Buying PC. What hardware?

I'm just getting into vr and I'd like to get a pc that can handle it all with ease. I'd like to spend under $2000 (Canadian dollars).
Mainly I want to get into 3d vr movie making with both stereoscopic cameras and with 3d animation programs like poser, daz studio, 3dsmax etc. I'm not all that interested in gaming but I guess that doesn't matter since it's all interconnected.
What hardware should I get and what should I be concerned with most?
Can I get a kick ass 3d tower for the price?

 

If you're primarily interested in virtual reality then you'll want to start with their recommended hardware. With the Oculus Rift that's a Core i5-4590 or greater, at least 8GB of RAM, and a GTX 970 or equivalent.

Just as a heads-up though, if you don't mind waiting a couple months, NVIDIA is preparing to release a new series of graphics cards and from what I understand the next x70 and x80 cards will be among them.

Outside of that though there aren't any meaningful hardware advances coming in a reasonable time frame.

 

Thanks. I don't know if I can wait for the release. I downloaded the iclone trial and doesn't seem to even want to run on my pc.
I don't suppose the older cards come down in price significantly when new ones are released?
I noticed that octane render requires a cuda enabled card. I was hoping to use that program so I guess I better be mindful of that when I buy.

 

Either of these look like they're within my price range. I've never bought either of these brands. Would these be good systems? I don't really want to get one custom built but there's always the option of getting one from Best Buy and upgrading the graphics card. For some reason anything prebuilt at any of the big box stores only usually only comes with a GTX 970 if the price is $2000 and up.


http://www.canadacomputers.com/product_info.php?cPath=1448&item_id=090721
http://www.canadacomputers.com/product_info.php?cPath=1448&item_id=087768

 

No. Both manufacturers more or less have fixed price points.

That's fine. Just be aware that if you build your own computer (and it is trivial to do) you can get better hardware for less.

They're alright. Just keep in mind they don't have any additional storage other than their SSDs. You might have to put an HDD into them or use an external if you find the 240GB of space to be insufficient. Between having eight large Steam games and my development tools installed I'm using 270GB of my SSD. It adds up quickly.

 

I'm not sure I have the skills to build my own. If I had someone else put it together it would probably end up costing more then buying it at place like best buy. I'd hate to try and do it myself and end up ruining my graphics card or something.
You're probably right about the storage space on these ones. I imagine it would fill up fast once I get all the programs installed and all the content libraries and then start actually making 360 degree animations. When you factor in the keyboard and mouse and hard drive and then possibly a ram upgrade and WiFi it'll end up costing quite a bit more.
I might just go for something like this and see how much it is to upgrade the graphics card to a gtx 970.
http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product...spx?path=1bfe429ab5a7bc2333c04707171d1874en02

 

Very little of building a computer is skill-based now. Every part has a designated location it fits onto the motherboard and nowhere else. About the only thing that might be a skill is determining if the components are compatible with each other and even then there are websites that automate the process for you.

Companies like HP allow you to customize the system you're ordering if you buy through their store. You'll want to check that out before ordering through a third party like Best Buy. I've linked the US version of the product's page.

http://store.hp.com/us/en/pdp/hp-envy-phoenix-860st-desktop-n3g98av-aba-1

 

'
Nvidia recommends a GTX980 for VR, and a 970 has already been shown to be anemic in real-world applications. I know it's not the cost sweet spot for traditional gaming, but the extra overhead really helps in complex games.

 

I'm not at all surprised that NVIDIA recommends a card that costs $200 more but only delivers a 20% boost. If you're going to spend that kind of cash though you may as well pay another $100 more and get a GTX 980 Ti. It's twice as fast as the GTX 970 and has more memory too.

 

Well, sometimes 1/5 is the difference between tweak town and just running an application. My GTX 980 cost me $410. There are good deals out there, it's worth being above the recommended minimum for VR.

 

If you are building (or adding to) your computer, you -MUST- compute the power it would need at maximum draw; and buy an appropriate Power Supply Unit [PSU] that can handle the maximum + 20% [minimum!]. I've learnt that the hard way*, and this can save you some serious money and time! You will need to know the draw for the motherboard, the cpu, the ram, disk drives, gpu, USB busses, etc. Also ensure your PSU has surge protection... even if it is connected to a surge protecting power bar, which I also advise!

*By using a surge protecting PSU, it saved the hardware although 'sacrificed' itself by too much draw! Much better then frying the entire hardware stack! If I had bought and installed a 650 watt PSU rather then the 550 watt PSU, it may have been avoided it all together, even though it would have costed me a few more dollars...

 

Additionally power supplies are generally designed to reach their peak efficiency when operating at half load. If you're going to be running the system on a regular basis then you may want to buy a power supply that is significantly more powerful.

Better yet buy yourself an uninterruptible power supply from a reputable company (APC is a good one). They not only protect against power spikes like a regular surge protector but also from power fluctuations. Plus they will give your computer enough run time to power down without losing data.

