prestazioni hardware con solidworks

[igiolo]

Hello.
I don't even know how to pull a line (or make a cube :d ) with solidworks.
we invested about 100000€ (100,000) in company x migrate all to solidworks 2011 and @64bit machines.
workstations are so configured
i7 2600 @3.9 (turboost stuck on always, always whip at 3.9ghz all cores).
8 gb of ram ddr3 1600
ocz vertex 3 from 250gb
Mobo msi gd80.
slave disk from 1 tb
2000
deactive hypertreading

does not go a solidworks.. we use assemblies, and the standard is 200 components and +
as from tradition uses a core x modeling, two x table putting, all x cosmos machine or rendering.
Is there no way to squeeze software? possible that while the engineer waits for a part to move the pc use 25% cpu?no way to optimize this thing?what news brings from this point of view 2012?
I tried different roads, and new macut did not know how to tell me much (in fact, I was + I made in certain things).
experiences?
Thank you so much!! !

 

[marcof]

does not go a solidworks.. we use assemblies, and the standard is 200 components and +

It’s not clear what you don’t go but sure or are so assiemi made with your feet to nail the machine (but you should do a course to shape so badly...), or are 200 single parts of 1000 features each, otherwise 200 normal components are a bullshit to handle.
I work on a laptop 2 years ago with assemblies from about 1500 components, 4 gb of ram that always advances, relatively simple parts but with many features (average 30 to 70), made to 70% in top-down and goes like a splint.

I think you should move the discussion somewhere else. it seems to me

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

It’s not clear what you don’t go but sure or are so assiemi made with your feet to nail the machine (but you should do a course to shape so badly...), or are 200 single parts of 1000 features each, otherwise 200 normal components are a bullshit to handle.
I work on a laptop 2 years ago with assemblies from about 1500 components, 4 gb of ram that always advances, relatively simple parts but with many features (average 30 to 70), made to 70% in top-down and goes like a splint.

I think you should move the discussion somewhere else. it seems to me

permaloso!!!:biggrin:
Say that swx is a terrible patch. .

 

[re_solidworks]

Hello.
I don't even know how to pull a line (or make a cube :d ) with solidworks.
we invested about 100000€ (100,000) in company x migrate all to solidworks 2011 and @64bit machines.
workstations are so configured
i7 2600 @3.9 (turboost stuck on always, always whip at 3.9ghz all cores).
8 gb of ram ddr3 1600
ocz vertex 3 from 250gb
Mobo msi gd80.
slave disk from 1 tb
2000
deactive hypertreading

does not go a solidworks.. we use assemblies, and the standard is 200 components and +
as from tradition uses a core x modeling, two x table putting, all x cosmos machine or rendering.
Is there no way to squeeze software? possible that while the engineer waits for a part to move the pc use 25% cpu?no way to optimize this thing?what news brings from this point of view 2012?
I tried different roads, and new macut did not know how to tell me much (in fact, I was + I made in certain things).
experiences?
Thank you so much!! !

Hi.

the machines are ok, the vga are not exhilarating but absolutely good for assemblies of a few thousand components (standard).
in my opinion the reasons can be two, already mentioned by marcof: or the parts have very complex geometries to put in solidworks crisis or are badly shaped.
over the years I took over several jobs made by colleagues who arrived at the "non-return point" which could no longer manage the model by showing them that working well solidworks manages to manage complex models without great difficulty.

for the use of cpu... solidworks does what all other cads do, that is, uses only one core. use all cores during regeneration of the views of the boards and on a few other occasions. Of course, it has been for years that users have been asking to intervene on this point to improve performance, but it is seen that the intervention is complex or they believe that current performance is sufficient.
I add that if you were used to thinkdesign the performance of solidworks should look like a hardware!

 

[igiolo]

would you like to give an eye to a set to assess how it goes from you and how it was designed?

 

[re_solidworks]

would you like to give an eye to a set to assess how it goes from you and how it was designed?

I'm glad to see you.

 

[igiolo]

I'm glad to see you.

You have a private message!

 

[re_solidworks]

Hi.

