Sketchup computer - selection guidelines
-
Hi,
It's time for a computer upgrade... in terms of specs for sketchup use, I came across this link http://www.vtc.com/products/GoogleSketchUpPro8/Introduction/99227 which seems to have good information - the highlights of which are:
- you don't need a multicore processor for SketchUp and because SketchUp only uses 1 core
- you're better off buying a 1 or 2 core processor that has a high clock speed
- don't worry about purchasing a 64-bit operating system with heaps of RAM as sketchUp operates as a 32-bit application and can only use 2Gb.
- there's really two video cards to consider: ATI FirePro and Nvidia Quadro...go for workstation cards because of the quality of the OpenGL drivers (and other things).
Is all this accurate? Anything to add?
Also relevant to my choice of computer.... at the moment I don't do any rendering, but might in the future. Probably also be using a bit of autocad (civil 3D if anyone here has had the misfortune of using it!) and I deal with very large spreadsheets.
Thanks
- Mick
-
Very large spreadsheets obviously require number crunching. That would benefit from multicore processing.
For graphics, NVidia Quadros come in several flavors. I believe they all support both DirectX and OpenGL, some higher versions than others. Quadro was recommended by our vendor for primarily Autocad, but we run Photoshop, Revit also--at work. I am less familiar with which ATI card to select.
I recently purchased a new home computer w7 64, not the hottest processor, but i7, with NVidia GTS450 and anticipating eventually to do some rendering. That card is somewhere in the lower middle range of available products, in price and functionality as I understand.
Obviously, some of the above is just my opinion. Some is fact. -
If you are planning to use the computer for rendering purposes too, a multicore processor is worth considering.
-
@sketchymick said:
Hi,
It's time for a computer upgrade... in terms of specs for sketchup use, I came across this link http://www.vtc.com/products/GoogleSketchUpPro8/Introduction/99227 which seems to have good information - the highlights of which are:
- you don't need a multicore processor for SketchUp and because SketchUp only uses 1 core
- you're better off buying a 1 or 2 core processor that has a high clock speed
- don't worry about purchasing a 64-bit operating system with heaps of RAM as sketchUp operates as a 32-bit application and can only use 2Gb.
- there's really two video cards to consider: ATI FirePro and Nvidia Quadro...go for workstation cards because of the quality of the OpenGL drivers (and other things).
Is all this accurate? Anything to add?
Also relevant to my choice of computer.... at the moment I don't do any rendering, but might in the future. Probably also be using a bit of autocad (civil 3D if anyone here has had the misfortune of using it!) and I deal with very large spreadsheets.
Thanks
- Mick
Ref 64 bit machines. Su does run as a 32 bit but but is large block address aware and as such can use more memory and in fact on my 32 bit P4 I can set the boot init to allow SU to use 3GB memory
-
Thanks Mitcorb. From what I can work out the gamer type cards are pretty much the same as the pro type cards except the drivers are different (there are other differences but they're not huge). They both support (and speed up) DirectX and OpenGL, etc, but for instance the GTS450 has code optimised for DirectX (i.e. games) where as the equivalent pro card (Quadro 2000) is optimised for OpenGL (i.e. pro graphics). I came across this link http://www.geeks3d.com/20101004/nvidia-quadro-600-and-quadro-2000-pro-versions-of-gt-430-and-gts-450/ which had a few interesting comments below, and found a few other articles along a similar theme. So it seems that for programs such as AutoCAD, it is well worth the extra money for the Quadro, but what about for sketchup? has anyone compared different graphics cards using sketchup?
