Benchmark 2.0

[HateWhatOwnsYou]

We should have a file with more GPU dependent operations to See where those stand.

and also, since 2017 is suppose to support better multithreading, will opening an old mcx file automatically utilize this or is it stil using its old single threading way?

[Motorsports-X]

Old files can cause errors. I loaded the original benchmark file and it asked me to do some stuff to make it compatible. I don't remeber what it was exactly.

 

 

As far as more gpu dependant processes... I don't know which those are. It appears that the verify uses more gpu, but this file never pegged my m2000. I'm not sure how we would go about testing gpu's specifically. (edit... Now that i think about it... Maybe doing compares? I will check to see how much gpu that utilizes Monday) I think mastercam just needs to keep working on thier r multithreading....

 

Honestly, it seems to me that crunching tool paths would be a great task for gpu acceleration. Since that's the kind of math gpus excel at. (meaning stream processing) i all am interested in how the math works. I have an idea for how to speed up the compute but i have no idea if it would work.

[Guest]

Mastercam does not use GPU for processing toolpaths

 

A Fast hard drive and a high bus speed with the largest amount of cache will process fastest.

[HateWhatOwnsYou]

I believe stock models and verification use the gpu, maybe simulation?

 

Maybe also when you open a large file and it's creating the solids too?

 

 

I use stock models on everything I do, sometimes that's 5 or 6 stock models.

[Guest]

It's been pretty well hashed over, people ask about using Cuda cores and such and Mastercam doesn't use them for processing

[HateWhatOwnsYou]

Now is this info only for the quatro cards? Because I could swear my current AMD card will use the gpu when doing stock models and one or two other things...

[BenK]

Mastercam uses the GPU to render graphics not to process data. Like JParis stated, we have been over this time and time again. If you want a fast computer for crunching toolpaths get a high gHz rated CPU with a large cache. More cores helps when you try doing a lot of processes at one time such as batch processing. If you also want to be able to manipulate a large assembly file on your screen without any noticeable lag, get a high powered GPU with an Nvidia K3000 being the minimum you should even consider. RAM most people would be good with 8-16GB while power users could use 32GB, I have 64GB and 99% of the time it is a total waste. A solid state drive is a must now days, I suggest running two in a mirrored raid setup for safety reasons. Its really as simple as that. If you look back at my setup on here you will see what the people with the top benchmark times run, their are several of us with very similar setups.

 

On a side note, this benchmark file is garbage. It only uses 10% on my available processing power so it really isn't a good test. Even with my laptop its only 13% utilization. If you want to spend the time to create a new file that utilizes 100% of the processor be my guest, I would rather get customer programs out the door so I can make money. We have come to a point that the computer equipment is no longer the bottle neck it has now shifted to the software and the users themselves. 

[Motorsports-X]

Mastercam uses the GPU to render graphics not to process data. Like JParis stated, we have been over this time and time again. If you want a fast computer for crunching toolpaths get a high gHz rated CPU with a large cache. More cores helps when you try doing a lot of processes at one time such as batch processing. If you also want to be able to manipulate a large assembly file on your screen without any noticeable lag, get a high powered GPU with an Nvidia K3000 being the minimum you should even consider. RAM most people would be good with 8-16GB while power users could use 32GB, I have 64GB and 99% of the time it is a total waste. A solid state drive is a must now days, I suggest running two in a mirrored raid setup for safety reasons. Its really as simple as that. If you look back at my setup on here you will see what the people with the top benchmark times run, their are several of us with very similar setups.

 

On a side note, this benchmark file is garbage. It only uses 10% on my available processing power so it really isn't a good test. Even with my laptop its only 13% utilization. If you want to spend the time to create a new file that utilizes 100% of the processor be my guest, I would rather get customer programs out the door so I can make money. We have come to a point that the computer equipment is no longer the bottle neck it has now shifted to the software and the users themselves. 

 

 

then why not post one of the heavy files you create... :popcorn:

[Newbeeee™]

then why not post one of the heavy files you create... :popcorn:

ITAR?

Company confidentiality?

[BenK]

then why not post one of the heavy files you create... :popcorn:

 

Quite simple, I work on ITAR Parts and my customers would get a little upset if I shared their proprietary information on a global forum. Even if I wanted to load them here the size limitation wouldn't allow me to. So you can either read back through this topic and the original benchmark thread and gather the information on what to get, or you can waste your time having the conversation yet again in an effort to change the outcome. Your choice, just don't be surprised when the longtime users don't contribute to this topic anymore. (Time to finish the popcorn and get some work done.)

