What should I upgrade for improved performance?

[mckeand13]

Here's the specs on my current computer.

It starts to get pretty slow when I work with large assemblies. The regeneration time and editing become very slow. If I try to move a sliding part it often moves very slow and takes a while to get it started.

Dell Precision360
P4 2.8 GHz
Nvidia Quadro FX500/FX600 w/128mb(That's what is listed)
Windows XP SP2
1GB ram

I don't know enough about computers themselves to understand what is limiting the performance.

Please offer any suggestions!

Thanks.

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Make sure you are using the corect driver:-

http://www.solidworks.com/pages/services/VideoCardTesting.html

Upgrade to 2GB RAM

Use the /3GB switch:-

http://www.panoramafactory.com/discus/messages/17/313.html?1057432320

http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.php

Helpful SW websites FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions FAQ559-1091

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

How "large" are your assy's?
Are you working locally or over a network?


Helpful SW websites FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions FAQ559-1091

 

[StefanHamminga]

Looks like a pretty well balanced system, I would save money for a completely new system or, if budget is really tight, I would go for some more memory or a faster cpu.

In my opinion it would not be wise to spend much on this system, as the next worthwile graphics card upgrade is the FX1400 and that card is PCIe (as are all modern cards). The faster (dualcore) cpu's also use different mainboards.

Stefan Hamminga
EngIT Solutions
CSWP/Mechanical designer/AI student

 

[Theophilus]

I agree. It also sounds like you need more RAM, by the symptoms you posted. So that may be the best thing to do as a "cheap" fix with the existing system. Otherwise, getting a new system would obviously bring you into a different realm of things to upgrade.

Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe trumps reason.

 

[mckeand13]

Well, I'm not sure if this qualifies as Large but the assembly has 320 parts & sub assemblies.

I used to work over a network and I had a lot of trouble with speed & crashing. I've since changed to working on my hard drive and periodically backing up to the network.

 

[StefanHamminga]

How about GBit lan? Works great over here, especially with a linux server running raid and a large filecache. That way both latency and throughput are better than a single wd raptor (fastest sata drive on the market).

Stefan Hamminga
EngIT Solutions
CSWP/Mechanical designer/AI student

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

How many Top Level mates does your assy have?
Tools > Assembly Statistics
Any more than 300 and you are highly likely to get performance & instability problems.


Helpful SW websites FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions FAQ559-1091

 

[mckeand13]

245 Top level mates.

How would you minimize this though in a large assembly?

StefanHamminga, I don't even understand what you are talking about regarding networks. I'm handcuffed as far as any change there anyway. I'll be limited to easy computer upgrades.

Sounds like additional Ram is the thing to start with.

Thanks.

 

[Theophilus]

Minimize top-level mates by using sub-assemblies--and therefore fewer top-level mates because of fewer total parts (sub-assemblies handle their own part mates).

Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe trumps reason.

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

http://www.solidworks.com/swexpress/pages/jan05/TT_AssemblyDrawingPerformance.html

and although old this still has some valid points;

http://www.solidworks.com/swexpress/sept02/200209_techtip_01.cfm

Also take a look at the Rules Of Thumb section at

http://mysite.verizon.net/mjlombard/

In particular the Tools Options Settings for SW2006 and Large Assemblies


Helpful SW websites FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions FAQ559-1091

 

[RawheadRex]

Hi mckeand13,

You're close to pushing the envelope on top-level mates. If there's any way to push some groups of components into sub-assemblies then I strongly suggest doing that. This might mess with your design logic (i.e. actual BOM structure versus an assembly file structure organized for better performance) in some ways but should improve the performance by minimizing the number of mates at the top level.

For example, if your assembly has patterns of components you might consider pushing those into a separate sub-assembly and patterning there. I worked on electric motors (at least as many parts as you're talking about) in a previous job and we used sub-assemblies to mate the polesets on common reference geometry (an axis of revolution, plus a distance mate, and one or two more mates for orientation). In the end the top-level assembly ended up with ~10 total components.

My suggestion for hardware upgrades would be additional RAM (as much as you can fit in the box - similar to what others have already suggested) and a better graphics card (128Mb used to cut it but is probably closer to a minimum requirement these days - I haven't personally looked into this though). Personally, I have seen significant improvement in performance when doing these two things alone. Especially for the amount of money one spends versus a whole new system.

Also, I assume you're using lightweight components in the assembly as well. I don't think anyone mentioned that. Try not to force everything to load into memory. Chances are you don't need most of the components to be resolved at any given moment.

Good luck!

Chris Gervais