I checked your set. First I converted it to version 2011, to work well files must be all of your version of swx, I have 2011 and I converted them. files of previous versions slow so much in many stages and if you did not do it you should convert the entire archive.
with my workstation the axieme was extremely fluid, despite some small piece of assembly, so I decided to try on a backup pc that I have at home.
also on this opening takes a few seconds (5-6 light weight 20-30 solved). in 5-6 seconds I put on the table the 3 views and in another pair the isomtrica.
I entered a dozen odds to try and it was extremely fluid. the pc in question I assembled it 3 years ago and is configured like this:

mainboard asus p5k
cpu core2duo e6750
ramstone king 8 gb at 667 mhz
vga nvidia picture fx 1700
hdd sata 300 gb 7200 rpm
win 7 x 64

the problem could be slow hardware, but the specifications you indicated are excellent, it could be the antivirus and finally the network. Here would serve an on-site analysis to exclude the cause.

the flaw I found concerns the lack of couplings in certain parts, other ultradefined.
would be the case of having everything "locked" to generate the views of the boards otherwise you run the risk of turning 1st a nut and forced swx to regenerate the views when you return to the table.
if you have to make movements create a "free" configuration.
even the use of "flexible" components in the boards is not the top.
modeling is quite basic, you could improve by using some less function and with sketches + simple by lowering a lot of rebuilding times.
the couplings are almost all on the faces and this makes the assembly very "heavy", having under a sketch of layout would make everything much easier and much more stable and wanting also for the geometry of the pieces that could be obtained in topdown.
I imagine you have a pdm and maybe that's why the topdown could be a complication, but anyway I would base myself on some sketch to assemble the components.
However, there are no issues of swx slowness, you have something in your pcs, antivirus or network.
I add, it's 2320 solid bodies, not 200...

 

[re_solidworks]

I forgot, these are the win performance of the pc I used for testing, as you see less than so you can not.

 

[ipotemusa]

Hi.

I checked your set. First I converted it to version 2011, to work well files must be all of your version of swx, I have 2011 and I converted them. files of previous versions slow so much in many stages and if you did not do it you should convert the entire archive.
with my workstation the axieme was extremely fluid, despite some small piece of assembly, so I decided to try on a backup pc that I have at home.
also on this opening takes a few seconds (5-6 light weight 20-30 solved). in 5-6 seconds I put on the table the 3 views and in another pair the isomtrica.
I entered a dozen odds to try and it was extremely fluid. the pc in question I assembled it 3 years ago and is configured like this:

mainboard asus p5k
cpu core2duo e6750
ramstone king 8 gb at 667 mhz
vga nvidia picture fx 1700
hdd sata 300 gb 7200 rpm
win 7 x 64

the problem could be slow hardware, but the specifications you indicated are excellent, it could be the antivirus and finally the network. Here would serve an on-site analysis to exclude the cause.

the flaw I found concerns the lack of couplings in certain parts, other ultradefined.
would be the case of having everything "locked" to generate the views of the boards otherwise you run the risk of turning 1st a nut and forced swx to regenerate the views when you return to the table.
if you have to make movements create a "free" configuration.
even the use of "flexible" components in the boards is not the top.
modeling is quite basic, you could improve by using some less function and with sketches + simple by lowering a lot of rebuilding times.
the couplings are almost all on the faces and this makes the assembly very "heavy", having under a sketch of layout would make everything much easier and much more stable and wanting also for the geometry of the pieces that could be obtained in topdown.
I imagine you have a pdm and maybe that's why the topdown could be a complication, but anyway I would base myself on some sketch to assemble the components.
However, there are no issues of swx slowness, you have something in your pcs, antivirus or network.
I add, it's 2320 solid bodies, not 200...

I had an exasperating slowness problem with solid edge, but I think it might be useful for you to discover that it was just the comfortable antivirus/firewall that was misplaced. changed setting and everything lined smoothly.
try to disable antivirus and firewall and watch the difference (think cmq that those who provided you with hw and sw have already tried).
other thing, try everything locally, not on the net.
a client of mine has modest assemblies but that by connecting my portable ws I can't manipulate, copying them locally and physically pulling me off the grid all very fast.
they do not understand why but any pc attached to their network becomes like a 486...

 

[igiolo]

Hi.

