Benchmark 2.0

[RaiderX]

Oh that was painfull  25 minutes, do I get the turtle award lol

X9

xeon e5-2620 2ghz

64 bit

16 gig ram

quadro 600

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

I'd be curious for people to run the benchmark on the same machine in X9, 2017, and 2018 and compare the numbers.

[Alvaro Gil - Cimquest-inc.com]

Time:  4:16.07

i7 8700k @ 3.7 ghz

Mcam 2018

Win 10

---

It is really awesome how fast this file regenerates on relatively inexpensive hardware! 

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

Looks like I forgot to post my results when I built this system over two years ago:

 

Time: 4:47

i7 6700K @ 4.7GHZ

Quadro M4000

64GB DDR4

Mcam X9

Win 7 64 Pro

 

I did turn it down to 4.5GHZ since then for stability.

 

[jlw™]

2019 = 3m 2s

[pullo]

The part  file is still bizarre after all these years.  In order to make it work right , you have to change the tolerance in TWO PLACES.  Op 4 (Horizontal) and  Op 2  (stock model).

That is two places somebody can make a mistake . First time around I only made one change , did not change the stock model.  So I would suggest that  you make Benchmark 3.0 , which has all the tolerances PRESET to this 0.0001.  Then we'd get  identical  results 100% of the time,  no fiddling at all . 

having said that ....

i7-7700K @ 4.2 GHZ,

32 GB ,  SIMM 4  memory , 

 Quadro  K620 ,

WIN 10  v 1703.

Mcam 2019 ,PB4

 

4 min 26 sec, all tolerances 0.0001

3 min 26 sec ,  stock model set to 0.003 . I am saying this because I suspect that JLW has a suspiciously  excellent time. JLW , could you confirm that you have changed BOTH of the

tolerances to 0.0001 ? If you have and you have the same hardware as I ,  the question is what grease are YOU using to get that  3 min result ?

 

Gracjan

 

 

[So not a Guru]

Apparently my work PC is a little sluggish.

6 minutes 13.963 seconds

Xeon E5-1650 @ 3.5GHz

32 GB 

64-bit

Win 7

Mcam 2018 

[pullo]

As people display their PC parameters proudly to everybody , I thought I'd try Xeon, sounded cool and was way more expensive than a i7 and also I had to wait two weeks for it.

First time around with the XEON , I had a support spacer missing from the middle of the motherboard and the board touched the housing , so I actually had a green flame fire

inside. So much for my 500 euro investment and the motherboard ... But I was persistent and I got another one , (500 + 200 ) . Well the speed was disappointing, but then

 the whole thing died on me  only like a year later. ...  So no XEONS for anytime soon

Gracjan

[Reko]

7 minutes 22 seconds... I need a new rig 

Dell T5500

Xeon Quad Core - W5580 @3.20GHz

24GB Ram

Windows 10 Pro... with many pauses

NVidea Quadro K4000

[So not a Guru]

1 hour ago, pullo said:

So no XEONS for anytime soon

Yeah, I tried to talk them into an I7 instead, but our IT guy kept swearing that the XEON would be MUCH better.

Not. 

[gcode]

I got a low 4 minute time on the rig in my siggy running X19 PB3 this morning

All the tool path tolerances were at .0001 and the stock model was set to .001

I used to buy refurb XEON's from Dell at home and high end XEON's at work

One day my high end XEON died on me and IT hooked me up with an i7 loaner

I pulled the Quadro card out of the dead XEON and put it in the i7 loaner

The difference was night and day.. been running i7's ever since

[pullo]

This is exactly what I was talking about . All of a sudden gcode decides to use .001 instead of 0.0001 for . As  we have room to wiggle , we wiggle and then try to compare apples and  potatoes .  

 

Here is the new benchmark :

Benchmark 3_0 for 2017.zip

1. So I propose Benchmark 3_0    . For starters the old file was a whopping  120 megabytes . This new file is  1.2 megabytes a 100 fold reduction in data transfer and you get the same stuff .  The earliest Mastercam I have is 2017 , so that will be the cutoff version .

2 NO WIGGLE ROOM HERE .  All the tolerenaces are set to 0.0001 for ALL the operation. Just open the file , go into the event log and with your right mouse button select clear log.

4.  The Mastercam event log is shown in the pic below . I suggest you open the log and with your Right Mouse Button (RMB )  "clear log" , for clarity.

 

[pullo]

This is exactly what I was talking about . All of a sudden G-code decides to use .001 instead of 0.0001 for . As  we have room to wiggle , we wiggle and then try to compare apples and  potatoes .  

 

Here is the new benchmark :

Benchmark 3_0 for 2017.zip

1. So I propose Benchmark 3_0    . For starters the old file was a whopping  120 megabytes . This new file is  1.2 megabytes a 100 fold reduction in data transfer and you get the same stuff .  The earliest Mastercam I have is 2017 , so that will be the cutoff version .

2 NO WIGGLE ROOM HERE .  All the tolerenaces are set to 0.0001 for ALL the operation. Just open the file , go into the event log and with your right mouse button select clear log.

4.  The Mastercam event log is shown in the pic below . I suggest you open the log and with your Right Mouse Button (RMB )  "clear log" , for clarity.

 

[pullo]

(not G-code but gcode in the previous post , sorry )

Benchmark 3.0  Here it goes , the first log :

So the PC is off the shelf standard stuff, self assemled:

i7-7700K @ 4.2 GHZ  ,  

32 GB , SIMM 4 memory

Quadro K620  ( circa 250 Euro)

WINDOWS 10 v.1703

 

             Mastercam 2017 :  4min 46.5 sec

            Mastercam 2018 :   4min  44.8 sec

            Mastercam 2019 :   4min  12 .4sec

 

Conclusions :

1 .  As we had wiggle room before , my today's result shaved  a hefty  14 secs off my previous post (4 min26 ).

And I can't explain this , because I'd have to remember what I did to the file before etc. Now You open the file and let it rip .

DON'T MANIPULATE THE PARAMETERS OR WE ARE NOT GETTING RESULTS  WHICH CAN BE COMPARABLE.

2 . As one would expect there is improvement  in the newest version .  So no sense in comparing 2017 /  2018 to 2019 

3 I ran the test once more on 2019 and got :  4min 12.8 sec , so a 0.4 sec difference . So the result is repeatable now.

4 . I  had a virtual drive installed in my previous  PC and I had all my Mcam temp files created on it, but as far as I remember , there was no significant time reduction 

when using it. 

 

I'm sorry I had to "hijack"  this thread , but I saw so much inconsistency in the method , I felt putting this thing back on track was the right thing to do. And thanx previous post

for wanting results for different  Mcams .  Mastercam 2019 is the way to go in my opinion . 

My next step here is I bought a water cooling set and I'll try to bump up my  Gigahertzes up to 4.7  GHZ.  I predict my time will decrease in a linear fashion  at ratio of 4.2/4.7 . I'll post the results when I get this done.

 

 

Gracjan

 

 2017

2018

 

2019 

 

[pullo]

I started a new Topic : Benchmark 3.0 . This way the relevant data is in the first posting instead of buried here on page 6 ....

Gracjan

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

If you want the fastest machine for Mastercam this is probably the way to go:

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-8086k-silicon-lottery-binned,37322.html

 

[pullo]

I'll wait for the 5 GHZ  when they are off the shelf stuff .  I am actually cool with the speed I have now . Benchmark 3.0 under 3 minutes.

Gracjan

 

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]