Free SolidWorks from Performance Constraints

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Free SolidWorks from Performance Constraints"

Roy Wood
5 years ago
Views:

1 Free SolidWorks from Performance Constraints Adrian Fanjoy Technical Services Director, CATI Josh Altergott Technical Support Manager, CATI

2 Objective Build a better understanding of what factors involved in a SolidWorks environment make the most significant impact on performance. Make the computer wait on you not the other way around Better understand the benefits of different hardware investments and learn how to apply performance data to purchasing decisions. AF

3 Agenda Determining the right hardware Examining modeling methodology Where are the multi-core requirements Comparing hardware year over year The bonus section JA

4 Determining the Right Hardware JA

5 The Workstation (Hardware) Boxx 4920 Extreme Intel i7 6 core (3.24 over clocked to 4.5) 32GB RAM Nvidia Quadro 600, 2000, 4000, K5000 and GeForce 650 Ti 240GB RevoDrive3 X2 PCI-E 180GB Intel SSD 6Gb/s 300GB 15,000rpm SAS Drive 500GB 10,000rpm SATA 6Gb/s 250GB 7,200rpm SATA AF

6 The Model Racine Railroad Products Item 1 Item 2 Folder size 1.92GB, 4854 files JA

7 The Tests SolidWorks Benchmark Includes Comparisons Dataset copy and delete Launching SolidWorks Opens Rotations Modeling Rebuilds Drawing changes Saves Closing Baseline (Typical from customer) Change one thing at a time with each test Hardware was run cumulatively Typical vs Practical vs Optimal Methodology will test individual changes in typical and practical configurations AF

8 The Baseline Win7 64bit SW Options default (LAM exception) 8GB RAM OS Visual Settings default Ghz RPM hard drive Image Quality set optimally High level of detail in models Large number of top level mates Assembly is fully resolved Run Time 4:43: sec JA

9 Typical Practical Optimal 3.4GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU $2,125 4:43:44 3.4GHz Processor 3.4GHz Processor 2 cores 2 cores 8 GB RAM 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Quadro 600 GPU $2,125 $2,125 $0 $0 4:43:44 4:43:44 0:00:00 0:00:00 0.0% faster 0.0% faster JA

10 RAM Is there such thing as too much? RAM is critical Every assembly has a threshold Without enough RAM Hard Drive becomes hyper-critical Used for SWAP simulating RAM Everything is slower OS struggles as well Stability can become an issue as well AF

11 RAM The Numbers RAM Comparison 6GB 12:19:41 :: 161% slower 8GB 4:43:44 14GB 1:58:41 :: 58.2% faster 16GB 1:56:49 :: 58.8% faster 32GB 1:55:07 :: 59.4% faster Hours to complete RAM AF

12 Typical Practical Optimal 3.4GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU $2,125 4:43:44 3.4GHz Processor 3.4GHz Processor 2 cores 2 cores 16 GB RAM 32 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Quadro 600 GPU $2,285 $2,565 $160 $280 1:56:49 1:55:07 2:46: sec 58.8% faster 1.5% faster 2

13 Processors How many cores can SolidWorks use? SolidWorks uses 2 cores OS can use an additional 2 cores Other applications will add to the load Simulation and Rendering can take advantage of many cores JA

14 Processors SolidWorks 1 core 7:35:41 :: 286% slower 2 cores 1:58:07 3 cores 1:41:47 :: 13.8% faster 4 cores 1:41:08 :: 14.4% faster 6 cores 1:40:40 :: 14.8% faster Hrs to complete Compare Cores Cores JA

15 Typical Practical Optimal 3.4GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU $2,125 4:43:44 3.4GHz Processor 3.4GHz Processor 4 cores 6 cores 16 GB RAM 32 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Quadro 600 GPU $2,725 $4,620 $600 $1,895 1:41:08 1:40:40 3:02:36 28 sec 64.4% faster.5% faster JA

16 Processor Speed The faster the better!! SolidWorks is limited on cores The cores it does use should be as fast as possible AF