I checked your set. First I converted it to version 2011, to work well files must be all of your version of swx, I have 2011 and I converted them. files of previous versions slow so much in many stages and if you did not do it you should convert the entire archive.
with my workstation the axieme was extremely fluid, despite some small piece of assembly, so I decided to try on a backup pc that I have at home.
also on this opening takes a few seconds (5-6 light weight 20-30 solved). in 5-6 seconds I put on the table the 3 views and in another pair the isomtrica.
I entered a dozen odds to try and it was extremely fluid. the pc in question I assembled it 3 years ago and is configured like this:

mainboard asus p5k
cpu core2duo e6750
ramstone king 8 gb at 667 mhz
vga nvidia picture fx 1700
hdd sata 300 gb 7200 rpm
win 7 x 64

the problem could be slow hardware, but the specifications you indicated are excellent, it could be the antivirus and finally the network. Here would serve an on-site analysis to exclude the cause.

the flaw I found concerns the lack of couplings in certain parts, other ultradefined.
would be the case of having everything "locked" to generate the views of the boards otherwise you run the risk of turning 1st a nut and forced swx to regenerate the views when you return to the table.
if you have to make movements create a "free" configuration.
even the use of "flexible" components in the boards is not the top.
modeling is quite basic, you could improve by using some less function and with sketches + simple by lowering a lot of rebuilding times.
the couplings are almost all on the faces and this makes the assembly very "heavy", having under a sketch of layout would make everything much easier and much more stable and wanting also for the geometry of the pieces that could be obtained in topdown.
I imagine you have a pdm and maybe that's why the topdown could be a complication, but anyway I would base myself on some sketch to assemble the components.
However, there are no issues of swx slowness, you have something in your pcs, antivirus or network.
I add, it's 2320 solid bodies, not 200...

hmmm.. what to say... thank you very much!
for the number of bodies, I actually sent you a model + weight of the norm.
also x regarding the conversion to 2011, I was actually aware of it, and in fact from what I know they always work on the convert,cmq will be what I will pay attention to.
the network is full gigabit, with traffic shaping and effective band of 100mb, the antivirus is kaspersky, with the due exceptions (that cmq x test I disabled).
They stay, and I think they're poppy, straights x modeling.
I'll let you know.
Thank you again!

 

[Matteo]

I appeal to the speech to ask a question: did you not notice a milgious fluidity with swx 2012 (x64)? it will be suggestive but to me it seems to go a little better than 2011 (x64).

 

[re_solidworks]

I appeal to the speech to ask a question: did you not notice a milgious fluidity with swx 2012 (x64)? it will be suggestive but to me it seems to go a little better than 2011 (x64).

I haven't tried yet, I'm still waiting for a higher maturity.

 

[reggio]

we invested about 100000€ (100,000)

x migrare tutti a solidworks 2011

is not a solidworks..

:36_1_15:

...after condolences:tongue:
I would like to propose a "garino" to compare the performance of pcs and settings... Who's there?
what features should the sample file have? part? a lot of parts? I think it should be a file big enough to allow time detection in an easy and precise way, it would take qlc that, in the best configuration and setting requires a processing of at least 20 or 30" .. what do you say?

It's like a splinter.

... are always the ones of others to go well ... :36_1_4:
ps: I can compete with 2011. unless this [youtube]b6sppiwuaei[/youtube] It's not "truly true"... (but still at home I didn't mount it. . )

 

[igiolo]

I appeal to the speech to ask a question: did you not notice a milgious fluidity with swx 2012 (x64)? it will be suggestive but to me it seems to go a little better than 2011 (x64).

Now 2012 is at sp1... I would say mature. ..someone can confirm better optimization than 2011?
Shall we do the garnish?
Hello! !

 

[Alex_vr-46]

hello to all...I bring out this discussion.
I have a pc with 16 gb of ram and processor intel core i7 from 3.4 ghz.
in the file I bring the custom settings of my picture nvidia card 2000, the driver version and the file size on which I usually work.
I denote a certain slowness and resulting difficulty in working with such assemblies despite my pc is (according to me) very good from the hardware point of view.
I wanted to ask the most experienced if it is normal, and this slowness is due to large files or if there is something wrong with the settings.

thanks to those who will enlighten me.