How fast is your Inventor PC really?

[Raider_71]

Hi guys,

We have had to do some testing on a bunch of Inventor PC's recently to determine which of the PC's needs to be replaced. Obviously we needed to find out which of the PC's are the worst eprformers as there was only budget to replace 50% of the design PC's. So we thought the Darwin theory will come in handy right... 🙂

Anyways I started searching on the net for toppics on how to benchmark an Inventor PC. Then I thought whats the point of using gaming benchmark tools because Inventor is not a game and there are more aspects than just graphics performance when it comes to percieved performance on an Inventor PC right.

So we decided to create our own Inventor benchmark tool which tests various aspects of an Inventor PC to give us an overview of our PC's performance. This then helped us make a decision as to whcih pc's to replace.

We have made the tool available free of charge to anyone interested in checking how their PC stacks up to their peers or friends. 🙂

Please download it here and post your results here as well if you want. Would be interesting to see what beast workstations are out there.

I would like to say thanks to Kirk #karthur1, for helping in testing the app.

Please feel free to send any suggestions our way. There is an email link in the app.

Download and Install

The application will work with Inventor 2014 to 2016 only.

IMPORTANT: After installation there will be an Inventor Bench icon on your desktop that looks like this: 

My resluts:

HP Elitebook 8560w with an SSD upgrade.

[leowarren34]

@Raider_71 Sounds excellent, I would love to have something that has all of the standard burn-in benchmarks as well thermal throttle indication, etc.

Count me in!

[vf275]

Hi @leowarren34, @Neil_Cross 

I am sorry, I am an amateur who tries to read most info a few days before he buys a new computer but I got a bit stuck. I applied all recommended spec such as >16GB ram; >6GB GPU; >512GB memory; >6 cores; BF > 4.0GHz and still got more than 30 laptops. Since CPU is probably the most important for Inventor, I would like you to ask for help to choose some. Based on this forum, I got a conjecture that AMD is beating Intel right now but mostly in Desktop CPUs rather than in laptops. Since many laptops scored high scores in benchmark test and you said that Turbo frequency of CPU is more important than other things, so I included Intel in my selection but not sure if higher BF is better than single-thread performance...

I come up to these: (including rating from cpubenchmark.net) (Cross-Platform Rating, Single Thread, CPU mark)

i7-9750H (2.6GHz, TB 4.5GHz); 6 cores; 22334; 2518; 11366

i7-10750H (2.6GHz, TB 5GHz); 6 cores; 25573; 2744; 12643;

i7-10870H (2.2GHz, TB 5GHz); 8 cores; 34432; 2675; 16273

Ryzen 7 4800H (2.9GHz, TB 4.3GHz); 8 cores; 26912; 2662; 19097

Ryzen 5 4600H (3GHz, turbo 4GHz); 6 cores; 21740; 2498; 14914

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-5-4600H-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-4800H-vs-Intel-i7-10870H-vs-In... 

All CPUs are in laptops which are in my possible budget. Which one would you choose or how else should I decide? 

[freesbee]

it's written in Autodesk performance optimization: "a faster, single processor is more desirable", so you can follow the general rule of leveraging clock speed versus core number.

AMD is way ahead than intel in all tasks where higher parallelism is very relevant.

By design inventor is NOT a multi-thread program, but during the years the performance team has tried to use the growing availability of multi-core power wherever possible (updating multiple views in background, optimizing FEA analysis and dynamic simulation...). Therefore Neil's new benchmark (this highly expected invMark) separates single core and multi core results.

So, as usual, the answer to your question is: "it depends on what you are going to do with it".

Nevertheless, after more than one decade on intel CPUs, in my last rig I have mounted a Ryzen7 5800x 😁

[JoschaWondraschek]

@vf275 

In your case I would go with the i7-10870H (2.2GHz, TB 5GHz) with 8 cores if it's in your budget.

So you have both: High TB clock speed and 8 cores for Multithreaded tasks. 😉 Seems like a good balance for me.

[gunter.stachon]

I am curious how those new Macbooks would perform as they seem to be very good in single-core Tasks... not that i am apple fan or something like that… just curious… 

[Timothy.Ward2]

Ah you got a 5000 series you git lol

[freesbee]

yep.. now I am only waiting for invMark.

But Assettocorsa, KartKraft and ProjectCars run wonderfully on that 😉

[leowarren34]

Hi @vf275,

Since you are going to be using a laptop there are a couple of factors you should consider. It's also worth mentioning here that Intel turbo speeds are no guarantee on a laptop as they rely on cooling and power limitations as I'll explain below.

Firstly is cooling - Any laptop that is thin and light is unlikely to have the cooling capacity to keep your CPU cool and allow it to turbo.

Secondly is power - How much time, relatively speaking, will you be using the battery compared to being plugged in. If you're on the battery more then hitting full turbo is unlikely as power becomes a limitation.

That's my $0.02 on the clock speeds but it's worth saying that there is more to a laptop than just specs such as the weight - even if it can turbo to 5Ghz do you want to carry a heavy laptop around. Battery life - Will the battery last whilst you are away from a socket?