17 Processor Speed The faster the better!! 120 Compare Cores 3.24 Ghz 104 mins :: 3.1% slower 3.42 Ghz 101 mins 3.78 Ghz 93 mins :: 8.2% faster 4.14 Ghz 90 mins :: 11.5% faster Mins to Complete Ghz 85 mins :: 15.9% faster 0 For every 1/4Ghz performance increases ~2.7% Proc Speed Ghz AF

18 Typical Practical Optimal 3.4GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU $2,125 4:43:44 4.5GHz Processor 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 6 cores 16 GB RAM 32 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Quadro 600 GPU $3,105 $5,300 $980 $2,195 1:25:04 1:22:56 3:18: sec 70.0% faster 2.5% faster AF

19 Hard drive speed How important could it be? When RAM is in short supply hard drive speed is critical JA

20 Hard drive speed How important could it be? Compare Hard drives 7200 RPM 89.5 mins 10K RPM 88 mins :: 1.8% faster 15K RPM 82.5 mins :: 7.7% faster Intel SSD 78 mins :: 13.1% faster Revo 77 mins :: 14.3% faster Mins to complete K 15K SSD Revo Hard drive type JA

21 Typical Practical Optimal 3.4GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU $2,125 4:43:44 4.5GHz Processor 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 6 cores 16 GB RAM 32 GB RAM SSD Revo Quadro 600 GPU Quadro 600 GPU $3,255 $5,865 $1,130 $2,610 1:17:48 1:15:36 3:25: sec 72.6% faster 2.8% faster JA

22 GPUs What fits my need? AF

23 GPUs Functions we tested Models we tested Cards we tested Display States Large Assembly Nvidia Quadro 600 Shadows RealView Graphics Image Quality Transparency Light Weight and Large Assembly Mode Small Assembly Part Nvidia Quadro 2000 Nvidia Quadro 4000 Nvidia Quadro K5000 Nvidia GeForce 650Ti Level of Detail Anti-Aliasing AF

24 Graphics Card Comparison Supported Cards GeForce Large Assembly 600 K5000 less than 2% faster Small Assembly :: 34.5% faster :: 6.8% faster 4000 K5000 :: 1.0% faster No RealView Unstable 10% slower than the Quadro 600 No Full Scene Anti-Aliasing No Stereo capability Unsupported The way it feels AF

25 Typical Practical Optimal 3.4GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU $2,125 4:43:44 4.5GHz Processor 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 6 cores 16 GB RAM 32 GB RAM SSD Revo Quadro 2000 GPU Quadro K5000 GPU $3,630 $7,751 $1,505 $4,121 1:17:48 1:15:36 3:25: sec 72.6% faster 2.8% faster AF

26 Examining Modeling Methodology Each of the tests in this section represent a single change compared to the Typical and Practical Baseline. These tests are in no particular order. JA

Files stored in an older version Does age of file matter? Files were not converted to SolidWorks 2014 As few as 1 file not saved in the latest version can increase Open, Save, and Rebuild times. 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Typical Baseline 4:43:44 Practical 4.

27 Files stored in an older version Does age of file matter? Files were not converted to SolidWorks 2014 As few as 1 file not saved in the latest version can increase Open, Save, and Rebuild times. 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Typical Baseline 4:43:44 Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM Baseline 1:17:48 Results SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 1:29:02-0:11: % slower AF

28 What is the best tool to simplify my files? SolidWorks has many tools available to clean up your files but which one will give you the best and fastest result. Manual Clean-up Defeature Envelope SpeedPak Save As Part JA

29 Defeature Can be used on Parts or Assemblies. Has many different options, faster than manually modifying parts but you have less control of the results. We chose to go with removing Internal components and ended up with a part file that was 401mb had 271 Surface Bodies and 1316 Solid Bodies. 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Results Typical Baseline 4:43:44 5:42:48-0:59: % slower Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM Baseline 1:17:48 Results SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 1:32:20-0:14: % slower JA

30 OS Visual Settings Never let Microsoft make a decision for you AF

31 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Typical Baseline Baseline 4:43:44 1:17:48 Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM SSD Quadro 2000 GPU OS Visual Settings OS Visual Settings 3:57:27 1:17:41 0:46:17 0:00: % faster.2% faster AF

Part and Assembly Details If it came from the internet in must be OK, right? We cleaned up just the Cab and its related parts and assemblies. Cab Assembly Stats Start Point 30.

