Solidworks 2007 and Vista
in [SolidWorks]
|
Prev: IGES conversion
Next: Laser cutting CAM software?
From: Jerry Steiger on 3 Oct 2007 14:57 "ChamberPot" <DaisyPot(a)Flower.org> wrote in message news:4703d2b9$0$26488$88260bb3(a)free.teranews.com... > I'm assuming your trying to make your living with this software? Or are > you just a weekend doghouse modeler? Why in hell would you cobb together a > fucked up jerry-rigged system, when Two people have now told you that SW08 > is faster on Vista than SW07 is on XP. That is JURY-rigged, not JERRY-rigged. For some reason I am a little sensitive about that particular misuse of the English Language. Jerry Steiger
From: zxys on 3 Oct 2007 18:20 Daisy and Wonderman, If you guys have some time... could you (or anyone) do us a favor and run a test to show that SW2008 on Vista is faster than SW2007 on XP? Since Anna chimed in here,.. can you use her "PunchHolder" file as the bench mark? http://www.acrodesigns.com/SolidWorks/ProcessorBenchmark/PunchHolder.zip http://designsmarter.typepad.com/solidmuse/2007/05/index.html http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pz7wTpIkC7LA28ybEyxyTPw What I'd like to ask specifically is,.. (get our your "stopwatch") and give us the total time from a ctrl-q to when you have full access to the model (when you can edit the model). (please,.. do NOT to give us the Feature Statistic numbers, just the total time from ctrl-q to when SW releases the data for you to edit!) Thanks. ... On Oct 2, 9:13 am, PotFlower <PotFlo...(a)Daisy.org> wrote: > solidsmack wrote: > > ... Vista is pretty and will probably be > > pretty fast with 10x the RAM, but the performance just isn't there. > > I can tel from that that you don't really use it. Vista and 2008 are > axually faster than xp ad 2007. It takes more ram but its a little > faster. What is it witht all these know it alls who read something > somewhere and then say it back, even when it wanst right to begin with. > > Daisy > > -- > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
From: zxys on 3 Oct 2007 19:12 Oh, btw, to insure more accuracy, or before you do the two test, make sure you open the original file in "both" SW2007 (XP) and SW2008 (Vista),.. do a ctrl-q, save as, "to another file name" (i.e., SW07XP and SW08Vista), close SW and reopen the new saved file and then do your test. ... 8^) On Oct 3, 3:20 pm, zxys <p...(a)zxys.com> wrote: > Daisy and Wonderman, > > If you guys have some time... could you (or anyone) do us a favor and > run a test to show that SW2008 on Vista is faster than SW2007 on XP? > Since Anna chimed in here,.. can you use her "PunchHolder" file as the > bench mark? > > http://www.acrodesigns.com/SolidWorks/ProcessorBenchmark/PunchHolder.ziphttp://designsmarter.typepad.com/solidmuse/2007/05/index.htmlhttp://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pz7wTpIkC7LA28ybEyxyTPw > > What I'd like to ask specifically is,.. (get our your "stopwatch") and > give us the total time from a ctrl-q to when you have full access to > the model (when you can edit the model). > (please,.. do NOT to give us the Feature Statistic numbers, just the > total time from ctrl-q to when SW releases the data for you to edit!) > > Thanks. > > .. > > On Oct 2, 9:13 am, PotFlower <PotFlo...(a)Daisy.org> wrote: > > > solidsmack wrote: > > > ... Vista is pretty and will probably be > > > pretty fast with 10x the RAM, but the performance just isn't there. > > > I can tel from that that you don't really use it. Vista and 2008 are > > axually faster than xp ad 2007. It takes more ram but its a little > > faster. What is it witht all these know it alls who read something > > somewhere and then say it back, even when it wanst right to begin with. > > > Daisy > > > -- > > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
From: ChamberPot on 4 Oct 2007 01:25 zxys wrote: > Daisy, > > Thanks for that... but, actually not mkay. > The whole point of this test is getting a accurate value at full > control of the model. > Feature statistic numbers are unreliable for real work values, it does > not capture the real issue of the strange delays you were seeing. > 100 seconds nominal is not close to the values I've witnessed,.. I've > seen 150% to 200% increases in the times over the Feature statistic > times. > That is why I wanted someone to show this.. and, I appreciate you > doing this!! sorry for beig such a drunken slacker, but let's just say its proportional. most of the times to have control were like this: (feat stat / time to control) 2008+vista = 219/315 2008+xp = 226/285 2007+xp = 235/275 vista did some rell werd stuff. It was like it would give you control, and then you move the mouse and it would do the hourglass (or that new ring thing) again, so it was hard to tell when it was really done. > > IMHO, it's not out of context to real issues with using SW2007 and > SW2008. I meant the model has out of context references, you know ->? Daisy. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: pete on 4 Oct 2007 04:07
I hope you are sober, ( :-P), when you decide to reply, but what was the hardware the test was run on? Was you running Vista, with all of the bell and whistles, or set to performance? Are you running Raid? What version of Vista? Was this Solidworks 2008 standard or the Office version, etc..., what, if any, add-ins did you have enabled? :-) "ChamberPot" <DaisyPot(a)Flower.org> wrote in message news:47046d75$0$26359$88260bb3(a)free.teranews.com... > zxys wrote: >> Daisy, >> >> Thanks for that... but, actually not mkay. >> The whole point of this test is getting a accurate value at full >> control of the model. >> Feature statistic numbers are unreliable for real work values, it does >> not capture the real issue of the strange delays you were seeing. >> 100 seconds nominal is not close to the values I've witnessed,.. I've >> seen 150% to 200% increases in the times over the Feature statistic >> times. >> That is why I wanted someone to show this.. and, I appreciate you >> doing this!! > > sorry for beig such a drunken slacker, but let's just say its > proportional. most of the times to have control were like this: > > (feat stat / time to control) > > 2008+vista = 219/315 > 2008+xp = 226/285 > 2007+xp = 235/275 > > vista did some rell werd stuff. It was like it would give you control, and > then you move the mouse and it would do the hourglass (or that new ring > thing) again, so it was hard to tell when it was really done. > >> >> IMHO, it's not out of context to real issues with using SW2007 and >> SW2008. > > > I meant the model has out of context references, you know ->? > > Daisy. > > -- > Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > |