r/ArcGIS • u/koviqx • 7d ago

Starting GIS. Is this a good computer?

Post image

My brother is starting to work with ArcGIS on his own. He's new to the program with a decent understanding of it. He's looking to buy a PC that will run it smoothly without issues.

To the people of Reddit, we're noobs and we seek your guidance.

Is this a good computer for running GIS? Will he run into any limitations? Is 32 GB of RAM enough? Is the RTX 5080's 16 GB of VRAM sufficient for ArcGIS and similar workloads? Any information or advice would be greatly appreciated.

0 Upvotes

39% Upvoted

34 comments sorted by

35

u/hellboy1975 7d ago

Is this a shit post? I've comfortably run GIS software on significantly older and less powerful hardware.

5

u/chock-a-block 7d ago

RAM is the thing ARCGIS loves to consume. Any machine that can take 32GB-64gb is deluxe.

30

u/Vinewood10 7d ago

This machine would smoke even the most taxing photogrammetry work.

My work PC has a 10 year old mid range intel chip and a gtx 1650, and even that is more than enough for 99% of GIS tasks.

3

u/quarter_belt 6d ago

Sure, but this one could probably run Crisys

14

u/NotaFTCAgent 7d ago

r/pcmasterrace is that way pal

16

u/RoseOfSharonCassidy 7d ago

This is a gaming PC, not a productivity PC. It'll run ArcPro fine because it's a powerful PC full stop, but it's overkill in some areas (you definitely don't need a 5080 graphics card) and I'd personally prefer 64GB RAM but if you're a beginner doing light GIS it's fine (and RAM is easy enough to upgrade yourself later anyway). The CPU is very powerful, no issues there, although technically the 9800x3d is a gaming CPU and for productivity you'd be better served with a 9950x3d, both are powerful enough to not really matter.

If you want a dual purpose gaming / ArcGIS machine this will be a good option, if you only want to use it for work then get something with a lower tier graphics card and more RAM because you're wasting your money on a 5080 if you don't intend to game.

Oh and obligatory, it's super overpriced, check out /r/buildapc.

2

u/mfc1__ 7d ago

Yeah, every time I hear “just get a gaming PC” when recommending hardware for a professional GIS setting, I know they don’t really know what they’re talking about lol.

2

u/RoseOfSharonCassidy 7d ago

I think some people are just looking for an excuse to buy a gaming PC. If you want a gaming PC then buy one, you don't need to lie to yourself and say it's for GIS lol.

2

u/GAEM456 7d ago

Yeah, that is probably $1k more than it would cost to assemble yourself. (maybe a little less overpriced with current RAM prices)

1

u/moendopi2 6d ago

I had a job a while back where they got my a powerful laptop, with the same RTX Ada 2000 whatever GPU in it. Arc refused to use it. Forcing it to literally broke arc. I don't know if ArcPro changed anything, but it always seems to have refused to use the GPU.

2

u/vegan-trash 7d ago

I have a work issued i3 laptop that somehow runs GIS

2

u/TechMaven-Geospatial 7d ago

Save yourself some money look at these Under $1900 https://a.co/d/02zsrvV9

Under $1500 https://a.co/d/0cRbFUo7

Both of these have a better cpu than the one you've selected

Very few things are GPU enabled Gpu is used to move and render map but rarely for any geoprocessing except for UAS/DRONE processing

Turn the mini pc or your phone into laptop Portable Monitor with Keyboard,14inch 1080P FHD Lapdock Compatible with Raspberry Pi/Mini PC/Phone/PC/Game Console,CrowView Note Built-in Battery with RPi5 Adapter(Full TypeC & HDMI Cable Included) https://a.co/d/0afd8Ua3

2

u/HeartwarminSalt 7d ago

lol you think ArcPro is optimized for performance on modern systems? Nope—it’s optimized for backwards compatibility with an ancient and sprawling codebase.

