What is the MAX system X4MU3 can use?

[Code_Breaker]

Right now I am using:

 

Window 7 Professional - 64 bit

Xeon E5430 @2.66GHz dual quad cores (2 processors)

12.0 GB RAM

NVIDIA Quadro FX 3700

 

My questions are:

 

1 - "If I increased the RAM to 20.0 GB will Mastercam use it?" (I have 2 empty slots)

 

2 - "What is the most RAM that Mastercam can utilize?"

 

3 - "Does Mastercam runs faster at higher clock speed on one CPU, or with more CPU cores?

 

any input would help ...

[gaijin_2007]

1 - No

 

2 - On your system 2GB, as it is a 32-bit process running on a 64-bit OS. On a 32-bit OS you can flick the /3GB switch in the boot.ini to get 3GB but that doesn't work on 64-bit OS (I think this was discussed recently in another thread).

 

3 - Multi-threading in MC is fairly simplistic in that rather than a single toolpath being spread across multiple cores, a single toolpath is calculated on a single core with additional toolpaths being calculated on another core. Basically 1 toolpath per core, 4 cores then 4 toolpaths can be crunched simultaneously. Unless I misunderstood your question?

I would say that MC would calculate faster on a single CPU with multiple cores rather than multiple CPUs.

[Ron Branch @ Verisurf]

1: No

 

2: I believe 3 gigs

 

3: Overclocking could not hurt.

 

HTH

[Guest]

Codebreaker,

 

With a system at those specs, there is really nothing else you're going to throw at it that is going to give you anything more than quite small performance gains.

 

You're pretty much at the end.

 

OC'ing the Bus will garner some gain. How much???

I would think 10% at best perhaps.

[Mark H]

With all that "extra" ram have you thought about using a ramdisk?

 

Or installing one of those solid state drives?

[Code_Breaker]

I also work with CATIA, NX and Vericut ... the RAM a must for them, just wish MC would get up-to-date with their product ... continually staying in "caveman technology" will lessen its marketability ...

[Verndog]

quote:

---

continually staying in "caveman technology" will lessen its marketability

---

What are you talking about??...I'd like to see you build a roman style door in Bobcad!!

 

BTW..since your Govenator was on the advertising campaign...possibly you can get him to help "git with the program".

[Chris Rizzo]

The only gain I can get is with oc'ing. I've experimented with various ram speeds and quantities (between 2 and 6 gb only), and only processor tweaks will do anything real.

 

That said my i7 920 mildly oc'd to 3.2 runs ye' ole' benchmark in 54 secs with 6gb pc 16000.

 

With 4gb of pc 14400 it runs in about 56 sec.

 

NON oc'd at 2.44mhz it's around 1:24 if I recall.

 

So the moral is a little processor goes a long way. A lot of ram doesn't help mc that much.

 

oh, 7 64bit btw

[Verndog]

quote:

---

NON oc'd at 2.44mhz it's around 1:24 if I recall.

---

Out of the box an i7 920 runs @ 2.66GHz.

[Chris Rizzo]

Yeah. 220... 221, whatever it takes

 

[Guest]

quote:

---

A lot of ram doesn't help mc that much.

---

On a max system like that, neither does a SSD.

[Code_Breaker]

quote:

---

What are you talking about??...I'd like to see you build a roman style door in Bobcad!!

---

OK already ... Bobcad is "caveman technology" ... all I meant to say, Mastercam, my bread and butter, is not using current technology, nor last years ...

 

maybe, I should have said the "dark ages technology" or "medieval technology"

 

Any, back to the reall issue ... I agree, adding aanother dual quad core and increasing clock speed is the answer for now ...

[bogusmill]

My Asus Rampage Formula machine is a quad core Xeon overclocked to 3.5ghz with 8Gb RAM and is still 10 seconds faster on the benchmark than the new Dell T5500 we have here at work. The T5500 has twin quad core CPU's at 2.26ghz and 12Gb RAM.

[gaijin_2007]

As I said earlier a single quad core CPU will be faster than twin quad core CPUs.

 

The clock speed of modern processors is so high that a major limit on their performance is the time it takes to access main memory. Processor manufacturers reduce this bottleneck by including fast ‘cache’ memory on the processor chip. Frequently used data is kept in the cache where it can be accessed quickly.

When a processor has multiple cores they share the same on-chip cache.

When processor cores are working in parallel, the communication between cores to coordinate their tasks can take advantage of the shared cache provided they are all on the same chip.

However, the benefit of the shared cache is lost if some of the cores are on a separate chip and communication has to use an external bus or main memory.

 

A further overhead arises because cache coherency must be maintained - the contents of the caches must be kept in step with the contents of main memory, and vice-versa. It is quite complex to keep a single cache up to date, but the problem becomes much more complex and time consuming when coherency has to be maintained between two or more caches and main memory.

 

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cache_coherency].

