Re: Slow mouse reactions on SW 2006

Problem solved! Not the video card, just an adjustment on the Default Open
GL settings for the video card to accomidate Solidworks.


"news.lightship.net" <nojunk_allowed@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ac1d1$43e8e5f4$d8ccbf04$31364@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You just proved the point I was trying to make. SW is always trying to
"push the graphics subsystem" and "They are also very particular about
specific versions of drivers." In order to push the limits they are not
following the true OpenGL standard. I don't see anywhere that SW is 100%
OpenGL compatible or any sort of claim so it looks like they are using
OpenGL as a baseline for compatibility and they chasing features that may
be in specific cards that will let them push the envelope.

My ATI cards are designed to work with OpenGL but maybe not the modified
tricks SW uses with OpenGL. I can download OpenGL tests form ATI as well
as from sites promoting the OpenGL standard (opengl.org) and I don't have
a problem with those demo's or tests. Who should I believe. The OpenGL
standards or SW when I need to see if my hardware meets the standard?

The fact is that right in the hardware compatibility list for SW it is
proven that they are doing just what I am saying. The video cards have
exceptions after exceptions where they work with SW04 and 06, but not 05
or they work on XP and NT but not 2000 or they work in 2000 for all
version but not XP on some, and many more.

If SW just wants to say the they are only going to work with certain cards
I guess there is nothing that I can do about that but please don't tell me
that it is my hardware that is the problem when I know it is not because
it meets or exceeds the standards that SW tells me they are stiving for.
It is like that old joke when the guy goes to the doctor and says "My arm
hurts when I do this..." and the doctor says "We don't do that!"



"ken" <goaway@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dsaiub$idu$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
That isn't a issue of SolidWorks adding specific features that makes your
card no longer usable. Let me lay it out for you. Applications like
SolidWorks, Solid Edge, Inventor, Pro/E, NX, etc... are always going to
push the graphics subsystem to give the user the most rich interactive
experience that they can, using the de facto workstation graphics
standard, OpenGL. Some of the features they are counting on are not
supported by consumer class graphics cards (overlay planes, multi-window
support, etc...). That is why most of them will not list Radeons from
ATI, GeForce's from NVIDIA and most other manufacturers as "certified".
They are also very particular about specific versions of drivers that
provide the correct (or often the least problematic) function. As OpenGL
standards evolve to add new features and card manufacturers evolve to
incorporate them, the application developers will start using these new
functions to boost performance and that will then allow them to add new
enhancements to their software. If you buy a card that really shouldn't
have been bought, or one that is bottom of the barrel, count on it not
working too well in a release or two. Buy one that is mid to high end,
then you will probably get 2-3 years out of it.

Ken
"news.lightship.net" <nojunk_allowed@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9e647$43e8bdb1$d8ccbf04$14158@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I think I will try that. Maybe they might get a head up on what is or is
not going to get dropped from future versions.


"Wayne Tiffany" <wayne.tiffanyRMVJUNK@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:43e8ba07$0$7112$6d36acad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Try this - call your VAR and have them bring over a video card other
than a Radeon, even an FX500 - a low end card, and see if it makes any
difference. Mostly what people on this group have said for years is
avoid Radeon. What do you have to lose from doing a free test?

WT

"news.lightship.net" <nojunk_allowed@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:9af40$43e8ad20$d8ccbf04$5077@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"The machine you spec'ed was bargain basement home internet box"

I don't mean to make this some sort of back and forth debate, but the
fact is those machine specs were the same if not BETTER that what Dell
and HP set for some of their "workstation class" computers and even
some of their eServers at the time. When SW came out to our site to
demo there was a salesman and person from Tech Support who performed
the demo. I personally asked what they required for hardware and the
person who was from Tech Support said "I am using a 1.2 GHz laptop
with about 256MB of RAM for these models". "These models" are
generally the same models of our products that they created for us to
demo and the same products that we are working on today with slightly
different charactoristics. I doubt that Dell laptop had anything
better than an integrated 8-16MB video card..

Again, the problem isn't ATI who has been and remains totally reliable
for every other purpose and every other application that I have had
for over the past 8 years since I started using them (including
previous SW versions). Everyone here seems to confirm my suspicions
that the problem really is that the specs SW gives out at sales time
are totally bogus and there is very little effort to allow companies
to effectively control their hardware investments from version to
version because they continually abandon compatibility with some
hardware to chase compatibility with the flavor of the day.

One of the things that was in SW's favor when we decided to go with
them is that their cost and maintainance was within our budget. We
pay about $1200-$1500 per seat for maintainance each year and we
assumed that our natural hardware upgrade path would be accomidated,
but from posts in this forum it seems like hidden costs are more than
double, if not triple. I am being told that I need a $1000 video card
now plus probably an extra GB of RAM not to mention that my 6 month
old system that runs number crunching design simlulators like Ansys
very well is now considered nothing more than a "bargain basement
internet box"?????

Just for my own future reference so I can accuratley budget my true
costs for Solidworks tell me if these numbers are correct for my
yearly or bi-yearly costs:

Maintenance per seat - ~ $1400
Brand New "workstation" - ~ $3000 every two years
Video card for "workstation" ~ $ 1000 every two years or year
IT Cost of implementing SW and new hardware ~ $750 every two

So with this numbers the best I should do is update SW every two years
and pay $2800 in maintenance and about $4000-$5000 for a new computer
and setup. That is about $3400 - $3900 per year on average to have SW.
Unfortunately, I still can't see a way around not knowing for sure if
my video card will be dropped next year or if my video card will be
dropped just because of the new version or SP for Windows.

"matt" <m_lombard@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e51c0edd915ea45989793@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


How am I supposed to be able to
keep my systems up with certified cards other than dumb luck?


You're way overexaggerating. ATI has been bad for OpenGL apps since
at
least 1999. Do a search on this newsgroup for Radeon, and it is
reviled
as often as it is mentioned. nVidia has been good for SW as far back
as
I've dealt with them. These things don't change from release to
release, although recommended driver versions do.

The machine you spec'ed was bargain basement home internet box, maybe
ok
for casual gaming. A high end graphics card (nVidia Quadro FX 4400
for
$2000+) is way more money than what you paid for an entire computer
with
specs like that. For reference, if you go to the www.Xicomputer.com
website and follow the link for the Mtower 64 SLI Workstation, the
starting price is $1059. It has a better processor (3800 instead of
3400) more ram (1 Gb instead of 512 k) better video (GeForce MX4000
instead of a Radeon, PCIe insted of AGP, and SLI capable to boot).
You
could trade the 15" monitor that comes with it for a little extra
hard
drive (only $25 to double the 80 Gb drive). So if we're generous,
let's
say you have $1000 into the hardware. It's simply inadequate to run
SolidWorks.

I wouldn't jump on you like this except that you're trying to pin
this
on SolidWorks, and the responsibility for your problem is clearly not
theirs. I'm all for letting them know when there's a problem, but
this
isn't one of those times. You sound like an IT person who got caught
not paying attention.












.

Quantcast