Verify Lockups

[Mark H]

Gcode, thanks for posting the version. I just downloaded the files a month ago, but I see they came out with a new version on June 6, 2001. I guess a month is a long time when it comes to computers.

[Multax]

Dear Mr. Gcode

I stand corrected!

Multax

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

I'd love to run a signifigant bench mark, but alas I am not made of money and do not feel like sinking a few grand into computer hardware/software. I'll test anything on my machine, but I'm not about to go out and buy a new UDMA100 HDD when my SCSI 80 works just fine. Besides if I'm going to get a new HDD, I think I'm going up to SCSI 160

I did a search for "Mastercam" on http://www.specbench.org and guesss what, NOTHING came up. In my estimation the readers of this forum want informed opinions about how things work with MASTERCAM. That is what I have done in my rants about Matrox. Never once did I say that Matrox was the best thing since sliced bread, nor have I even implied it. Just suggested that it works well. I've simply stated that it works for me, it's a good value for the money, things of that nature.

I notice you seemed to have completely disregarded the comparison of the High-End card vs. my Mill. G400.

Yes this forum is intended for (sometimes) vigorous discussion about issues related to Mastercam. The problem with your "Data" only apporach is that many specs are meaningless. Take for example MIPS. Most people don't even know what is means. A few years back this was a biggie in the "Spec Wars", Millions of Instructions Per Second. In several cases, I seem to remember some systems that had lower MIPS scores that other system performed better under certain circumstances/conditions. Should data be looked at?? Of course. Should it be the end-all? I think not. No matter what, no matter how good computer component mfrs. are, they can never make things EXACTLY alike. Each system is going to have it's nuances.

quote:

---

Mr. Meyette, how come your predatory and denigrating statements “Man, the "suits" have no stinking clue how things are going to collapse in the next 10-15 years after the "Old Guys" retire" falls within the bounds of acceptable discourse and yet when I challenge your likes or opinions your “defenders” feel that I have “attacked” you?

---

These statements do not any particular individual (as you have attacked myself and others), they attack a mode of thinking (specifically, many managers in manufacturing). Also "Mr. Multax", it's so easy to attack people when you don't even have the guts to use your real name in here isn't it? I personally find that cowardly. If you want to attack people/opinions, or whatever, at least have the decency(sp?) to attach your real name to it. Also , you may carry more weight in here if you used your real name.

------------------

James M.

[cadcam]

This Multiax sure smell's like someone from my past or mine & james' past .

Alt.CNC.news is ringing bells big time here for me.

------------------

jay/ aka cadcam

Precision Programming

cnc programming &

Predator reseller

email: [email protected]

web: www.ppcadcam.com

Mastercam forum FTP free file support

ftp://www.ppcadcam.com

User: mastercam

Pass: forum

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Jay,

Check out multax's profile. Too ashamed to have his real name attached to his posts.

 

------------------

James M.

[This message has been edited by James Meyette (edited 06-20-2001).]

[cadcam]

James look at the log in name diffrent person i saw that over the weekend thinking the same thing.

1) Multiax

2) "steve" multiaxis

------------------

jay/ aka cadcam

Precision Programming

cnc programming &

Predator reseller

email: [email protected]

web: www.ppcadcam.com

Mastercam forum FTP free file support

ftp://www.ppcadcam.com

User: mastercam

Pass: forum

[This message has been edited by cadcam (edited 06-19-2001).]

[Multax]

Dear Mr. Meyette

If you do not want to acquire additional computer equipment, then use your current setup to develop the benchmark in conjunction with Mr. Jay, Mr. Stephens, and Mr. Thompson. Then you can use your systems performance as a productivity standard for the other Mastercam users. Mr. Meyette, specbench.org has developed benchmarks for UG, SolidWorks, SolidEdge, and ProEngineer. Although specbench.org has not developed a test for Mastercam, the performance that a video card can achieve on these four benchmarks can give a Mastercam user an educated estimation of the overall capabilities of a tested card in a CAE, CAD, and CAM environment. Consequently, Mr. Meyette, I hope that Mr. Jay, Mr. Stephens, Mr. Thompson, and perhaps Mr. McKay will join you in the creation of the first Mastercam benchmark. I believe that your collective programingmachining experiences can produce that killer test part that can bring virtually any P.C. to its CPU knees! What better way to serve all forum users than to have an OBJECTIVE and accepted benchmark that will stress all component parts of a potential Mastercam user’s computer! I know the four of you have the ability to create this benchmark, the question that remains, do you have the will to accomplish the challenge?

