Best cinema 4d pc workstation computer – cg director

This List could go on and on so what I will try to do here when People ask me what the best Computer for 3D Animation, the best Workstation for 3D Animation or specifically the best Computer for Cinema 4D is, is configure a Workstation that makes most of the stuff an average C4D User uses, run the best it can. With “most of the stuff” I mean:

This Workstation will give you roughly 1360 R15 Cinebench Points, which is still excellent for CPU-rendering. This PC though was configurated as a Workstation and not a render-node, meaning: “As little delay as possible while actively working on Scenes”. Cinema 4D Render-Node or Rendering Workstation / Best Computer or Workstation for 3D Rendering

Now lets look a bit into what the best PC configuration for 3D Rendering would be.


If you are looking for fastest CPU-render-speed the Processor configuration will have to go into a different direction: Max CPU Cores (e.g. Dual Xeon E5 2630v3 or i9 7900X – 7980XE), but this will then be slower for actively working, Animating/Modeling/Texturing in the viewport and more expensive.

I’m a Cinema 4D user of about 18 years, all of them spent using Apple Mac’s. I’ve a decent workstation (Mac Pro 2010 12-core) which I have recently upgraded the processors to the highest available for this machine (X5690 @ 3.46Ghz). I now get a CB score of around 1560, which is good for rendering, but with my stock Radeon HD 5770, and the general malaise of GPU performance under Mac OS anyway, I have become despondent that by even adding an Nvidia 1080 or Radeon 580 etc, I will get any decent viewport performance where I really need it these days, during modelling and animation! – Hence, I found myself here, having decided that maybe I need to rethink the front end of my workflow, and invest in a PC for this task, whilst utilising my MP as a Team Render machine.

So, prior to finding this article, I priced up some machines at sites like Overclockers UK, with their ‘Renda’ boxes, which seem to be using pretty the same hardware as you have listed here, with the i7 8700k being in their base model, but overclocked above 4Ghz. Their default GPU is also the Nvidia 106o, and I can add the 1080 or 1080TI for about £200 and £400 more consecutively.

My question to you, regardless of whether I look at building this machine myself, or buy configured, is in regards to the GPU – I want the fastest/smoothest C4D viewport feedback whilst modelling and animating, and whilst I understand the CPU single clock speed is of primary importance, will I see any greater benefit in a 1070/1080 0r 1080TI GPU over the 1060, or are the additional specs of these ONLY really seen if I use one of the GPU renderers like Octane or Redshift? (would Pro~Render benefit also?)

First, a fair point I realized when reading some threads on odforce forums ( http://forums.odforce.net/topic/27164-how-much-ram-is-enough/) and that made sense to me is that – aside from any overclocking considerations – it should be a complete waste of money to buy some RAM with a higher clock speed than what your CPU may support (which is way different from what your mainboard may support), ie, in your case (AMD TR 1950x) a maximum of 2,666Mhz ( https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x).

– the list of clock cycle times per frequency (which I could partially double-check with the official info issued by Crucial here: http://eu.crucial.com/eur/en/memory-performance-speed-latency), enabling you to determine in principle the actual latency of any type of DDR4 RAM: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/63gc1s/ram_speed_and_cl_equivalance/

-> I would not be surprised that the determination of the actual speed of RAM be significantly more complex than the simple formula included in Crucial’s white paper (considering for example that the latency of RAM is usually expressed by a series of increasing numbers, like 15-16-16-35-2N for example) but the above felt like being a pretty good indicator of the general “efficiency / speed” of a certain type of RAM to me.

And in the end, while having considered in my case as well a CPU that doesn’t support more than 2,666Mhz either (btw, am not sure that any CPU may actually support more than that for the time being), this led me to consider the relatively cheap set of HyperX Predator 4×16 Gb 2400Mhz CAS 12-14-14 as one of the best bang-of-the-buck types of RAM to get at the moment… Just my 2 cents here.

1) “After Effects became quite inefficient in using lots of cores unless you use a rendermanager”: Just to be sure I understand you correctly here, do you imply that the i7-7820x or the i9-7900x should not significantly harm the After Effects experience in the daily work / viewport navigation (I mean, compared to the i7-8700k) but that any of these 2 CPUs would just be some wasted overkill (still, compared to the i7-8700K) as far as rendering speed in AE (without any rendermanager) is concerned?

2) Re possible reported crashes with the Adobe suite, here is the post I had in mind (might just be the experience of one particular user whose uses may also be different from ours but it’s true that reports of overheating issues on the Skylake-X CPUs are generally recurring): https://pcpartpicker.com/b/JCFtt6 (see especially his 4 paragraphs as from “I was reading a few message boards where the 7820x was having issues with Adobe software…”)

b) any particular efficient cooler? (am really not a hardware geek, even less if custom loop watercooling options start being mentioned but am a bit worried whether just a good air cooler (like the Noctua NH-D15), or – if not – just a good AIO (like the EVGA – CLC 280 113.5 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler) would still do the job properly at stock speeds (or just slightly overclocked) on any of these 2 CPUs?)