ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
(OP)
Hi folks
I'm hoping you will help me out. I've searched the forum but didnt find anything covering this topic.
I'm trying to maximise processing power for one of our guys running NX4. some of our upcoming projects are fairly big projects so I'm hoping to get the best out of the machine he is currently using. he's running on a dell 64bit, dual core, 4GB RAM, with a 256MB graphics card.
I've some questions if we upgrade the machine altogether;
I've read that UG doesnt utilise the 2 core unless you change an environmental variable which is nice to find out now, I can change that but will UG utilise quad core technology? would it be worthwhile to upgrade from a dual core?
does UG rely heavily on the graphics card or predominently on the RAM i.e is it worthwhile paying big for a top end graphics card?
I'm interested in hearing what kind of spec other folks are working on and what would you go for if buying a new pc?
any suggestions would be appreciated.
thanks
I'm hoping you will help me out. I've searched the forum but didnt find anything covering this topic.
I'm trying to maximise processing power for one of our guys running NX4. some of our upcoming projects are fairly big projects so I'm hoping to get the best out of the machine he is currently using. he's running on a dell 64bit, dual core, 4GB RAM, with a 256MB graphics card.
I've some questions if we upgrade the machine altogether;
I've read that UG doesnt utilise the 2 core unless you change an environmental variable which is nice to find out now, I can change that but will UG utilise quad core technology? would it be worthwhile to upgrade from a dual core?
does UG rely heavily on the graphics card or predominently on the RAM i.e is it worthwhile paying big for a top end graphics card?
I'm interested in hearing what kind of spec other folks are working on and what would you go for if buying a new pc?
any suggestions would be appreciated.
thanks





RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
ATI FireGL V3100 128 MB
Xeon 3.40 GHz Processor
1 GB RAM
That's what I'm currently running. The graphics card doesn't bog down when I turn translucency on or when I'm working with large assemblies. My only complaint is that it needs more RAM. When I'm working with parts with a lot of repetitive features and blends (think packaging tray for small components), UG can take 20-30 minutes to update a model.
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
As for what configuration of processors is best for NX, we have done some studies and while we've never officially published the results, we've provided the details when asked, and in keeping with that, I've posted below what we consider to be the current status of this situation:
NX can take advantage of up to 4 threads. Actually it's Parasolid that is doing all the work in this case as the kernel will continue to parse out work to the available treads up to a maximum of 4. However that being said, do not be mislead into thinking that quad-cores are therefore the best solution, as that is not the case.
From a purely raw NX performance point of view (or really ANY SMP enabled software) the order of performance, best to worse, is as follows (this is assuming that all else is equal, such as clock-speed, memory, IO bus-speed, etc.):
1) Four single-core CPU's in 4 sockets
2) Two dual-core CPU's in 2 sockets
3) Two single-core CPU's in 2 sockets
4) One dual-core CPU in 1 socket
5) One quad-core CPU in 1 socket
6) One single-core CPU in 1 socket
Now 4 & 5 could go either way depending on the actual part models and what was being done, but the reason for THIS ORDER OF PROGRESSION is that dual- and quad-core CPU's share a lot of resources and so very little is gained if anything (as the number of cores on the same CPU goes up, the actual performance of any one core goes down even if the clock speed was the same) for an application like NX even if it can theoretically use all four threads, which is also why multiple CPU, multiple socket systems will ALWAYS be superior, albeit at a much higher cost for hardware. Now this may change over time, but for now, this is about how it all shakes out.
Anyway, I hope this helps.
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
NX Design
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA
http://www.siemens.com/plm
http://www.plmworld.org/museum/
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
cargeke - RAM is dirt cheap at the moment. why not go for it?
John - thanks for the feedback. It's interesting to see the quad core so low in the results table. Did ye get any data representing the actual difference in the results? i.e. is the 4 socket setup generally twice as fast as 2 socket setup? I'm just wondering how much I would gain if we upgrade.
also, what does UG use to do the number crunching, is it primarily the graphics card or the RAM?
thanks again.
(anyone else care to post their setup?)
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
NX Design
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA
http://www.siemens.com/plm
http://www.plmworld.org/museum/
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
my problem is that our dell agent is unlikely to have any tests done on UG specifically, he's likely to make the reasonable suggestion to try asking the software developers
Is there any plan to publish the test findings you refer to? I'd be interested to see the difference in performance between the different setups you mention. Were the tests documented using the same models and parameters to see what percentage faster one machine was over another?
If the performance difference is minimal then I can drop it in the knowledge that we are getting good value from the machine we have but if we can save serious time using a machine configured differently then I need to follow it up as any time savings on our upcoming project is likely to pay the cost of a new workstation.
would my local UG tech support guy have access to these same studies if I called him?
thanks again
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
You can ask you local support and perhaps they can contact the same people I did (have them call/e-mail me and I'll pass it along to the people I deal with when questions like this come up).