As for you Mr. Meyette, can you please give us a five hundred word dissertation on what constitutes a “personal attack”? Many people can and would call your “suits” quote a statement that stereotypes management, anyone that wears a suit, and manufacturing managers in particular. Tell me Mr. Meyette, how would like it if a potentialpresent employer made judgements on your job effectivnesscompetence or potential based on your “suit,” your age, your looks, your race, your sex, or any other criteria other than an objective examination of your job performance or resume! Mr. Meyette, do you realize that people who stereotype others often have P-R-E-J-U-D-I-C-E-D views! At the minimum, in order to prejudge others, one must dispense with any pretense of O-B-J-E-C-T-I-V-I-T-Y! Your “suits” statement also infers a blanket or absolute statement that pillories all within the named class or group that you insulted. The “suits” pronouncement does not fall into the classic form of an absolute statement that would place the words “all of” after the word “man” in the following, “Man, the "suits" have no stinking clue how things are going to collapse in the next 10-15 years after the "Old Guys" retire.” Your rant may have intended to attack their thinking or mind set, however, your blanket statement simply proves an error in logic. When a person makes an absolute statement, they leave themselves open to the fatal counter, the presentation of a member of the named class that does not posses the alleged qualities. And I dare say, that should not prove difficult at all.

Mr. Meyette, how can you make this statement “And on another note, I'd appreciate keeping the personal attacks at a minimum. This is a pretty friendly community and we'd like to keep it that way.” And yet you state “Also "Mr. Multax", it's so easy to attack people when you don't even have the guts to use your real name in here isn't it? I personally find that cowardly.” I did not realize that you posses the sole privilege to engage in name calling and scurrilous personal attacks. I have never engaged in name calling on this forum. Consequently, Mr. Meyette, for the good of the emastercam forum, demonstrate that you have some modicum of class, dignity, and respect for yourself and your fellow forum users and apologize to me, and the forum in general for your offensive language. In addition, you should pledge in your apology that you will NEVER engage in name calling again.

Remember the old adage that states; when you can’t attack the message, attack the messenger!

Multax

[This message has been edited by Multax (edited 06-19-2001).]

[Jeremy]

Despite Multax's missteps (I don't think he is winning Meyette's love), he makes a very good point. There is no Mastercam benchmark.

I would love to have a benchmark that can be used for performance testing, stability testing, and proper display testing.

For instance, the Geforce 2 is a sweet card. I have recommended it to many users. But the GeForce 2 MX leaves a "chunk" of the screen behind on a dynamic zoom, the same size as the mouse cursor. Some people don't mind the small artifact, and other people ask me to fix the problem.

Has anyone tried anything like a benchmark for Mastercam in the past?

It could be useful for deciding between the P4 and the P3/Athlon.

[This message has been edited by Jeremy (edited 06-19-2001).]

[Mark H]

Jeremy,

I have a quick fix for that "chunk". In Windows 2000 - go into Display Properties, Effects, and select "Scroll effect" instead of "Fade effect".

 

[Webby]

Let's drop the crap and get back on topic.

Multax - Not sure how long you've been reading the forum, but James is the top contributor here. You may find that singling him out as the enemy will alienate you from many of the Members here.

[cadcam]

Thanks Webby, This has gone fare enough.

Mutiax you can obviously bring good things to the group so bring them lets not have the fight of the brains but the help for all to grow.

Thanks guys

 

------------------

jay/ aka cadcam

Precision Programming

cnc programming &

Predator reseller

email: [email protected]

web: www.ppcadcam.com

Mastercam forum FTP free file support

ftp://www.ppcadcam.com

User: mastercam

Pass: forum

[This message has been edited by cadcam (edited 06-19-2001).]

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

On Windows 98/2000 systems there is a feature that on some occasions can cause disruption of Mastercam. It has to do with the "Single Click" feature. One way to tell you have it enabled is that itms open/execute, etc.... on a single click. It's handy in some respects but to those of us that are used to "Double Clicking" on things, you may find that you've open up multiple sessions of something, or open up files twice. Some people that I know, once they set it back to "Double Click", some "Phantom" problems disappeared. The resident MFC expert may be able to shed further light on this.

------------------

James M.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Multax,

No where in my post did I call you a coward. You may perhaps have made an incorrect interpretation. I said

quote:

---

“Also "Mr. Multax", it's so easy to attack people when you don't even have the guts to use your real name in here isn't it? I personally find that cowardly.”

