I'll mainly be using the computer for music/video production, and animation products. I'll be running professional programs like Adobe Premiere/Flash/After Effects, so I needed a very high end computer set up.

I would also like anyone else's opinions on what could be better alternative components, or would further the performance of what I would like to do if you see anything lacking in the components I have chosen.

Here is my computer check list.

Motherboard - MSI X99A GODLIKE GAMING CARBON
Graphics card - EVGA GeForce GTX 1080
Processor - Intel core i7 6850k
RAM - Kingston Technology 64GB RAM kit 2133mhz DIMM drx4
SSD x1 - Intel Single Pack 400GB 750 Series Solid State Drive PCIE Full Height 3.0 20NM MLC 3.5"
HDD x4 - WD Black 2TB Performance Desktop Hard Disk Drive - 7200 RPM SATA 6 Gb/s 64MB Cache 3.5 Inch
Network Card - Intel PRO/1000 Pt Dual Port Server Adapter
Cooling fans x? - Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus - CPU Cooler with 4 Direct Contact Heat Pipes
Power Supply - EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G2, 80+ GOLD 1000W
Blu-ray/DVD drive - ASUS External 12X Blu-Ray Burner with USB 3.0

Everything is supposed to be included in that list (other than the case), so if anything is missing that this computer won't work without, please let me know.

As for the case. At first I was looking into the Thermaltake tower 900 E-ATX, which I believe would house this build appropriately. However, I started looking into server racks instead, because they're much bigger than normal towers, and they can be used to house additional equipment as well. I would like to house external 5.1 receivers for stereo equipment, Blu-ray/DVD drives, DACs, and preamps, possibly even additional computers (or multiple of this build for instance) sometime in the future.

The main problem with this is that I know little about server racks and the like, so I could use some additional help choosing the right equipment.

The research I've been doing for the last four hours or so has led me to the knowledge of needing additional pieces to assemble such a system. Pieces like shelves, rails and screws, and something like this... https://www.amazon.com/Rosewill-Server-Chassis-Rackmount-Metal/dp/B0056OUTBK?th=1 ... for the actual building of the computer inside of it, right? Or could I do it some other way I'm not understanding?

I'm alright with buying just the frame/skeleton of the server rack, without the panels and the doors if necessary. I just need the actual server rack to be compatible with an E-ATX sized build, and to be compatible with the additional pieces, like the shelves and rails.

So I would really appreciate a simplistic walkthrough of how to build a server rack for the following purposes, along with possible suggestions for every piece that would be needed to build it?

-the above computer build.
-a 5.1 receiver for a speaker system.
-External Blu-ray/DVD drives.
-DACs and Preamps.
-Possibly future duplicates of the above computer build.

I'm looking to buy a 42U server rack as well.

I am continuing to research this myself as I wait for replies so I can better understand what I'm doing and the possible suggestions from my fellow users.

Please do not be concerned about price, my budget is rather flexible for this project right now. I would like to attempt to keep this server rack case under $600, as I'm already looking at $4000 at the least, but if it's not possible, then it's just not possible, and I can break that budget.

Anybody who can assist me as I work on this project, I would very greatly appreciate it. I understand the computer builds and how to put one together, but the server rack thing is really confusing to me, and good information is difficult for me to find on the internet for some reason, so that's the main thing I need assistance with.

Again, thank you to everybody who is willing to help me build this workstation. I'm hoping to have it finished by the spring. ;- )

[PTR_1275]

Chenbro is a good brand for rackmount of cases. They do several (quite a lot actually) different models to suit what you need. I have one of their 4RU cases and it's great. You will need to put the other items in the rack separately, whether by their own rackmount ears if they are rackmountable, or by fitting shelves and just putting the amplifiers etc... on their own shelf.

[radar_macgyver]

Would suggest a Xeon CPU and motherboard, and ECC memory. With 64 GB memory you're more likely to get random bit flips that could potentially lead to crashes. Supermicro makes some very good Xeon boards and barebones. Their barebones would solve the server rack compatibility issue.