Unless you are heavily multitasking and don't need the extra 2 core then the 10750H should be fine otherwise the 10850H might be beneficial.

[vf275]

Hello,

@leowarren34  thank you for you answer. And does Ryzen guarantee the turbo speeds? Should I stick with 10750H as you wrote or consider 4800H. 

To the battery, does capacity influence the turbo speed or unless you are plug-in it will not hit the maximum. And is it healthy for the computer to be plug in most of the time?

[cfagerst]

@leowarren34 wrote:

Hi @vf275,

Since you are going to be using a laptop there are a couple of factors you should consider. It's also worth mentioning here that Intel turbo speeds are no guarantee on a laptop as they rely on cooling and power limitations as I'll explain below.

Firstly is cooling - Any laptop that is thin and light is unlikely to have the cooling capacity to keep your CPU cool and allow it to turbo.

Secondly is power - How much time, relatively speaking, will you be using the battery compared to being plugged in. If you're on the battery more then hitting full turbo is unlikely as power becomes a limitation.

That's my $0.02 on the clock speeds but it's worth saying that there is more to a laptop than just specs such as the weight - even if it can turbo to 5Ghz do you want to carry a heavy laptop around. Battery life - Will the battery last whilst you are away from a socket?

Unless you are heavily multitasking and don't need the extra 2 core then the 10750H should be fine otherwise the 10850H might be beneficial.

---

In my humble opinion Intel is not an option for anything anymore. Especially not for laptops. Yes, you might have that mighty 5GHz turboboost on paper, but as leowarren34 said, this is not guaranteed and depends on the amount of cooling available and also on the silicon lottery factor. Intel has not evolved since 2015 and are still on that old 14nm proces. Adding plusses and calling it 14nm++++++++ only does so much... I just had 17pcs Dell 7540s that I tested a little bit (with the i7-9750 6c/12t 4.5GHz turbo cpu and Quadro T1000 4GB GPU). The "45W TDP" cpu pulls 85-90W (according to hwmonitor) when stressed properly with cinebench, and hits 100c almost instantly and the throttles. In inventor use being mostly single core, this problem of course is not as bad. I happened to have a laptop with a R5 4600H and GTX 1650 4GB lying around, that cost less than half than the Precision. It scores better both in cinebench and invbench... (and also runs cooler and doesn't throttle, even in cinebench). If not in a hurry with they buy, one could wait for the zen3 based laptop chips, which should be just around the corner. Those will DESTROY the last remnants of intel in the laptop market... (As they did on desktop.)

[cfagerst]

---

@vf275 wrote:

Hello,

@leowarren34  thank you for you answer. And does Ryzen guarantee the turbo speeds? Should I stick with 10750H as you wrote or consider 4800H. 

To the battery, does capacity influence the turbo speed or unless you are plug-in it will not hit the maximum. And is it healthy for the computer to be plug in most of the time?

---

4800H any day of the week. If you don't need to fry eggs on tour laptop and want some actual guaranteed performance. Or wait a bit for 5800U/5800H or what they will call it (a bit of caution though as some 5000 skus will actually be zen2s.) I have a Dell 7550 with the i7-10750H coming in the next few weeks. Will run some test on it just for the kicks and compare it to my R7 4800H machine..) 

[cfagerst]

---

@JoschaWondraschek wrote:

@Timothy.Ward2  I just wanted to ask exact the same question 😅

I would be so interested in the performance of the new AMD processors with the faster Zen3 structure and how it affects Inventor. Especially the AMD Ryzen9 5950X.

Please let there be someone who got one before all the gamers 

---

 One gamer here 🙂 ,fortunately I play with inventor too 😉

I managed to get one 5600x, will test that one properly also soon enough. A R9 5900X is also on backorder.... The r5 5600X did around 16 in this old inv benchmark on inv2k21 with the last updates, but as someone said, the latest updates tanked the score with around 2 points.. Framerates are great, the best I've seen so far in invbench, 2d test too. Model save time and build time takes too long and that tanks the total score... will test with a vanilla install of inv2021 without the updates to see if it's able to beat that 10900K, which it should as it also does it in most games due to the better singlecore performance... I wonder if that 10900K pulling a 19 was OC:ed btw? I was able to raise my 9700K score from 17 to 18 with a 5.2GHz OC on 1st core. That's one thing that AMD still needs to work on, the per core OC whicj intel has. I still haven't got the per CCX oc that AMD is supposed to have figured out properly.

Looking forward to those new benchmark tools from both Neil Cross and Raider007! I'm sure they will be great and that burn in feature sounds like a very good idea indeed. Will make those OEM micro atx boxes with a 10900K and very questionable cooling sweat so my custom builds will shine even more 😉 Intel laptops will probably melt 🙂

[bwatson1967]

I have an Alienware 10900K laptop with RTX  2080 super and can inv bench consistent at 17.5-17.8 and after installing the updates it struggles to get 16.5. 

[freesbee]

@cfagerst 

...unfortunately I can only confirm what you are writing: we are forced by some corporate agreement to purchase by Dell, and I am experiencing miserable CPU performance with very aggressive thermal throttling after less than 5 seconds. We are now trying to compose another workstation to test with some more "seconds" of turbo frequency, but it will take some more days to have it in my hands.

