Thinking about buying old used Dell Precision T3500 workstation

Hello, I've been stumble upon of buying a system within my budget and could do my jobs. Even if my budget is limited low, my tasks are all video and graphic related.
I don't have enough knowledge in computer hardware nor software. Therefore, I need your help before deciding to buy one.

I've been offering an old used Dell Precision Workstation T3500 with these spec:

Processor: Intel Xeon E5620
Memory: 12GB DDR3
Storage: SSD 128GB + HDD 1TB
Graphics Card: Nvidia Quadro 4000 2GB

Price: $610

I don't play game at all. I will only use it solely for Graphic works such as Photoshop CC, Illustrator CC, InDesign CC, Premiere Pro CC, After Effect CC, Audition CC etc. Is above spec could do the jobs?

Within the budget $610, it's nearly impossible for me build a new PC with decent spec that could fit my cased tasks.
Or, if you have any recommendation, I'd really appreciate your advice.

Thank you in advanced!
21 answers Last reply
More about thinking buying dell precision t3500 workstation
  1. If it takes a 5620 then you can jump up to the 5680 when you think you need an upgrade for threads and speed.
    2.4 to 3.3 and 8 to 12.
  2. The corporate DELL kit is good sturdy equipment, and used Precisions can be great value for money. I currently run a T3500 for CAD and Photoshop/Illustrator work, and it's ideal. (Also have a Precision M6600 for when I'm on the move.)

    The T3500 is a little fussy with RAM, but you can upgrade it to 24Gb if needed, and it has a rather beefy PSU as standard, that will allow it to run good video cards (two in SLI, if you are so inclined).

    $610 is a little on the steep side, although a Quadro 4000 isn't a cheap card, so on balance it's (or maybe was) a fair deal.

    Did you buy it, and what do you think of it?

    Andy.
  3. Admittedly, $600 sounds steep, but it's not all about benchmarks.

    If cheap "old tech" is productive, then why spend literally thousands on new kit, and if it's fit for purpose (it handles PS/AI, and even Solid Works perfectly well!), then who's the mug for chasing numbers. I personally wouldn't be any more productive with a $3000 workstation, so why waste my money, and why advise others to do so too?

    I bought my system from my employer, who swaps kit out when it nears the end of its on-site warranty, and have had it for well over 2 years now. It's perfect for what I do, and probably would be for a lot of people that aren't obsessed with benchmarks and pouring money down the drain!
  4. Thanks both of you for your advices. I'm not buying it considering it's an old system.
    I'm looking to buy newer one now!
  5. Not wishing to be argumentative, but I still maintain that ex-corporate machines can be good value, but it does seriously depend on usage.

    My T3500 is perfect for what I need to do. It handles my image manipulation and CAD programs (which are also a couple of years old, because for a private "low-use" user, tens of thousands for the latest and greatest software is out of the question!) perfectly.

    Again, it depends entirely on what you want to do. I have a licensed SolidWorks 2013 seat, and PS/AI CC (also 2013 licenses), 24Gb ECC RAM, a couple of Samsung EVO 850 SSDs, and a Quadro FX5800 card. It cost a 10th of a 2015 system, that *PERSONALLY* I would be no better off with.

    I'm not playing games, I'm not building 'hugely' complicated parts/assemblies in SolidWorks, and I'm not in film production, so I have no need to buy a 2014/15 workstation.

    Horses for courses, my friend. What I do concede, is that on reflection $600 is a lot. A basic T3500 can be bought for less than £100/$65, and my comment was based more on the Quadro 2000 GPU and RAM, which would be useful in my personal scenario.
  6. tea urchin said:
    Because 'old' tech can never be productive compared to 'new' tech. Thats what Moores law is about.Thats why new pc's are cheaper than old ones.Thats why people upgrade old stuff for new, the ever increasing transistor count and performance increase per $/£/whatever.
    If you believe you can buy a six or 7 year old system and defeat these laws by buying something that cost $5000 7 yrs ago, you are mistaken..
    It does not work. Todays programs are written for todays pc chips.
    A 4k cpu mark work station with its cpu score spread out over twice the threads will not compete in a modern game scenario,no matter who wrote the game.It just does not have the single core or single thread instruction per cycle score.
    As a work platform,it will be 2/3rds of a modern 6000 cpu i5 machine.
    Forget it and buy a new pc.
    It IS all about the bencnchmarks.
    Thats what they are FOR? ;
    MEASURING THE PERFORMANCE OF A CPU; translated into numbers.
    Its not 'Rocket Science'.
    These heavily threaded old slow chips are just Junk.