---

There is a HUGE difference. I said your "actions" were cowardly, not that you are/were a coward.

Multax(slipped again), youshould create the benchmark. Be the one to design it. You are as well informed about the issues involved, and what it takes to make a good demo part. That IMHO makes you as good a candidate as any to build it.

quote:

---

Currently, in the June 2001 issue of their Power Pages a (Matrox Millennium GeForce II 64mb)? AGP card holds the fastest time of any video card tested so far.

---

I went to the Matrox site and tried to find this card..... what gives???? The Millenium G550 32MB is the latest offering from Matrox that I could find. I'd sure like to get a 64MB Matrox. I've been very pleased with the performance of their cards. Would I be happy with a $1200 Oxygen card? Sure! Who wouldn't

I most certainly will not apologize to you. I think you should apologize to the group for stirring the pot just for the sake of doing it. You could have easily started another topic like "We need a Mastercam Benchmark!" or something of that nature, then begin your dissertation and suggestions. That would've been better for the group as a whole, and more productive as well.

------------------

James M.

[This message has been edited by James Meyette (edited 06-20-2001).]

[gcode]

"Currently, in the June 2001 issue of their Power Pages a (Matrox Millennium GeForce II 64mb)? AGP card holds the fastest time of any video card tested so far."

I don't think so...

GE Force II is an NVIDIA chip used by dozens

of card builders, but I'd be real surprised to see an NVIDIA chip in a Matrox card.

Matrox has always build and used their own chips.

 

[Multax]

Dear Mr. Meyette

Again Mr. Meyette, your linguistic efforts do not match you programing skills. The 1990 Edition of Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary on page 301, column one, 2cowardly adj (15c) : being, resembling, or befitting a coward - cow-ard-li-ness n syn COWARDLY, PUSILLANIMOUS, CRAVEN, DASTARDLY, mean having or showing a lack of courage. COWARDLY implies a weak or ignoble lack of courage; . . .

Mr. Gcode and Mr. Meyette, I enclosed MCAM’s video card description with a parenthesis and followed with a question mark because I suspect that they have mislabeled the card they intended to describe. Consequently, one can see what happens when people fail to use the English language with all of the precision that it offers.

Toolpath Graphics Corner MCAM POWER PAGES Page 4

FEBRUARY 15, 2001

Before we can deal with performance, we must first get things working well. If you are experiencing graphics problems or seemingly poor performance, here’s the steps we recommend to resolve the problem.

1. Make sure you have properly identified your graphics card before proceeding. You will need to know the Maker, Model, RAM, PCI or AGP connector.

2. Make sure you know your operating system—Windows 98, ME, Windows 2000, Windows NT Service pack#)

3. Next, download the very latest video driver for your graphics card, even if you have done this in the last couple of months, these are changing rapidly. Try click on downloads, select Drivers & System Files, select Display & Video, then look for your display adaptor. If it’s onboard graphics, you should check with the computer manufacturer for drivers first.

4. Try slowing down the acceleration— Go Start, Settings, Control Panel, Display, Settings tab, Look for a troubleshooting or performance tab, then move the slider (see figure 1) to the left one click at a time, reboot if necessary, then try Mastercam each click. At some point, the problems may disappear. If there’s no improvement, move back to the original setting.

5. If turning down the acceleration or updating drivers doesn’t solve the problem, then download the original Microsoft OpenGL files, available at follow the instructions listed there.

6. Last, make sure you first try running the graphics at 1024x768 max, 16 Bit high color max. Most graphics adaptors work best with this setting. Some adaptors require the true color setting for proper OpenGL, but very few.

BENCHMARK 51.25 SEC / Sony Computers have adopted the SIS graphics chipset on some new models. We are running Mastercam v8.1 on the Vaio Slimtop 800mhz PIII with the SIS 630 16mb chipset. Initially, the results were less than spectacular; Grainy wireframe, dogslow dynamic rotation, ghosting, smearing. Just recently, Sony posted new video drivers for the Vaio system / SIS 630 (on-board graphics). Once the new video driver was installed, the performance was excellent, especially Verify, True Solids.

BENCHMARK 61.6 SEC / The ATI Rage Fury 32 MB AGP graphics card running under Windows 2000, appears to have all the right stuff for Mastercam. We are currently running this in house on a HP Pavillion PII 400, that has been transplanted with a TWAN 133mhz motherboard. Excellent shaded rotation, verification and backplot with shaded tools. The video driver that installs from CD has actual settings for OpenGL. This has not been tested with ME or 98, the question being of course, the video drivers. The price for this card is less than $150.