I'm confused why you'd need rack mounting for a workstation.

[slicendice]

I'm confused why you'd need rack mounting for a workstation.

The reasons are clearly stated in the first post. :-)

8TB of storage sound as a lot, but over time that will run out, and some stuff need to be archived. This is a good time to add a rack mounted storage server into the build.

If you want a really high-end computer for professional music/video editing then I'd go for a Xeon/Quadro build. Those components are designed to work well with professional software from Adobe and other big companies. But the price jumps up drastically. If that is a too big jump then the components you chose are just fine.

If you are doing some 32-64 channel music with a lot of effects, then a CPU with more cores will perform a lot better when playing tracks in real time. The overall experience will be much better. For final music rendering purposes any number of cores will be just fine. Takes just longer time to get the final tunes spit out to the HDD.

Building everything in to a rack tower is a great idea, because you get all the cabling hidden inside the rack. As long as you make sure it has proper ventilation, or you blow up all your devices eventually. Stick the hottest stuff on top and coolest on bottom.

[rstofer]

The other day, I googled for a dual Xeon build and came up with this:
http://www.techspot.com/review/1155-affordable-dual-xeon-pc/

32 threads seems like a lot.  Note the performance at various tasks and see if it will be adequate.  FWIW, those Xeon E5-2670 are fairly cheap at this point:
https://www.amazon.com/Intel-E5-2670-2-60Ghz-8-Core-Processor/dp/B007H29FRS/ref=pd_sbs_147_t_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=0PR50MD6EQDK0GEZC29H

It seems that a lot of these chips are 'pulls' from servers.  Brand new chips are still pretty pricey.

It's fun to note that Win 10 will support 256 cores, presumably 512 threads.

[slicendice]

yes 32 threads sound like a lot but when you have hundreds of things that has to be calculated fast and in sync, 32 threads on a CPU is not that much anymore. GPUs use thousands of threads/cores.

[Lizzie_Jo_Computers_11]

slicendice: Thank you very much. Those are some great suggestions. A rack mounted storage server was something I had just run into during my continued research, so I think your right, I should start looking into that. Any good suggestions? I'll bring my own in a little while.

When I google Xeon processors, I get 8 core prices at around $100-$200, which is an extremely big price drop? Is it lacking greatly in something that the i7 8650k has, or am I missing something here?

About the mounting rack, I had an idea, I might try and build one myself rather than spend the $1000+ on buying one. I could customize it's exact size and specifications and save at least $500 doing so.

I was thinking about something else, and if it sounds like a really bad idea, please warn me of negative consequences. I was thinking that if I build the whole rack myself, I would build the PC system directly into it. Sectioning off about a 1/3 of the station as a makeshift computer case. It would have a massive amount of space inside, allowing adequate breathing room for any heat it would start giving off.

Speaking of the cooling system, I was wondering how good of an idea this was. I'm not sure if this is even a logical idea right now. I have absolutely no problem with fan noise, as an even louder AC unit would likely be constantly drowning out that sound anyway, so I was looking into buying a large box fan to install in my customized server rack. Something by Lasko or the like. Mounting/screwing it in as one big fan. Would blowing outward of the makeshift PC case section, or directly into the case pushing cool air on the components be better? Or is this destructive somehow? I could also set up two fans, one front and one back if necessary.

rstofer: Thank you for that article, it was informative, and quite helpful to break that what I'm getting into with a Xeon CPU processor. I just can't understand why the prices are so low, if they would work even greater for what I'm doing, I'd figure they'd be much more expensive than my pre-decided i7?


Something else I was completely forgetting to mention, which was the reason for that motherboard was that the computer will also be used for video game creation (more than actually playing), possibly using high-end programs such as Unreal Engine 4/Unity, and programs requiring lots of rendering power such as those again, and programs like Blender.

Will the Xeon build still be sufficient for that as well?