    You are an idiot, moors law with cpus died long ago. People buying new stuff are wasting money. Its the opposite of the dribble you are pedding. You can get T3500 for 250.00 now on ebay. You won't be able to build anything close new that can touch it at that price.
  7. tea urchin said:
    Moore's law never existed actually.It was 'more' of a prediction.
    As for people buying new stuff wasting money you obviously have absolutely no grasp whatsoever of the way software influences hardware and how they are linked through evolution.
    So I can buy a knackered old multithread unit for 250 something or other but if I run modern software on it it will grind to a halt because it was not written for ten yr old tech.
    And motherboard life spans are generally in single figures because of capacitor and transistor life expectancy but you found one that works so the general public are idiots.Or just me perhaps.
    Mr STbob, of zero best answers out of 9, its probably best you actually gain a grasp of the subject before you start calling others idiots because at the moment you are coming across as a completely out of depth imbecile. (edit;who spends 250 on several year old junk computers).


    You continue to put foot in mouth. The t3500s came with w3690 xeon 6 core cpus. They still hang with everything out there. Can run windows 10, hyperV, with ease, Faster than a quad 3770k. There is NOTHING they can't run in 2016 including ALL games, VMs. They have 12 threads not 4 like the new I5s.

    And unlike most dekstop systems they support ECC ram. An option only available on xeons. A similar new system is over $1,600 and is like 10 percent faster. Put a GTX 970 in one and you have a $550.00 dollar workstation gaming rig that will handle any game at 1080p while running Virtual machine in the background. Computers stopped getting faster 6 years ago, since then its been incremental steps and reduced power usage. Its sad but not much exciting has happened with PCs in some time.
  8. lajame said:
    Hello, I've been stumble upon of buying a system within my budget and could do my jobs. Even if my budget is limited low, my tasks are all video and graphic related.
    I don't have enough knowledge in computer hardware nor software. Therefore, I need your help before deciding to buy one.

    I've been offering an old used Dell Precision Workstation T3500 with these spec:

    Processor: Intel Xeon E5620
    Memory: 12GB DDR3
    Storage: SSD 128GB + HDD 1TB
    Graphics Card: Nvidia Quadro 4000 2GB

    Price: $610

    I don't play game at all. I will only use it solely for Graphic works such as Photoshop CC, Illustrator CC, InDesign CC, Premiere Pro CC, After Effect CC, Audition CC etc. Is above spec could do the jobs?

    Within the budget $610, it's nearly impossible for me build a new PC with decent spec that could fit my cased tasks.
    Or, if you have any recommendation, I'd really appreciate your advice.

    Thank you in advanced!


    lajame,

    A Precision T3500 was designed to run those exact programs listed with complete reliability and can be configured to run today at speeds fully competitive with current systems for 1/5 of the cost. For the last seven years I've bought used workstations (Dell Precision: 390, T5400, T5500, T3500, HP z420 4-core, 6-core) and upgraded with perfect reliability and very good performance- sometimes very good performance as the current HP z420 is the highest rated on Passmark.

    As I documented the upgrading of a T3500 for a project in systems analysis:

    Purchased for $53 + $24 shipping 12.12.15:

    Precision T3500 (2011) (Original) Xeon W3530 4-core @ 2.8 /3.06GHz > 4GB (2X 2GB) DDR3-1333 ECC > GeForce 9800 GT (1GB)> WD Black 500GB
    [Passmark system rating = 1963, CPU = 4482 / 2D= 609 / 3D=805 / Mem= 1409 / Disk=1048]

    CPU: $60
    RAM: $43
    GPU, PERC 6/i and drives left over from another upgrade

    TOTAL Expenditure $185 =

    3. Dell Precision T3500 (2011) (Rev 2) Xeon X5677 4-core @ 3.06 / 3.46GHz > 12GB (6X 2GB) DDR3-1333 ECC > Quadro 4000 (2GB) > PERC 6/i + Seagate 300GB 15K SAS ST3300657SS + WD Black 500GB > 525W PSU> Windows 7 Professional 64-bit > 2X Dell 19" LCD
    [Passmark system rating = 2751, CPU = 7236 / 2D= 658 / 3D=2020 / Mem= 1875 / Disk=1221]

    If I add the value of the used parts I added, the total cost is about $350

    This is how I studied the upgrade possibilities. The GPU is not as much analyzed as the CPU as I was going to be using a left-over Quadro 4000:

    Passmark Ratings:

    I. Highest rated Precision T3500 / W3530_ Passmark 12.13.15

    A. Rating = 2918 (Quadro 4000 / Kingston HyperX 3K 240GB / 24GB)
    B. CPU = 5298
    C. 2D = 605 (Quadro 4000)
    D. 3D= 2562 ( Quadro 4000)
    E. Mem = 1675 (24 GB)
    F. Disk = 2677 (Kinsgston HyperX 3K 240GB )

    II. Top score T3500 / W3530 by Parameter:

    A. Rating = 2918 (Quadro 4000 / Kinsgston HyperX 3K 240GB / 24GB)
    B. CPU = 5597 (Quadro FX3800 / W5000AKS / 12GB)
    C. 2D = 605 (Quadro 4000)
    D. 3D= 5828 (GTX 960)(Highest workstation: 3024 Quadro K4000)
    E. Mem = 1750 (24 GB> Quadro 4000)
    F. Disk = 8189 (Samsung 840 series)

    III. Top scoring T3500 (710 tested_12.13.15):

    A. Rating = 4155 (X5690 / GTX 680 / Raid / 12GB)
    B. CPU = 9712
    C. 2D = 684
    D. 3D= 5723
    E. Mem = 1878
    F. Disk = 5378

    IV. Top score T3500 by Parameter:

    A. Rating = 4155
    B. CPU = 9712 (X5690)
    C. 2D = 891 (GTX 570)(Highest workstation: 781 Quadro FX 1800)
    D. 3D= 8131 (GTX 970)(Highest workstation: 3024 Quadro K4000)
    E. Mem = 1965 (24 GB> Quadro FX1800)
    F. Disk = 8189 (Samsung 840 series)

    V. Top T3500 with Quadro 4000 (56 tested)

    Rating_CPU _____ 2D__ 3D__ Mem ____ Disk

    A. 3439 9404 (W3690) 662 1464 2066 (20GB) 4244 (Sam 850 PRO)

    VI. Top T3500 / Quadro 4000 by Parameter

    A. Rating = 3439
    B. CPU = 9652 (W3690)
    C. 2D = 692 (W3690)
    D. 3D = 2562 (W3530 / Kingston Hyper 240GB, 24GB)
    E. Mem = 2066 (24GB) (X5687 /Quadro K4000)
    F. Disk = 4244 (W3690 / Sam 850 Pro)

    LGA1366 CPU’s:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Xeon_microprocessors

    http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php

    http://ark.intel.com/products

    4-Core: Passmark CPU Average Ebay_12.13.15

    _W-3500 series / 45nm / 8MB cache / 130W / 24GB > 800,1066 / HT

    I. W3520
    II. W3530 2.8 / 3.06GHz _5372 [5587 actual] _$11 > $65
    III. W3540 2.93 / 3.2 _5492
    IV. W3550 3.06 / 3.33 _5761
    V. W3565 3.2 / 3.46 _6083
    VI. W3570 3.2 / 3.46 _6261 _$25 > $50
    VII. W3580 3.33 / 3.6 _6586 _$50 > $95

    _X-5500 series (8MB cache / 45nm / 95W_ 2009)

    I. X5550 2.67 / 3.06 _5422
    II. X5560 2.8 / 3.2 _5442
    III. X5570 2.93 / 3/33 _5638 _$14 > $45
    IV. X5590 3.33 / 3.6 _9216 _$37 >

    _W-5500 series (8MB cache / 45nm / 95W_ 2009)

    I. W5580 3.2 / 3.46 (130W) _5718 _$21 > $50
    II. W5590 3.33 / 3.6 _6314 _$32 > $200

    _X-5600 series 32nm/ 8MB/ 95W_ 2011)

    I. X5647 2.93 / 3.2 _5996
    II. X5667 3.07 / 3.46 _4655 _$16 > $40
    III. X5672 3.2 / 3.6 _5148 _$45 > $87
    IV. X5677 3.46 / 3.73 (130W)_7046 _$33 > $80
    V. X5687 3.6 / 3.86 _7217 _$70 > $130

    6-Core

    _X-5600 series 32nm / 12MB / 95W_2011)

    I. X5660 2.87 / 3.2 _7587 _$68 > [$100] > $180
    II. X5675 3.07 / 3.46 _8584 _$78 > [$112] > $215
    III. X5680 3.33 / 3.6 (130W) _9011 _$113> [$140] > $274
    IV. X5690 3.47 / 3.73 (2011) _9216 _$182 >[$220] > $291

