pullo

Benchmark 3.0

Recommended Posts

Thanks to pullo for updating the benchmarking file and thread.

These are my benchmark times. I have been suffering while regenerating lately.  Based on this data, when requesting a new box I should get a chip with high clock speed, as much ram as my company can afford, and at least a mid-level Quadro? We just ordered DMG cells and I want to make sure my box can keep up with the demand for programming to keep that machine fed.  Any insight would be appreciated. 

 1740690570_4core8coretotals.png.8d0f88049000670a88d0bb1f056c5c23.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we are building two new computers, whats best now, we have 3 I7700k now  on Ron's recommendation, but replacing some older I74900?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/31/2018 at 4:52 PM, jlw™ said:

The stopwatch is built in.  Just do the math from start time to end time:

capture.png

The almost two year old computer that got 4m9s seconds is:

i7-6700k @ 4GHz

64GB RAM

ASUS Hero 8 MB

ASUS GTX1080 Turbo Graphics

Liquid Cooled,

PNY 256GB SSD

 

The processor and graphics card debates.  Some prefer Quadro, some the GTX.  I am a GTX user.  The i9 has been released as well as the next RTX which is 2080 and is on Amazon for around $1000.  When it comes time to upgrade I will likely go with i9 and RTX unless something newer is out by then.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, rhettmandel said:

Thanks to pullo for updating the benchmarking file and thread.

These are my benchmark times. I have been suffering while regenerating lately.  Based on this data, when requesting a new box I should get a chip with high clock speed, as much ram as my company can afford, and at least a mid-level Quadro? We just ordered DMG cells and I want to make sure my box can keep up with the demand for programming to keep that machine fed.  Any insight would be appreciated. 

 1740690570_4core8coretotals.png.8d0f88049000670a88d0bb1f056c5c23.png

You need to replace that XEON with a fast i7 or i9

Clock time is king with Mastercam

a fast clock time and 4 cores will

beat a slow XEON with 12 cores every time

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My time for Benchmark 3_0 was right at 5 minutes. I'm trying out a new machine with a 3.7 Ghz Xeon with 32 Gb ram.  I had 4 threads turned on for multi-threading and switched to 8 but the time got slower by a minute. I went back to 4 threads and the time repeated. Fastest machine in the programming room so now I have no excuses.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clock speed wins.  We recently bought two computers and the cheaper I7 with higher clock speed beat the I9 that had more cores and twice the memory.  Times are for Mastercam 2019 and were by subtracting the start time from the end time in the events log.

 

3:44 - I7-8086K, 32 GB Ram, Quadro P4000, M.2 SSD

4:06 - I9-7900X, 64 GB Ram, Quadro P4000, M.2 SSD

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is more of a general question about PCs, albeit related to processors: Are most of you guys building these PCs yourselves or buying off the shelf?

I'm trying to spec new computers for my shop and I doubt they would want to have home built PCs, so I'm using Dell's workstation configuration tool. From what I can tell, all that I can spec for a desktop are Xeons, though a few do have clock speeds around 4.0 GHz. Mobile workstations can be spec'd with some i7s and i9s but the best base clock speed of those is 2.9 (Turbo up to 4.8).

Based on the CPU Benchmark single thread rating, some of the available Xeons don't look too bad. Am I losing out on that much performance by going with Xeons, even if they appear to have good performance based on those benchmarks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We recently started having the company that manages our network do custom build for us.  I prefer them over the Dell computers we used to buy.   Dell will actually do more then what there workstation configuration tool on the website shows.  On the last Dell's we ordered we were able to get I7 processors but had to call them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had to fight tooth and nail to be able to build my own workstation every place I've worked, but the results are head-and-shoulders above an off-the-shelf.  Management likes buying off-the-shelf because it absolves them of responsibility, but no off-the-shelf system is going to be optimized for Mastercam.  Using a third-party build company is a bit expensive, but may satisfy management while still allowing you to get a more optimized system.  If you have to buy off-the-shelf, go for a gaming rig, max the memory, and maybe sub a decent Quadro card if there's the budget for it.  Avoid low-end Quadros; a gaming card will be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Matthew Hajicek™ - Conventus said:

I have had to fight tooth and nail to be able to build my own workstation every place I've worked, but the results are head-and-shoulders above an off-the-shelf.  Management likes buying off-the-shelf because it absolves them of responsibility, but no off-the-shelf system is going to be optimized for Mastercam.  Using a third-party build company is a bit expensive, but may satisfy management while still allowing you to get a more optimized system.  If you have to buy off-the-shelf, go for a gaming rig, max the memory, and maybe sub a decent Quadro card if there's the budget for it.  Avoid low-end Quadros; a gaming card will be better.