[Goldorak]

just try it on MCAM 2017 

4:44  

 

 

specs below 

[Motorsports-X]

Quite simple, I work on ITAR Parts and my customers would get a little upset if I shared their proprietary information on a global forum. Even if I wanted to load them here the size limitation wouldn't allow me to. So you can either read back through this topic and the original benchmark thread and gather the information on what to get, or you can waste your time having the conversation yet again in an effort to change the outcome. Your choice, just don't be surprised when the longtime users don't contribute to this topic anymore. (Time to finish the popcorn and get some work done.)

dude i don't know you... but i have read two post from you and quite frankly... you are a xxxx .... no one here asked you for anything - the least of which are your snide condescending replies.   We are/were having a conversation amongst ourselves about potential ways to benchmark GPU performance.   Everyone here knows that Mastercam does use CUDA cores... your not the only genius in the bunch buddy.  I hope you dont talk to your customers  like you talk to people here.  if you actually have any

 

i never expected you to post a file.. that comment (along with my popcorn)   was simply  bait to sit back and watch you make yourself look like what you actually are ....mission accomplished

 

and "quite simply,"  im positive not every part you have ever done has:

 

#1 - been ITAR

#2 - been "confidential customer information" 

 

 

if it is, then you haven't been doing much. 

 

 

now back to the regularly scheduled programming....... for those that were interested... I'm drawing up a file for us to use for benchmark 3.0 that should stress the cpu a little more. I am going to use opti-rough in a few areas in ways that I know have been heavy on my past machines.  I'll also work with the GPU a bit and see if I can find the areas  that stress it the most. 

[jlw™]

Too many feelings in here for me.

[THEE THAINZ™]

[HateWhatOwnsYou]

I can understand mastercam not using the GPU for toolpaths (but I'd still bet $100 I've seen mastercam maxing out my current GPU for something)

Either way we can use This thread (or a new one) for learning what a good combo is for a computer for people like me who used this website to figure out what to look for, some parts work better together than others. That is a fact

There's combos on here with the same cpu with 30second variances, so what're the deal with that if the CPU is the only factor?

In the end I ended up spending 4K on parts since I'm a firm believe of "it's better to have and not need than to need and not have" and results are hit and miss for unknown reasons. I also frequently have 20mb solid files And don't want them all laggy

 

The most confusing part for me was our local "workstation" computer supplier told us mastercam was VERY GPU dependent. Prolly the biggest reason why I second guess the contradictory replies in here.

 

 

I have some large files (non ITAR bro) and another with like 360 standing pins that would literally lock my current computer up when trying to rest rough between them, let me know if these could be helpful

 

dude i don't know you... but i have read two post from you and quite frankly... you are a xxxx .... no one here asked you for anything - the least of which are your snide condescending replies. We are/were having a conversation amongst ourselves about potential ways to benchmark GPU performance. Everyone here knows that Mastercam does use CUDA cores... your not the only genius in the bunch buddy. I hope you dont talk to your customers like you talk to people here. if you actually have any

 

i never expected you to post a file.. that comment (along with my popcorn) was simply bait to sit back and watch you make yourself look like what you actually are ....mission accomplished

 

and "quite simply," im positive not every part you have ever done has:

 

#1 - been ITAR

#2 - been "confidential customer information"

 

 

if it is, then you haven't been doing much.

 

 

now back to the regularly scheduled programming....... for those that were interested... I'm drawing up a file for us to use for benchmark 3.0 that should stress the cpu a little more. I am going to use opti-rough in a few areas in ways that I know have been heavy on my past machines. I'll also work with the GPU a bit and see if I can find the areas that stress it the most.

 

[jlw™]

Post it up. I haven't found one yet my $1500 MSI wouldn't crunch.

[HateWhatOwnsYou]

I'll look at it tomorrow between me busy making money, id also want to make some general changes to it.

 

 

Another thing I don't understand is the Xeon processors post some of the worst times on here yet solid box uses them for their high end computers?