32 Part and Assembly Details If it came from the internet in must be OK, right? We cleaned up just the Cab and its related parts and assemblies. Cab Assembly Stats Start Point 30.15mb, 621mb folder End Point 12.74mb, 554mb folder Removed details like extruded text, transparency, and patterns. Created configurations of imported parts to remove details not seen at the top level. 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Results Typical Baseline 4:43:44 2:09:45 2:33: % faster Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM Baseline 1:17:48 Results SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 1:00:13 0:17: % faster JA

33 System Options How do I choose the right option? We changed 18 different settings in the system options. We did not include Lightweight or Large Assembly Mode, those test will come later. Most of the settings changed are items that are visually appealing. 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU For a complete list of the settings please see the slides at the end of this presentation. Results Typical Baseline 4:43:44 3:56:46 0:46: % faster Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM Baseline 1:17:48 Results SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 1:14:59 0:02:49 3.6% faster AF

SpeedPak Can be created at the Top Level Assembly or in a Subassembly to an existing configuration. You can choose faces or bodies the will be referenced in other assemblies.

34 SpeedPak Can be created at the Top Level Assembly or in a Subassembly to an existing configuration. You can choose faces or bodies the will be referenced in other assemblies. We removed the ghost to increase performance. 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Results Typical Baseline 4:43:44 1:31:36 3:12: % faster Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM Baseline 1:17:48 Results SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 0:53:55 0:23: % faster JA

35 Image Quality Is too much a bad thing? Set at around 25% is the sweet spot This is a per document setting. Changing at the top level assembly allows parts to be changed also (does not change sub assemblies). 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Results Typical Baseline 4:43:44 18:51:33-14:07: % slower Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM Baseline 1:17:48 Results SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 1:29:28-0:11: % slower AF

Envelope Both Parts and Assemblies can be set as an Envelope when inserted or in the component properties. Serve as a reference or selection tool. Envelopes are ignored in BOMs and Mass Properties. 2.

36 Envelope Both Parts and Assemblies can be set as an Envelope when inserted or in the component properties. Serve as a reference or selection tool. Envelopes are ignored in BOMs and Mass Properties. 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Results Typical Baseline 4:43:44 3:01:01 1:42: % faster Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM Baseline 1:17:48 Results SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 1:17:31 0:00:17 0.4% faster JA

RealView Graphics and Shadows Can my parts look like the real thing? Help to give your part a realistic appearance. Takes a large amount of system resources to rebuild, refresh, open, save and close.

37 RealView Graphics and Shadows Can my parts look like the real thing? Help to give your part a realistic appearance. Takes a large amount of system resources to rebuild, refresh, open, save and close. If needed on files create a Display State or Configuration. 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Results Typical Baseline 4:43:44 3:46:26 0:57: % faster Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM Baseline 1:17:48 Results SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 1:15:41 0:02:07 2.7% faster AF

38 Save As Part We chose to save just the Cab Assembly as a Part with the 3 different options. Exterior Faces Exterior Components All Components File Size 79mb File Size 120mb File Size 317mb Part has 0 Solid Bodies and 8432 Surface Bodies. Part has 1080 Solid Bodies and 225 Surface Bodies. Part has 3668 Solid Bodies and 271 Surface Bodies. 2 nd Best Option 20.9% to 55.1% Faster Best Option 25.9% to 60.0% Faster Worst Option 4.7% to 95.0% Slower JA

39 What is the best tool to simplify my files? Over all results stack up as follows. Manual Clean-up Savings between 22.6% and 54.3% o Takes additional time to complete, good for standard parts that will be reused over and over. Defeature Cost between 18.7% and 20.8% o Lots of options to try so there may be a way to save time. Envelope Savings between 0.4% and 36.2% o Good option but not included in BOM and Mass Properties. SpeedPak Savings between 30.7% and 67.7% o Great option leaves ability to Mate and still be included in BOM. Save As Part Savings between 20.9% and 60.0% (Exterior Faces and Exterior Components) o Choose what option you use wisely other wise it may cost you time (All Components). JA

Top Level Mates How do Flexible Subassemblies effect the top level performance? Eliminated Flexible Subassemblies. Suppress or Delete unneeded mates. 2.

