Speeding up X1

[PhoenixConstruction]

Thank You, guess I did not look hard enough. OK now that I can see the times, here are what I come up with;

Plan to overhead full Vector - 4.07 sec (actual-5.9 sec)
Overhead Vector to Front View - 4.99 sec
From Front to restore initial view - 4.02 sec
Low Detail redraw - .43 sec

[DL Drafting]

[COLOR="Navy"]Plan to overhead full Vector - 4.07 sec (actual-5.9 sec)
Overhead Vector to Front View - 4.99 sec
From Front to restore initial view - 4.02 sec
Low Detail redraw - .43 sec[/COLOR]

Those are good timings, I would say, George. Not too far off of the Version 10 times I ran below for comparison. I knew X1 was slow, but I didn't realize how slow until I put the watch on them:

[COLOR="navy"]Version 10 Vector Views of the Riverstone Plan at 1280 x 1024 Screen Res.[/COLOR]
Plan to overhead full Vector - 3.43 sec (actual-5 sec)
Overhead Vector to Front View - 1.67 sec
From Front to restore initial view - 3.56 sec
Low Detail redraw times of various angles spread - .21 sec - .4

[Tim O'Donnell]

i also have found the v11 demo so very slow for nearly everything i do...many things about twice as long as v10 (not just vector views...but dimensioning as well)

ie the riverstone plan, full vector overview in v11 10+ sec...5 sec in v10


with a self built system..xpsp2, 2g ram..amd64 3400+ 10,000 rpm sata drives 7800gs nvidia w/256m vram...it is old but certainly should not be that slow...

[frwillia]

On the initial opening of the overhead vector view from the plan 2D view, the actual time was 8 seconds. The time shown on the screen was 6.26 seconds.

Near as I can measure, it's 7 seconds for the initial overhead vector view on my new computer, though the screen has "developer's time" of 4.4 seconds. Turning on the redraw time is a waste of computer cycles, it's meaningless in any practical sense.

My screen resolution is 2560 x 1600, the main video card is a NVIDIA 8800GTU, the one for the satellite monitors is an NVIDIA 7300GT, or something like that.

The program is usable on this computer (2.66GHz Core2 with 2Gig RAM and a 1066MHz FSB), but barely fast enough. Windows XP-Pro. The computer is not on the WEB and doesn't load any extra SW overhead.

I said in an earlier post, different thread, that I didn't think I'd need a new computer to run X1. I was wrong.

Fitch

[Tim O'Donnell]

I said in an earlier post, different thread, that I didn't think I'd need a new computer to run X1. I was wrong.

Fitch

ahh, yes..the techno slippery slope, one i am growing quite tired of traversing...i just will not/cannot be a bottomless pit of revenue for them......

first a program upgrade...then replacing hardware is needed (new system/OS often means more than just that, but peripherals as well (scanners, printers, etc) as well as other software that may not work on the new system..and of course there will be bugs in all these new things)..then add, lost time relearning the programs (and any other new hardware/software)...add cost of training if one were to opt for that...the list and cost just grows...then repeat every year or two...

[DL Drafting]

George,
Are you running a quad by any chance? I'm interested in your setup.

[PhoenixConstruction]

DL;

No, I'm running the Core2 Extreme Dual-core x6800 (2.93 GHz), overclocked to 3.47 GHz, on an EVGA nForce 680i SLI Motherboard. I'm currently using an EVGA GeForce 8800GTX video card, but sometimes switch out to my two-Quadro FX4400 cards in SLI (not much difference in speeds actually).

One of the things I was curious about though, is how long X1 takes to start up, and once started, how long it takes to load this plan. It seems like very disk drive intensive, and I'm running 3-15,000 rpm Maxtor Serial Attached SCSI 147GB drives in RAID 5.

Attached; Complete Specs

[DL Drafting]

Yes, George, I would say your drives could be your advantage there. And I agree, the start up is huge. Adobe Photo Shop CS2 starts up in half the time as X1 for me, and before X1 debutted, Adobe was the world's worst. At least Chief X1 is number 1 in something :>)

[Dakine Design]

I was considering the upgrade but I don't want to have to upgrade my PC to support each new version.

To all who did upgrade:- On a scale of 1 to 10 please all rate the upgrade and tell me if you think it was worth it.

I guess it's back to Autodesk!!

[retire45]

Methinks this is the consequence of the recoding required to allow 3d manipulation... maybe those additional wall layers also.. People accept it as routine to upgrade hardware very frequently for games but I guess the 3D enhancements here may not be seen as worth the cost in speed.

I highly doubt this can be resolved while keeping the 3D "improvements". Still surprises me how 3D taxes even these multi-core systems.. code must be lagging.

[DL Drafting]

George,
I just got through looking at your system specs. Now that I have toweled off all the drool, just let me say: "I'm not worthy, I'm not worthy." - Dan

[Tommy Blair]

many things about twice as long as v10 (not just vector views...but dimensioning as well)

I feel it takes longer to dimension too. I thought I was the only one who felt that way. Maybe it just takes time to get used to.??

[PhoenixConstruction]

Don't be ridiculous Dan, it's just a little something I threw together . You would think though, that with all of this horsepower, I could make X1 really fly. I really hope the forthcoming update will contain some improvements to address the speed issue (on all fronts).

Actually, building computers is somewhat of a hobby of mine, just to see what can be done. Used to build race cars, but that got to be to expensive (when you blow up a $15,000.00 engine). This way, if I blow a nine hundred dollar processor (which luckily I have not yet), it would be easier to take. I still have some overclocking room on this one, but I'm running at a good temperature now, so I don't think I'm going to push it, cause at this point I need to start kicking my FSB up, and then the voltage - That's where the balancing act comes in, and starts to take up a lot of time to get a stable system (no crashes).

[jtcapa]

Double Buffer drawing means the image is drawn off screen then the whole image is pasted to screen. When you turn this off you get more flickering.

We would also like to see if the machines being affected can be fixed by lowering hardware accelleration by one notch. We cannot reproduce this problem in house but know that a hand full of users are experiencing this issue.

Dan,

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the hardware acceleration and issue with windows DirectX?

[SC8PER]

I have experience the same slow down. That's why I posted the thread "Vector views are useless!"
Once you have a plan with a subject larger than a box and with a "typical" amount of detail the vector camera movement is useless. Unless you go low detail and turn most of your layers off. But what good is that. Vector views are essential to putting your design together. Especially if you intend to use CA for a substantial amount of site work in addition to the architectural elements. Too slow even for newer machines. You should not have to run out and invest in a $2-$3K video card to get results. And even then you may increase your vector views but slow down you render views- catch 22.

We need to have standard elevation view cameras that allow line drawings, hidden line drawings, low res, and high res, if we are to have CA continue on the present software path! Other wise we all need to push CA to update the software to take advantage of the hardware capabilities that are main stream to the profession designer.

Honestly from you long time users is that really too much to ask? **** Turbocad 14 will soon be on the heels of CA in one or two more updates. They've added a great deal of parametric functionality in just two years and are pushing forward with site work capabilities.

Lets get CA to move on this, and not in 5 years. I really enjoy the program and don't want to see it lag in hardware integration and fall behind the competition. I see a great many suggestions for user functionality but this aspect of CA must be improved and soon.

X1 as many of us are finding out is a real "pig" for performance. You would expect many of you long term users that have over a 1000 plus post in Chief talk would be pushing CA as hard as you could for performance gains. Functionality is great but again what good is the vector view if it takes a month of Sundays to do what should be very basic.