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
NX Design
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA
http://www.siemens.com/plm
http://www.plmworld.org/museum/
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
anyone else care to post their setup?
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
To answer your original question it would also be helpful to know what you are doing when it slows down. Is it during model edits? Assembly edits? Are you running some sort of simulation/FEA on the assembly? Are you rendering scenes?
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
I now run 2x dual core 3.0ghz, 8gb ram, nvidia FX 4600
Using the windows task manager, I see that I regularly use between 2gb up to 6gb of memory, with multiple designs open. When rotating a large part (8000 surfaces) I feel a noticeable different switching translucency on/off, though neither mode is prohibitively slow.
Swapping displayed part from component to assembly is slow, snapping views (f8) causes a long delay, and saving is horrendous IMO. If I were to upgrade, I might expieriment with striped drives (raid 0).
If I did not utilize so much memory, I would clearly stay with a 32 bit system.
NX 5.0.3.2 MoldWizard
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
NX 5.0.3.2 MoldWizard
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
I hope you dont mind me bumping this thread again, you folks have been much more useful and helpful than our UG support guys, I have just one or two more querys that I'm hoping you could help me with
I'm probably going to go with a dual core processor rather than quad core. seeing as Ug will only use one core really, I can get a faster dual core for my money. I've configuured Dell T7400
One Intel® Xeon® X5272 (3.40GHz, 1600FSB, 6MB Cache, Dual Core)
16GB RAM ( 8 GB RAM would cost me 500e less)
768MB nVidia QuadroFX 4600 (512MB graphics card would cost me 800 euro less)
24in 2408WFP WIDESCREEN dell monitor ( 19" would be 500euro less)
my questions are regarding the expensive upgrades I've configured above. I have the budget for it but I would expect to see value for money.
Is the upgrade from 512MB to 768Mb graphics card worth the 800euro?
In the case of the RAM, is it always the more the better with regards to NX?
do any of you guys use widescreen monitors? does it mees with the aspect ratio, making elipses out of circles etc?
thanks for any help you can provide
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
As for the dual-core CPU, NX does take advantage of multiple CPU's. Granted, it's confined pretty much to Modeling operations using the Parasolid kernel, but it does add up. Also, with NX 6 we added a AVI capture function which when it's recording a movie of your NX session also uses whatever available extra processor that there is.
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
NX Design
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA
http://www.siemens.com/plm
http://www.plmworld.org/museum/
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
There's another similar post I have responded to recently on the same subject.
http://www
Unless you're absolutely convinced that you have extremely heavy CAD requirements exceeding the needs of most other users then I think you're overspending on that machine.
Personally I would go the 8Gb RAM but purchase in large individual memory cards. Usually boards may have four memory slots so if you buy 2x4b and leave two slots free you can always add more later if you require it.
Also if it were me I'd be just as happy with the cheaper graphics card.
At this point I should explain that in terms of dealing with the situation that we all face with computers so quickly becoming obsolete my tactic is to purchase with a two year minimum and three year maximum lifespan in mind. Expect to have to replace your system at least that often and tailor your spending accordingly. Expecting at the outset that you can buy the very latest and in so doing that you will extend the working life of a system is fraught with pitfalls. You pay too much for the short lived initial prestige of having the latest equipment and then you can't always predict accurately what technology and software changes could come along and swamp your system out to the third year.
Best Regards
Hudson
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
I dont mind spending on the 16GB RAM or the 768MB graphics card as long as NX will make use of it
regarding the Graphics card - does NX not rely heavily on the card when doing a lot of the number crunching/model generations? is it not a case of the bigger the better?
I have reconfigured to include a 15,000RPM HD as that makes sense.
Hi Hudson, thanks for your post + link. I read that yesterday after bumping this thread. it was very informative.
I'm not sure how our CAD requirements weigh up against other peoples usage but in an effort to describe whats driving this purchase, (+excuse my lack of NX lingo), one of our designers is starting work on a 128 cavity mould assembly, so obviously with 128 cavitys there are 128 core pins,ejectors etc etc, thousands of surfaces etc etc, + once the assembly is complete he will need to be able to import another machine assembly which will need to be modified to bolt onto the first mould assembly. so all in all thats probably a lot of parts and surfaces to have open in an assembly at one time.
Based on a previous experience designing a 96 cavity mould, our man (on top dollar! ;) ) spend a fair bit of time every day twiddling his thumbs waiting for NX to update a model, or save after mods. Seeing as this project is signifigantly bigger we want to minimise the wasted time that he will inevitably spend looking at the screen waiting for things to update/generate.
we are not trying to invest in a machine that will be cutting edge for 5 or 6years, this machine will probably be replaced in 2 or 3 years and passed onto another designer that isnt working on mooulds with the same requirements. The fact is that, 4 or 5grand of an outlay on a pc is good value if it can save us some time during the life span of this project.
but on the other hand then, there's no point spending a budget just for the sake of it, I want to see value for money and have a reasonable idea of how it should perform before I purchase
thanks for your help
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
For most design work I suspect you would be equally happy with either graphics card. NX will usually make full use of graphics card memory if it is available. I did however encounter a colleague who purchased a card with 1Gb of memory when it first came out and was for a time unable to address more than 512Mb such are the problems with 64bit systems and graphics drivers.
