MCx 5 axis video card

[cboggs]

Hi gang,

 

Yes I know, .. the age old question, . "what video card"

 

I searched but couldn't really find what I was looking for.

 

So, .. Ideas for a fairly fast video card using mill 5 axis V x???

 

Fairly complext tool paths, .. and whimpy little card that

came in my Dell just can't hang, ( ok well it does hang, ..

and crashes MC )

 

Computer has the latest duel core processor and 2 gig ram.

 

Thanks,

 

Curtis

[gcode]

Quadro FX 3450 PciE

[cboggs]

Ive seen this card sold as HP refurbished unit a little cheaper, ..

any thoughts on buying a HP refurb??? Good , bad, ugly?

 

Also, the FX1500 is a little less expensive, . but is it close in

performance?

 

Thanks for the help.

[Greg Williams]

Curtis,

 

You need to remember it is not the size of the card in mb that matters it is the arcitecture.

 

For example my old banger at home has a 32Mb Quadro pro and it works a treat. A good guide is anything that is certified for Catia, UG or solidworks should work fine with Mastercam X

[gcode]

quote:

---

Also, the FX1500 is a little less expensive, . but is it close in

performance?

---

A lot depends on the size of your solid models

(real world phyisical size, not megabytes)

The bigger the part the more you need the horsepower.

The FX-1500 should be fine for most parts.

Last year I did some 5X aircraft bulkheads the

size of a small speedboat. It took V9 and an FX3400 almost 2 minutes to shade the solid model.

X on the same computer takes a little over a minute.

 

When CNC Software wrote X they bent over backwards to make sure it would run with ATI cards. I don't know if they succeeded or not.

Since V9 demmanded NVIDIA/Quadro cards, 99.9 percent of X users are still using their V9 Quadros. This means the ATI cards havn't had a

fair trial yet. That will change as time goes on.

 

[ 04-23-2006, 11:54 AM: Message edited by: gcode ]

[cboggs]

Thank you for the help.

 

My work will be limited to automotive cylinder heads, not

a huge part, .. but I do want the system to be as fast as possable.

 

Curtis

[cboggs]

There's quite a range of cards and cost, ..

 

FX540 @ $200, .. FX1400 @ $500, .. FX3450 @ $800, ..

and FX4500 @ over $1200.

 

So for the difference in cost of these cards, will I really see

a big difference? PNY lists these cards as the ones for CAD, ..

 

Again guys, .. thenks for the help.

 

Curtis

[heavychevy2155]

I see this all the time in the machining world. Company's buy the top of the line machines mills or lathes then skimp on the tooling or software. If you want the best out of the machine you cannot go cheap on the support end. Would someone buy a 200,000. dollar car and put tiger paw tires on it, I dont think so. Why Spend xx,xxx. on Mastercam X Level3 multi axis and run it on a cheap computer. Im not saying that is what you are doing, just asking and getting info on new cards is a great step in the right direction. I just wish that managment could see that staying up to date with support tools (computers, trying new endmills, inserts and stuff) could have a great turn around in the investments they make. I will most likely get flamed for this but it really does take money to make money. Yes i have my own business and I am building it more everyday, so I do know how much it takes to run a machine shop. I know of shops that have been around for years and they are still stuck in the old days, there machines are run in the ground and they could replace or repair them but they have become so use to the work arounds. The machines cannot even mill a round hole, aw just put a boring head in and let it go. That sucks, if you would just fix the machine you could just mill it and not have to setup the dang boring heads all the time.

[gcode]

quote:

---

will I really see a big difference?

---

you will see a difference in 4 main areas

1. speed of shading solids and surafces

2. smoothness of dynamic rotation

3. smoothness and speed of Verify sessions

this last one is most noticable if you have

purchased the TrueSolid muliaxis option

for Verify. ( a mandatory purchase in my view)

4. Smootness and stability with Backplot.

 

Whether its worth the money or not is something

I can't answer.

[cboggs]

"G"

 

"you will see a difference in 4 main areas"

 

That's Just the answer I was looking for, .. .

and as far as I'm concerned, .. it's worth every penny if it

speeds production.

 

Now, the system I have has a 2.8 mhz duel core processor

and 2 gig of ram, .. is there anything else I need to be aware of

for a good system?

 

Thanks again,

 

Curtis

[Steve Zirtzman]

cboggs,

After you get that new video card add a second monitor. This is one of the easiest, most cost-effective and significant improvements you can make to your workstation.

[Greg VN]

I have to ask - what is the advantage to having a second monitor?

[htm01]

you can run 2 sessions of MC,or have the edit or any other prog on the second screen,but most have the board on it.

