Hardware (Read Only)
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Reply
Message 1 of 2
jbeaman
244 Views, 1 Reply

RAM vs Porcessor

Hi,
I'm needing to spec a couple of new systems to handle very large, unruly topo files that I am receiving from China. We are using Land Desktop 2008/09 and right now it is taking 15 minutes just to open the file and just as long to save it. I'm thinking that I'm going to need to go 64bit OS to handle more RAM, but should I be looking to maximize my processor or RAM in order to get the best performance? And will video card play a major role or should any higher end Nvidia quadro or ATI card work ok?

Thanks for any help you can give

John
1 REPLY 1
Message 2 of 2
Anonymous
in reply to: jbeaman

On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:11:59 +0000, jbeaman@rnmdesign.com <> wrote:

>Hi,
> I'm needing to spec a couple of new systems to handle very large, unruly topo files that I am receiving from China. We are using Land Desktop 2008/09 and right now it is taking 15 minutes just to open the file and just as long to save it. I'm thinking that I'm going to need to go 64bit OS to handle more RAM, but should I be looking to maximize my processor or RAM in order to get the best performance? And will video card play a major role or should any higher end Nvidia quadro or ATI card work ok?
>
>Thanks for any help you can give

With large files (of any type) load times are a function of a combination of
factors:

1. How fast is your network (You need a Gigabit network with the proper cabling,
MINIMUM);

2. How fast (unbusy) is your file server? If it is also doing Domain Controller
duties, along with printing, running your accounting and email server, then it's
gonna be slow.

3. How organized is the file itself? Does it heave dead links to Xrefs or
images? Has it been PURGEd lately? Does it use efficient drafting techniques,
such as lots of blocks?

As far as machine specifications, there are several things to consider:

1. IMHO, a 64-bit OS is now considered baseline for Autodsk products. The
performance difference seen on large files can be amazing.

This is largely independent of the actual application in use. If you are using a
32-bit app, using a 64-bit OS will improve performance by allocating up to a
full 4GB of RAM to that program, rather than a 2GB limit under a 32-bit OS.

Given that, I think the only reasonable choice for OS today is Windows 7. Go
grab the free Release Candidate (you only have 1 more day!), which is stable
enough for production.

2. Once you have that, load up on RAM. 4GB at a minimum for laptops, and 6GB
minimum for workstations. If your machine is of a recent make/model, you should
have 6 RAM slots; a Core i7 uses triple-channel DDR3 RAM, which means that you
are buying memory in 6GB increments (i.e., 3 x 2GB, 6 x 2GB, 3x4GB, 6x4GB)
instead of 2 or 4.

3. CPU choice comes next. I would always choose the best CPU architecture first
- Core i7 at this writing - and then go for clock speed. When comparing CPUs and
pricing, understand that anything under a 5% difference in CPU Ghz is probably
negligable. But I would not go below a 2.6Ghz CPU.

I would also opt for a quad-core CPU as well.

4. Video cards are actually the lowest factor in most CAD systems, unless you
spend all of your time in 3D. With all Autodesk products running over the
DirectX instead of OpenGL graphics APIs, you can "get away" nicely with almost
any decent graphics card. IOW, you don't need an $800 Quadro card.

Matt
matt@stachoni.com

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Autodesk Design & Make Report