The channel is still there and if you have a direct link to a video you can still view it. Seems the videos are all now 'unlisted'. So, that probably rules out anything coming from youtube and most likely it looks like a personal decision to unlist. Can only speculate as to the reason behind that....accidental, or otherwise. His content is great so hopefully it was just an accidental setting and things get sorted out soon.

There's also a lock beside the selection you can use.

I said this before but maybe worth saying again... 12th gen intels are a huge step in performance over previous gens, more than we've seen recently. DDR5 RAM and PCIe 4.0 help a ton. A Benchmark 3.0 time with a similar system above, 2:09 !!! I'm running a high end 10th gen system and I'm a minute slower. That's a massive gain! ...so ya, that setup will be good!

I get this issue too on some 3D toolpaths. Update 1 did not fix it. You have to Disable GPU processing in config under Simulation. At least, that's the only thing that worked for me.

Seems to have something to do with the locked rad/diam when using 2022. Unlock and you should be fine. In 2023 it works fine if the lock is on.

I'm having a hard time picturing when 128GB of RAM is needed for Mastercam. I have some big Mastercam files (~1gb with ~300 toolpaths) for testing but have never seen Mastercam use a massive amount of ram. Maybe it would use more if I had more?? Anyone have example files or able to share scenarios where Mastercam will use massive amounts of RAM? Currently, I'm running with 32GB and I'm thinking of adding another 32, but all this talk about 128 has me thinking. I do run more than just Mastercam so even if this 32gb addition doesn't improve its performance I'm confident I'll see some improvement elsewhere (premiere pro, camtasia), just not sure how much. Anyways, when I complete the upgrade I'll do some benchmarking and report back. I guess if I see huge improvements, I may need to consider 128GB on the next build.

Dynamic toolpaths maintain engagement angle. Engagement angle does not equal stepover. Here's an older video talking briefly about this. Gets into it about the 1:50 mark. The rest of the videos in this can be found on our website...one day I'll update them and get them on youtube and the blog. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0PG2XIph2E&t=5s FWIW, ModuleWorks has addressed the sliver issue in their most recent toolpath release. Guess we'll wait and see if Mastercam brings that tech over into their paths.

Your tplane should match the plane that your geometry is in. You'll notice you are exactly 180 out from your spiral. Either move your geometry in Y by half the circumference or just chain your spiral instead. If you chain the spiral, you'll have to enable unroll in the toolpath and turn off the lead extensions. To get the tool to lead in/out, you'll need to create a longer spiral. Also, if you are using 2023, seems the classic backplot is having issues with axis sub. You'll have to use the new backplot, or just verify instead.

This was not intended. You will probably see a fix very soon.

https://www.cncci.com/post/three-point-arc-center-macro He is doing XY while you are wanting YZ, but the math should be relevant.

I have an active link in a blog post here... https://blog.caminstructor.com/whats-the-best-computer-for-mastercam The main link in this thread is dead. There is a re-posting of the link but I forget what page its on.

The 12 series Intels are really killing this file. After only seeing small incremental improvements over the last 5-6 releases, this is very good news!

Calculations work for me. I used the X value in the Analyze Entity menu, 1+3/32. With and without brackets, all good.

I clicked on that video and thought there is no way I'm going to watch an hour long video on programming optimization...was I wrong lol. Watched the whole thing and was intrigued the entire time!! I have compared several different CAM softwares running similar type toolpaths on the same part and have noticed some are faster than others. Guess this is whats going on, better/more optimized programming. I'd also like to add to this, we should all keep in mind that Ghz is not the end all be all that it used to be. We will probably never see any chips much beyond the 5Ghz range so how are they getting faster year over year...IPC. I wouldn't go as far as the video title that Ghz doesn't matter, but there are more things to consider in the overall picture (apple M1 being a prime example)

I've been on it a couple months now. Few things I don't like, the right click menu in file explorer having half the items hidden is one. But the option to have it remember windows locations on monitors makes up for any short comings, for me anyways. I also find that the graphics look better in win11, not sure if thats HDR related or not. For Mastercam, it all seems good. Just some issues with buttons that are pressed not being graphically obvious they are pressed, ie in the chain manager. I did a quick benchmark on it as well and found no difference from win10. I don't think its adding any additional tracking over win10, I think you can turn most of it off anyways? Anyone on the fence, I did up a video which may help you decide on upgrading... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UiXLpmm1Nk

Nvidia is getting things really confusing with their card naming right now. Some RTX are in fact quadros. The RTX4000 is the newest quadro 4000. But, they have a new line of GeForce coming out which are RTX 4070, 4080 etc. So they are really messing things up right now lol FWIW, I use an RTX 3080 without issue. No one has been able to show me how a quadro outperforms this in Mastercam. But in an industrial setting I would point you towards the quadros just because they are supposed to be more bullet proof. ...guess I should add in info about SolidWorks too. The GeForce cards do not run SolidWorks approved drivers so you may run into support issues there if you are getting odd happenings. The only short coming I found in SW with the 3080 was I couldn't run some VR stuff.

