Digital Storm's Davinci workstation gets down with Core i7-980X, Quadro graphics

Creative professional. Hear that much? If that's how this all-too-structured world views you, you just might be due a new rig -- particularly if you're thinking of stepping into 4K territory. Digital Storm is offering up a rather unique solution in its Davinci, which opts for a 3.33GHz Core i7-980X Extreme Edition (yeah, that new Intel chip) instead of a more traditional Xeon. You'll still get an NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800 (768MB) GPU, 12GB of DDR3 memory, Windows 7 Processional and one of the nicer liquid cooling systems that we've seen, which may or may not be enough to sneak a little Crysis in between edits. Too bad the base price base rings up at $4,995, but look, that next indie film you're producing is totally hitting it big.

[69camaroSS Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:02PM]

I think I'd rather have 2 Xeons for that price. 8 cores versus 6.

[maty Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:05PM]

@69camaroSS

I'd settle for either.


/sobs on mediocre dual 2.8Ghz core desktop

[Giac Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:09PM]

@69camaroSS
this

[Philip Han Posted Mar 21st 2010 4:46PM]

@69camaroSS: i7-980X has hyperthreading so you actually have 24 threads...

Beat that.

[manofchao5 Posted Mar 21st 2010 6:41PM]

@maty
and i laugh away cause i have 2.2Ghz dual core laptop thats 5 years old and still beats some desktops

[69camaroSS Posted Mar 21st 2010 7:56PM]

@manofchao5

Me too! ASUS G1s

[mixiboi Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:03PM]

See, this is the Mac Pro compitition, for those who were complainning about the expense of rumored 12 core Mac Pros, as these things are a bit more then 8 core Two 2.26GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processors.

[69camaroSS Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:09PM]

@mixiboi

You can't get a NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800 in a Mac

[loocas Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:20PM]

@69camaroSS Why? Because Steve doesn't like you working on his Mac?

[69camaroSS Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:51PM]

@loocas

Actually, it is because Steve want us to buy all of our content from iTunes and the appstore, not create our own.

Pretty soon he'll have a homemovie store, where you can upload your raw footage and buy developer editted home movies of your family at the beach. . that is if they pass the approval process. And maybe he'll just use the inbedded cameras in his apple devices so he can bypass all of our creative control and then patent the rights to our life, so we can buy them back at a hefty profit.

[DoctarPeppar Posted Mar 21st 2010 3:31PM]

@mixiboi
Mac Pro's are better since they all use Xeons...they are better "workstation" CPUs because alot of the video editing \ color corretion \ etc applications are specifically designed for multiple CPUs.

[69camaroSS Posted Mar 21st 2010 3:43PM]

@DoctarPeppar

They are only better at Final Cut. If you use Premier or Avid, The Quadro FX option makes a huge difference.

[spaz1 Posted Mar 21st 2010 4:26PM]

@DoctarPeppar
But so is 3D rendering, and Mac Pros have ass graphics cards, so sort of a moot point for workstation purposes. Only Final Cut Pro would be able to take full advantage of Mac Pro's speed, rest of the rendering and editing programs are fully multi-core optimized, so a non-Xenon, core i7-980X would absolutely rock on a PC platform.

[RauBurger Posted Mar 21st 2010 5:55PM]

@spaz1

Also in other news the mac pro can sport a NVIDIA Quatro fx 4800.
I don't honestly know if its better or worse than the 1500 (I would think higher numbers would indicate so, but you never know) but it is a worksation graphics card.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/TW386LL/A?n=graphic_cards&fnode=MTY1NDA5OQ&mco=MTA4MzU2Nzg&s=topSellers

[SONYEDDIE Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:04PM]

will this give me cancer? :(

[(Unverified) Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:06PM]

@SONYEDDIE
I'd guess it's too late for you man!
;)

[BrownSound Posted Mar 21st 2010 10:05PM]

@SONYEDDIE

no and yes

[(Unverified) Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:04PM]

That's more like 5K than 4...
Awesome work though!

[Dori Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:18PM]

@(Unverified)
4K is a resolution

[(Unverified) Posted Mar 22nd 2010 4:47AM]

@Dori

DOH!!! ;)

[Massive Poop Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:05PM]

Ahem you mispelled profeshinal in the windows profeshinal sentence

[dreamerkm Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:32PM]

@Massive Poop So did you.

[tomer Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:36PM]

@dreamerkm I'm pretty sure that was the joke...

[n0ne Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:06PM]

How will this compete with the iPad?

[69camaroSS Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:10PM]

@n0ne
I will Edit the HD video meant for the iPad to keep all of Steve's minions happy.

[69camaroSS Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:11PM]

@69camaroSS

It. . . .excuse my typo

[MikeZ Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:13PM]

@n0ne It plays Flash.

[n0ne Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:14PM]

@69camaroSS But what kind of magic are we talking about here. I don't want any of that "Science" mumbo jumbo.

[69camaroSS Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:17PM]

@n0ne

Yeah. . .science is for nerds.

[Michael Scrip Posted Mar 21st 2010 7:08PM]

@MikeZ -- "It plays Flash."

True... but Flash will still cripple a Core i7-980X

[n0ne Posted Mar 21st 2010 10:44PM]

@Michael Scrip, it would seem your new to the gadget world. Welcome!

[loocas Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:15PM]

DaVinci isn't for editing, it's a Color Grading suite.

Besides, this is a very nice rig, however, I'd build the same for almost half the price (skipping the water cooling). Besides, if you can afford DaVinci, you'd definitely NOT buy this "gamers' wet dream machine", but settle for a dual Xeon system with very, very fast harddrive setup, possibly SSDs and perhaps upgrade the GPU to something like 3800 at least with a GenLock card.

