Nope. Dell's the only option.

Homemade:
Dual Opteron 244s (1.8GHz, benchmark comperable to Xeon 3.2 GHz)
2 GB RAM
Quadro FX 1100 with 128 MB

I have been very happy with this machine and it has been one of the most stable in studio, including the Dells and definately the IBM t42/43. Apparently, there is a conflict between the ATI drivers and Rhino which often results in crashes and file corruption. Rhino knows about it, ATI knows about it, neither are really doing anything about it.

If it's just for rendering, you don't need a decent graphics card. get the cheapest, and load up on cpu+ram instead

AMD is pretty far ahead in terms of processing power at the moment, either get a dual core X2 or opteron 165/170/175 if money is an issue, dual dual cores (265-280) if you have more to spend. Also to consider is how the licensing structure works for your rendering engine - how many cores will it let you use? May or may not be an issue- but if you're limited to two cores, the dual dual core route is pretty much a waste.

if assembling it yourself, dont' skimp on a power supply. most common mistake people make.

Even if you don't use Maya, this is a good place to compare the specifics of hardware:

Maya Qualified Hardware

Click on Maya 7 under Windows XP and see a list of notebooks. Alias' list is very definitive, but you can get an idea of what it "takes" to be qualified for modeling/rendering.

quad 2.5 ghz G5 with 4 gigs of ram - cranks out full GI renderings in no time...

A note on processors, if your laptop does not have "mobile technology" you will rarely truly have a 2.8 ghz processor. The excessive heat of a desktop processor stuffed into a laptop will make it run at half speed, or less. Also, bus speed is more important that noted processor speed. Often the big guns like Sony will advertise the fastest processors, but if you read the fine print, they also have the slowest bus speeds.

If you bought a laptop without a mobile processor, you can buy a laptop cooler fan. I got mine shipped from ebay for under $25. I have had it for 2 years and it works great.

Here is the one I have by Bytecc.

Boxxtech makes nice machines.

http://www.boxxtech.com/

Everyone that I know in computer graphics has switched to opterons.

Nice!

John- have you had any heat issues with your G5 quad? I've been hearing it's a problem

does anyone know if the current rendering programs make full use of dual or multicore processors? i remember reading a few articles suggesting that unless your are running multiple programs which are split between the cores, that you would be better (in the short term) with a faster single core cpu, as some programs are unable to split their load between the cores.

my home pc (for competitions, tv, music and an unhealthy amount of games) is an amd 64 4000+ 4gig ram. nvidia 6800gt (game card i know ). its still faster than my work pc, which my boss refuses to upgade, allthough he still likes to complain at how slow it is.

Upside down,

I don't know of a rendering program that doesn't use multiple cpu's. Mental Ray lets you use up to 8 satellite cpus 4 local I believe, with one license that is included with Maya/Max. It all depends on your licenses. Want to use more, buy another license.
There are optimizations for render jobs on multiple CPUs but it is pretty in depth to take advantage of them.

HP makes this bad boy that can be customized to include dual dual core opterons...yummy fast.

http://www.hp.com/workstations/pws/xw9300/

Stay away from apples for rendering. They architecture lack the power needed for 3d. For other computer companies check out, xicomputers, boxx, polywell. Newegg if your looking to build the thing yourself. Opertrons are the way to go if you can afford it. http://forums.cgsociety.org/ has alot of good info if your looking for something more program specific.

Macs are fine for 3D work and rendering. They're just a bit expensive, that's all.

G5 quad runs like a charm... Not a single peep and it CRANKS

I mean, Jrocc - are you serious?

This is just funny - you are aware there is a G5 that renders real time right?

Look PCS are good because you can "upgrade and tweak them" - but my experience has been that you spend more time upgrading and tweaking them than you do actually working. If you buy a good Mac, you dont have to touch it

Which saves time, which means you save money.

There is a reason mac is switching to Intel chips. if your doing 2-D macs work great if you dont mind spending the cash. For 3-D the the stonger processor is needed. Not "tweaking" I mean raw processing power. For that AMD's king. They even forced Intel to release thier dual chip early and buggy.

Beside processpr power wich i believe the origional thead was about OSX has had issues since release with thier OpenGL scripting. Maybe under OSx86 it will be better but that is yet to be seen.

john, not tobe argumentative, but saying there's a G5 that renders realtime is kinda silly. even the oldest 3d game "renders realtime"... to say that and have it mean something would requre info like engine, resolution, etc. Got more info?

here's a list to look at if you're using maya/mental ray:

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/fabien.corrente/MR.htm

basically: it's about tied at the high end between the quad core opterons and the quad core G5.

what is remarkable is the value offered by the dual core, single socket AMD X2s.

thank you manamana