At least once a week I have a problem where Mastercam refuses to Copy or Move Entities from one Level to another Level. The only solution is to close Mastercam and restart where Copying or Moving Entities between Levels again works like it should. This problem occurs in Mastercam X2 MR2 SP1

quote: Neil, MU1 is 25% faster. My X3 benchmark time is 4:00 and my X3 MU1 is 3:00. The i7 920 CPU is under $300 and will overclock past 4Ghz so go ahead, spend! If you're going to spend the money on a core i-7 motherboard and the matched DD3 memory you have to buy to go with it I figure you might as well spend the extra money on a better core i7 chip as well. It's not like Mastercam surfacing toolpath and solid Verify doesn't badly need the extra processing speed.

quote: Has anyone used a core i7 for mastercam yet? Core i7 seems like the best way to go for Mastercam if you're doing a lot of surfacing toolpath. I'll be putting a system together with the top of the line Core i7 chip in a few weeks. I doubt I will over-clock it.

quote: MSI x58 Platinum quote: Thoughts Please?? http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3471&p=13

I get the exact same error when using Verify on .stl files. I've turned down the Tool Tolerance and the STL Tolerance to .001 and this seems to help. I had to reboot the computer to get Mastercam X3 MU1 to Verify properly when I had this problem. I continue to be very disappointed with how the MachineWorks component works in Mastercam. It's far better in X3 MU1 but it's still not good enough with .stl files compared to other products that use the exact same component (MachineWorks.) and have better reliabilty, performance and more features. I'm beginning to feel that the graphics engine and the Machining Operations Manager in Mastercam need to be totally rebuilt from the ground up because CNC Software appears to be patching them constantly. This approach doesn't appear to be working very well and they both are a constant source of problems for me.

I'd be curious to know what the time difference is between X2 MR2 SP1 and X3 MU1 on the benchmark file using the same machine because it feels like a big difference between the two to me. Perhaps I can now hold off on dropping a grand on the new top of the line core-i7 chip.

quote: neil, can't you just go into your "machine group properties" and check "assign tool numbers sequentially"? this way as you generate your mcx file the tools are numbered properly. It's already checked. Doesn't help when I modify a program and wish to renumber my tools.

Any estimate when tool renumbering will work? I'd like to move all of our 5 seats to X3.

quote: Having this information would be incredibly helpful as it would aid greatly in determining which version of Mastercam to use for the particular type of work at hand since all versions as of late are severely broken in one way or another I'm still using X2 MR2 SP1 for all 2 1/2 axis mill work. For surfacing work I'm using X3 MU1. Graphics performance in X3 MU1 blows away X2 MR2 SP1. It's not even close. Surfacing toolpaths also seem much faster and more robust in X3 MU1 and Solid Verify / .STL files in X3 MU1 also have far better performance than in X2 MR2 SP1.

quote: You know how I feel about blogs. Change can be good. Blogs can be good.

Start a blog.

quote: I'd like to see a list of bugs which were fixed like we used to get in the past, not a list of the bugs I find. I wonder why this was eliminated.

quote: and YAY for the tool renumber fix ^^ Wish I could say the same. Doesn't work here.

You could always start one. In X3-MU1 I'm still not able to renumber tools properly. Are you?

quote: Did the tool renumbering get fixed? Still doesn't work for me. Happy to provide the file it doesn't properly renumber the tools on. On the bright side the general graphics performance in X3 MU1 for solid Verify and for something like Analyze Dynamic is significantly better than X2 MR2 SP1.