This is nonsense, imho...

[beneditor Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:39PM]

@loocas It's got nothing to do with the grading system. I don't think the name Da Vinci is copyrightable...

Anyone doubting the use of this thing would do well to go to NVidia's site, or google 'CUDA'. It's not much use until CS5 is released - and I'd rather remove my own testicles than edit on Premiere Pro...

[sydcinema Posted Mar 21st 2010 3:24PM]

@loocas different da vinci

[pizzaboy Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:17PM]

You can get a similarly speced computer, but with a better Nvidia FX3800 workstation graphics card at Xi Computer for $4,300.
I purchased a high-end CAD workstation from them last year and it has been a great buying experience with no problems with my computer.

http://www.xicomputer.com/products/Configure_prof.asp?model=mtowersp4&configid=

[loocas Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:25PM]

@pizzaboy I wouldn't buy a pair of shoelaces from them with such a website!

[69camaroSS Posted Mar 21st 2010 3:05PM]

@pizzaboy

Yeah, good find! Lot's of customizable features.

[nodrog2994 Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:17PM]

Widows 7 "PROCESSIONAL" wow is that new coz I thought it was "PROFESSIONAL" c'mon engadget spell stuff correctly

[KennyB123 Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:35PM]

@nodrog2994

It's the Wedding Edition.

[kgp777 Posted Mar 21st 2010 4:13PM]

@nodrog2994
Day after day, they provide us with updates on tech stuff and they make ONE mistake....Get over it?

[MRCUR Posted Mar 21st 2010 2:21PM]

I must say, I really like that case design.

[2shizzle Posted Mar 21st 2010 3:04PM]

I thought it was the funeral edition.

[Hazdaz Posted Mar 21st 2010 3:16PM]

The Quadro cards are the biggest waste of money - anyone that thinks they are any good simply because they are expensive has a lot to learn about graphic cards.

[sydcinema Posted Mar 21st 2010 3:25PM]

@Hazdaz anyone who hasn't used a Quadro card the way it was intended doesn't know anything about Quadro cards

[69camaroSS Posted Mar 21st 2010 3:47PM]

@Hazdaz

Go back to your games!!! Quadros are optimized and make most 3-D rendering and video editting programs scream.

[AniMill Posted Mar 21st 2010 5:35PM]

@69camaroSS Ahh, My favorite pet-peeve... I've met with the nVidia processional graphics experts and they've NEVER proven the advantage of the Quadro series over any routine video card. Programs like 3DS MAX (and I think Maya) use DirectX for their GUI acceleration, not OpenGL. I've got a friend who has this card and it doesn't do squat! The only place the Quadros count is the forced lockout of the gamer cards from Cuda... but that'll change when Dx11 is fully supported by other graphics programs utilizing the GPU Compute functions. But if you just want to throw away your money to show off (shades of SGI's later years), keep buying these "speciallty" cards.

[Hazdaz Posted Mar 21st 2010 6:59PM]

@69camaroSS

You CLEARLY have no clue what you are talking about.
Any professional that has even a remote knowledge about computer hardware knows that "gaming" (for lack of a better word) cards will work just as well - or better - in any CAD, 3D modeling, or video application. These "pro" cards are (for the most part) rebranded gaming cards with slightly tweaked drivers and maybe a little bit more cooling - however none of this even remotely warrants the absence prices that ATi and Nvidia charge for them. They also tend to be at least one generation behind their gaming-card cousins which in term give them less advanced features... and yet still usually cost 2X (or more) than a high-end gaming card.

Only idiots that equate a high price to performance think that Quadro cards are worth a damn. These cards are specifically aimed at the clueless IT people that don't know jack about graphics and order these over-priced cards so they can label a computer a "workstation."

[sydcinema Posted Mar 21st 2010 7:27PM]

@Hazdaz So what you're saying is, the 10X performance boost I see when I use the right card for my work is what, the work of the devil? Nvidia writes their drivers to specifically work with my software/hardware configurations. If your friends don't see a significant performance boost, they're doing it wrong. They're not using the right software, they're not configuring it correctly, so on and so on. That's that. If I need tweaks, they make tweaks... And it runs even better. If I have to pay an extra $1500 and not have the Co. hire on another IT guy with a d-bag attitude, I will GLADLY pay that, and then some. You have no idea how my industry works. There's a very good reason they seem "Behind" the gaming industry with drivers and whatnot. That is because they need to be sure it works, and doesn't crash. That sure as hell isn't the case in the consumer realm. Throw it at the wall like spaghetti, see if it sticks. Some shows I've worked on will run in excess of $18,000 per hour in post production costs. If one little card goes down and holds up production, who gives a rat's ass if it only cost $500. We pay money to make sure things work, and work smoothly. If it doesn't work, one of their support staff had better be finding out why. Every single company I've worked with who makes expensive hardware does so. Avid, Autodesk, etc. They all tend to do that.

[sydcinema Posted Mar 21st 2010 7:33PM]

@AniMill 3dsMax uses both OpenGl and DirectX. Most of the other compositing software I use is optimized for OpenGl, and DirectX isn't even an option. So wherever you got your info, they're doing it wrong

[Hazdaz Posted Mar 21st 2010 7:35PM]

@AniMill

It gets a little old trying to explain to people that don't have the foggiest idea about this stuff that a $300 "gaming" card is going to be as fast or faster than a $3000 "pro" card.

In years past, there was a MUCH bigger performance different between pro and gaming cards - the drivers that pro cards had gave you real, honest to goodness performance gains. I remember getting like 2X the viewport performance with an old-school FX1100 card while running MAXtreme drivers. 2 or 3 releases later, and the performance difference was negligible... today, there is essentially no performance difference.