Intel Q35 Chipset

[OlorinFiresky]

Hi there,

I'm new to the AutoCAD world.  We are currently trying to test our current equipment with AutoCAD Civil 3D 2011.  One of our machines has the Intel Q35 chipset and the video doesn't seem to have any supported drivers from Autodesk's side of the equation.

I guess my question is, how much importance is there on having Autodesk tested hardware?  Are there any significant performance advantages?  Should I be concerned that this particular piece of equipment doesn't appear to be supported?

[TravisNave]

For 3D, it's pretty significant.  If you start having graphical anomolies and crashing, it will likely be due to this.  You will want to make sure your system meets or exceeds the Autodesk requirements for the software along with a certified driver. 

[seskinner]

I wouldn't be concerned if you have no performance issues. I used to buy Dell Precisions with Xeon processors and AD certified graphics cards at $5000 each and found that a $1500 gaming machine with GeForce graphics out-performed them. I'm disappointed in Dell and Autodesk for selling and recommending unneeded hardware. All the new consumer graphic chips support Open GL and Direct X, so don't waste money on workstation-grade hardware.

I now use:

i7 960 @ 3.2 GHz

Win 7 x64

12 GB 3 channel RAM 667MHz

GeForce GTX 260

Velociraptor HD

~$3000

[OlorinFiresky]

We are looking at Core2 Duo processors at 3.0Ghz with 2GB of RAM and onboard graphics using a variety of Intel Series 3/4 chipsets.  Would these, in your humble opinion, be suitable for 2D drafting?

[seskinner]

OlorinFiresky,

You should have no problem with 2D drafting, but as soon as you add large images, such as aerials, you will have problems. I have several Dell Precisions with Core 2 Duo 3.2 GHz, 2GB RAM, and FireGL graphics which all have trouble plotting in color or converting drawings to PDF. There is also noticeable lag when panning and zooming. They are only occasionally able to overcome these issues by restarting their computers, which tells me RAM, and possibly temp files, are the culprit.

I highly recommend a 64 bit OS with at least 8 GB RAM and a consumer-grade graphics card. Autodesk is constantly increasing the hardware required to run their software with each release, even though they don't admit it. The money you spend now in better hardware will definately be rewarded by the increase in production.

However, the specs you mention should be fine. You can try onboard graphics, as they have greatly improved over last 2 years, but be ready to add a cheap GeForce card if you see that it's needed. nVidia seems to have the superior products and software drivers at this time.

I no longer have a humble opinion when it comes to hardware. I've been jaded by Autodesk and Dell promoting unnecessary and expensive equipment, when it isn't needed.

[OMCUSNR]

If you want to use onboard graphics look at a machine with the new I3-2400 chip.  They can be had for about $400, and will give you much better performance in 2d drafting than an older system.

[dgorsman]

Newer hardware than the Core2Duo will serve to future-proof the computer for upgrades to the operating system and other software as well (nobody runs *just* AutoCAD).  Within the next 4-5 years (reasonable lifespan of a work computer) I can forsee at least one major update to "office productivity" software, and at least one new Windows OS release (and associated compatibility releases for the rest of the software).

[OlorinFiresky · Accepted solution]

Unfortunately our situation is such that we are having to utilise equipment already deployed within the organisation.  We are talking 80+ CAD users who will be moving from a "lighter" CAD application to what is a much "beefier" application in AutoCAD.

Our currently deployed systems are:

HP Compaq DC7700 - Intel Core2 Duo 3.0GHz, 1GB RAM, Intel 945/943 graphics chipset utilising shared memory from RAM

HP Compaq DC7800 - Intel Core2 vPro 3.0GHz, 2GB RAM, Intel Q35 graphics chipset utilising shared memory from RAM

Lenovo M58p - Intel Core2 vPro 3.0GHz, 4GB RAM, Intel G45 graphics chipset utilising shared memory from RAM

Lenovo T61p (laptop) - Intel Core2 Duo 2.2GHz, 2GB RAM, 256MB nVidia Quadro FX 570M utilising shared memory from RAM

Lenovo T500 (laptop) - Intel Core2 Duo 2.26GHz, 2GB RAM, Intel GM45 graphics chipset utilising shared memory from RAM

Lenovo T510 (laptop) - Intel Core i5 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, nVidia NVS 3100 graphics chipset utilising shared memory from RAM

How do these all sit as far as 2D drafting/modelling is concerned?