Besides that, I could build a separate computer for the game creation, if it makes difficult building this into one single PC, but I'd much prefer it all as one high performance machine. Although if building it as one would greatly diminish it's capability, I would move towards two, but I thought I would mention this.

I'll be back on later, I have to go look up more Xeon processors/motherboards, and start looking into the memory thing as well.

Thank you so much everyone! ;- )


EDIT:

I've continued looking into Xeon processors, and have seen very, very cheap ones, to $2000 ones appearing in results.

I was reading that article provided above, and started looking at the possibility of getting this one: https://www.amazon.com/Intel-E5-2670-2-60Ghz-8-Core-Processor/dp/B007H29FRS

It's very cheap, so that is what worries me about it. I thought (in the case I continue to use the above MSI board) that I would buy two of them to install in the mother board, which would bring the cores up to 16, which is significantly better than what I was doing yesterday. At least I think it is. I can't see anything that it is lacking in opposed to the i7?  Only the Ghz it would seem.

I have also been looking at more RAM. I was indeed looking into ECC, although I don't know, and haven't found a conclusive answer if it is compatible with the MSI motherboard. I found a few sets of 128GB RAM. What do you all think, would any of these work out better?

http://www.nextwarehouse.com/item/?2260912_g10e

https://www.serversupply.com/products/part_search/pid_query.asp?pid=279079

The latter ones are refurbished, however.

Also, I was looking at the server racks for the HDDs, and they are quite expensive, even for as little as 16 bays. At least $400 have been the average.


EDIT 2: LGA2011-v3 is the socket for the MSI mother board, is that other Xeon CPU I listed going to fit into that? It's socket is FCLGA2011?

[Monkeh]

I was reading that article provided above, and started looking at the possibility of getting this one: https://www.amazon.com/Intel-E5-2670-2-60Ghz-8-Core-Processor/dp/B007H29FRS

This is an old, Sandy Bridge based CPU.

The Xeon equivalent to your suggested i7 6850K is an E5-1650 v4. They're only very slightly more expensive, but you will need an ECC capable board for it to be worthwhile (and ECC RAM).

On that note, you may want to consider a more appropriate board either way - a name like 'GODLIKE GAMING CARBON' does not inspire confidence. Thankfully, proper boards aren't nearly as expensive as that... thing, and you won't need the extra network cards either. Look at, say, the Supermicro X10SRA. There are also options with SAS controllers should you desire some real storage performance onboard.


Be wary of heatsink height, the Hyper 212 will most likely be very tight in 4U ( Heatsink is 159mm, 4U is 177.8mm max - subtract ~2mm each for top and bottom plates, 4-6mm standoff, 1.5-2mm PCB and you're down to ~166mm - how tall are LGA2011 sockets with CPUs, again?).

About the mounting rack, I had an idea, I might try and build one myself rather than spend the $1000+ on buying one. I could customize it's exact size and specifications and save at least $500 doing so.

What's your location? You can regularly walk off with them for at most a couple hundred bucks, usually with odds and ends (shelves, power strips, etc) attached, if you can collect. If not, well, <$200 gets you an aluminium flat-pack..

[cdev]

Did you figure out the power consumption/cost? Some CPUs use less power per unit of computing than others.

That energy gets turned into heat. Computers may reduce your heating cost in winter.

Also,  The "Lack" IKEA table, ODDA night table and OPPLI media stand also are sized so they can hold rack mount equipment.

[GreyWoolfe]

No real need to pay $1000 for a server rack.  I scoured eBay and CraigsList a few years ago for my ham radio club.  We needed one fairly quickly for one of our repeater sites and I scored a 42U rack with all panels and doors installed and even the keys to lock it.  We paid $300 because we didn't want any of the power strips as we were installing a UPS that had all the outlets we needed. 

[Lizzie_Jo_Computers_11]

Thank you for your reply Monkeh. I was starting to think the same thing about the Motherboard, actually.

