Community
Inventor Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Inventor Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular Inventor topics.
cancel
Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

System performance questions

14 REPLIES 14
Back to Inventor Category
Back to Topic Listing
Reply
Message 1 of 15
Anonymous
196 Views, 14 Replies
‎02-05-2003 03:37 AM
‎02-05-2003 03:37 AM

System performance questions

This is not necessarily an Inventor exclusive question but I am sure someone
here has an answer. I just received my new system below:

-win 2000 OS
-Dual Xeon 2.8
-4GB ram
-3D Labs 7210 video card

My performance seems to be equal to or slightly less than my old dual AMD
2000+ system with 1.5 GB ram, does this seem right?

The tech from company that built the computer said that it might be a
problem with win 2000 pro not supporting hyper-threading and not supporting
over 2GB RAM. He did disable the hyper-threading and I saw a little
performance increase but not much.

He said the only other option is to go with win 2000 server (for an
additional 500 bucks) and he said it supports up to 4GB ram and
hyper-threading, does this sound right and would I get enough performance
increase to pay for the 500+ $.

Any advice would be appreciated.
Report
0 Likes
Reply
14 REPLIES 14
Message 2 of 15
rllthomas
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 04:05 AM
‎02-05-2003 04:05 AM

Just my opinion:

Your old system had an Athlon processor which I have heard has a better FPU. I don't know how much Inventor relies on this but it could be a possible consideration. You went from an intel equivalent of 2GHz to 2.8GHz which should provide a performance increase of about 25% on computational intensive tasks like large arrays and filleted and drafted parts. Your second processor, well that has been proven to actually decrease performance some. That was the case when I did some benchmarking with Cosmos Designstar. It wasn't a big difference but it was measurable.

As for your ram, a single process can only access 2GB in a 32bit system so if all you run is Inventor and the OS you need 2GB plus your overhead. Perhaps 2.5 GB but then again since a lot of the overhead etc. is cached you just aren't gaining much with more than 2GB ram.

So you should notice an increase on complex parts, and in large drawings because of the processor. If your weren't using more than 1.5GB of ram before then the 4GB is giving you no benefit.

Rich Thomas
Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 3 of 15
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 04:53 AM
‎02-05-2003 04:53 AM

XP Pro


Chas

"Albert Allen" wrote in message
news:011740738BFB7C0BFABC5BAD1E837B88@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> This is not necessarily an Inventor exclusive question but I am sure
someone
> here has an answer. I just received my new system below:
>
> -win 2000 OS
> -Dual Xeon 2.8
> -4GB ram
> -3D Labs 7210 video card
>
> My performance seems to be equal to or slightly less than my old dual AMD
> 2000+ system with 1.5 GB ram, does this seem right?
>
> The tech from company that built the computer said that it might be a
> problem with win 2000 pro not supporting hyper-threading and not
supporting
> over 2GB RAM. He did disable the hyper-threading and I saw a little
> performance increase but not much.
>
> He said the only other option is to go with win 2000 server (for an
> additional 500 bucks) and he said it supports up to 4GB ram and
> hyper-threading, does this sound right and would I get enough performance
> increase to pay for the 500+ $.
>
> Any advice would be appreciated.
>
>
Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 4 of 15
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 04:53 AM
‎02-05-2003 04:53 AM

Will XP support 4GB ram and Hyper-Threading?
This is something our tech has not even checked up on.


"Charles Posekany" wrote in message
news:985C57BA1EEC47A2FC5D53204BFB3D4B@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> XP Pro
>
>
> Chas
>
> "Albert Allen" wrote in message
> news:011740738BFB7C0BFABC5BAD1E837B88@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > This is not necessarily an Inventor exclusive question but I am sure
> someone
> > here has an answer. I just received my new system below:
> >
> > -win 2000 OS
> > -Dual Xeon 2.8
> > -4GB ram
> > -3D Labs 7210 video card
> >
> > My performance seems to be equal to or slightly less than my old dual
AMD
> > 2000+ system with 1.5 GB ram, does this seem right?
> >
> > The tech from company that built the computer said that it might be a
> > problem with win 2000 pro not supporting hyper-threading and not
> supporting
> > over 2GB RAM. He did disable the hyper-threading and I saw a little
> > performance increase but not much.
> >
> > He said the only other option is to go with win 2000 server (for an
> > additional 500 bucks) and he said it supports up to 4GB ram and
> > hyper-threading, does this sound right and would I get enough
performance
> > increase to pay for the 500+ $.
> >
> > Any advice would be appreciated.
> >
> >
>
>
Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 4 of 15
MechMan_
Advocate
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 04:53 AM
‎02-05-2003 04:53 AM

I agree. You should have gotten a system with WinXP Pro instead of Win2k. XP Pro supports HT.