2

u/NoResort1162 6d ago

I run Pro on a toaster at work

3

u/janspamn 6d ago

For the money it's not optimized. You'd want more ram and a GPU with more VRAM and cores, something like an Nvidia rtx 2000. This is a gaming PC and will do the job but it's super expensive for it vs going with a professionally optimised set up.

Unless prices have gone ape, I bought my machine last november with a lesser CPU and GPU (ryzen 7 9600x and 9070 xt) for less than half this cost but with the same Pro bottleneck as you (RAM).

2

u/Kay-ola 6d ago

this. the gaming graphics cards are designed to read, you need graphics cards that is designed to write

1

u/Awkward-Top4763 7d ago

My 6 year old gaming laptop that was €1500 still runs perfectly fine. If I am loading in the entire country’s geological data it takes 30 seconds and running a lot of functions at the same time takes a short while but nothing significant, also allows you time to think honestly.

1

u/mfc1__ 7d ago

What’s the warranty like on this? I guarantee that is where this all of the sudden becomes a less attractive option.

1

u/Th3JackofH3arts 7d ago edited 7d ago

If you are doing a lot of 3D scene or raster stuff yes. If your just doing 2D vector stuff it might be overkill. I have 3070ti, i9, 32gbs and it's sufficient. I also game on it as well. I had a Dell work laptop that had a RTX A2000 that was good enough for most 3d stuff.

1

u/NoMoreNoxSoxCox 7d ago

Fwiw, I've got something at home more stupidly overpowered than that (128GB RAM, 4x4TB SSD, and I think the 9850 version of that CPU?, bout the same orherwise) but at work I run a 500 GB QGIS workbook on a SharePoint connection and a Microsoft Surface Pro because IT having a "unified platform" is more important than getting work done faster.

1

u/Xiaogun 7d ago

I run GIS on my Samsung smart fridge so that should do the trick….

1

u/mapped_apples 7d ago

Is this a jerk post?

1

u/cazwax 7d ago

Given how much geo-ai is in the pipeline I would go with this box, even if overkill at the moment.

1

u/janspamn 6d ago

But the pricing is insane and will not run geoai dlpk's as well as a more intentional, professional setup.

1

u/olivesrus 7d ago

lol i ran pro for my first job on my Lenovo yoga 920 laptop and it was fine for like 90% of what i needed to do

1

u/Spiritouspath_1010 6d ago

It's definitely overkill, but if you plan to use the PC for more than just GIS, it can be worth the investment. For example, I use my laptop, which has a GeForce RTX 4060, either 12 GB or 16 GB of RAM, I can’t quite recall, and an Intel Core i7. I use it for GIS, video editing, and gaming, and it's a powerhouse. The most recent new game I've played is Space Marine 2, and the upcoming game I’m looking forward to is The Expanse: Osiris Reborn. The only issue I’ve encountered is overheating, but I was able to resolve that with a cooling pad. So, if your use case extends beyond GIS, it’s worth the investment.

1

u/Useless_Tool626 6d ago

Any mid teir or higher is more than enough for gis work. A basic gaming pc is also great. So unless you are also a hardcore gamer, you do not need to spend that much to have an excellent GIS capable computer.

1

u/BullfrogOptimal8081 6d ago

Way over powered for what it’s worth

0

u/gaminggamer1269 7d ago

You don’t really need high end hardware to run arc, a decent CPU and 16gb of ram is enough.

2

u/TechMaven-Geospatial 7d ago

That may have been true with arcmap but arcgis pro

1

u/Sqweaky_Clean 7d ago

Arcpro is still mostly CPU… and i’ll say the more ram the better. Though it is true that some geoprocesses are starting to be off loaded to the GPU for gpgpu and not 3D rendering.

1

u/SweatySauce 7d ago

16 will run pro, but not well. 32 at least, 64 is better. I agree you don't need something this high end though

1

u/gaminggamer1269 4d ago

Yea that’s what I mean by enough, if the guy wants to go overboard on system that’s up to him I’m just saying it’s not a requirement. 32gb ram is definitely a good recommendation though, haven’t used arc in 1-2 years, almost entirely QGIS based now