What about this board? https://www.amazon.com/Memory-2011-3-Motherboard-Z10PE-D8-WS/dp/B00O1AXIHM

It's a dual CPU, which might be capable of hosting the two Xeons, right?

The old Xeon I posted, is it not a good deal, even with two of them?

I'm going to go look into the board you suggested as well, thank you.

I'm in the United States, and all of the racks I'm looking at are far and above the $300 mark. I think I'm going to make one myself, but can anyone direct me to where I may find these cheaper ones?

[Monkeh]

Thank you for your reply Monkeh. I was starting to think the same thing about the Motherboard, actually.

What about this board? https://www.amazon.com/Memory-2011-3-Motherboard-Z10PE-D8-WS/dp/B00O1AXIHM

It's a dual CPU, which might be capable of hosting the two Xeons, right?

Sure, that'll take two current generation Xeons. But again, you can save a couple hundred bucks getting something not made for gamers.

The old Xeon I posted, is it not a good deal, even with two of them?

If you're looking to spend this much on a machine, don't even think of getting three generation old parts.

I'm in the United States, and all of the racks I'm looking at are far and above the $300 mark. I think I'm going to make one myself, but can anyone direct me to where I may find these cheaper ones?

I know you're in the US - where, exactly? ~50 mile area covers it.. You can easily find second hand racks on eBay or a multitude of other sources, if you happen to live near somewhere which would have them.

You can get the alu flatpack examples trivially: http://www.ebay.com/itm/42U-4-Post-Open-Frame-Server-Data-Rack-19-Adjustable-Depth-25-37-/152319524887

These absolutely require stiffening and shelves or rails for heavier gear, but those are cheap.

[Lizzie_Jo_Computers_11]

Monkeh: Thank you again! Alright, so definitely not those CPUs. I think I'll go for two of the ones you posted, the E5-1650 v4? Unless I can find a better one. If anything, are there any other even better ones for around $1000, two of them that can do what the ones you posted can and then some. If I know I'm going to spend some money of CPU then, I may as well get something that is definitely going to be worth it.

Besides that, do you have any suggestions for a motherboard then, besides the one I said. I didn't think that was made for gamers, though. It said it was a dual CPU board, which, generally speaking isn't something that's going to improve gaming, really.

I'm going to keep looking myself, and then come back, but some other people's suggestions are always welcome, in fact, I could obviously use some assistance.

I'm in Pennsylvania. I'm going to start looking again at what I can find, though.

[Monkeh]

Monkeh: Thank you again! Alright, so definitely not those CPUs. I think I'll go for two of the ones you posted, the E5-1650 v4?

Those are single-socket CPUs only, you need the 2643 for dual socket.

Unless I can find a better one. If anything, are there any other even better ones for around $1000, two of them that can do what the ones you posted can and then some. If I know I'm going to spend some money of CPU then, I may as well get something that is definitely going to be worth it.

You need to seriously consider just how much power you think you need. You seem to be intent on spending enough money to buy a car, here.

I'm in Pennsylvania. I'm going to start looking again at what I can find, though.

PA is 280 miles across and 160 tall, that doesn't narrow things down much.

[Lizzie_Jo_Computers_11]

Well, this is not for a "hobby thing", this is for my professional business that requires running top of the line programs such as Adobe Premiere/After Effects, and being able to render up to 4K complicated video projects at high speeds, meaning I would like it to take less than all day to finish a project.

Besides that, I need it to be able to process 64 channel VSTs in professional grade DAWs like Pro Tools, and again be able to efficiently export these projects. Often times, I'm working on multiple projects at once, and I need this PC build to be able to handle the things that I'll be doing, not only at a "It can do it" level, but at the level where it can do these things with minimal fuss, and at the quickest possible speeds.

Therefore, I need a lot of power with this computer.

As far as the rack is concerned, I've decided to build a highly customized one by myself. Building the PC directly inside of it, instead of worrying about the different parts and pieces and where to find them. I'm fully confident in my actual building and designing ability, so it just makes a lot more sense, and it can be exactly the way I want it to be.

