Nvidia Geforce GTS 450 for my quad.
Pictures of your trading stations
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
Quote from NetTecture:
Sadly - I am opening a trading floor in October and we can not rely on Ebay for purchasing what may be a regular amount or larger amount ;(
I hate that. Those are perfect sized for larger farms. 16:9 just is WIDE - though the idea of three vrtical is something to try out
Not cheap but I last time I looked NEC (and maybe Eizo) still do 4:3 20" and 21"
Well, i checked our local ebay equivalent 2 weeks ago for the new setup I am putting up in hardware.... and found 55 pieces of Drll 2007 Fp for sale in one auction.
Got 40 of them. Should be enough for the 12 trader places I am putting up now.
All
After much research I recently purchased an HP Z400 workstation on ebay. These are awesome high end machines with XEON QUAD CORE 2.66GHZ processors. They were built for high end CAD and 3d work and so came standard with high end Nvidia cards.
There are a lot out there for under $400 loaded with RAM. I am running 4 monitors and some heavy analytical software as well as all the usual stuff and it is lightning.
Arb
After much research I recently purchased an HP Z400 workstation on ebay. These are awesome high end machines with XEON QUAD CORE 2.66GHZ processors. They were built for high end CAD and 3d work and so came standard with high end Nvidia cards.
There are a lot out there for under $400 loaded with RAM. I am running 4 monitors and some heavy analytical software as well as all the usual stuff and it is lightning.
Arb
Cough. Yeah. Right.
Sorry.
They WERE awesome high end machines. WERE as in PAST. In their time. Which is 2-3 generations ago.
Current high end xeons have up to 12 cores. Not 4. Heck, low range Intel chips have 4.
This is why they are so cheap. And your heavy analytical likely would run a lot faster on a high end desktop machine these days - because it would run curcles around your system. Any haswell I7 - or any lower end haswell based single xeon - likely beats it or at least comes close.
Not from the price, obviously. Just do not call it high end. Please.
I think you likely have a E5640 -- that is a release 3.5 years old
It was not high end at this time - I Used to work on servers for a data management project at this time and our Xeons had 6 cores, not 4.I have a full blade center of those - though I paid less than you (roughly I paid 5 times your price, but i got 16 blades in a center each with your computer power). That was some months ago, cheap low end stuff from ebay
NetTecture
Thanks for your kind response. I take it that you are an Intel sales guy. I have run the numbers and the performance gains that you describe in real world analytical situations are minimal.
I run some very large SAS / hadoop analytics packages and the benchmark gains on even the fastest Fourth Gen I7 processors is minimal - despite what the marketing literature says. For less than the price of just a mid-level I7 chip I got a 16GB Xeon in a Workstation with enterprise grade everything for $400. This is hard to beat!!!
Arb
Thanks for your kind response. I take it that you are an Intel sales guy. I have run the numbers and the performance gains that you describe in real world analytical situations are minimal.
I run some very large SAS / hadoop analytics packages and the benchmark gains on even the fastest Fourth Gen I7 processors is minimal - despite what the marketing literature says. For less than the price of just a mid-level I7 chip I got a 16GB Xeon in a Workstation with enterprise grade everything for $400. This is hard to beat!!!
Arb
No. Actually a frustrated die hard AMD fan.
You are pretty wrong - fundamentally.
* More modern chips are faster at same frequecy. Although not a LOT - given your processor that is like a 15% to 20% advantage if you would get a currently coming high end chip (i.e. it is dripping through channels now). I agree, this is TOTALLY NOT WORTH IT.
* Sadly, this is just as ignorant as it gets. It is at same frequency. The E5 series coming now will go a little higher. E5-2697 would be 2.7 ghz. Ok, not worth it.
* Sadly that is now REALLY ignorant. Want to know why? Her is the deal: 12 cores.
The last years saw die shrinks and added core count. Seriously added core count. The result of that is that if you ahve a paralellable task (hadoop) you gain a lot by multiple cores.
I just wish AMD would not be so damn far behind the curve. They are slower per frequency per core (this is called IPC - instructions per core). They have way fewer cores.
Now, I really do not dislike your machinge - go back some pages and you ccan see the "monster" as we call it that I Was buying some month or two (or three) ag0. Definitely not more than 3. That would be one blade center with 16 times your machines. I mean exactly 16 times - basically 16 blades, each with 8gb and the same processor layout you have.Terrific machines, great value for the money.
Just not "high end" by todays standard. And, btw., real money hogs regarding power - for the performance