SLOOOOOOW X2MR2SP1

[mold100]

So after out of the seat awhile Mcam 4 or 5 years, I have been using X out on the floor doing our high speed milling. I decided to rearrange floor systems to use the hasp on my puter in engineering (long story version) any how the floor puter was a dual core 2.4, 2 gig of ram with quadro fx 540 windows xp 32bit. Now the rig I have moved the hasp to so i can design and pgram at same seat, Intel Quad core 2.4, 4gig of ram, geforce ti 8800 card 528meg (suspect part of the prob) and xp pro 64Bit. This is an easy 3 to 4 times slower than the floor puter, it takes minutes to just rotate a model (not big or complex parts). Is the 64 bit an issue, cause its a night and day differance this system rocks with solidworks (Other than skimpy graphics card)

[Richard Thomas - Mastercam UK]

This probably isn't relevant but I've been struggling with slow graphics performance in X2 Mr2 SP1 for a couple of weeks - I won't bother listing my spec as it turned out that I simply checked "disable hardware acceleration" on the Screen page in Settings/Configuration some time ago and forgot to clear that box again.

 

Unlikely to be your problem but it was a classic "doh!" moment so it's worth ruling out.

 

Or... it maybe worth checking that box to see if it has any effect on your system. If so then I would guess it's a graphics driver/64 bit issue, but I have to admit that I have no experience of 64 bit Windows, sorry.

[Todd Tracey from Fastech]

What's the chances of swapping graphics cards. Ypu're comparing an engineering graphics card to a gamer card. Might be worth a shot if possible.

JM2C

[Guest]

on the slow system, have you check to see if the "Hardware Acceleration" is turned down or off?

 

I use an 8800GTS 640 meg on WinXP 32 and Vista/64

 

swapping the card might help verify it's a card issue but I doubt it's hardware related to the card, more than likely a software setting.

 

JM2C

[gcode]

MicroSoft .Net 2.0 has both x32 and x64 versions.

Both will run on an x64 system.

If it wasn't on your machine when you installed X,

you got the 32 bit from the X disk.

I did the same thing. I uninstalled the x32 version and downloaded the x64 version from MS.

I did get better performance, but not 2 to 3 times.

 

One thing that always helps if you have a lightweight video card is turning off the Windows eyecandy. (My Computer/Advacned/Setting/Adjust for Best Performance

[Jeremy Grigsby]

It's probably the quad core. If you watch the processor usage in task manager, you will see it most likely only uses one core of the processor. The best computer for mastercam is probably an older one. Stay away from new technology.

[Guest]

quote:

---

It's probably the quad core. If you watch the processor usage in task manager, you will see it most likely only uses one core of the processor. The best computer for mastercam is probably an older one. Stay away from new technology.

---

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG

 

I run a quad at home, have 2 in the training room. They are the fastest systems we have right now, per the benchmark thread, performance is TOP notch.

 

That statement could NOT be more wrong.

 

Sorry Jeremey

[connormac]

John,

 

Are you trying to tell us something.

[mold100]

Thnx fellas.

 

Turns out the file is crap, the model must have some S%@$# wrong with it because I decided to open some other larger files and it works great. John yes the quad core screams over the dual core. It still bothering me though its a solidworks file that is only like 60 surfaces. Corrupt. Anyhow dont like the g card it leaves fragments when x-forming. Guess the first file tried with in the box I just assumed it was the rig.

[Jeremy Grigsby]

So mastercam takes advantage of all cores? There is something wrong with our computer because it maxes out at 25% load.

[Colin Gilchrist]

Jeremy,

 

Mastercam is a single threaded application and as a result, it is not designed to use more than one core. Windows is managing your processors and breaking up the tasks across your cores, not Mastercam. X3 is supposed to have support for multi-threading built in and will be the first version of Mastercam to directly support multi-core processors.

 

HTH,

[Jeremy Grigsby]

So would the current mastercam run faster on a single core 3ghz system, or a quad core 3ghz system?

[Guest]

Quad core

 

It would run faster on a even on slower(2.4 Ghz) Quad core.

 

I've already done it and proven it in testing.

 

Plus if you read the Benchmark thread you'll see that NO single core even comes close to a multi-core.

[Ron Branch @ Verisurf]

I have to agree 1000% with John on this. I swapped my 2.4 ghz p4 single core with a 2.66 ghz Xeon quad core and doing some 200 meg files right now that would crash my old system. Anything over 40 megs was killing that computer this one doesn't even notice it is there. Have Beta, but still using X2MR2SP1 for my programming and been very great having this work horse of a computer. I have a Quardo FX1700 512mg card and really does a good job.

 

HTH

[Thee Rickster ™]

I swapped my 2.6 ghz quad core for a 3.2 ghz core 2 duo.

 

obviously the fact that the ghz went up so I got 3mins better timing/benchmark on the Duo, but if I could have afforded the 3.2 Quad I would have gone that route.(average file sizes 250 megs to 400 megs)

[Bjorn Petersson AME AB]

Hi,

 

Something that might be worth a check is the Groups. I've got files from customers where groups have been duplicated, and the file very slow to work. (But it should affect the filesize too)