Regarding the "intel vs AMD dilemma", I'm out of the business "inventor on laptop", so I cannot bring much added value here (but I can subscribe to everything what LeoWarren and cfagerst wrote, and that's why my CPU cooler is a Noctua NH-U12A 😁 ).

As Linus said... remember this day

[leowarren34]

@cfagerst I do think we're in for a time with AMD, just hopefully not as long as we had for Intel. I currently think Intel will still fair well in the server and server workstation department as Xeons are practically industry standard at this point and the reliability & reputation is superb. If AMD manages to hold dominance then Epyc might be able to make a stab in servers/datacentres. The other thing I think is worth mentioning is all of the other features that come with Intel especially on Intel boards such as Intel ethernet which is also industry standard at this point.

I think the biggest limit to AMD in workstations is contracts and agreements with vendors being limited to one or the other, with more of the big guys with Intel on the high-end workstation department.

[cfagerst]

---

@freesbee wrote:

@cfagerst 

...unfortunately I can only confirm what you are writing: we are forced by some corporate agreement to purchase by Dell, and I am experiencing miserable CPU performance with very aggressive thermal throttling after less than 5 seconds. We are now trying to compose another workstation to test with some more "seconds" of turbo frequency, but it will take some more days to have it in my hands.

Regarding the "intel vs AMD dilemma", I'm out of the business "inventor on laptop", so I cannot bring much added value here (but I can subscribe to everything what LeoWarren and cfagerst wrote, and that's why my CPU cooler is a Noctua NH-U12A 😁 ).

As Linus said... remember this day

---

Did a reinstall of inv2021 and let it stay as sp0 an what do you know: 

Remember this day, indeed 🙂 Linus was right.  Is this the new new "workstation slayer" chip or what... Can't wait to get my hands on that 5900x I backordered.

[brotherkennyh]

Sadly we are also forced to order Dell. Although, as Dell do own Alienware this has helped. My CAD PC at work is an Alienware desktop. I must say the the time it was one of the best CAD PC's available IMO and it wasn't too expensive either. Even then though I was a little disappointed by the Alienware in terms of cooling. The PC performance is good in general, but do anything that requires some sustained work and it thermal throttles quite quickly. My PC sounds like a jet engine taking off. That includes things like opening larger assemblies.

Our IT team were also unusually open minded. They allowed us to order some faster hard drives than were available from dell at the time and swap them out. I am considering asking for some decent cooling now as the thermal throttling all the time just seems like a waste to me.

It boggles my mind that these days professional companies still forget things as simple as cooling for performance PCs.

[Anonymous]

Love hearing someone that appreciates cooling. It is the first thing we figure out whenever we design our high-performance workstations. The difference between potential and actual is cooling. Very few people get that. There is more to a system than a CPU's base and boost clock speed. If manufacturers had to post their Net Effective clock speed it would be a joke. Ours is 5.3Ghz all core on our design authoring system, the Stryker II. Loved reading your post. 

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Love hearing someone that appreciates cooling. It is the first thing we figure out whenever we design our high-performance workstations. The difference between potential and actual is cooling. Very few people get that. There is more to a system than a CPU's base and boost clock speed. If manufacturers had to post their Net Effective clock speed it would be a joke. Ours is 5.3Ghz all core on our design authoring system, the Stryker II. Loved reading your post. 

---

I never saw a reply to Neil about your fan configuration, I am assuming you have fixed that then to make such claims.

When are you sending him one to test? 

Maybe send one over to Gamers Nexus even, that would be very interesting.

[Anonymous]

I responded - it was an early engineering sample photo moc-up. The image did not include a PSU, so it was not a complete unit.  I have spoken to Neil and would love to send over both a desktop and mobile product. Our desktop is EOL as of Jan and we will be rolling out or new Stryker II workstation with Intel PCIe 4.0 compatible processors as well as RAID Boot 980 Pro boot drive and 3000 series GPUs. There is a huge Inventor community and no one has done more to bring light to the importance of hardware than Niel.  Our company is uniquely positioned to service this community and would love to. We have the capability to produce highly specific, performance systems, using components that big box manufacturers can't do to agreements. We have set up production facilities and made relationships with both AMD and Intel that allow us to produce systems in volumes exceeding 12K per year, along with providing enterprise support and warranty. I am not tooting our horn, but I come from the industry. I was a project solutions manager at a top ten global GC and we issued laptops and desktops to all our users. We spent a lot of money on the systems we bought, and they just didn't perform well. This is an underserved industry and the only reason our company has grown is we continue to focus on serving our niche and provide enterprise support and warranty. No one builds better computers, higher clocks, invests more in cooling, performance components, but I would opt out completely to Neil for an Inventor specific product if he said it was different than our current offering. We just went through this with the head of algorithmic processing at Leica and Faro on our reality capture products and have done this for our next-gen product line for our Revit systems. There is no ego in product development. That is why we are so thrilled to get our hands on the new benchmark.  

@Neil_Cross It might be time we catch up again about systems over the pond. 🙂 buck@bimboxusa.com