Anyone's input on my Lasko fan ideas from earlier?

EDIT: The 2643 seems to be a 4 core processor (according to Amazon). I was aiming for to dual 8 cores, bringing it up to 16 cores.

EDIT 2: So will two of the Intel Xeon E5-1650 work with this motherboard, or is that what you were saying? That it wouldn't work putting two of the 8 cores in this dual cpu?

EDIT 3: Never mind, I already found the answer, it won't work. The search led me back to the intel Xeon E5-2670. Could someone (in detail), explain to me the cons of choosing this outdated processor? In terms of how it would affect the performance of what I'm trying to do? That would be really, really appreciated.

EDIT 4: Would this... http://www.nextwarehouse.com/item/?2260912_g10e ... be compatible with this... https://www.amazon.com/Memory-2011-3-Motherboard-Z10PE-D8-WS/dp/B00O1AXIHM ...?

From what I've researched, I think it should, I've found no issues with Kingston and Asus, but again, I'm proofreading my work. Thank you all.

[TiN]

You need to make sure your software works with that many cores. It's often not the case, then you can have 100 cores in the system, but workload would be only on 4 of them. 

[Monkeh]

EDIT: The 2643 seems to be a 4 core processor (according to Amazon). I was aiming for to dual 8 cores, bringing it up to 16 cores.

The E5-2643 v4 is a 6-core processor just like the i7 you initially specified. If you want 8-core, that would be an E5-2667 v4.

Sandy Bridge era processors are not compatible with modern boards. They are five years old - put them out of your mind.

And no, you cannot use that RAM with that motherboard - dual socket motherboards must use registered RAM.

[slicendice]

What music software will you be using? A dual Xeon may be overkill, but at least you can add a lot of RAM, which is important when using a lot of channels and effects, and you get the advantage of ECC memory which helps preventing data corruptions, which is also important when composing music.

Adobe Premiere works best with a CPU that has about 10 Cores, but if you use GPU acceleration then the speed increases drastically for 4K video, and you can scale up by adding a second GPU if ever needed even more acceleration. :-) Having 30 cores will not help at all in Premiere.

For Unity games development you can never have too many cores. If the game is coded right you can utilize all of them. but more important is the GPU as for graphics calculations CPUs suck big time. I would also suggest you look into Unreal Engine, it's fast and it's free (used to be $100k-250k for a single license, don't remember the exact figure but it was in 100K's), including source-code, and you only pay once you make a lot of money from your game. Uses C/C++, while Unity is best coded using C#.

[Howardlong]

FWIW I use a dual E5-2670v1 for video editing. I bought the whole thing in a 1U Supermicro rack chassis including 96GB ECC DDR3 RAM for £650 off eBay. This particular unit has one PCIe slot, which, together with its 650W PSU, limits the graphics card you can use with it, assuming you are going to be using it as a workstation. Cinebench score is a tad over 2000. It will almost render 4k videos in real time.

I use an AMD FirePro W4100 which will run up to three monitors, all at 4k 60Hz, and is single slot and relatively low power, so no additional PCIe power to contend with. It's useless for GPU rendering but why would you use GPU rendering when you have 16 cores/32 threads?

I upgraded the chassis from 96GB to 192GB ECC DDR3 for $150, not because I needed to, but because you can!

Another upgrade (which failed) was to upgrade the processors to E5-2696v2 which are 12 cores each, at $250 each. The BIOS in my mobo didn't recognise these processors despite it being advertised by Supermicro as supporting v1 and v2 E5-2600 series Xeons.

If you are using them as workstations in a rack, be aware that they're really noisy beasts. In addition, if you're running video from them you'll be lucky to get a 5m run to work at 4k 60Hz: I've achieved this by converting from DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 at the card and running Amazon Basics 5m HDMI cables to the HDMI 2.0 monitors. There doesn't seem to be much of a market for long DP cables.