BENCHMARK 83 Sec / On a Micron PII 450mhz with Number 9 Ticket to Ride, 32mb video RAM running under Windows NT4.0 SP4, True Solid verification would not function. We decided to load the old OpenGL files (available from our message board) in the mcam8 directory, then Verify, True Solid functioned.

BENCHMARK: 50 SEC / Sony Computers Vaio Slimtop PIII700 with onboard ATI Rage Pro 4X AGP, 8mb video RAM running under Windows 2000. Using OpenGL v4 (1996) - See above.

BENCHMARK: 27.7 SEC / Generic system - Athlon 900mhz processor, 128mb with ASUS Graphics adaptor, GeForce2 MX chipset, 32mb video RAM running under Windows 2000. Using OpenGL v4 (1996) - See above.

If you have a system that performs particularly well (or poor) with Mastercam v8.1, especially shaded rotation and True Solids Verify (Tool On) we would appreciate an email, fax or phone call describing your experience, and any tricks to get it running fast. What we need to know: Benchmark time, Operating System (service pack), Exact Card or chipset model, amount of RAM on card and Driver version / Date.

MCAM Graphics Benchmark

for Mastercam v8.1

Using the sample file [rough pocket.mc8] located in the [samples/3D machining] folder, set Verify to the settings pictured on the right. Make sure that you have made no changes to the roughing operation in this file, and that the verify speed slider is set all the way to the right. Start Verify and your stopwatch. As soon as the verify is complete, stop and record time. You can experiment with some of the settings that have been mentioned below, and in previous newsletters. Also, check out the MMB (MCAM Message Board) for other tips and fixes. In certain newsletters, we will feature this section (Toolpath Graphics Corner) where we will provide you with the results of this benchmark on various systems for your information. Figure 1

Toolpath Graphics Corner (Continued from February)

MCAM POWER PAGES Page 4 JUNE 1, 2001

In the February newsletter we introduced this section of the newsletter. We developed a simple benchmark for Mastercam that would allow us to compare video performance between systems. In order for this information to make sense, you need to be familiar with the first article. If you need a copy of the newsletter, it can be downloaded from our website at

BENCHMARK 22 SEC (FASTEST BENCHMARK TO DATE)

Dell 1.5ghz P4 Running Win 2000 with a Matrox Millennium GeForce II 64mb AGP graphics card.

BENCHMARK 3:27 (SLOWEST BENCHMARK TO DATE)

Generic P166 running Windows 95 with unknown generic vga card

BENCHMARK 83 Sec / Micron PII 450mhz with Number 9Ticket to Ride, 32mb video RAM running under Windows NT4.0 SP4.

BENCHMARK: 50 SEC / Sony Computers Vaio Slimtop PIII700 with onboard ATI Rage Pro X AGP, 8mb video RAM running under Windows 2000.

BENCHMARK: 27.7 SEC / Generic system - Athlon 900mhz processor, 128mb with an ASUS Graphics adaptor, GeForce II MX chipset, 32mb video RAM running under Windows 2000.

Mr. Meyette, I truly believe that you have greatly superior CNC programming and post modification and writing skills than I currently posses. I also believe that you have developed your machining knowledge and skills beyond my own. Fortunately, my mentors have taught me well, they always said, think objectively and never subscribe to the NIH (not invented here) attitude. Consequently, by any objective measure, I must humbly and respectfully request that you, Mr. Meyette, Mr. Thompson, Mr. Stephens, Mr. Jay, and perhaps Mr. McKay can perform a great service for all Mastercam users and produce the benchmark that I suggested. The credit does not matter, the end result does, a trusted and universally accepted benchmark that gives all Mastercam users the ability to make an informed decision on their computer purchases. I hope that your next twenty posts chronicle your development efforts in conjunction with your above-named compatriots.

Multax

[This message has been edited by Multax (edited 06-20-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Multax (edited 06-20-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Multax (edited 06-20-2001).]

[Bill]

Cowardly

Cow"ard*ly, adv. In the manner of a coward. Spenser

After reviewing the remark in question about cowardly, I conclude cowardly in that sense was an adverb.

An adverb,as in, describing one's actions and actions as in VERB.

Now get over it!

Enough said!