Constant chip load, no it doesn't. Constant engagement angle, yes. I'm not exactly sure why there is not an option to keep a constant chipload or maybe even MRR constant, I assume it is a patent infringement on someone elses toolpath as it seems like a no brainer to have this option in Dynamic. As is, we are over feeding on internal features and under feeding on external. ...I think there is mention in a posting somewhere here of handling this in the post processor. No idea how well it works as I've not tested it. Of course, not all will agree with me so I leave you this...

Intel is on 12th gen now. I would suggest going with a 12900K instead, single core performance on these is always improving gen over gen.

Feature based machining in Mastercam does not compare to other CAM systems that are strictly feature based, eg Esprit. Its not a fair comparison though. Mastercam is a toolpath based system that added a bit of 'feature based machining' ability. It's kind of jury rigged into existence. There is no feature for you to interact with. The software is creating this feature and turning it into a chain and then putting it into toolpaths along the way. For some applications, this works just fine and accomplished the feat of making life easier. Solid Chaining, I don't put that into the Feature Recognition category, although I guess it is technically recognizing features for the chain its creating. The solid chaining in Mastercam is getting pretty slick so if you don't use it and are working with solids on the regular, you need to explore. Every CAM software has its plusses and minuses, could be software limitations or even just personal preferences. When switching software it is often hardest to see those plusses of the new software when you keep trying to do things the way you did in the old. Yes, training is often the quickest way to adapt even though you already know how to CAM.

Esprit does handle it better so technically not inherent in every package. Just depends on how you attack the stock initially and what you prioritize in the toolpath. You can make Mastercam behave like Esprits with geometry manipulation so its not like we're missing anything in Mastercam, the user just needs to be aware of the problem and know the solution before breaking a bunch of endmills. It would be nice to have a toggle in Dynamic to have it use an alternative strategy to reduce the risk of slivers. This could be either an initial starting strategy (recognizing geometry that leads to slivers and changing the initial cut pattern) or an ending strategy where that last several cuts only happen on one side of the sliver. Seems like easy solutions to me but I've never generated a toolpath algorithm so who knows. And just to be clear, I'm not saying overall that Esprits Profit Milling is better than Mastercam Dynamic. It just handles this scenario better, and better is subjective. Better being no sliver, but there is a cost and that is typically increased cycle time. Overall, I think you will find Dynamic Mill faster on similarly shaped parts due to it wanting to stay in the cut as long as possible but this is what leads to slivers on certain parts.

loft. make sure your chains go in the same direction and have the same relative starting point. you can use a branch sync mode to keep things lined up but you'll have to add some geo.

Not to be knit picky but looks like 3:43. 6:19:51 to 6:23:34 Just pointing out incase you compare future builds. or versions. There is an in depth thread somewhere on GPU and multicore usage in Mastercam. Not sure if that was here or the main forum. To summarize it, 'sometimes the gpu is used'. They found that for the most part, the time needed to prepare data for GPU usage and then receiving it back negated any gains that the faster GPU calculations had.

Windows 11. It is supposed to move windows to where they were when monitors were connected/removed. I haven't tested extensively but for me its working nicely.

Yes, some toolpaths were multi-thread paths, some not. OpenCL, no idea. It doesn't specify in any of the notes. Too early to be critical so I'll revisit closer to PB.

I'm hoping something is just not hooked up right now in this next version. I know its early but I'm seeing longer regen times. Although, I'm not sure if the GPU processing is applied to any toolpath calculations since its checkbox is listed in the simulation section. Could also be I'm on Windows 11, which isn't technically supported right now. Aaron was nice enough to share some inside information on these toolpath calc processes, hopefully someone else is able to keep sharing with us as this GPU processing add seems promising. I was really hoping your link was to this computer you're eyeing up with dual RTX8000's