40 Top Level Mates How do Flexible Subassemblies effect the top level performance? Eliminated Flexible Subassemblies. Suppress or Delete unneeded mates. 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Results Typical Baseline 4:43:44 4:06:06 0:37: % faster Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM Baseline 1:17:48 Results SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 1:15:11 0:02:37 3.4% faster AF

41 Large Assembly Mode Is this the greatest tool to improve performance? Overall it has the greatest impact on performance. Utilizes loading models Lightweight as well as several other System Options to increase performance. Important to review all options and watch out for 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU dismissed messages. Results Typical Baseline 4:43:44 0:53:54 3:49: % faster Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM Baseline 1:17:48 Results SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 0:32:08 0:45: % faster JA

42 Bring It All Home Practical Hardware Optimal File Set 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores 16 GB RAM SSD Quadro 2000 GPU System Options set to optimal Fixed Assembly Details (Cab Only) Cab Saved as Part File (External Components) RealView, Shadows set to Off Image Quality set to 25% Flexible Subassemblies - Removed AF

43 Optimal (without Large Assembly Mode) What happens when it all comes together? 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Typical Baseline Baseline 4:43:44 1:17:48 Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores Optimal (w/o LAM) Optimal (w/o LAM) 16 GB RAM SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 1:37:17 0:53:14 3:06:27 0:24: % faster 31.6% faster JA

44 Optimal (with Large Assembly Mode) What happens when it all comes together? 2.8GHz Processor 2 cores 8 GB RAM 7200 RPM HD Quadro 600 GPU Typical Baseline Baseline 4:43:44 1:17:48 Practical 4.5GHz Processor 4 cores Optimal (with LAM) Optimal (with LAM) 16 GB RAM SSD Quadro 2000 GPU 0:28:50 0:18:21 4:14:54 0:59: % faster 76.4% faster AF

Where Multi-core Matters XEON Processors Intel s only processor to support multiple processors in a single workstation Supports greater system memory

45 Where Multi-core Matters XEON Processors Intel s only processor to support multiple processors in a single workstation Supports greater system memory bandwidth Larger Memory capacity required to support 16 cores and larger datasets Registered ECC memory support preferable for larger memory configurations AF

46 Where Multi-core Matters PhotoRendering RenderPro Dual XEON E GHz 20MB cache (8 cores each) 32GB RAM DDR3 750GB 7,200rpm SATA NVIDIA Quadro 600 JA

47 Photo-Rendering JA

48 Photo-Rendering The more cores the better Hyper-Threading helps As much as 16.8% Mins to Complete HT Off HT On # of Cores AF

49 Photo-Rendering cores 17% faster 4 8 cores 51% faster 4 16 cores 74% faster 50 Mins to Complete HT Off HT On # of Cores AF

Where Multi-core Matters Simulation 3D BOXX 4925 XEON E5-2697 2.

50 Where Multi-core Matters Simulation 3D BOXX 4925 XEON E GHz 20MB cache (12 cores) 32GB RAM DDR3 180GB INTEL SSD 6Gb/s SATA NVIDIA Quadro K2000 JA

51 Simulation (FloWorks) 30% Hyper-Threading Hyper-Threading 20% Helps with large problems In general the more cores the higher the percentage improvement % improvement 10% 0% -10% - 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000, Core 10 Core 8 Core 6 Core 4 Core -20% 2 Core -30% -40% # Cells AF