They aren't that expensive either. I picked mine up for $40 USD during a sale.

 

Make sure that the UPS can reliably deliver the load the PSU is calling for, and any other devices it is attached to! You also need to factor in how long you want it to run, and from the power draw with respect to length of time, calculate how many joules you will need.

 

Also, some UPS are based on batteries while others are based on slow-drain capacitors: in the former, the battery loses its charge potential over time. Different kinds and makes of batteries have different strengths and weaknesses in this respect.

 

Mine uses a lead acid battery. I wasn't aware there were some based on capacitors though. I'll link mine below.

http://www.amazon.com/APC-BE550G-Back-UPS-8-outlet-Uninterruptible/dp/B0019804U8

It's rated for 330 watts which is within range of my system (Kill-A-Watt reported ~250 watt during heavy load).

 

I cannot seem to find any capacitor based UPS's anymore... how strange... Batteries must have won that battle, it seems!

Edit: I thought we figured out capacitor-based storage a while ago... but my brain was apparently ahead a few years in relative to reality. Just don't give me a soldiering iron and we should be good !

 

They may not be available for consumers now. My searches are turning up data center equipment.

http://www.riello-ups.com/products/6-solutions/76-supercaps-ups

 

Makes sense, most consumer electronics starts as a server component, then by demand the prices drop to consumer prices. And advancements in science, but that's kinda besides the point. Furthermore, [super]capacitors of this type are fairly new! Anyways, I think we've lost focus of this thread... Still, nice find!

 

Not necessarily true: PSUs can - and is - being designed with higher efficiencies... My PSU is starting to make some bothersome chirping noise, and I've been meaning to get a better PSU anyways, for my later GPU upgrade. Given that I have a mini-ITX case (acer aspire x3400), I've searched and found this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817104197.

So if I chose the 250 Watt version, this means I should get at least 80% of the power as usable power for the system, not generating wasted heat! Seriously saves on the electric bill too, when running in 100% for a sustained duration of time. Now, I cannot seem to find an iota about the stock PSU... so all I know is that it can draw up to 220 Watts from the wall, it makes noise, and I don't know its efficiency chart. It might have one stickered on the physical PSU, but if I see it it means I'm already replacing it with the link above, so it would be irrelevant.

Then I can finally go search for either a Quadro or Geforce with low-profile. Either http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4175&cm_re=geforce-_-9SIA5752NW4175-_-Product or http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...quadro_low_profile-_-9SIA5752RC7554-_-Product.

Or maybe I'll bite in to some RAM first... the stock 4gb is getting restrictive, and I know I can get faster RAM (1600 from 1333) at the same timings (9-9-9-24). Something like Crucial Sport: http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/aspire-x3400/CT5667784. Just buy 4 and be good with it... If I need more I'll use my mSATA slot for another SSD, and dedicate it to RAM. I do like how well suited the Crucial MX200 is for that! http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/ct500mx200ssd3

...Arguably, by using a SSD for RAM, and I allocate dedicated space on it for database manipulation, this could be quite useful! Especially for sudden power outage scenarios... I'll need to build data recovery tools and techniques, but that's besides the point. It would also be faster then my currently installed SSD, which is throttled by the SATA interface.

 

Fair enough though that strikes me as designed for a specific niche that generally doesn't involve high end gaming.

My biggest concern, having only recently begun getting into SSDs and not really knowing the specifics, is that some of them have a DRAM cache built into them. If the device lost power would it actually lose any data? Or is that something a bit too specific to the SSD to determine?

 

"High end" has become problematic to define. Do you mean bleeding edge? Then yes. But I won't need the latest and greatest to achieve what I seek. // Edit: I lied, the faster the SSD and motherboard busses, the better.

"Specific niche" - not so much a niche, its there for the purpose to replace a failed mini ITX PSU (commonplace), upgrade (almost a niche) or to build your own mini ITX (Ok, that's a niche!). But it does seem that most people would rather replace rather then upgrade a mini-ITX computer! And most upgrades need the space of an ATX form, like a Geforce Titan, so you can use a full ATX PSU. This yields more space for the PSU, so more components can be installed, so it could achieve a higher power control. As I said though, I -personally- won't need such a beast. This doesn't mean it wouldn't be useful for someone else!

 

The drive can be used a virtual RAM device... and given that it is a storage device, data is not lost when powered down, unlike proper RAM chips. Data corruption is my number one concern: data could be in a write phase and the system suddenly powers down (IE: power outage). If I get paranoid over it, I'll bite in to an UPS and RAID-type NAS storage approach, and attach it directly to my computer VIA 100gbit/s Ethernet cable.

As for why I would choose a Crucial MX200 instead of, say, a Samsung Evo, other then having a high reputation: performance, reliability, Memory correcting code, and average length of device life, and that Crucial has two types: mSATA chip format and SATA 2.5 inch drive format. Of course, if I bite, I would need the mSATA variant.