We are currently looking at the future of our PC fleet in regards to what equipment is going to be given the green light for future deployments.  I know that I'm going to be fighting to get a CAD specific machine approved in that, but I would at least like to be able to recommend some suitable minimal specs for future machines to meet the CAD needs of the business as well as the Microsoft Office needs.

So, suggestions as to absolute minimum specs that we could get away with in a new device that is not a CAD specific device?

[seskinner]

You can buy inexpensive GeForce graphics cards (or any consumer grade card that supports Open GL) for your existing machines. That will free up your RAM for your apps, but you are still limited by the 3GB limit imposed by 32-bit Windows.

Absolute minimum specs are a bad idea and not a good ROI for any business. Productivity is directly influenced by tool performance.

We debated the jump from AutoCAD 14 and Softdesk to AutoCAD Civil 3d 2006 for months before actually getting the upgrade. It was a difficult transition, but within 2 months it had paid for itself. Tasks that would take 3 weeks in the old software, took only minutes in Civil 3D. Its the same, at a smaller scale with hardware. We transitioned from 19 inch CRTs to 24 inch LCDs and productivity and morale soared. I'm not saying that it is the solution for everyone, but you should talk to many people regarding your computer requirements because the bean counters are sometimes limited by thier ignorance of new technology.

[OMCUSNR]

Reread your 1st post - With C3d, trying to patch those systems is "pennywise & pound foolish".

Minimum Ram & OS for C3d 2011:  8gig & Win7 64 pro.  If you try to do anything else, you'll not have a stable environment for C3d, and if you try to do ANY grading at all, you'll tear your hair out with crashes & lost work.

Use of on-board graphics is NOT A GOOD THING WITH ANY ACAD VERTICLE!  Sorry that's jsut a fact of life.  You need more ram & a dedicated video card with at least 512k of Vram.

Look around for a new I3-2400 with 8gig of ram, a 500gb HD spinning at 7500rpm, a Nvida GTX video card with 500mb of Vram & Win7 64 pro (no home editions, and no 32 bit).  That's aMINIMUM SYSTEM TO RUN C3d EFFECTIVLY.

PERIOD!  Anything else is thorwing money away in lost production time and system crashes.

Reid

[OlorinFiresky]

Our main utilisation of AutoCAD will be Map 3D, however we are utilising Map 3D purely for the Map aspect.  None of our drafters will be utilising 3D in Map, they will only be doing 2D drawings.  We do have 6 Surveyors who will be Civil 3D users utilising the 3D aspect of Civil, however it will only be wireframe terrain information and not complex 3D models.  As they are out in the field a lot of their time they are utilising Panasonic Toughbooks due to the rugged nature of those machines.  An upgrade of graphics in one of those units just isn't possible.

As an organisation we have a PC implementation across the board in excess of 1500 units.  Revised figures of CAD users in this initial implementation is 125.  With PC replacements of AutoCAD spec level at $3k a pop that is a cost of $375k.  This is not a small amount of money and certainly not an amount of money we could get approved on top of the budget to get AutoCAD implemented within our organisation.  And that doesn't include the cost of getting a 64bit SOE developed for those specific machines outside of the normal SOE.

Unfortunately I'm working within a very tight and strictly controlled IT environment that I have minimal to no influence upon.  I understand where you are all coming from, and if I had the choice I would be doing exactly as recommended, however I do not have that luxury.  So I am looking to the experienced users within this forum to offer advice on how I can, at the very least, get an environment where the user experience is tolerable but will allow us to build towards a CAD specific machine in the longer term.