52 Simulation (FloWorks) 16:48:00 4m Cells Hyper-Threading 13% performance increase on average Cores 18% performance increase per 2core step on average Time to Complete 14:24:00 12:00:00 9:36:00 7:12:00 4:48:00 2:24:00 HT STD 0:00: # Cores AF

53 Static Simulation Static Simulation 4 6 cores 7.7% faster 4 8 cores 12% faster 4 16 cores 16% faster Minutes to Complete HT-Off # Cores AF

54 Comparing Old Hardware with New AF

55 Comparing Hardware year over year 5 Machines of varying age and hardware meets 4 different test runs and this equals a lot of new data. Machine1 (6y2m) Built: 11/2007 Type: Laptop Processor: Centrino Duo 2.2GHz RAM: 4GB Video Card: NVIDIA FX1600M Hard Drive: 80GB, 7200RPM Operating Sys.: Win7 SolidWorks 2014 SP0.0 Machine2 (6y1m) Built: 12/2007 Type: Tower Processor: Core Duo 2.66GHz RAM: 4GB Video Card: NVIDIA Quadro 2000 Hard Drive: 80GB, 7200RPM Operating Sys.: Win7 SolidWorks 2014 SP0.0 Baseline Test Time : 80:53:32 Baseline Test Time : 93:06:34 AF

56 Comparing Hardware year over year 5 Machines of varying age and hardware meets 4 different test runs and this equals a lot of new data. Machine3 (3y1m) Built: 12/2010 Type: Tower Processors: 2-Xeon 2.4GHz RAM: 12GB Video Card: NVIDIA Quadro 4000 Hard Drives: 2-1TB, 7200RPM Operating Sys.: Win7 SolidWorks 2014 SP0.0 Machine4 (2y11m) Built: 02/2011 Type: Laptop Processor: Core I7 2.8GHz RAM: 8GB Video Card: NVIDIA Quadro FX2800M Hard Drive: 500GB, Intel SSD Operating Sys.: Win7 SolidWorks 2014 SP0.0 Baseline Test Time : 2:09:19 Baseline Test Time : 2:08:34 AF

57 Comparing Hardware year over year 5 Machines of varying age and hardware meets 4 different test runs and this equals a lot of new data. Machine5 (1y3m) Machine6 (0y3m) Built: 10/2012 Built: 10/2013 Type: Tower Type: Tower Processors: I7 3.24GHz (4.5GHz) Processors: I7 3.5GHz (4.3GHz) RAM: 16GB RAM: 32GB Video Card: NVIDIA Quadro 2000 Video Card: NVIDIA Quadro K2000 Hard Drives: 180GB, Intel SSD Hard Drives: 180GB, Intel SSD Operating Sys.: Win7 Operating Sys.: Win7 SolidWorks 2014 SP0.0 SolidWorks 2014 SP0.0 Baseline Test Time : 1:17:48 Baseline Test Time : 1:02:41 AF

58 Comparing Hardware year over year Baseline Test Results Baseline comparison 108:00:00 Time to Complete (H:M:S) 96:00:00 84:00:00 72:00:00 60:00:00 48:00:00 36:00:00 24:00: % 12:00:00 0:00:00 Machine1 (6y2m) Machine2 (6y1m) Machine3 (3y1m) Machine4 (2y11m) Machine5 (1y3m) Machine6 (0y3m) JA

59 Comparing Hardware year over year Baseline Test Results Baseline comparison Time to Complete (H:M:S) 2:24:00 2:09:36 1:55:12 1:40:48 1:26:24 1:12:00 0:57:36 0:43:12 0:28:48 0:14:24 0:00:00.01% 39.5% 19.4% Machine3 (3y1m) Machine4 (2y11m) Machine5 (1y3m) Machine6 (0y3m) JA

60 Comparing Hardware year over year Optimal Test Results Optimal comparison Time to Complete (H:M:S) 0:00:00 19:12:00 14:24:00 9:36:00 4:48:00 0:00:00 19:12:00 14:24:00 9:36:00 4:48:00 0:00: % Avg. Increase over Baseline Machine1 (6y2m) Machine2 (6y1m) Machine3 (3y1m) Machine4 (2y11m) Machine5 (1y3m) Machine6 (0y3m) JA