[BenK]

dude i don't know you... but i have read two post from you and quite frankly... you are a xxxx .... no one here asked you for anything - the least of which are your snide condescending replies.   We are/were having a conversation amongst ourselves about potential ways to benchmark GPU performance.   Everyone here knows that Mastercam does use CUDA cores... your not the only genius in the bunch buddy.  I hope you dont talk to your customers  like you talk to people here.  if you actually have any

 

i never expected you to post a file.. that comment (along with my popcorn)   was simply  bait to sit back and watch you make yourself look like what you actually are ....mission accomplished

 

and "quite simply,"  im positive not every part you have ever done has:

 

#1 - been ITAR

#2 - been "confidential customer information" 

 

 

if it is, then you haven't been doing much. 

 

 

now back to the regularly scheduled programming....... for those that were interested... I'm drawing up a file for us to use for benchmark 3.0 that should stress the cpu a little more. I am going to use opti-rough in a few areas in ways that I know have been heavy on my past machines.  I'll also work with the GPU a bit and see if I can find the areas  that stress it the most. 

 

I don’t know what I did to offend you, and quite frankly I don’t care. But please don’t come in here looking for a fight. For starters this is a topic I started on a public user forum, if you don’t want me or anyone else that has a different view point from you to post go start a private forum somewhere. Secondly, my comment was in no way condescending to anyone, I just refuse to handle everyone with kid gloves like your obviously are used to. And yes, that is what my customers expect from me so yes I do talk to them like that.

 

Now, nowhere in my posts did I say to close this topic for discussion. In fact, my first post yesterday gave a summary of what has been discussed over the last few years. I went on to say the current benchmark file is not very good and if you wanted to spend the time to make a new one to go right ahead. Not sure why you feel the need to attack me and what I do but I guess if that makes you feel better about the small world you live in that’s fine with me.

 

P.S. Yes everything I work on is covered by at least an NDA. Same with many other contractors I know. The manufacturing world is far bigger than you think.

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

I would like to see some new benchmark files put together:

 

1. Toolpath regeneration.

2. Verification.

3. Large assembly.

4. User interface (could use a training file).

 

#4 would be to see how different people have their Mastercam configured, how they interact with it, what input devices they use, and how all that effects their work speed.  In full disclosure I have bit of an agenda with this one; personally I'm of the opinion that 2017 cannot be used as fast as X9 can be used, but I'm open to learning from anyone who proves me wrong.

[Motorsports-X]

I don’t know what I did to offend you, and quite frankly I don’t care. But please don’t come in here looking for a fight. For starters this is a topic I started on a public user forum, if you don’t want me or anyone else that has a different view point from you to post go start a private forum somewhere. Secondly, my comment was in no way condescending to anyone, I just refuse to handle everyone with kid gloves like your obviously are used to. And yes, that is what my customers expect from me so yes I do talk to them like that.

 

Now, nowhere in my posts did I say to close this topic for discussion. In fact, my first post yesterday gave a summary of what has been discussed over the last few years. I went on to say the current benchmark file is not very good and if you wanted to spend the time to make a new one to go right ahead. Not sure why you feel the need to attack me and what I do but I guess if that makes you feel better about the small world you live in that’s fine with me.

 

P.S. Yes everything I work on is covered by at least an NDA. Same with many other contractors I know. The manufacturing world is far bigger than you think.

so your telling me that you own a consulting business for 15 plus years doing cam programming, and you have never done anything for yourself?

 

lol..

 

 

anyways...

 

@hatewhatownsyou   id like to try to crunch those files myself and see what they look like.  send me a drop box link if you can.

[HateWhatOwnsYou]

**Out of date time, new time in post below**

3:39 sofar with the new build, increasing the OC buy an additional .125mhz lowered my time 22 seconds.

currently @ 4.5mhz, mastercam peaked the cpu @100% for all about 5 seconds with this file.

 

 

 

[HateWhatOwnsYou]

3:18s dirtying the first opp and regen all dirty ops

Running at 4.625mhz

 

 

Has anyone else noticed if you run the test a second time its even faster?

my second regen time was 2:55s

 

 

 

 

 

jlw & Motosports-X

I will work on getting the other file cleaned up later to share, i covered up all the pins to get around the issue i had so i will have to undo some things.

do you guys have other benchmark files in the making?

[Guest]

The reason it's faster the 2nd time around is because it's in the regen buffer still.

[So not a Guru]

6:35 with my laptop (HP ZBook i7 4900MQ 16GB RAM, Quadro K2100M), tolerances at .0001.

When y'all say setting the tolerances to .0001, does that include the stock model tolerance? Or do you leave that at .001 for shape & .003 for path?

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

Not touching the stock model settings.