AFAIK Win2k supports 4+ GB RAM.



Did the computer builder use quality RAM (Corsair, Kingston, etc...)?



Is Win2k up-to-date with SP3?



I think when you use dual CPU's the top performance of each individual CPU drops a little. So in essence each 2.8Ghz CPU may run an app a bit slower than a single 2.8Ghz CPU. I'm not positive about that though.



MechMan
Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 6 of 15
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 04:53 AM
‎02-05-2003 04:53 AM

Hey MechMan what does AFAIK mean? you guys and your
abbreviations<G>

 

Our tech talked to two Microsoft  support guys
and one said W2K does support 4GB ram and one guy said it only supports 2GB ram!
All I know is I have (4) 1GB sticks of good quality ram and the OS is
only seeing  2.8 GB total ram.

 

 


style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
I
agree. You should have gotten a system with WinXP Pro instead of Win2k. XP Pro
supports HT.


AFAIK Win2k supports 4+ GB RAM.


Did the computer builder use quality RAM (Corsair, Kingston,
etc...)?


Is Win2k up-to-date with SP3?


I think when you use dual CPU's the top performance of each individual CPU
drops a little. So in essence each 2.8Ghz CPU may run an app a bit slower than
a single 2.8Ghz CPU. I'm not positive about that though.


MechMan

Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 7 of 15
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 04:56 AM
‎02-05-2003 04:56 AM

 

AFAIK, Albert, it means: as far as I know.
<G>

~Larry

 

 



style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
Hey MechMan what does AFAIK mean? you guys and
your abbreviations<G>

 

Our tech talked to two Microsoft  support
guys and one said W2K does support 4GB ram and one guy said it only supports
2GB ram! All I know is I have (4) 1GB sticks of good quality ram and the OS is
only seeing  2.8 GB total ram.

 

 


style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
I
agree. You should have gotten a system with WinXP Pro instead of Win2k. XP
Pro supports HT.


AFAIK Win2k supports 4+ GB RAM.


Did the computer builder use quality RAM (Corsair, Kingston,
etc...)?


Is Win2k up-to-date with SP3?


I think when you use dual CPU's the top performance of each individual
CPU drops a little. So in essence each 2.8Ghz CPU may run an app a bit
slower than a single 2.8Ghz CPU. I'm not positive about that though.


MechMan

Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 7 of 15
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 04:56 AM
‎02-05-2003 04:56 AM

...does anything support hyper-threading yet? everything that i have reads
suggests that performance is better when it's off...turn it off in your bios
and try for a while...

--
Mark A. Bystry
Engineer
Ziggity Systems, Inc.
mbystry@ziggity.com
Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 9 of 15
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 04:58 AM
‎02-05-2003 04:58 AM

...good grief! what would anyone want with 4 gb of ram? i have 32 mb and i'm
quite happy...just kidding...

--
Mark A. Bystry
Engineer
Ziggity Systems, Inc.
mbystry@ziggity.com
Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 10 of 15
MechMan_
Advocate
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 05:06 AM
‎02-05-2003 05:06 AM

AFAIK = As Fas As I Know. B-)



The document below says WinNT/2k/XP all support 4GB maximum memory.



http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.asp



Check your BIOS settings to see if it's set up to recognize RAM in all 4 slots.



Have you run a real test between your old and new system to make sure it's not just your perception of speed?



MechMan
Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 11 of 15
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 05:15 AM
‎02-05-2003 05:15 AM

Hey Mech, the bios is setup for 4GB ram and the ram
test at bootup sees 4GB but the OS does not.