In today's market I would be loathe to spend over the 4 Grand mark. There is a fallacy in the doubling and redoubling of performance benchmarks that they don't translate with anything like a direct correlation into quicker design times. You can perform tests to show that updating the entire feature tree of the model there might be a 5 minute saving. But the problem is that you don't use that processing power 100% of the time so that over a day you may only 5-10% better off by getting the better machine but the operators frustration level drops by 30-40%. Which definitely makes the system upgrade worthwhile, even if it may at the same time question the value in spending the extra grand.
Just a thought on bang for your buck!
Cheers
Hudson
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
I never had big problems until NX4.
The dramatic drop in performance occurred with NX5 and NX6.
The problem is software or hardware?
Ciao.
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
I find 8gb ram sufficient (often overkill), but can easily envision using more if circumstances were different. Thats going to be a personal call, but you can always leave the option to upgrade.
Don't forget hard drives!!! FAST!!!
I have never been able to measure the effect of video cards, I have no idea if you'll get a return on this. I use the FX4600 and... it works as expected. Back in my pro-e days it was common knowledge to avoid ATI, they had some serious driver conflicts that I expierienced first hand. No idea if that still stands or if it matters with NX.
NX 5.0.3.2 MoldWizard
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
Your hard drive investment will definitely pay off.
As for monitors, while many of our customers are using dual-screen setups successfully, there are some issues with NX that may cause some odd behaviors and at the moment we have no planes to look into this since it is so dependent on the graphics card/driver/screen combination that it would be impossible to certify all possible configurations and then make whatever obscure codes changes would be needed for the more problematic cases. So when it comes to monitors, it's generally safer to go with a single big screen than 2 smaller ones.
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
NX Design
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA
http://www.siemens.com/plm
http://www.plmworld.org/museum/
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
Regarding the following list from JohnRBaker (in order of performance from best to worse), where can I insert a "Two Quad-Core CPU's in 2 Sockets"?
1) Four single-core CPU's in 4 sockets
2) Two dual-core CPU's in 2 sockets
3) Two single-core CPU's in 2 sockets
4) One dual-core CPU in 1 socket
5) One quad-core CPU in 1 socket
6) One single-core CPU in 1 socket
Waiting a suggestive answer as soon as possible,
My best regards
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Cypress, CA
http://www.siemens.com/plm
http://www.plmworld.org/museum/
To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
I don't believe that list would hold true anymore with the new core i7 processors?
I was curious however, our main problem area with NX is time wasted in CAM during Generation/Verification... We're running pretty ancient systems and are upgrading soon, however I was wondering if going to a core i7 would make a dramatic difference or if changing video cards to a higher end Quadro would make the difference.
Current setup is a 2.4ghz core 2 duo with 4gb of ram and a Quadro FX 1400 running 32-bit NX5. Although we plan on switching to 64bit NX6 with Windows 7 when we purchase our new computers.
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
Since Windoze 7 is still in beta, how far off is this purchase?
How much memory and what graphics cards are you looking at?
The multi-core processors still have process and memory management functions that take resources away from the CPU itself. So even newer generation chips wil still show some of the characteristics that John has in his list.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
RE: ideal PC spec for UG - dual core - quad core?
I'd presume you're either guessing or basing some of your ideas at this stage upon something you've read. With W7 in the infancy of beta that will run for about a year there's no way to be certain that it will suit your needs. Even if you're going to use beta releases I'd advise waiting until later before exposing too many users to something that may be too raw fro a production environment.
By all means think ahead but if you do there is seldom financial justification for having the latest and greatest at a premium price for the sake of obtaining a technology advantage which lasts all of five minutes in modern computing. I rationalise that you can buy a cheaper but sufficiently high end system that is not the stuff of cutting edge hi-tech glamour and have it last for two years competently for about the same ongoing cost as the creme de la creme model that may still struggle to last for three and seem ancient by the time that you replace it.
Now is a reasonably hard time to get into systems because we're still caught on the horns of a Vista dilemma in my opinion. But hardware is cheap with the financial crisis. I think it is not yet the time to buy for W7 so I'd get in cheaply for a year or two using affordable existing technologies and plan to upgrade again at a sound price point perhaps within 18 to 24 months. Buying more frequently needs to be cheaper and shun the cutting edge. It also annoys company bean counters for some reason but it gives you the flexibility to get it right more often than not.
Best Regards
Hudson
www.jamb.com.au
Nil Desperandum illegitimi non carborundum