61 Comparing Hardware year over year Optimal Test Results Optimal comparison 1:40:48 Time to Complete (H:M:S) 1:26:24 1:12:00 0:57:36 0:43:12 0:28:48 0:14:24 4.2% 40.8% 22.0% 0:00:00 Machine3 (3y1m) Machine4 (2y11m) Machine5 (1y3m) Machine6 (0y3m) JA

62 Comparing Hardware year over year Optimal with Large Assembly Mode Test Results Optimal with LAM comparison 1:40:48 Time to Complete (H:M:S) 1:26:24 1:12:00 0:57:36 0:43:12 0:28:48 0:14:24 0:00:00 Machine1 (6y2m) Machine2 (6y1m) Machine3 (3y1m) Machine4 (2y11m) Machine5 (1y3m) Machine6 (0y3m) JA

63 Racine Railroad Products Thank you

64 Bonus Round JA

65 Monitor Resolution Does the resolution of your monitor increase performance? Test was run on Machine6 at baseline settings Overall time difference between high and low run time was 2m28s less than 4%. Time to Complete (H:M:S) 1:04:00 1:03:00 1:02:00 1:01:00 1:00:00 0:59:00 Monitor Resolution 0:58: x x x x600 Resolution JA

66 Anti-Virus and the Network Network vs Local working directory 1:55:12 1:40:48 1:26:24 1:12:00 0:57:36 0:43:12 55% 56% Local Network 0:28:48 0:14:24 112% 0:00:00 Baseline STD Optimal STD Optimal LAM AF

67 Anti-Virus and the Network Anti-Virus On vs Gone 2:09:36 1:55:12 1:40:48 8% 1:26:24 1:12:00 0:57:36 0:43:12 31% 15% Network AV Both 0:28:48 0:14:24 0:00:00 Baseline STD Optimal STD Optimal LAM AF

68 The Enterprise PDM Difference 1:55:12 1:40:48 1:26:24 1:12:00 0:57:36 0:43:12 0:28:48 30% 32% 27% Network Working Local Working 0:14:24 0:00:00 Baseline STD Optimal STD Optimal LAM AF

69 Dual Monitors and Hyper-threading Does dual monitors or hyper-threading effect performance? Tests were run on Machine6 at baseline settings Dual Monitor testing with SolidWorks running on Monitor1 and there was less than a 15 second difference from the Baseline. Hyper-threading showed only a 10 second increase in run time over the Baseline. JA

70 Racine Railroad Products Thank you

71 Questions

72 Top Tips for Performance review Check Image Quality at top level assembly and drawing level. Review any imported parts for simplification possibilities. Use Assembly Xpert to point out and possible conflicts. Great hardware does not make up for poor modeling practices. Following these guidelines will make your SolidWorks tasks more productive because your computer will have to wait on you vs. you waiting on your computer to complete tasks.

73 Optimal SolidWorks Settings uncheck thumbnail uncheck news feeds 2

74 Optimal SolidWorks Settings uncheck show contents while dragging uncheck allow auto update when opening 2

75 Optimal SolidWorks Settings Set background to Plain 2

76 Optimal SolidWorks Settings Maintain Assy Tran Anti-aliasing set to None Check Display draft quality ambient occlusion 2

77 Optimal SolidWorks Settings Uncheck Transparency options Level of Detail to Less (Fast) Auto load lightweight - Should be checked, but not for testing Check out of date set to Indicate Mate Animation set to Off Uncheck Use shaded preview Check No Preview 2

78 Optimal SolidWorks Settings Uncheck Use Trans flyout FeatureManager 2

79 Optimal SolidWorks Settings Zoom to fit should be unchecked but not practical Set all Transitions to Off 2

Maximize SOLIDWORKS Performance

Maximize SOLIDWORKS Performance Performance can be dramatically improved with cost effective hardware upgrades and simple configuration changes. A Study by: Sponsored by: Presented by: Maximize SOLIDWORKS