 

Getting back on subject: For virtual reality, you will need a very high performance GPGPU, like a Geforce Titan, due to the the refresh rate; too slow of a refresh rate seems to cause sickness to users*. Resolution is also important for visual quality, and (typically!) each pixel adds a computational price. If you are modelling, and comparable hardware Quadro could outperform a Titan, and yield only a few percentage points slower in rendering speed in the game play.

// *:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_reality_sickness
https://developer.oculus.com/documentation/intro-vr/latest/concepts/bp_app_simulator_sickness/
In a nutshell: you want a minimum refresh rate at 120 or better.
//

Ensure your PSU is of very high efficiency (80% or better)... no point wasting unnecessary power, and it would reduces excessive heat generation; and you yield a much better signal that would reduce wear-and-tear on your hardware. Ensure it has its own surge protection, even if you are using other tools like a UPS/Surge Protecting Power Bar. Ensure the maximum draw from the PSU to the system is at or below the highest efficient rating on the PSU power chart. Avoid PSUs that do not have said charts.

Ensure your motherboard has enough PCIe lanes, and is of the latest version (PCIe v3), so you can take advantage of your GPGPU's actual potential. PCIe bandwidth can be fickle that way. Realize that most device ports, like USB, takes a PCIe lane.

Realize that most hardware's maximum potential cannot be realized without an appropriate motherboard. My SSD, for instance, cannot go faster then my motherboard's SATA2 interface, even though the SSD could go twice as fast as its current speed as it was designed to handle SATA3. It is of course compatible to SATA2, but still.

Another: RAM types: there are plenty of different kinds of RAM with different pin layouts, different timings (which should be based on the CPUs own timings for maximum performance, like my own 9-9-9-24 timing), and different speeds (1333, 1600, 2100, etc; the higher the better; although you must ensure the motherboard supports its speed, timings, and pin socket.). Ensure that the RAM installed is all of the same type and have matching parameters, like Crucial Sport 4x2gb for my system. RAM is kinda like batteries: sometimes you can mix and match, but you shouldn't. Avoid the nightmare!

A motherboard's RAM slot can only contain so much memory... for example, I cannot install a RAM chip with more then 2gb memory on my current motherboard. Today's is usually looking at 8gb to 32gb per slot, so you should be good. Just double check if in doubt!

CPU: I'd look for either an Intel I7 or Xeon, or the highest performing CPU AMD has. Ensure the motherboard has the correct socket for the CPU!

Drives: I am biased to the SSD's, although if it fails, the data is GONE. An HDD backup, like a NAS storage set for backups, should be used in conjunction. The faster the better; that said, there are two ratings: data access and data storage. If you seek very high speed data storage, the MX200 mentioned in another post on this thread would be a good start for your research. Or if you just want the bleeding edge without paying for server-grade prices.

A dedicated card for networking would be useful if you need high performance network speed, as the motherboard stock never does cut the mustard... its like a dedicated audio chip. Same deal.

Even with the information I can share, this is in no way complete; consequentially, you must also do your own research. This post should serve as a starting point for your research. I hope this is helpful!

EDIT: I've noticed you said you want to make VR Movies. Depending on the quality of what you seek, like ultra high cinematic quality, you might want to look for 64gb of RAM or more, with appropriate motherboard considerations. For every level of tessellation quadruples the vector count in quads... just think about it: a tessellation resolution of 10 in an object already composed of over 10k quads with high resolution UV maps and fancy shaders... And thats only one object. And I'm sure it would have more then one shader/map. I'm not even going to touch ultrafine resolution voxel modelling...

That, of course, doesn't mean you will do any of that, for that is entirely your own decision, but I should mention it none the less!

 

For some prebuilt VR-ready systems recommended from Nvidia for their Quadro GPGPU line: http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro-vr-recommended-systems.html

Note: Quadro is for designing. Geforce is for gaming. Quadro can handle everything a Geforce can, but not the other way around. I do not use AMD GPGPU's and as such I'm unfamiliar with their lines.

Edit: https://www.msi.com/Workstation/WT72-6QN.html

 

An original Titan is a bad recommendation.

Get a minimum second-generation Maxwell card, GP20x, not GP10x.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_(microarchitecture)#Second_generation_Maxwell_.28GM20x.29

You don't need an i7 or a Xeon, you need a fast i5 from the last two-three generations, with a strong reliability recommendation for a Haswell or Skylake chip.

The major changes to the architecture between GTX7xx and GTX9xx are all geared towards better VR performance. As a Vive owner, and loss of performance is unacceptable to the point of the system including a setting which alerts you in-game if more than x number of frames are late in y timespan. Do not try to save $200 while gearing up for VR, either by buying an Oculus Rift or cutting corners on your GPU. If you must have a Rift, I strongly suggest youw ait until it's motion controls are proven and supported by software. I thought I was going to do a lot of gamepad stuff, there is no point once you have motion controls. The magic is instantly apparent the moment you see a 1:1 representation of the controllers on your monitor. VR without 3D controls is half the story.