REMINDER! If you encounter any issues with Enscape (e.g. crashes, installation problems) or your subscription please reach out to our dedicated support team directly through the Help Center or by using the Support button as detailed HERE! Thank you for your understanding.
  • Hi Enscape Forum,

    I am planning on buying a new pc for my office (sketchup, enscape vr, vectorworks, adobe, ...) no gaming

    I did some research and combined a few options of a custom build pc around an Nvidia RTX4080. It would be helpful in having some other opinion about the (processor, RAM, motherboard)

    OPTION 1:
    Intel I9-14900K 3,2GHZ (6GHz turbo boost

    Msi mpg Z790 carbon wifi socket

    Gskill 96GB DDR5 5600 kit

    Msi Geforce RTX 4080 16gb gaming X TRIO

    OPTION 2 (variation on the INTEL: I7 3,4GHZ)


    amd ryzen9 7950X3D (not sure if the 3d is actually good for modelling and rendering), 4,2 GHZ (5,7 turbo boos)

    msi mpg x670E Carbon wifi board

    Gskill 64 GB DDR 5 5200 kit

    I see a benifit of a higher speed of the amd processor (4,2 over the basic 3,2 on the intel)

    the intel seems to get more hot and eats more power than the amd

    on the amd it seems to be not possible to install a 96 gb ram (according to Alternate: the ram sets for 96 gb ram are 5600 speed and they are to fast for the speed which the processor allows)

    all those three options makes a budget around 3500-3700 euro, which i would like to keep.

    Any advice or input around this would be very helpfull helping me to decide, and get a better insight.

    Thank you


    • Official Post

    Hi Niek , welcome to our Forum and thanks for your inquiry.

    Generally these (three) CPU's you listed whether from Intel or AMD should more than suffice even when working with larger or more complex scenes, since it will always mainly be the graphics card which is responsible for a fluent experience with Enscape. Besides that the mainboards mentioned should be entirely sufficient too, and usually depending on the project sizes of yours you shouldn't really require more than 32-64GB of RAM either. There may be expectations of course, but generally speaking.

    Furthermore especially with a recent CPU like the Intel i9-14900K/AMD Ryzen9 7950X3D or even a current i7 there generally shouldn't be any bottlenecks that would hinder the GPU with meeting its full potential overall, like for example when it comes to utilizing our VR mode which naturally requires quite a bit of performance.

    Ultimately then it does depend on personal preference I would say. As you correctly stated Intel CPUs usually run hotter and consume more power compared to current "similarly performant" AMD offerings, but since you will be tethered all the time (unlike using a laptop for example) it wouldn't matter too much either.

    Again, you can't really go wrong with any of the options here but if you have any further questions what so ever let me know anytime!

  • burggraben , thanks for your reply, budgetwise a 4090 means 850 euro plusmin on top, which is quite a bit.
    Is in your opinion the 4080 not capable of dealing with VR?

    If you only want to run Medium quality a 4080 might be fine, but it depends on your project size too.

    In my opinion VR needs the best of the best, because it

    A - need to render more things (two eyes)

    B - lower FPS in VR are a lot worse than lower FPS on desktop (breaks immmersion, some people even get sick below a certain FPS threshold)

    You could get a cheaper card if VR isn't your focus, save the money for the next generation. We are halfway there to the 5090

  • I'm looking into VR for my office, but now I'm overall confused.

    Is it because the headsets are getting better, or the software requires more now, that previous "VR-ready" cards are not working well?

    In other words, yes, it will require top hardware to run a brand new headset, but if we get 1 or 2 generations behind, I assume the graphics card can be lesser as well.

    I have an RTX A4000 for reference. So I don't necessarily need the new HTC Vive, but maybe a Quest 2 would be fine.

    Is there a site I can look at for guidance per card?

    This is the NVIDIA Geforce Experience guidelines.

  • VR-ready is meaningless. Just because a card can run Beat Sabre, doesn't mean it can run Enscape. All very application specific, specific to YOUR model, YOUR textures, YOUR geometry and how much time you spent optimizing it.

    Not sure why you're running a workstation-class card if you want to do VR. It favors stability over performance for 3x the cost.

    To me Enscape VR is more like running a game, and less like calculating a protein structure prediction in research, so I choose a bleeding-edge consumer-grade hardware over enterprise-grade one-generation-behind 3x the price hardware.

    Especially since the 40 series consumer card come with lots of GPU memory (24gigs) another reason to choose enterprice GPU became mostly irrelevant.

  • Yeah, I fully agree with you and suggested a gaming card when they were building my PC, (I do a lot of rendering) but for whatever reason got a workstation card which I agree are way overpriced and barely appropriate for the use case.

    Maybe I'll suggest a 4090 and pass down my card to someone only using Revit and BIM software.

  • Option 1 (Intel i9-14900K):

    • High-performance CPU with impressive clock speeds.
    • Adequate motherboard and RAM for multitasking and rendering.
    • Powerful GPU for graphic-intensive tasks.

    Option 2 (Intel i7 variation):

    • Slightly lower specs compared to i9 but still suitable for office tasks.
    • Components should provide sufficient performance within budget.

    Option 3 (AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D):

    • Competitive performance with higher core count and slightly better speeds.
    • Adequate motherboard and RAM for most office tasks.
    • Comparable graphics performance to Intel options.

    Consider the specific requirements of your tasks, such as rendering and multitasking, and choose the option that best fits your needs within the budget.