If I bought a CRAY super computer will CA be faster?

[Doug Park]

NVIDIA ran through numbers like 7000, 8000, 9000 and then switched over to 100, 200, 300, 400, and 500. The 500 series is the latest at the moment.

In answer to your Cray question. The first Cray super computers are slower than your iPad is now. Current technology would be a lot faster than what you have currently, but assuming Chief ran on a super computer, which it doesn't, you could still build models that take a long time.

[sutcac]

My three year old computer had the 8800GTX, so now I think that one is pretty dated. Just got a new computer with the GTX590 and loving it. One of the only single cards (actually two-in-one) that will push three monitors natively. Thank you to George for the recommendation, I think it is the card he is currently running too.

[dshall]

NVIDIA ran through numbers like 7000, 8000, 9000 and then switched over to 100, 200, 300, 400, and 500. The 500 series is the latest at the moment.

In answer to your Cray question. The first Cray super computers are slower than your iPad is now. Current technology would be a lot faster than what you have currently, but assuming Chief ran on a super computer, which it doesn't, you could still build models that take a long time.

Thanks Doug, very clear answer.... here is my computer man's response...

Here’s the main issue: When considering computer performance, you’re only as fast as the slowest component. Since we recently upgraded your RAM, we’re essentially left with the following:

1) The program has to pull data from the hard drive. (Textures, data, etc). Solid state drives are much faster than traditional hard drives. The most noticeable symptom of this would be slow loading times, but theoretically once the file is fully loaded, shouldn’t be much hard drive access.
2) The CPU performs calculations. Your processor, Core i7-920 is very fast, but there are faster.
3) The GPU (graphcis card) performs calculations. This is the upgrade you’re considering. I spent a bit of time reading forums/support for CA and it seems that certain views/renders are more CPU intensive whereas others are more GPU intensive.
4) Software limitations. Certain programs have limitations of exactly how fast they can process information based on the way the code was written. Regardless of the speed of the hardware, sometimes the software simply can’t go any faster. I found this support article from CA regarding things that can cause slowness on larger drawings. http://www.chiefarchitect.com/suppor...?faqNumber=521 One of these items was:

Chief Architect does not recommend reusing plan files by deleting everything out of an existing plan file and renaming it.

It is important to always start new plan or layout files from a template.

Not sure if any of the above suggestions are relevant, but essentially I’m hesitant about recommending an $800 video card without knowing specifically what is causing any of the slowness. It may not even be the graphics card that’s holding you back.

Also, part of the problem with the GTX 590 specifically (aside from very limited supplies)…. The GTX 590 is essentially two cards on one physical board, joined through what is called “SLI” technology. Each of the individual cards is slower than the card that is one step down (the GTX 580) but with two joined together, the performance is greater…IF the program supports it. Not all programs support SLI mode, so even with the fancy dual card, under the hood the software can only make use of one of them. I was unable to find anything on CA support as to whether or not it supports SLI mode. If it doesn’t, you’ll actually get superior performance by using a GTX 580 which is a significant savings.

We definitely would like to get the performance up to snuff for you, just want to be careful that you’re not spending money on an item that isn’t going to provide a good benefit.

Any additional comments before I spend Lynn's X-Mas money on a computer upgrade?