 

So to agree with JParis you're pretty much at the end of the road regarding any significant gains in performance even by adding another dual quad core (you'll probably seen a slow down tbh) only overclocking will make any difference and that will be minimal IMHO.

Until MC becomes 64-bit, which I'm not convinced will happen for some time if at all, then I think you're as far as you're going to go.

[Code_Breaker]

Latest word from my IT guy:

 

quote:

---

Your computer has a server motherboard which supports SAS (15,000RPM and SATA is only 7,200RPM). With SAS, you can configure RAID.

 

Ram disk is a misused term I think in this case (“A RAM disk (not to be confused with a RAM drive or solid-state drive) is a block of RAM (primary storage or volatile memory) that a computer's software is treating as if the memory were a disk drive (secondary storage).” Source(

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAM_disk

).

 

Back in Windows 3.11 or Windows 95, one can configure a virtual disk (make up of RAM) but data will not be retained after computer shutdown. I don’t think it’s a good idea to configure virtual disk because Windows manages application memory. In other words, Windows’s still running under SATA so data is still being load from SATA to CPU (slow)

 

SSD is the easiest way to go.

 

---

Thanks for everyones input ... very helpful and very knowledgable ... great forum to be part of ...

 

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

In my experience it's all about clock speed and cache size.

[Code_Breaker]

Well, this is what I decided to do:

 

1) changed HD to INTEL Solid State Hard drive (149 GB)

 

2) changed video card from NVIDA Quadro FX 3700 to NVIDA Quadro FX 4800

 

3) increased RAM from 12GB to 20GB changing the "memory channel mode" from 'dual' to 'quad'

 

4) wrote BAT files forcing Mastercam infinity settings to access designated CPU ie. one file uses only 2,4,7 CPUs and another uses only 3,5,6 CPUs

 

My system rating basic score went from 5.9 to 7.1

with 7.9 as the highest possible score ...

 

 

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

4) wrote BAT files forcing Mastercam

infinity

a

ffinity.

---

fissed

 

The SSD helps speed quite nicely doesn't it?

 

Like that program load time for CATIA?

[Code_Breaker]

quote:

---

Like that program load time for CATIA?

---

lightening ... it is faster than Mastercam now ...

 

quote:

---

4) wrote BAT files forcing Mastercam infinity affinity.

---

Maybe, I didn't misspelled it ...

 

Interestingly, by using the affinity settings, each instance of Mastercam I open using this method, Window 7 is directing about 2 GB of RAM for each, thus, all the files operate at the same speed ... no bogging down as before ...

 

I usually have 3 mastercam, Vericut, Office Word, Outlook, and CATIA or NX (or both) opened and being used at the same time ... all run with independent RAM dedication ...

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Faster than MC? WOW! Must be that CATIA will run natively in 64bit unlike MC being 32bit.

 

I wish more people would run 64bit systems so Mastercam could get onboard with it. You think people bitched when they went to the X interface??? Hell hath no fury like a 32bit user scourned.

 

I normally have MC, Outlook, Word, Windows Media Player, and CATIA running. Only one session of MC for me, unless it's during a Beta Cycle, then I'll have X4 and some Vaproware running as well. All this on a Dell M6300 w/ 4GB RAM.

[Code_Breaker]

quote:

---

Must be that CATIA will run natively in 64bit

---

I am running CATIA-64 bit ...

 

I not only program, but manages the department ... so I am wearing many hats, at one time, but now with the extreme speed, I may not need to open so many MC at one time ... way faster opening time ... files that took up to 8-9 minutes to open, now opens in less the 1-2 minutes ... simple files FLASH on the screen ... hope they don't melt the monitors ...

[Rob @ Target Machine]

Nice. I wonder how those slc ssd's perform versus the mlc drives.

 

I'm thinking of spanning a volume with 3 64gb ssd's to total 192 gig.

 

Just sooooo expensive at $630 apiece.

 

[ 05-27-2010, 08:31 PM: Message edited by: Mastercam Guru ]

[Code_Breaker]

How to dedicate your CPU

 

CPU_347.bat

 

@echo off

Start /affinity 98 c:mcamx4mu3mastercam.exe

 

98 is hexidecimal for CPU 347

 

Others are:

1 is CPU 0

2 is CPU 1

4 is CPU 2

8 is CPU 3

10 is CPU 4

20 is CPU 5

40 is CPU 6

80 is CPU 7

100 is CPU all

 

For combinations, a few are:

E is CPU 1,2,3

1C is CPU 2,3,4

5F is CPU 0,1,2,3,4,6

60 is CPU 5,6

90 is CPU 4,7

 

Have fun ...

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

Just sooooo expensive at $630 apiece.

---

My 128GB was not that much.

[Code_Breaker]

quote:

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

Replace the hd with an intel x25-m

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

 

My SSD is: Intel X25-M SSDSA2MH160G2R5 Solid State Drive - 160GB, SATA, 2.5"

 

Cost: $429.99

 

Performance rating is 7.8 (7.9 isthe highest you can get) ...