    _W-3600 series / 32nm / 12MB / 130W > 24GB >

    I. W3670 3.2 / 3.46 (1066) _6261 _$90 > $160
    II. W3680 3.33 / 3.6 (1333) _9398 _$140 > $208
    III. W3690 3.47 / 3.73 _9703 _$160 > $400

    _________________________________________________________

    However, a Precision T3500 at $610 with that processor can be far bettered by going a generation newer:

    Dell Precision T3600 Workstation | 2.80GHz Xeon | 4gb DDR3 | 250gb | DVD-ROM sold for $232 (2Jan16)

    http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dell-Precision-T3600-Workstation-2-80GHz-Xeon-4gb-DDR3-250gb-DVD-ROM-/131688711266?hash=item1ea9424462%3Ag%3AUxIAAOSwk1JWg-AQ&nma=true&si=Ne0b%252Fyr7cmFIpl1Yb38htVsvGKw%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

    And changing the CPU to an 8-core Xeon E5:

    Intel Xeon E5-2680 2.7GHz 8-Core Processor (CM8062107184424) SR0KH > sold for $185 (19Feb16)

    http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-E5-2680-2-7GHz-8-Core-Processor-CM8062107184424-SR0KH-/191760214322?hash=item2ca5cca932:g:5ioAAOSw~otWb1tC

    There are then 8-core / 16 threads at 2.7 /3.5GHz,- double a 4-core with 3.5GHz for modeling, and all those 2.7GHz threads for video processing in Premiere, which is fully multi-threaded. Large, high resolution rendering will be faster as well, but especially in video editing, the running time could be cut to less than 1/4.

    And add to above system:

    1. 64GB of DDR3-1600 ECC unbuffered
    2. PERC H310 RAID controller- I bought one NOS for $60 for a Precision T5500
    3. A Samsung 850 Evo 500GB or M.2 drive on an M.2 to PCIe adapter for OS/Applications
    4. 3X enterprise level mechanical drives in a RAID 1+0 ( I like Seagate Constellation ES.3, and WD RE)

    Purchasing the right system, and the upgrade parts at the same time, you can have it up and running on in hours or get it into service and then upgrade as you find the parts. Based on a reliable workstation will give you really good performance for less money and far less effort.

    I've bought obsolete workstations for the last seven years and upgraded them with perfect reliability. these systems are also worth a far higher percentage of their original cost when sold. The Dell Precision T5500 listed below cost a total of about $1,000 and after a year's use might be still worth, $1,200 and when sold in three years it may have cost about $50/ year or so.

    Just a thought.

    Cheers,

    BambiBoom

    Modeling:

    1. HP z420 (2015) > Xeon E5-1660 v2 (6-core @ 3.7 / 4.0GHz) > 32GB DDR3 1866 ECC RAM > Quadro K4200 (4GB) > Intel 730 480GB (9SSDSC2BP480G4R5) > Western Digital Black WD1003FZEX 1TB> M-Audio 192 sound card > 600W PSU> > Windows 7 Professional 64-bit > Logitech z2300 speakers > 2X Dell Ultrasharp U2715H (2560 X 1440)>
    [ Passmark Rating = 5064 > CPU= 13989 / 2D= 819 / 3D= 4596 / Mem= 2772 / Disk= 4555] [Cinebench R15 > CPU = 1014 OpenGL= 126.59 FPS] 7.8.15

    Pending upgrade: HP /LSI 9212-4i PCIe SAS /SATA HBA RAID controller, 2X Seagate Constellation ES.3 1TB (RAID 1)

    Rendering:

    2. Dell Precision T5500 (2011) (Revised) > 2X Xeon X5680 (6 -core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz), 48GB DDR3 1333 ECC Reg. > Quadro K2200 (4GB ) > PERC H310 / Samsung 840 250GB / WD RE4 Enterprise 1TB > M-Audio 192 sound card > Logitech z313 > 875W PSU > Windows 7 Professional 64> HP 2711x (27", 1920 X 1080)
    [ Passmark system rating = 3844 / CPU = 15047 / 2D= 662 / 3D= 3500 / Mem= 1785 / Disk= 2649] (12.30.15)
  9. tea urchin said:
    'A similar new system is over $1,600 and is like 10 percent faster.'
    And there is the rub. Not only do you not understand the difference between a work station and a desktop, you dont know if this motherboard will last another 2 months or 3 years.
    You keep coming out with nonsense like 'it will hang' with the new stuff.
    Its total power is spread over 12 threads but most games can only utilize 4 threads max, some , 8.
    (so thats near a quarter of the chip unusable for a start)
    Many windows apps cant use more than 8 threads, many more only 1.
    You keep comparing these processors over all scores to new desktop chips but it doesnt work like that.
    Even your prices are wildly exaggerated. A new intel hex core chip is under 350 dollars and a motherboard is under $200.
    https://pcpartpicker.com/part/intel-cpu-bx80648i75820k
    https://pcpartpicker.com/parts/motherboard/#s=28&X=0,20324
    You can post all the benches you want.You wont escape the fact a new i5 desktop chip is a better home pc than a several yr old work station.
    https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-5820K+%40+3.30GHz
    This chip overclocks to low-mid 4 gigs with ease.Thats about 17000 cpu marks. It RINCES your old work station gear.
    You keep valuing stuff by what it cost 5 years ago you will never benefit from the reductions progress gives us.
    Old crap will always be old crap. If you spend your 250 $ and are happy its not unusual.
    Most people who have not been in a position to buy something newer would be over the moon as well.
    Generally, right up until the motherboard dies and leaves them without a working machine at all.