 

When we disabled hyperthreading in the
bios the performance definitely got better and is now better than my
old machine but not nearly as good as it should be.

 

It is hard to find benchmarking programs for these
processors, do you know of any?

 

Thanks


style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

Check your BIOS settings to see if it's set up to recognize RAM in all 4
slots.


Have you run a real test between your old and new system to make sure it's
not just your perception of speed?


MechMan

Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 12 of 15
MechMan_
Advocate
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 05:37 AM
‎02-05-2003 05:37 AM

Definately sounds like an OS issue. I wish I could help you more but I'm not really a Microsoft Software Engineer, but I do play one in the Inventor news groups. 😉



Can't suggest a benchmarking program either. I've never really messed with them.



I'd send your tech guy on a hunt for Win2k RAM issues. Shouldn't be too hard to find someone with the answer.



Sorry I couldn't be of more help Albert.



MechMan
Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 13 of 15
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 07:47 AM
‎02-05-2003 07:47 AM

Thanks Rich, yes with my old system with 1.5 gb ram
I was hitting the HD quite a bit for extra, sometimes I would need 2.5
GB for the bigger stuff.

 

 The more you can do the more the boss wants
you to do and as long as he keeps buying the hardware I will keep making the
assy's bigger <g>


style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
Just
my opinion:

Your old system had an Athlon processor which I have heard
has a better FPU. I don't know how much Inventor relies on this but it could
be a possible consideration. You went from an intel equivalent of 2GHz to
2.8GHz which should provide a performance increase of about 25% on
computational intensive tasks like large arrays and filleted and drafted
parts. Your second processor, well that has been proven to actually decrease
performance some. That was the case when I did some benchmarking with Cosmos
Designstar. It wasn't a big difference but it was measurable.

As for
your ram, a single process can only access 2GB in a 32bit system so if all you
run is Inventor and the OS you need 2GB plus your overhead. Perhaps 2.5 GB but
then again since a lot of the overhead etc. is cached you just aren't gaining
much with more than 2GB ram.

So you should notice an increase on
complex parts, and in large drawings because of the processor. If your weren't
using more than 1.5GB of ram before then the 4GB is giving you no
benefit.

Rich Thomas
Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 14 of 15
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 03:53 PM
‎02-05-2003 03:53 PM

Albert,

Doing some benchmarking is as simple as
follows:

 

Test 1 (Graphic performance):

- set the frame count display to on (registry
hack)

- create a cube 1x1x1mm

- create an assembly consisting of an array of
20x20 cubes, 2mm spaced (x and y)

- create another assembly consisting of 20 times
the aforementioned array, 2mm spaced (z)

You end up a 3d array of 8000 cubes, zoom/pan/orbit
it and note the framerate.

3Hz would be a good value

 

Test 2 (number crunching):

- create a cube 1x1x1mm

- make a feature array of this, 20x20, 2mm spaced
(x and y)

- make a feature array of the result, 20 times, 2mm
spaced (z)

- draw the EOP up and down again, take the time for
the recalculation

You may expect values of about 10 to 20
minutes

 

Regards,
--
Leo Laimer
Maschinen- und
Fertigungstechnik
A-4820 Bad Ischl - Austria
Report
0 Likes
Reply
Message 15 of 15
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous
‎02-05-2003 10:56 PM
‎02-05-2003 10:56 PM

For 3D benchmarking you can use SpecView 7, it is a
looong program (close to 300MB) but it is the ultimate 3D benchmark software.
All professional sites base their comparison according to this program. Here is
the link:

 


 

Give it a try and let us know about the
results...

 

Ahmet Unal

 

 


style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

Hey Mech, the bios is setup for 4GB ram and the
ram test at bootup sees 4GB but the OS does not.

 

When we disabled hyperthreading in the
bios the performance definitely got better and is now better than my
old machine but not nearly as good as it should be.

 

It is hard to find benchmarking programs for
these processors, do you know of any?

 

Thanks


style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">

Check your BIOS settings to see if it's set up to recognize RAM in all 4
slots.


Have you run a real test between your old and new system to make sure
it's not just your perception of speed?


MechMan

Report
0 Likes
Reply
Reply

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

Post to forums  

Autodesk Design & Make Report

Report a website issue