Benchmark for Autodesk Inventor 2012

[prusas]

Autodesk inventor 2012 has worked exclusively on Direct3D. At the moment, there is no single test that is likely to correctly identify performance hardware.The results of such tests as Cinebench, 3DMark, SPECviewperf - untrue. But the need to determine the real performance of video cards is growing. According to this offer on their own to determine the performance of different video cards. For the test we will use the internal mechanism of Autodesk inventor 2012 definition of refresh rate.
One benchmark test that you can perform is to run the Post Statistics.

This requires an understanding of registry editing.
Go Start>Run & type “regedit”. Click OK & navigate to this branch: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Autodesk\Inventor\RegistryVersionXX\System\Preferences\Scene Manager\Debug\Post Statistics, set the REG_DWORD to 1.
The next time Inventor is run, a small information box will appear at the bottom of your screen.
 We twist the assembly . Pattern editing in the assembly "1000.iam", we change the number of parts in the assembly until the refresh rate will be equal to 15 Hz. This is the minimum, and psychologically comfortable refresh rate.We work exclusively in the factory settings
The results report in the next volume:
1.     The operating system and its capacity
2.    Processor
3.    RAM
4.    Video card
5.    Number of parts with assembly at a refresh rate of 15Hz.

[brian.uptain]

So based on what I read about the Nvidia drivers, mainly around the one I currently use, I decided to review their respective websites again.

I have attached an image of the drivers listed for me to download. I see only one main issue, neither driver from either side supports the other software. Could this be what is causing my performance issue? Could this also be whats causing my machine to have issues relating to interference graphics hanging my machine up instead of allowing it to go to a completed state with an error listed?

Thanks again for all the great information.

[mcgyvr]

---

@brian.uptain wrote:

I tried doing this benchmark as laid out on page 1, but  I must be missing something. The diagnostic window appeared at th ebottom of the screen. The model seemed laggy but it rotated. the HZ on the basic model ranged from 600 down to 3, and would never display a consitant number during rotation or static  position. I would move the mouse across the screen and would see a 350hz valuse change.

Inventor 2012 Performance does seem slow as compared to my Inventor 11, but I have not been able to find an adjustment or setting that will fix this issue yet.

System:

Windows 7 (64Bit), T7500 Dell

@Dual Xeon X5647 @ 2.93GHz/ea

12Gb ram

@Quadro 5000 @3Gb physical Mem 8Gb Shared

@hd: (Dell SCSI Virtual Disk @ 550Gb) (No clue how to tell actual hardware)

---

Brian, Simply open the model, keep all parts on screen and rotate using your 3d controller (don't have one..GET ONE.. if you are using a cad program and don't have one you should be fired..:) ) still don't have one... Simply use the orbit tool. Then you should get numbers that stay much closer. These test numbers are the value displayed when rotating the model (via orbit or 3d controller) not just moving your mouse around. Edit the component pattern and start at 200 then go up until you get a consistant 15hz or close to it.

[brian.uptain]

I haven't needed the use of an orbital controller in about 10 years. I found that using my left and right hand on the keyboard and mouse was actually faster for me for the type of design I do now. (No longer Automotive).

As for the test, (Updated Video driver to 8.17.12.7589)

1500 : 11.63

1400 : 11.63

1300 : 11.63

1200 : 11.63

1100 : 11.63

1000 : 11.63

900 : 11.63

800 : 11.63/11.76

700 : 11.63/11.76

600 : 12.82

500 : 15.38

400 : 18.87

300 : 23.81

I have noticed that with the new video driver it is running much smoother than before.I hope this resolves all of my issues, but it is more likely only to solve laggy design issues. Most of my files I work with are about 2-3Mb in size, occasionally (about once a week) I get a 100Mb file to play with. Rarely I will get a 1.2Gb file that my computer wants to kill me for.

System:

Windows 7 (64Bit), T7500 Dell

Dual Xeon X5647 @ 2.93GHz/ea

12Gb ram

Quadro 5000 @2.5Gb physical Mem 5.5Gb Shared (8.17.12.7589)

HD: (Dell SCSI Virtual Disk @ 550Gb) (No clue how to tell actual hardware)

[Ray_Feiler]

Inventor 6 Grapics Benchmark

11/21/2011 2:57:52 PM

Shaded = 54.9 FPS
Hidden = 18.4 FPS
Wireframe = 28.1 FPS
Multiple Windows = 30.3 FPS
Average = 32.9 FPS

IBM IntelliStation M Pro
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 2.66 GHz
4 GB PC2 5300 CL5 ECC DDR2
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3500
Microsoft Windows XP Professional SP3
Inventor 2010 SP3

I will retest once we get our new work stations next month.

Ray

[Ray_Feiler]

Inventor6 Grapics Benchmark

1/5/2012 8:16:17 AM

Shaded = 228.1 FPS

Hidden = 49.7 FPS

Wireframe = 77.1 FPS

Multiple Windows = 229.3 FPS

Average = 146.1 FPS

Xi® MTower™ PCIe Workstation

Intel® Core™ i7 2700K @ 4.10GHz

16384MB DDR3 @1333MHz Dual Rank Interleave
nVidia® EVGA® GeForce® GTX 580 Classified 3072MB GDDR5

500GB 7200RPM SATA 6.0Gb/s 16MB Cache IntelliSeek™

Asus® P8P67 Motherboard
27" S27A350H ToC Samsung® SyncMaster™ Wide LED 2ms. 1920x1080

850W Corsair® TX Series Power Supply

Microsoft® Windows® 7 Professional Edition 64Bit SP1
Product Design Suite Premium 2012 SP1

Mechanical Desktop 2009 SP3

Finally had some time to do this.