    http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+X5680+%40+3.33GHz

    https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-6700K+%40+4.00GHz

    https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-5820K+%40+3.30GHz


    tea urchin,

    You're approach to performance comparison is completely ignoring the OP's query. The original post asked if a particular Dell Precision T3500 for $610 would perform well for a particular set of workstation tasks: "I don't play game at all. I will only use it solely for Graphic works such as Photoshop CC, Illustrator CC, InDesign CC, Premiere Pro CC, After Effect CC, Audition CC etc. Is above spec could do the jobs?"

    The salient points are then tying reasonable performance to particular hardware at a particular price.This is a typical and fundamental cost / performance analysis. From your comments which concentrate on performance in games, it's apparent that you have not had experience with these applications and yet venture dogmatic proclamations as fact.

    To answer, it's necessary to understand the particular demands of the program used and , in my view, relate the hardware to the most demanding program. In this example, the most hardware-intensive application is Premiere Pro as it is fully multi-threaded- more threads are more important than fast single-threaded performance as it has to process every frame.

    As the OP apparently has a limited budget, the task becomes one of which system for $610 would perform best in that application- is the T3500 up to the job? My answer is that the particular system can be easily bettered for a similar cost- or by upgrading the Xeon E5620 to a Xeon W3690, but the best performance for the cost will always be a used system.

    Used is a question of degree. The HP z420 I use (system cost $937, total cost about $1,800) has a Xeon E5-1660 v2 - introduced the 3rd quarter of 2013 (6-core @ 3.7 /4.0), That CPU is ranked No. 34 on Passmark and scores 13989, higher than any of the new CPU's to which you linked, with the added benefit of 12 threads instead of 8. In the case of my Precision T5500, (system cost $171, total cost $1,100) the CPU score from a pair of Xeon X5680's - from the 1st Quarter of 2010 is 15047, higher than any Skylake available and offers 24 threads, 48GB of RAM, and a 6GB's disk system. The T5500 challenges any new $1,100 system in the World to run a Premiere Pro project. With the right choice a depreciated CPU means that for the same cost the performance is higher.

    It's critical too to consider the entire system, not only the CPU or GPU. the Quadro 4000 in the T3500 is quite good for the use, and in for example Maya, the Quadro 4000 will perform better than a GTX Titan. again, it's necessary to know what aspects of performance are important to the application. and Quadros finish every frame as compared to the "it's good enough to be seen for for 1/24th of a second" approach of gaming cards that rely on high frame rates. using the same program and setttings, I spent a lot of time trying to get a GTX 285 to make renderings and was never able to have a single one of sufficient quality and it included crashing after 30 minutes. This was replaced by a used Quadro FX4800 and that GPU is still working perfectly 4 years later.

    As for reliability, I have at the moment four Dell Precisions: 390 (2007), T5400 (2008), T3500 (2010), T5500 (2011), and two HP z420's (2013 and 2015)- all purchased used. None of these system has ever had a single failed component and I paid $25 for the second X5460. Show me a new $25 CPU that will outperform an X5460 for five years. The T5400, purchased in 2010 was used for rendering until I bought the T5500 in 2015, running usually 12 hours per day and sometimes continuously for three days at full performance.

    Given unlimited budgets, a new system can be constituted that will have better performance, but in the example of the Xeon E5-1660 v2, the next higher performing CPU is the Xeon E5-2643 v3 - the current model- and that CPU costs $1,730- almost as much as I paid for my entire upgraded system, the highest rated z420 on Passmark. For the X5680, the currently available dual Xeon with equal performance (14,900, which is actually lower than 15,047) is the E5-2623 v3. Further, that is 4-core @ 3.0 /3.5GHz compared to the X5680 6-core @ 3.33 /3.46GHz and a pair will cost $2,040, whereas the X5680 in m system cost $230 and $170.