My experience with Broadwell-E such as the 6800K is that they don't overclock at all well compared to Haswell-E such as the equivalent 5820K. I get significantly better performance overclocking on the 5820K, but overclcoking might not be your bag. Otherwise the 6800K is only marginally better than a 5820K at stock speeds, perhaps 5% on a really good day. Whether you need the 6850K over a 6800K is up to you, I didn't consider it worth the price for a few more PCIe lanes and a minor speed increment.

Edit: I am aware that many software products don't scale over many cores, but I would add that if you do much effects processing, many of these don't even touch the GPU. I would also add that it's unlikely you're going to leave your multicore beast sitting there just doing a render, you can of course continue to use it for plenty of other things with all that grunt. However thing I would say that if you use h.265/HEVC rendering, Skylake and Broadwell-E support 8 bit natively but you will need Kaby Lake for 10 bit HDR. This is where a modern GPU like the NVidia 1000 series will help, as they do support 10 bit HEVC assuming your software takes advantage of it.

A dual socket E5-2670v1 can play 4k HEVC despite not having hardware acceleration, but it is working pretty hard, perhaps 30-40% CPU. As a comparison, a single core Skylake or Braodwell-E will be running at barely 2% CPU playing the same media as it takes advantage of the hardware acceleration.

[slicendice]

It's useless for GPU rendering but why would you use GPU rendering when you have 16 cores/32 threads?

Because in some cases GPU rendering can be up to 1000x faster (and even more) than any CPU can ever achieve. GPUs are designed to process graphics data, CPUs are designed for general purpose computation. Where CPUs suck, usually GPUs rock, and vice versa.

[Howardlong]

It's useless for GPU rendering but why would you use GPU rendering when you have 16 cores/32 threads?

Because in some cases GPU rendering can be up to 1000x faster (and even more) than any CPU can ever achieve. GPUs are designed to process graphics data, CPUs are designed for general purpose computation. Where CPUs suck, usually GPUs rock, and vice versa.

Citation on 1000x please, plus please also see my edit.

[slicendice]

Yes, it all really depends on the software. Some encoders are heavily optimized for multicore CPU and GPU accelerated rendering, and you can see the results in speed, required passes, size and final quality. Adobe software suck at video encoding. One would think that such expensive software would contain some proprietary algorithms that outperform some open source encoders in every aspect, but this is not the case. :-)

Either way we are way off topic now.

After detailed defining what the computer will be used for and what exact software will be used on that device, than it will be much easier to determine what hardware will be required.

If on Adobe software only, then 10 CPU cores is enough, 32-64GB of RAM is enough, and some mid range Gaming GPU will help in most cases at least a bit.

ECC memory is always a good thing when producing video and audio at professional level.

If any advanced 3D rendering software will be used or any CAD software will be used where 3D realtime view is a must then a Radeon FirePro or nVidia Quadro GPU is a must. They ensure compatibility, has a lot more GRAM, generally are faster on such software than Gaming GPUs due to optimized drivers, and most high end Pro grade GPUs has ECC memory, which I already stated to be quite important. Price could be an issue though.

The motherboard should have a 3-5year warranty. Meaning the components used (especially caps and voltage regulators) are top grade. Many Asus MBs have this and I highly recommend Asus MBs from the professional line. Does not cost that much either, except for the Best of the best MBs with almost all features a MB can have.

If producing music with a software that supports hardware accelerated audio processing, then getting a compatible soundcard/HWencoder/HWdecoder that supports on the fly post processing effects is better than having tons of CPU cores. The cards are way faster and the CPU pretty much sleep while listening to multitrack audio in realtime with a lot of effects and filters applied. Rendering all the effects on CPU only, very quickly ends up in distorted sound or other artifacts.

[Lizzie_Jo_Computers_11]

Monkeh: Thank you very much again. I'll be checking out the E5-2667 v4, while also looking into a 10-core as slicendice was suggesting. I understand where I was confused about what you said earlier, though.

Alright then, those processors are completely out of my mind then, and off the table, thank you for clarifying.

I even checked a compatibility list, I must have missed something. Thank you again, I appreciate it.

Howardlong: Thank you so very much for that detailed and well thought out reply. You obviously put time into your posts.

If you are using them as workstations in a rack, be aware that they're really noisy beasts. In addition, if you're running video from them you'll be lucky to get a 5m run to work at 4k 60Hz: I've achieved this by converting from DP 1.2 to HDMI 2.0 at the card and running Amazon Basics 5m HDMI cables to the HDMI 2.0 monitors. There doesn't seem to be much of a market for long DP cables.

Thank you for your input on this. Finding a decent way to display in 4K or decent 1080p for that matter, has been a complicated situation trying to use longer cords for my set up. Noise is definitely not a problem though. The room where this will all be operated has a huge AC that will be running the most of the time which will drown out the loudest of fans. I'm also thinking of by large box fans and hooking them up directly into my custom built rack for cooling, so they'll be producing noise anyway.

I am aware that many software products don't scale over many cores, but I would add that if you do much effects processing, many of these don't even touch the GPU. I would also add that it's unlikely you're going to leave your multicore beast sitting there just doing a render, you can of course continue to use it for plenty of other things with all that grunt. However thing I would say that if you use h.265/HEVC rendering, Skylake and Broadwell-E support 8 bit natively but you will need Kaby Lake for 10 bit HDR. This is where a modern GPU like the NVidia 1000 series will help, as they do support 10 bit HEVC assuming your software takes advantage of it.

Good to know with the cores, I was quite hoping they would allow me to do more than just sit there waiting for a render to finish.

Would this EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 GPU be sufficient? Based on the kind of model you listed? Or could I do better than that?

slicendice: Thank you very much again. You've been rather helpful this whole time, and your posts very clear and detailed. Thank you for taking the time out to write this all out for me, I appreciate it a lot.

If on Adobe software only, then 10 CPU cores is enough, 32-64GB of RAM is enough, and some mid range Gaming GPU will help in most cases at least a bit.

ECC memory is always a good thing when producing video and audio at professional level.

If any advanced 3D rendering software will be used or any CAD software will be used where 3D realtime view is a must then a Radeon FirePro or nVidia Quadro GPU is a must. They ensure compatibility, has a lot more GRAM, generally are faster on such software than Gaming GPUs due to optimized drivers, and most high end Pro grade GPUs has ECC memory, which I already stated to be quite important. Price could be an issue though.

The motherboard should have a 3-5year warranty. Meaning the components used (especially caps and voltage regulators) are top grade. Many Asus MBs have this and I highly recommend Asus MBs from the professional line. Does not cost that much either, except for the Best of the best MBs with almost all features a MB can have.

If producing music with a software that supports hardware accelerated audio processing, then getting a compatible soundcard/HWencoder/HWdecoder that supports on the fly post processing effects is better than having tons of CPU cores. The cards are way faster and the CPU pretty much sleep while listening to multitrack audio in realtime with a lot of effects and filters applied. Rendering all the effects on CPU only, very quickly ends up in distorted sound or other artifacts.

Everything you said in that last post was very helpful for breaking down exactly what I might be looking at here. I'll be getting to more on that in a moment, but figuring out the performance difference between CPU/GPU/Sound card is invaluable for this machine to be built properly.

Either way we are way off topic now.

No need to worry about that, it was actually informative for me, and quite good for my note taking, so not too off-topic.

After detailed defining what the computer will be used for and what exact software will be used on that device, than it will be much easier to determine what hardware will be required.

I probably should've done that a lot sooner, shouldn't I have?

I believe I've compiled a complete list here. If I notice something missing, I'll add it on to this list.