[mooresk257]

I've tried to run Inventor6 Grapics Benchmark and I get a "division by zero" error every time.

Autodesk Product Design Suite Ultimate 2012 

HP nw9440

Win 7 Pro 32bit

Intel Core2 T7200 2.0 GHz

4 GB Ram

NVIDIA Quadro FX 1500M

[Ray_Feiler]

Did you have the Engine MKII.iam file open? I copied it along with all of it's files to my local project folder and then I migrated all of the files to 2012 before running the program.

HTH, Ray

[mooresk257]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Did you have the Engine MKII.iam file open? I copied it along with all of it's files to my local project folder and then I migrated all of the files to 2012 before running the program.

HTH, Ray

---

No, I tried running it with a different assembly. I do not have the engine.iam file. 

[karthur1]

In order for the results to be meaningful, you should use the Engine MKII file.  If you are using 2012, here is where you can get the sample files.

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=16463987

[mooresk257]

I downloaded the 2012 tutorial files and EngineMKII.iam was not in there - or at least I couldn't find it. I tried googling it to see if it was available elsewhere but didn't have much luck. Can someone help point me to a download site for the engine MKII files?

[karthur1]

Sorry about that.  Here is a link to the sample files.

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=13923228&linkID=9242019

[mooresk257]

Thanks for the link.

Using the EngineMKII.iam file I still get the "divide by zero" error when the multiple windows test finishes opening the last window. I don't have any older versions of INV installed so I can't test it to see if the error is version related or something else. It could just be my notebook. It's nearing the end of it's useful life I think.

If I had the password I could debug the code and at least find where the error is occurring. 

[mooresk257]

Using the original test:

Autodesk Product Design Suite Ultimate 2012 

HP nw9440

Win 7 Pro 32bit

Intel Core2 T7200 2.0 GHz

4 GB Ram

NVIDIA Quadro FX 1500M

# parts @ 15Hz = 175

[ComputerGuru666]

Using the EngineMKII.iam I ran the Inventor 6 benchmark with the computer hardware listed below (Signature) only switching video cards and here are the results

Single Nvidia Geforce GTX 560 Ti

Shaded = 124.5 FPS
Hidden = 36.8 FPS *
Wireframe = 58.8 FPS *
Multiple Windows = 195.3 FPS *
Average = 103.9 FPS *

Single Nvidia Quadro FX 4800

Shaded = 130.9 FPS
Hidden = 27.2 FPS
Wireframe = 41.6 FPS
Multiple Windows = 134.7 FPS
Average = 83.6 FPS

Dual Nvidia Geforce GTX 560 Ti (SLI)

Shaded = 141.3 FPS *
Hidden = 31 FPS
Wireframe = 49.8 FPS
Multiple Windows = 165.8 FPS
Average = 97 FPS

I tried all these different video cards because I work with a guy who always claims that his problems were video card related because he was running a geforce (Sounds like he has delt with autodesk for to long) so out of the 12 designers he is the only one running a Nvidia Quadro (Just to make him happy). For those of you searching for that life long question of Quadro or Geforce this is what I can tell you running both kinds of card in our design department working with 5000 to 10000 part assemblies we see the same performance out of both and we see the same problem with both. The problem is once in a while the screens go black and the video card drivers crash/stop responding however I believe this is a Windows 7 thing only because I have this happen even when Im not in an Inventor.

So to conclude 

Inventor is DirectX not OpenGL and Geforce is for DirectX 

Using the Benchmark test for FPS Geforce is the winner 

Cost Geforce GTX 560 Ti ($250) Quadro FX 4800 ($1500)

Geforce !!!

[prusas]

I tried Inventor 2013. Unfortunately, the same results .... All Autodesk efforts to train whistles, but no real improvement.

[karthur1]

I tried the same refresh rates test in 2013 as well.  The results that I got showed that 2013 video tests were comparable to 2011.  They were better than 2012 for sure and it looks like the performance is headed in the right direction for a change.

Too bad we lost a whole year over this.  I was hoping it would be better wioth 2013 and now I can probably upgrade when it gets out.  I just glad 2012 is over with.

Maybe when 2013 gets released to the masses, we can start another thread similar to this one and see what everyone else gets.

[richiesuk]

good benchmark!

now all Inventor reseller should stick up their quadros in ther backside 🙂

..and Adask should state these facts, so more people would choose Inventor regarding the cost of the workstation vs ."normal gamng pc".

hallelujah

[karthur1]

Here is my results for 2013 (beta3).  As you can see, the results for 2013, fall almost right on top of the 2011 results.

[smjanows]

Here are my results with a new build.  Strangely the CPU never maxes out and neither does the GPU.  This machine does not feel much faster than the old E8400 Core 2 Duo @ 3Ghz with a GTX480.

15 Hz at 600 parts.  Quality is a bit faster than performance.  Huh?  The smoother versus rougher settings make no difference.

HP Pavilion h9-1150t
Windows 7 Enterprise x64 SP1
Intel® Core™ i7-3820 CPU @3.60Ghz, HT disabled
16 GB RAM
160 GB Intel 320 SSD, 1TB HD
AMD 7950 3GB, Catalyst 12.2 Driver

Dual monitors at 1680*1050

[smjanows]

Here's the old machine.  This one is CPU limited.