    In summary:

    1. Workstation hardware is designed and configured for high performance and reliability in content creation applications reliability.

    2. New can be higher performance than used, but new will always be more expensive for the same performance.

    3. The hardware for content creation is different from that for content consumption and as you ignore cost / performance and without reference to the use, the answers derived are snide, meaningless, and in my view contrary to the interests and benefit of the OP.

    Very good discussion!

    Cheers,

    BambiBoom
  10. You are way too wordy in the the replay. Bottom line you can get used T3500 with a 6 core for 200-280.00.

    Nothing that has comeout in recent years is going to crush it performance wise. Maybe 10-20 percent on cherry picked tasks. Unless you are doing something that takes 8 hours to do like 3D max a new system is not going to beat it for the money. Computers are so fast now that 10 percent faster of a process that takes 1 milisecond will not be felt in real world.

    I have machines from I7 920 to 4770k to 12 core servers. I can do everything on the 920 I can on the 4770k and they feel about the same. Sure I can cherry pick benchmarks to show in certain areas the 4770k is faster but unless you are encoding all day the difference is not felt in day to day tasks.
  11. tea urchin said:
    In summary; spending 250 greenbacks on a several year old ex business machine is a very risky proposition indeed and will likely lead to a 'no pc at all scenario' and a hosed away $250.
    The lost 250 will be the bottom line.


    Oh yes the sky is falling nice try to scare people. T3500s are bullet proof. Run for years non stop. Built better than consumer pcs.
    I have one at my office running for years no issues. The cpus are fast, stable and support ECC ram. They are a great deal because 3 generations of intel cpus have not widened the gap much. People just buy new like drone without tinking bang for the buck. I bought a 3 year old R610 for like 1200 with 12 core 24 threads. New its like $10,000 and its been running over a year 24/7 no issues.
  12. STbob said:
    tea urchin said:
    In summary; spending 250 greenbacks on a several year old ex business machine is a very risky proposition indeed and will likely lead to a 'no pc at all scenario' and a hosed away $250.
    The lost 250 will be the bottom line.


    Oh yes the sky is falling nice try to scare people. T3500s are bullet proof. Run for years non stop. Built better than consumer pcs.
    I have one at my office running for years no issues. The cpus are fast, stable and support ECC ram. They are a great deal because 3 generations of intel cpus have not widened the gap much. People just buy new like drone without tinking bang for the buck. I bought a 3 year old R610 for like 1200 with 12 core 24 threads. New its like $10,000 and its been running over a year 24/7 no issues.


    STbob,

    I fully agree with you comments regarding used systems. Since 2008 I've had used systems, mostly workstations: Dell Precisions: 390, T3500, T5400, T5500, HP: z420 , HP z420, Poweredge 2600 (server), Optiplex 740, Dell Dimension E520. I still have all of these and not one of these systems has had a single component failure. The T5400 2008 - purchased for $500 in 2010 is especially noteworthy as it was my main system for five years, sometimes running continuously a week including rendering slogs with all 8 cores working continuously for three days.

    The T5400 performance is easy to better today, but as compared to the 2011 T5500 only at great expense. The T5500 has 12-cores at 3.33 / 3.6GHz, 48GB of RAM, a Quadro K2200 4GB, PERC H310 controller, Samsung 840 / WD Black. The system, which cost a total of about $1,000, has a Passmark rating is 3844 with a CPU score of 15047. That CPU rating can be surpassed by a new CPU, but on Passmark, two six cores at that clock speed require a pair of E5-2643 v3 costing about $3,200. If I bought a new Dell Precision T7910 with a similar system rating on Passmark: E5-2630 v3 / K4200 / 64GB, SK hynix SH920, the CPU is an 8-core 3.0 / 3.5GHz, scoring 12913 and costing more than $6,000. As well, after resale my used workstations over three years have cost about $50-$100 a year to own, whereas the T7910 may cost $800-1,000 /yr.

    There is of course a risk in anything used, and at the top end, with enough money, new systems are amazingly capable and reliable, but workstations were designed- like servers- for ultra-reliability under continuous, full performance use. For a 1/10th overall operating cost, I'm willing to take that risk and so far have been rewarded. Our friend tea urchin seems obsessed with dramatic comments without apparently having personal experience.