I tried the custom built route here

Our IT dept built them with the components I specified but it did not turn out well

I didn't get into the nitty gritty of picking a case and specing out fans and coooling systems and all three machines

were dead within 18 months from overheating issues.

Since then, we've been buying watercooled overclocked Boxx machines.

They do come at a premium price but we've had almost no issues with the machines we've purchased

We've got 8 of them now, the oldest is 3+ years old... all are still in service

The only issue we've had is one machine had a bad CD reader.

Boxx's response???  a next day air package with 8 CD readers and prepaid shipping to return the old components.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, putting a cheap power supply in a workstation is like putting cheap tires on a muscle car.  Either one will soon end up in the ditch!

I find it helps a lot to use a power supply rated for twice the load I need, then it doesn't have to work very hard and lasts a long time.  Power conditioning is also important if you have dirty power, and of course cooling is critical.  I use the Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo air cooler.  It's performance is up there with some water coolers, but it's more reliable.  Pretty quiet too, only drawback is it's large.  I've been running this i7-6700K at 4.7GHz for almost three years now without a hitch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ben Wood said:

Clock speed wins.  We recently bought two computers and the cheaper I7 with higher clock speed beat the I9 that had more cores and twice the memory.  Times are for Mastercam 2019 and were by subtracting the start time from the end time in the events log.

 

3:44 - I7-8086K, 32 GB Ram, Quadro P4000, M.2 SSD

4:06 - I9-7900X, 64 GB Ram, Quadro P4000, M.2 SSD

 

 

What were the clock speeds and Ram specs? While Im leaning to this to be true, Being a ryzen guy myself... Im curious how Ram timings and speeds are in effect/different in your scenario ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, seltz08 said:

What were the clock speeds and Ram specs? While Im leaning to this to be true, Being a ryzen guy myself... Im curious how Ram timings and speeds are in effect/different in your scenario ... 

As much as I like them keeping the pressure on Intel, you have to go pretty far down the list to find an AMD:

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

And it costs more than the top rated Intel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Matthew Hajicek™ - Conventus said:

As much as I like them keeping the pressure on Intel, you have to go pretty far down the list to find an AMD:

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

And it costs more than the top rated Intel.

Yes we all know single thread on intel is still stronger than AMD, and with what has been buzzing, AMD is going to soon put heavy pressure on that along with clock speed over the next year or two... but life isn't single core, and my ryzen 7 1700 (laptop mind you) is SPANKING our xeon 1620s and 1650s.. im not sure why our company pays through the roof for 1620s.. its a joke.  And more unfortunately, my 'IT' will not listen to anything I have to say of what computers we should be using or the specs they have... They gave our Marketing laptops with i3s and 4gigs of ram to run adobe premier on... 

I'm mostly on the fence of building a desktop right now and where most of my curiosity lies, real world parts and results...  I've conviced myself intel and AMD every other day... I really wanna build 2 but I know ill be 2500+ into a threadripper system as is.. 

They all have pros and cons.  My little ryzen is kicking butt and I have no regrets.. especially since my previous laptop is a i7 5700HQ... the ryzen kicks it to the curb by 30-50% regardless of operation.. 

comparing a 8086k to a TR1950... single core and clock is the only thing it wins.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, seltz08 said:

What were the clock speeds and Ram specs? While Im leaning to this to be true, Being a ryzen guy myself... Im curious how Ram timings and speeds are in effect/different in your scenario ... 

I9-7900X has 10 cores and a base speed of 3.30 GHz and a turbo of  4.30 GHz

I7-8086K has 6 cores and a base speed of 4.00 GHz and a turbo of 5.00 GHz

 

The ram in the I9 computer was 64 GB of Ballistix Sport LT - DDR4 2666 (PC4 21300) - Timing 16-18-18 - CAS Latency 16 - Voltage 1.2V

The ram in the I7 computer was 32 GB of Corsair Vengeance LPX -DDR4 3466 (PC4 27700) - Timing 16-18-18-36 - CAS Latency 16 - Voltage 1.35V

 

If i understand it correctly the faster speed of the ram in the I7 computer would only matter if it was overclocked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, seltz08 said:

comparing a 8086k to a TR1950... single core and clock is the only thing it wins.. 

When it comes to Mastercam, single core performance and clock is almost all that matters (cache and RAM also matter).  In my experience four fast cores seriously outperform six or eight mediocre cores, and I'm pretty sure six fast cores will beat 16 mediocre cores in the vast majority of Mastercam workloads.  Yes, those Xeons are a very poor choice for Mastercam.  An 8086K would cost less than the Xeon or your Threadripper, and probably run about 50% faster than the Xeon 1650 or the i7-5700HQ even before overclocking.