------------------

B. Henderson

OMEGA PlASTICS

[email protected]

opinc.com

[lou]

Hey Multax, What is your REAL name? Where are you from? Where do you work? I double dog dare you to tell us!!!! I think that your posts are a waste of time for anyone to read. People on this board like to help other people and sometimes get help.

Not, TRY to make people sound stupid that are helping in here. It makes you look stupid. It sounds like to me that you are a little man that is trying to feel big by trying to make other people look small. (Notice the word TRYING) That is just the way I see it. I am sorry that people have to sit and read all this garbage...

------------------

Lou Wilson

Cnc Programmer

http://www.opinc.com

[Allan Brown]

James - Please don't confuse Multax with Multiaxis (Steve) - Two different forum Members.

[ChrisD]

It's amazing how one question (just about a video card problem) can invoke such a catty attitude. Don't waste time trying to call this "multax" guy out of the bushes. There are other AND better things to worry about.

Concentrate on doing the best job that you can with what you've got.

This forum has been helpful to me and I have enjoyed reading alot of the posts in it.

But this one is getting ridiculously childish.

This has been my honest opinion and just

to make sure that I won't be called a coward too, here is my name and address:

Chris DiNardo

Accufor Industries

46 Auriga Drive

Nepean, Ontario, Canada

 

 

[Bullines]

When it comes to video cards, it tends to get personal. We've seen it before and we'll surely see it again. I'm certain the Mastercam forum isn't the only one affected. Forums for games like Unreal Tournament or Quake 3 Arena or even general hardware forums are like this too when the topic turns to video cards. Say what you want about me, just don't bash my video card

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

I apologize for confusing one member in good standing for another member that is not playing nice.

Sorry Steve.

------------------

James M.

[Jeremy]

Mark H:

I changed the menu display effect to scroll instead of fade, and I also turned it off. Neither of them fixed the problem.

But I installed those whiz-bang new Detonator drivers (version 12.41) and the problem went away.

For those who need clarification:

Prior to Detonator 12.41, dynamic zoom would leave a "chunk" of the old screen exactly where the second click occured, using Geforce2 MX cards. It did not happen with GeForce 256 or GeForce 2 GTS/Pro/Ultra cards.

[Kenneth Potter]

Video Card ,video cards

Man this Video card thing is getting way out of hand. Why is mastercam so darn fussy about video cards. Do you think it might be that mastercams interface is Not a true windows compliant interface because its program coding ???? I have other High end cad & cam installed on all my other computers with no way near the Freaking headaces?

Come on CNC software folks

[Bullines]

PDG or another developer at CNC Software could answer that question best but I'll wager a guess. First some background...

Developing graphic intensive applications used to be a huge pain until the advent of established APIs like OpenGL and DirectX. Hand-crafted algorithms for graphic routines like creating graphic primitives, scaling, translating, rotating, shading, clipping, etc may work great on the video card used for testing and some others. But there's also a chance that some video cards will make a mess of these algorithms to due various reasons (incompatibilty, inferior chipset, etc...).

If a graphics-intensive application was developed with an API like OpenGL and DirectX, there's a high chance that it will run perfectly on video cards that support the API used. In the case of using an API, it's up to the user to choose a suitable card that supports the given API. In the case of doing it the ol' fashioned way, it is up to the developer to make sure that as many cards as possible can understand the algorithms used. Of course, hardware changes all the time and something that worked on one chipset from a card Manufacture may not work on a different chipset from the same manufacturer.

And onto Mastercam...

To my knowledge, Mastercam uses OpenGL for shading. I don't believe that it uses OpenGL for anything else like primitives, rotating or scaling. Of course, I could be wrong and it could be used for things like what I mentioned.

[Kenneth Potter]

Yes i want some answers to this from the developers from CNC software about the problems about Mastercam & video cards nighmares. Never in my life have i seen so much money & time spent on video cards JUST to make mastercam run smooth.When the problem may been in the way mastercams program itself is designed. I see a pattern of Mastercam running fine on computers Then when you add small upgrades /patches Then "" BANG"" back to video card headaces again! Folks are pulling there hair out !!!

IF all the other cad & cam systems were this fussy then it seems to me that you will need a seperate video card for each program to run on the same computer. Its Starting to be a big joke with this video card & Mastercam. At the moment my Mastercam is running fine. But i wont spend another Dime into it until this Video card thing is undercontrol.

Thank Bullines for the background explaination about open GL & DirectX. I'm starting to see the real picture.

 

Kenneth Potter

[This message has been edited by Kenneth Potter (edited 06-22-2001).]