    Cheers,

    BambiBoom
  13. bambiboom said:
    STbob said:
    tea urchin said:
    In summary; spending 250 greenbacks on a several year old ex business machine is a very risky proposition indeed and will likely lead to a 'no pc at all scenario' and a hosed away $250.
    The lost 250 will be the bottom line.


    Oh yes the sky is falling nice try to scare people. T3500s are bullet proof. Run for years non stop. Built better than consumer pcs.
    I have one at my office running for years no issues. The cpus are fast, stable and support ECC ram. They are a great deal because 3 generations of intel cpus have not widened the gap much. People just buy new like drone without tinking bang for the buck. I bought a 3 year old R610 for like 1200 with 12 core 24 threads. New its like $10,000 and its been running over a year 24/7 no issues.


    STbob,

    I fully agree with you comments regarding used systems. Since 2008 I've had used systems, mostly workstations: Dell Precisions: 390, T3500, T5400, T5500, HP: z420 , HP z420, Poweredge 2600 (server), Optiplex 740, Dell Dimension E520. I still have all of these and not one of these systems has had a single component failure. The T5400 2008 - purchased for $500 in 2010 is especially noteworthy as it was my main system for five years, sometimes running continuously a week including rendering slogs with all 8 cores working continuously for three days.

    The T5400 performance is easy to better today, but as compared to the 2011 T5500 only at great expense. The T5500 has 12-cores at 3.33 / 3.6GHz, 48GB of RAM, a Quadro K2200 4GB, PERC H310 controller, Samsung 840 / WD Black. The system, which cost a total of about $1,000, has a Passmark rating is 3844 with a CPU score of 15047. That CPU rating can be surpassed by a new CPU, but on Passmark, two six cores at that clock speed require a pair of E5-2643 v3 costing about $3,200. If I bought a new Dell Precision T7910 with a similar system rating on Passmark: E5-2630 v3 / K4200 / 64GB, SK hynix SH920, the CPU is an 8-core 3.0 / 3.5GHz, scoring 12913 and costing more than $6,000. As well, after resale my used workstations over three years have cost about $50-$100 a year to own, whereas the T7910 may cost $800-1,000 /yr.

    There is of course a risk in anything used, and at the top end, with enough money, new systems are amazingly capable and reliable, but workstations were designed- like servers- for ultra-reliability under continuous, full performance use. For a 1/10th overall operating cost, I'm willing to take that risk and so far have been rewarded. Our friend tea urchin seems obsessed with dramatic comments without apparently having personal experience.

    Cheers,

    BambiBoom


    I just figured out why tea bag keeps worrying about a dead 250.00 PC. He buys very very cheap new stuff with weak solder and bad caps which dies in a few years. He is a cheap skate.

    I have PCs from the 1980s, Ataris, commodores, PCs from the 1990s, 2000s, and you know they all still work. I've only had a few power supplies (cheap ones) go bad, a a few hard drives. Both are easy to replace if you know what you are doing.

    PC motherboards even from the 90s don't just die, he must buy the worst ones to save a buck maybe ones with bad caps. That explains why he worries over a used PC going bad, his new ones go bad in a year or two, he has never had a quality motherboard.
  14. tea urchin said:
    Any circuit board with modern components on it including caps, transistors,resistors etc DOES just die,which is why your local dump has flat screen tv's wrapped up in cellophane to be recycled by kiddies in china.
    Generally I dont take much notice of somebody who comments on quality whilst admitting to repeating the mistake of buying cheap power supplies,but for your info I am running an asus H87m-plus.
    The previous pc I had for many years is still working away for a friend despite having an asrock hybrid board in it.
    I do actually own a 128k spectrum +3, (the one with the floppy drive).
    Cheeses, you dont half crack on like a newb.


    Cheap non lead solder of consumer cheapy boards. You have never owned a real server with ECC. You are small potatoes. Comparing LCD to motherboards is apples and oranges again, you sound like a PC noob.
  15. tea urchin said:
    But I have 800 best answers on this(purchased new) motherboard and you have on your (used) dinosaur ;.. erm, zero.


    You don't have any experience with commercial grade servers. You should not even be posting here given your limited experience. Go troll someplace else.
  16. tea urchin said:
    Thats quite funny considering the numbers.
    And who said you had to have experience with commercial grade servers to advise about pc's here(not that you have demonstrated any beyond paying too much for one and using it for U toob)
    Lets see. 'Night Owl' and 'initiated'. A day or so short of 6 weeks membership and not a single best answer not just in business,but anywhere.
    Get something out of that dinosaur you can pass on before you judge others,eh?
    You are embarrassing yourself.