On 6/29/2018 at 2:45 PM, Matthew Hajicek™ - Conventus said:

For the last few builds I've based my CPU choice on this benchmark:

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

Using that I've built workstations ranging from $2600 to $3600 new that have had top end Mastercam benchmark scores and stayed performing well for years.  That said I like the "legacy" surfacing paths, and use a lot of stock models, so single-thread or just a few threads at a time for a lot of it.  I do use the "Optirough" stuff, but usually don't have to wait very long for it.

Let's try a thought experiment.  Say we have 100 gallons of work to do.  You can choose one CPU with four pipes of 5 gallons per minute or another with 8 pipes of 3 gallons per minute.  The one with 8 pipes has more throughput when all pipes can be used (24GPM vs 20GPM), but if a task is thread-limited to four, two, or one pipe at a time it's slower.  20 vs 12, 10 vs 6, and 5 vs 3 respectively.  If you consider that thread-limited tasks are going to take more time regardless of your processor, the time saved by slightly speeding up the tasks that are already fast is much less than that saved by speeding up the slower tasks by going the other way.  If we have 25 gallons of 8-thread, 25 gallons of 4-thread, 25 gallons of 2-thread and 25 gallons of 1-thread, these should be your numbers:

8 pipes of 3GPM each:

1.04 minutes, 2.08 minutes, 4.17 minutes, plus 8.33 minutes = 15.62 minutes total.

4 pipes of 5GPM each:

1.25 minutes, 1.25 minutes, 2.5 minutes, plus 5.0 minutes = 10 minutes total.

 

 

If your IT won't listen that that's a whole nother problem...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Matthew Hajicek™ - Conventus said:

 

If your IT won't listen that that's a whole nother problem...

 

No xxxx.. I damn near screamed when they paid 4k for a dell 1620 with a 500gb hybrid drive. *smfh* 

I personally have to live on laptops since I travel, so until the 8th Gen shows a little more mobile promise.. I have to stick to my ryzen... And knock out 6 programs at once :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, seltz08 said:

No xxxx.. I damn near screamed when they paid 4k for a dell 1620 with a 500gb hybrid drive. *smfh* 

I personally have to live on laptops since I travel, so until the 8th Gen shows a little more mobile promise.. I have to stick to my ryzen... And knock out 6 programs at once :)

Would your boss listen if you tallied up how much it costs per year to sit around waiting for that expensive yet inferior machine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What settings and programs should I change  for the nivida P4000? I have added master cam to list, but after 2-3 hours running you lose the classic back plot shading. It is wnd 10 I7700K With nivida P4000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a recap of Benchmark 3.0 .  We have spontaneously created a new, parallel metric here (Metric 2)  , whereby to get the total time we subtract the first time from the last time.

The original metric was adding all the times together (Metric 1) .  

 

Orvie seems to have the best machine , but we have yet to wait for his 2019 results to come in and then there is  the  overclocking ....  The best comes at a price , the Intel I9 7980XE

is a whopping 2100 euros.   I would think that he's Metric 1 would be in the range of 3.5 minutes and Metric 2  3.1 minutes  ,  so  a top machine will be nearing the 3 minute range  

I seem to have the second place here , but I have overclocked the memory and the processor and added water cooling  .My processor was only 300 euros . Metric 1 is 3minutes 57sec and Metric 2  is  3min 37 sec

 

Gracjan

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The system clock (metric 2) is usually not a good way to test preformance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some tend to think that Metric 2 tells more about parallel processing.  I was happy with Metric 1 as we had one clear number . Now basically one has to inform if he is a 1 or 2 

believer ....

Gracjan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matsrecam 2020

1117399750_Benchmark3_02020.thumb.png.916f8bbda7d5be9d362afea0c6462ddd.png

 

3 minutes 47 sec Metric 1

 

Very good news from 2020 testing . Calc times have improved by 5% compared to 2019 .  My initial result looked like 2020 might be slower , but I was just sloppy. 

All other Mastercam sessions must be killed off as they seem to influence the end result. 

Compared to 2018 that makes it a whopping  26% improvement in calc times .

 

Gracjan

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pullo said:

Matsrecam 2020

1117399750_Benchmark3_02020.thumb.png.916f8bbda7d5be9d362afea0c6462ddd.png

 

3 minutes 47 sec Metric 1

 

Very good news from 2020 testing . Calc times have improved by 5% compared to 2019 .  My initial result looked like 2020 might be slower , but I was just sloppy. 

All other Mastercam sessions must be killed off as they seem to influence the end result. 

Compared to 2018 that makes it a whopping  26% improvement in calc times .

 

Gracjan

Wow, that's pretty impressive. I'm still over here using 2017, so I'm sure I'll be pleasantly surprised when making the jump to 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Join us!

eMastercam - your online source for all things Mastercam.

Together, we are the strongest Mastercam community on the web with over 56,000 members, and our online store offers a wide selection of training materials for all applications and skill levels.

Follow us