Everything is pretty much evened out as far as priority goes, so balancing this out is a good idea, but I'd rather push the envelope farther, rather than compromise between pieces. This is meant to be a long term computer investment that will be used day in and day out for professional grade production, so I'm comfortable with spending in the range of $5000-$7000 if it is absolutely necessary, but lets definitely try and figure out the best choices overall. I don't want to under or over spend for absolutely no reason.

In the Adobe department, I'll be heavily reliant on...

Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 (4K/2K editing, very complicated projects, with a lot of effects, etc.)
Adobe After Effects CS6 (I create a lot of logos, such as YouTube intros for clients with a lot of effects and things piling up in a project)
Adobe Flash Pro CS6 (Animation projects, a lot of card board animation, but as well it's used as a stand in for my other program RETAS, which is a Japanese frame by frame program meant for anime projects, when I'm doing more Japanese style animations, which get complicated as far as a lot of high quality images at 24 fps.)
Adobe Illustrator CS6 (Used regularly in conjunction with After Effects/Flash/RETAS, as most of the pre lay work is done in here.)
Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Besides the usual photo editing done in this program, it fills in for whatever illustrator may lack in, so it's used less than Illustrator, but still often.)
Adobe InDesign CS6 (Laying out book designs quite often, the usual things you do with these programs.)
Adobe Dream Weaver CS6 (I do actually build websites quite frequently, but I don't host a lot of them from my own computer, but I will likely have at least one likely massive website running from here.)

Very expensive programs... That's mostly in order of who will be used most often.

In the music production department...

Reaper 5 is my primary DAW where I do basically all of my music editing.

Omnisphere 2 is one of my most frequently used synthesizers, and it utilizes 16 channels (generally 8 ) and is one of the biggest issues as far as music production I'm having with slow play back, especially in real time.

I'm also using Komplete's Kontakt 5, and other high end instrument VSTs.

There is a good amount of effects processing done throughout here.

On my current system, it simply isn't possible to run even two of any of these programs together, and one of them alone takes up the entire CPU. Basically, I have all of the programs, and nothing to run them on. At first, I was figuring I could make due while I wait to save enough money, but the money put into the programs is a waste if I don't have a powerful computer to run them.

I believe I've covered everything, if something else comes the mind, beside internet browsing, which does need to be very high speed, but that is left to my router/modem combo, I'll add it to this post, or in my next post if it's not something too important.

Thank you again to everyone, you've been really helpful. I've been jumping between researching, a job, all of these projects, and reading up on your posts and computers in general, while doing my usual around the house routines, so your help with all of this is extremely helpful and time saving, so its a real life saver everyone! ;- )

EDIT: I forgot blender, and yes real time 3D modeling capability is definitely a must. As far as the NVidia Quadros, I'm seeing prices from $800-$4000.

[slicendice]

For the GPU and CPU part I think you have it covered. :-)

Now, for the audio part:

I looked a bit on Audio interfaces and such...For external MIDI and other Real Time instruments, I can not be that helpful. But I took a look at what sound cards Image-Line recommends for their Fruity Loops product (have been using it quite a lot, uses MIDI, VST etc...). They state in their FAQ that the $120 SoundBlaster Z is a really good card and recommended, and they also state that it might be a surprise that they recommend a consumer level sound card over a professional grade sound card.

Most important is that the card has a good Audio processor, which most SB cards has, and second but not less important is that the drivers support ASIO, which most SB cards also have. (ASIO enables the software to communicate directly with the card, skipping Windows completely, which improves performance and lowers latency to almost zero)

There also exist an upgraded SB Z card ( SoundBlaster ZxR ) which is even better.

Hope this info help you choose a proper card for audio processing and real time monitoring.

If someone else has some better recommendations, feel free to correct me on this one as I have no experience with the latest Audio Software and Hardware.

[Monkeh]

I'll just briefly chime in on the audio issue before I sleep: For the love of all that is holy, unholy, unrelated to holiness, and just general existence: Do not buy a Creative card. They can't write stable drivers or firmware to save their lives and even more than that, they don't care.