So, I am limited to a 32 bit Windows XP or 32 bit Windows 7 environment where the most we could afford to do within the project budget is make changes to graphics cards.  Most of our machines have 4GB of RAM available, but being a 32 bit environment the most I could do in that space is use the 3GB switch.  I can only use the 3GB switch if I install independent graphics cards. 

If I were to do all the above would I have, in your experiences, a tolerable user experience to at least get us through the implementation for the AutoCAD Map users?

With the Surveyors utilising the Panasonic Toughbooks what likely performance issues will the users experience doing wireframe 3D terrain work without an independent graphics card available to them?

Your assistance is greatly appreciated!

[OMCUSNR]

Right now, all most of us can offer is pity.

Your IT department is going to cripple your revenue stream by staying with a 32 bit OS.  None of the ADSK products past 2010 will work well w/out a 64bit OS.  They will work, but with lost time and frustration due to system crashes because you don't have enough system resources (RAM), your workplace won't be pretty.  You're not going to kill the goose, but you are choking it a good bit.

Also, if you are going to have your survey teams use C3d, THEY WILL NEED TRAINING, OR THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO USE THE SOFTWARE!! C3d can work for surveyors, but it's not ideal, and doesn't support the way surveyors work all that well.  It's good design software, but sucks for survey work.

Sorry man.  O really wish I had better news for you, but it just ain't there.

Reid

[Sinc]

---

@OMCUSNR wrote:
C3d can work for surveyors, but it's not ideal, and doesn't support the way surveyors work all that well.  It's good design software, but sucks for survey work.

---

That's only true without the right third-party tools...  🙂

We find C3D works quite well for us, for the most part.  We regularly do things in hours that would take days with Land Desktop, and our products are done to a higher quality level and degree of consistency than before.  There are still a lot of brain-dead things in C3D, and it did take a lot of effort to reach our skill level.  But when we look at what we are able to accomplish and the time frames we do it in, there's nothing that can beat it, all things considered.

I agree with most of the rest of what you said, though.  The most critical thing for C3D performance is by far the CPU, and C3D has reached the point where even the fastest Core 2 Duo chugs on it.  Win 7 x64 also helps a lot, but Win 7 x32 can work just as well for many people.  The key thing is to get off of XP.

As far as graphics, it seems to definitely be beneficial to use a graphics card, and not integrated graphics.  But as long as you have a decent graphics card with a decent amount of RAM (preferably 1GB or more), you don't see a whole lot of difference from going higher.

I have an i7-920 2.67GHz, 6GB RAM, with GeForce 9800GT that runs C3D 2011 quite satisfactorily, even though the graphics card is a good four generations behind current technology.  I also have a Core 2 Duo E6700 2.67GHz with Quadro FX1500 and Win XP x86 that is painfully slow with C3D 2011, almost to the point of being unusable (in my opinion).  A Core 2 Duo P9700 2.8GHz laptop, 4GB RAM, with Win 7 x64 and a GeForce G105M and solid-state hard drive is usable with C3D 2011, although slow.  The hands-down winner, though, is definitely my i7-2600, 16GB RAM, with Win 7 x64 and GeForce 550 Ti, which greatly outperforms the others for roughly $1500.

[seskinner]

I don't think your specs for the AutoCAD Map users will be adequate, especially if you are taking advantage of subscription. I have the only Win 7 x64 machine in our company, and I am having users bring their projects to me for certain tasks. I hear nothing but complaints from the vanilla AutoCAD users with Win XP x32, Xeon 3.2, 3 GB RAM, FireGL graphics.

It was ok until v 2011, then everything went downhill regarding performance. You'd be better to have your users running AC 2010 if you have to stay on 32 bit. Many colleagues recomment v 2006. Ouch.