[MIL-TFP-41]

I recently did some testing with different cards, tested in mastercam verify with a stopwatch (not exact, but close within a few seconds). Used the same machine, reinstalling drivers for each card, used the latest drivers from nvidia's site. Machine is a 3GHz P4. File used a imported STL created in Rhino and used 5axis toolpaths

 

Card 1 - GeForce FX5200 - 2min 30sec

Card 2 - GeForce 6800GS - 2 min flat

Card 3 - Quadro FX4000 - 1min 50sec

 

 

Card 2 can be had for under $200 US. For the fun of it, I loaded rivatuner with the 6800GS & worked its magic and softmodded it into a FX4000. Time was the same as the "real" FX4000 (priced at $1500)

 

Next I overclocked the machine to 3.5Ghz. Times dropped by approx 30sec.

 

My conclusion...spend the $$$ on more GHz. Odds are your processor is the bottleneck, not your GPU. The main differece I noticed for the ultra cheap 5200 vs the other cards was the loading time for the stl file.

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

One comment regarding the shading of physically large models: Pay attention to your shading settings. When I'm working on small parts I'll set the chord height to .0002 or smaller in order to see the details clearly. Standard parts I leave it at .002. For very large parts, you'll probably want to set it to .02 (or .2, depending on scale). Setting chord height to a larger number will really ease the workload for your video card.

 

-Matt Hajicek

AMD64 4000+

Nvidia Quadro FX 540

2GB PC3200

XP Pro 64

Dual 1800 x 1200 Displays

[chowquoe^]

We are currently using a

NVIDIA Quadro FX3400

2GB RAM

3.4GB Pentium D

XP Pro Service pack 2

1280 X 1024

 

This combination seems to be working much better with complex 5axis tool paths. Cut verify time on a paticular job from 1hr 45min to 50min.

[cboggs]

OK, .. this MAY be getting more complicated.

 

I did order the FX3450 card today, .. ;-)

 

But, in running back plot on a 5axis tool path, .. if I turn

the shaded tool appearance off, back plot runs very smooth

and runs the entire tool path with no problem.

 

If I turn the shaded tool Appearance on, it's VERY choppy and

will some times freeze.

 

I have my Windoze performance monitor running and it only

shows 50% processor usage, but pegs it at 50% when BP

is running and having a hard time. It won't run higher then 50%

 

So, .. it this telling me the system can only use 50% of the processor? Like maybe there's a problem using the Duel

core processor??

 

Maybe the duel core processor needs XP pro instead of the

"home" version I'm running ??

 

Or, .. is this pointing to the video card???

 

thanks

 

Curtis

[gcode]

quote:

---

it this telling me the system can only use 50% of the processor

---

I'm going to make a wild guess.

You have hyperthreading turned on, try turning it off.

[cboggs]

OK, ..

 

How do I turn it off, .. ( OK now I'm showing how PC dumb I am )

 

When running Rhino I can easly get the processor well over 50%.

 

Curtis

[gcode]

Do you have V9 on your machine?

With V9 running and hyperthreading enabled

you will pull 50%.

If hyperthreading is off you'll pull 100%

To turn it off you have to go into the BIOS setup

On this machine I hit F2 during bootup.

[cboggs]

gcode,

 

I found how to turn hyperthreading off, ..

 

so am I to understand hyperthreading and MCx is not

a good combination?

 

Is hyperthreading different then the dual core ??

 

Curtis

[cboggs]

Gcode,

 

Yea I got to the system set up, ..

 

OK, .. the processor info says it's multi core capable

but it also says it's not hyperthreading capable.

 

When I got to "performance" it doesn't list hyperthreading, ..

but it lists multiple core ????

 

Do I want to turn multi core off, .. or is it just hyperthreading

that can be a problem?

 

I'm in Windoze XP, .. and MC X, ..

 

Curtis

[bikejunkie]

I think you need to run windows XP pro to use the dual processor chip. I am running a ATI Fire GL 5100 with good luck in MC X I am running a P4 640 3.2 Ghz overclocked to 3.84 Ghz 2 gig of ram and have had very few problems. I do alot of surface milling and this card work better than anything else I have tried so far.

[gcode]

quote:

---

so am I to understand hyperthreading and MCx is not a good combination

---

X is no written to take advantage of hyperthreading so its not going to help you

if its on. Personally, I think hyperthreading is a bunch of sales hype. I always turn it of.

[cboggs]

OK guys, ..

 

More tests, ..

 

I ran MCx with the windoze performance monitor open so I could see

the processor use. In back plot using a shaded tool display it would

stall and peg the processor but only at 50%, . I could not get it to go over

50% no matter what I did.

 

So, .. I went into the system set up and turned the duel core off, ..

 

same test, .. but now shows 100% processor use, but it still runs the same.

 

My guess is, as has been stated, .. it's not using the duel core processor

and perhaps MCx can only "see" 1/2 the processor.

 

I've installed a Quadro FX 3450, .. and that didn't help at all. ;-(

 

I'm guessing that the software, MCx , .. has to be written to take advantage

of the duel core processor, .. so at this point duel core processors

with MCx is not a good idea?

 

I'll try Windoze XP pro next and see if that helps, .. and I also

have a Pentium 4 machine coming to try as well, ..

 

Thanks,

 

Curtis