Problem with Geforce GTX 965M and AutoCAD 2017

[Anonymous]

Hello,

I just bought a new Microsoft Surfacebook with an Intel i7-processor and a Nivida Geforce GTX 965M graphic card.

When in AutoCAD 2017 I have a problem with my mouse coursor dragging and twitching. But when I turn off Hardware Acceleration, the mouse cursour works just fine but then I can't draw lines due to them starting to be all twitchy and lagging.

Does anyone know a solution to the problem?

Thanks in advance!

[rkmcswain]

What O/S?

You can check here for supported hardware and IF it's on the list, download the supported driver.

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/syscert?id=18844534&siteID=123112

[Anonymous]

Windows 10

But it seems I found the solution myself after going back to the source. By enabling hardware acceleration but turning of every option within the lagging from the mouse seems to be gone.

Or, it still doesn't seems to be perfect, but it has improved greatly.

[john.vellek]

Hi @Anonymous,

Since that graphics card is not on the certified list you might see some less than perfect behavior.  You have already discovered what I would suggest first by toggling features inside of Graphicsconfig.

I suggest that you also go to the nVidia site to see if there is a more current driver for your card.

Please select the Accept as Solution button if my post solves your issue or answers your question.

[john.vellek]

Hi @Anonymous,

Have you had the opportunity to see if a newer driver exists and if so does it help with the problem?

Please add a post with your status.

[Anonymous]

Hi John,

My problem with your response (and honestly most any response I can find about this) is that Microsoft's website advertises that it is "engineered for professional grade software" and that the Surface book "speeds through profession software like Solidworks 3D CAD, AutoCAD, Revit and Adobe Premiere".   See link here for that exact quote on Microsoft's website:  https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/devices/surface-book/overview

I bought the Surface Book, with the GeForce GTX 965M dGPU, primarily as a work computer. I work in the engineering field and will use AutoCAD and Revit almost exclusively.  

To date, it's had less than stellar performance, lagging on the simplest of models making it very difficult to use.  If Autodesk's stance is that the graphics card is not certified or recommended, then why is Microsoft advertising it towards professionals that use Autodesk's programs?  

Regards,

J

[Anonymous]

Hey,

I found a solution that worked for me at least. As I'm still a student I upgraded my version of AutoCad from 2017 to 2018 and then everything seems to work fine. Haven't done any serious 3d-modeling or something like that as I use other software for these functions, but 2d-drawings has worked smoothly.

Just a tip!

[pendean]

FWIW We have three Surface Books in our office, recently purchased: these are the most troublesome devices ever with Autodesk software, with Adobe software (InDesign, Illustrator and Photoshop), with our Windows Server connectivity through the brick connector, and overall performance when these users are remote.

Updates and more updates later, things have calmed down a bit but the three power users that use them hate them. With a passion.

Three other power users with Lenovo workstation-class Laptops (not as sexy, and a bit heavier) have had no issues and pretty much love their devices and the performance. No issues at all, except when they compare their performance with the desktop Workstations they sit next to, but that's another story altogether.

Conclusion from our small study group: SurfacePros and Surface Books are not workstation worthy no matter what the marketing department at Microsoft says on their website.

FYI Our surface Books are being transitioned to field staff to use since they are mobile friendly and will not be used heavily by power users. We are sticking with true workstation-class mobile devices from other vendors moving forward.

My 2cents worth: don't believe marketing BS you read on the web.

[rkmcswain]

jontskinner wrote:

To date, it's had less than stellar performance, lagging on the simplest of models making it very difficult to use.  If Autodesk's stance is that the graphics card is not certified or recommended, then why is Microsoft advertising it towards professionals that use Autodesk's programs?  

I represent neither Microsoft or Autodesk. But if you're interested, I'll throw in my 2 cents. First off Microsoft wants to sell Surface Books. They are going to say "it works great with software X", regardless of the true performance. Who knows if Microsoft and Autodesk even came to some formal agreement that says they can say this about AutoCAD and Revit. (Do you know @john.vellek ?). 

Secondly, Autodesk wants to sell rent their software to you. They are not going to say it takes a huge desktop workstation class, with a Xeon, 64GB Ram, dual NVME SSDs, and an NVIDIA P4000 graphics card - to run AutoCAD or Revit. They are going to list the absolute minimum sysreq so that the program will install and run normally with a light load of data. That way many consumers will think their existing $800 PC will run AutoCAD/Revit just fine. (Maybe Microsoft read the min req, and just decided their Surface was more than adequate?

As @pendean - says, don't believe what you read. Get the hardware vendors to give you a test workstation, and give it a workout. We are doing this right now with a vendor.  Your data, your projects, your environment - those are the things that matter to you. The hardware and software vendors have not been there, so they can't say how the performance will be.

Cheers.

[john.vellek]

HI @rkmcswain,

To the best of my knowledge,  the graphics cards are not yet certified for the Surface Books. This leaves me to question how well the current drivers perform for AutoCAD and other programs. I have seen quite a few posts about the Surface Books and their graphics issues.  I know that they have also recently been rated as not terribly reliable ( I Believe by Consumer Reports) although I understand their review is being debunked a bit.

With that said, I think like any piece of hardware, one must evaluate what tasks it is really designed for and determine if other compromises are worth it in their own workflow. I know that we have staff that use them and even run AutoCAD and Revit on them. How well this really works I have no idea as I don't have any personal hands-on experience with them.

As far as system requirements are concerned, I agree that the minimum requirements (even stated as such) are not a great way to start. Minimum means minimum and does not mean runs good, great or better. 

Do I have any idea about agreements between Microsoft and Autodesk? You are too funny. I am too low on the ladder to be made aware of anything like that.

With all that said, have a good Friday and thank you and @pendean for your continued contributions in the Community.

[Anonymous]

Carl, thanks for the tip.  When my company upgrades from 2017 to 2018 version of CAD, we'll see if the performance improves.  

Pendean, I'm starting to feel the same way about Microsoft's products.  Second time I feel burned by them.  The quality and reliability just doesn't seem to be there. 

Just to clarify, the machine I have is the Surface Book, with Performance Base.  The $3,300 version with 16 gb RAM, I7 processor, 1 TB harddrive and the Geforce GTX 965M graphics.  The "Performance Base" version is specifically marketed toward professionals who use software similar to Autodesk's products.  I guess shame on me for not testing it first, or for believe the marketing BS on their website. 

It would be good to know Microsoft and Autodesk came to any kind of formal agreement on this, or if there are going to be any updates to the graphics drivers to improve performance.  

RKMS, I agree with your comments and understand.  However, this isn't a $800 machine, I wouldn't expect great performance on a cheap machine.  I would have assumed a laptop that cost over $3k, that is marketed towards my kind of work, would at least be able to perform the most basic CAD tasks.  I'm not even using it for anything 3D, literally just the most basic 2D cad models.  And no, I would never expect it to have the same abilities has a huge desktop workstation, but would definitely expect it to handle the normal day-to-day tasks. 

Either way, thanks everyone for the advice, types, and thoughts.

Best,

J