    What is this best answer thing you care so much about. Oh you are less interested in the truth as you are in some kind of popularity contest. That stuff does never enters my mind. Best worst answer king.
  17. tea urchin said:
    But I have 800 best answers on this(purchased new) motherboard and you have on your (used) dinosaur ;.. erm, zero.


    I feel you have taken this conversation off topic. Is the T3500 a solid machine? Short answer is YES.
    Many have a warranty even though used.

    Used Workstations and Servers from Dell are not a huge risk. I've purchased many and have yet to have a bad one. They test them and warranty them. These are not parts from some kids basement.

    Do Xeon cpus have a lower or higher failure rate vs consumer chips? Lower (not much though)

    Would I risk 250.00 on a used Xeon worstaion or pay 2,000 for a new one. Oh its not much of a risk and the production of a T3500 vs new is going to be very similar.

    My vote is T3500 as best bang for the buck. Take the savings and go buy something else.
  18. tea urchin said:
    Ah,yes. I can see having the answers to peoples questions might elude you a bit.
    There is a fresh episode of The Vampire Diaries on primewire just in case you really want to exercise those 12 threads.


    tea urchin,

    The focus of the original post was for the OP to acquire a system suitable for video and graphic work. The work included using Premiere Pro and After Affect, two very demanding programs And, in looking for this system, lajame realized that a new system with the performance required is over the budget, so asked if a Dell Precision T3500 with a Xeon E5620 and Quadro 4000 would work.

    The answer, in my view is that a T3500 could do these tasks, but would be better with a 6-core CPU and more RAM. Your answer was nowhere to the point; that used computers were rubbish and the money would be wasted when it failed. That reply does not seem to be supported by any direct experience and to me seems counter-productive. It's certainly counter to my direct experience and apparently to that of our friend STbob.

    I bought in 1998 a new Dell T700R with a 750Mhz Pentium III ($2,400) and with XP Pro 64-bit running AutoCad 2004, Adobe CS3, Sketchup 8, Office 2003. I can start this system today and run any of the those programs without any irregularities. As it's running programs for it's era, the speed is completely acceptable. The same is true of my 2004 Dell Dimension 8400 P4 3GHz (bought new $1,800) , and all my used systems: 2006 Dell Optiplex 740, 2007 Dell Precision 390,2006 Dell Poweredge 1900 server, 2008 Dell Precision T5400, 2008 HP Elite M9426F, 2010 Dell Precision T5500, 2013 HP z420, and 2015 HP z420. None of these nine systems has ever had a single component failure. It may be luck or relatively careful maintenance but, to support your reply, can you offer direct experience in which nine, used systems failed ?

    Yes, workstations today are faster and have more cores, but within a certain range- I'd say starting in 2010, the cost / performance / reliability of a used workstation can't be even nearly approached by a new one. I challenge any new $1,000 computer in the World against my $1,000, 2011 Dell Precision T5500 to time in the running of 40, 3180 X 2140 renderings continuously and in one year see which system sells for a higher percentage of it's cost.

    Cheers,

    BambiBoom

    -only 323 best answers

    Dell Precision T5500 (2011) (Revised) > 2X Xeon X5680 (6 -core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz), 48GB DDR3 1333 ECC Reg. > Quadro K2200 (4GB ) > PERC H310 / Samsung 840 250GB / WD RE4 Enterprise 1TB > M-Audio 192 sound card > Logitech z313 > 875W PSU > Windows 7 Professional 64> HP 2711x (27", 1920 X 1080)
    [ Passmark system rating = 3844 / CPU = 15047 / 2D= 662 / 3D= 3550 / Mem= 1785 / Disk= 2649] (12.30.15)
  19. Again we have Tea Bag kiddie rambling off topic about cars now.
  20. I think it might have decent performance for what you want to do......... but 600 bucks? That's steep vs what you could build yourself with either new or old parts or a combination.

    My old company used to let you take these type of machines home with you, for just a £50 donation to charity (including the keyboard, mouse and monitor - less the OS as they wiped the drives for data protection!)

    You can get better on Ebay for less.
  21. our office needed another win 7 workstation. I priced out a new one on Dell 2,800 for a 6 core 16 gig ecc. Got a 3 month warranty T3500 with w3690 hex core 24 gig ecc win7 pro for 225.00. Its faster than we need at that particular workstation but for 225.00 it was a steal. Saved $2,500 off a new one.
Ask a new question

Read More

Workstations Dell Systems Job Market