Thanks
- Mick
-
@mac1 said:
Ref 64 bit machines. Su does run as a 32 bit but but is large block address aware and as such can use more memory and in fact on my 32 bit P4 I can set the boot init to allow SU to use 3GB memory
OK that's interesting... so how does one come across such information? I've been searching and have only found little scraps of information here and there. Cheers - Mick
-
@sketchymick said:
@mac1 said:
Ref 64 bit machines. Su does run as a 32 bit but but is large block address aware and as such can use more memory and in fact on my 32 bit P4 I can set the boot init to allow SU to use 3GB memory
OK that's interesting... so how does one come across such information? I've been searching and have only found little scraps of information here and there. Cheers - Mick
Read all of these http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2008/07/21/3092070.aspx
-
@mac1 said:
Read all of these http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2008/07/21/3092070.aspx
I was thinking specifically about sketchup... in other words how do we know it is "large block address aware"? How do we know that it only uses 1 processor? that's the sort of thing I meant. Cheers - Mick
-
@sketchymick said:
@mac1 said:
Read all of these http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2008/07/21/3092070.aspx
I was thinking specifically about sketchup... in other words how do we know it is "large block address aware"? How do we know that it only uses 1 processor? that's the sort of thing I meant. Cheers - Mick
I have personally included the 4Gb switch I my boot init file and have been able to open 340 MB files. That is documented in my postings: a number of post have cited the same LA; the issue of some programs not being able to efficiently use massive parrelel CPU has been around for a number of years and if you read some of the Google post they state it will not use dual cores. Again search some of my post wherein I gave ref to the testing showing thw 4x problem
Why don't you ask the same questions to the poster you cited?? -
@mac1 said:
I have personally included the 4Gb switch I my boot init file and have been able to open 340 MB files. That is documented in my postings: a number of post have cited the same LA; the issue of some programs not being able to efficiently use massive parrelel CPU has been around for a number of years and if you read some of the Google post they state it will not use dual cores. Again search some of my post wherein I gave ref to the testing showing thw 4x problem
Why don't you ask the same questions to the poster you cited??OK thanks, I'm not doubting your information at all, in fact it is very helpful and had in fact bookmarked one page on 4GB Patch that I noticed you'd contributed to, I was just curious if there was one core reference out there that I couldn't find. I'll have a look at your other posts, and I have actually emailed the other author as you suggested but no reply as yet. Thanks - Mick
-
@sketchymick said:
@mac1 said:
I have personally included the 4Gb switch I my boot init file and have been able to open 340 MB files. That is documented in my postings: a number of post have cited the same LA; the issue of some programs not being able to efficiently use massive parrelel CPU has been around for a number of years and if you read some of the Google post they state it will not use dual cores. Again search some of my post wherein I gave ref to the testing showing thw 4x problem
Why don't you ask the same questions to the poster you cited??OK thanks, I'm not doubting your information at all, in fact it is very helpful and had in fact bookmarked one page on 4GB Patch that I noticed you'd contributed to, I was just curious if there was one core reference out there that I couldn't find. I'll have a look at your other posts, and I have actually emailed the other author as you suggested but no reply as yet. Thanks - Mick
Couple other comments / factoids for you:
- Do not forget about solid state hard drives. I built my present machine about 6 years ago. A P4 running 3.2 GHz CPU , 4 GB RAM and the biggest /cheapest performance improve I could do now would be to install a solid state hard drive. They are still a little pricey;
- Upper limit on CPU is around 3.5 GHZ. If you visit some of the shopping mall computer stores just feel the bottom of some of the lap tops and some will be really warm ( almost hot). There have been some complaints in this area. Think some suppliers are trying to get a around this by clock rate switching.
- I'll see if I can find the single core vs dual task speed test and e mail to you if I can find it. If your profile does not have your e mail address e mail me so I can get it;
- If you have not read the links I sent you read them they are full of good info. Plan to spend some time they make your eyes glass over
- If my memory serves me the 4 GB switch only works for INTEL MBs. They comment in the supplied links. Those links also cover how device drivers eat up memory. I have seen post where people go to 64 bit machine and then install a lots of graphics memory and use up a good chunk of the extra memory they just bought. Most do not under stand this. Links covers that also.
- This maybe out of scope of your effort ,but I think there is a major issue coming with SU and the OpenGL. The OpenGL folks have started to move toward non-downward compatibility. In fact Apple Lion machines have either OpenGL 2.1 or 3.3 where 3.3 is not downward compatible. My suspicion of some Lion machine / SU problems may be caused by this but my post comments go ignored. I need to do more reading in this area.
-
The dual vs single core comparison. http://www.futurechips.org/tips-for-power-coders/writing-optimizing-parallel-programs-complete.html
-
@mac1 said:
Couple other comments / factoids for you:
.....OK interesting stuff... thanks. I've sent you a PM with email address if there's more you can send.
The system I'm currently looking at putting together is based on i7-3930 (3.2 GHz), Quadro 2000, WinPro64. I will definitely put in a SSD for the system and programs drive, but probably just a normal HDD for data due to cost. Probably 16Gb memory since RAM is comparatively cheap. I've read your links... to me it seems there isn't a whole that that can be done about devices needing memory - you just have to account for it and be aware of the system limits? Right? I'd be interested in comments about the graphics card (it has openGL 4.0), some say go with a consumer card, others say go with a workstation card because the drivers are better - this has been one of my biggest conundrums.
Heat is one thing that has been really bugging me lately, I have a dell studio laptop that pumps heat out the back like a hairdryer, and I've noticed also the power supply warms up quite significantly. Obviously can't be good for the machine - so getting a laptop cooler for that one, and will make sure the new computer is well cooled.
Cheers
- Mick
-
@sketchymick said:
@mac1 said:
Couple other comments / factoids for you:
.....OK interesting stuff... thanks. I've sent you a PM with email address if there's more you can send.
The system I'm currently looking at putting together is based on i7-3930 (3.2 GHz), Quadro 2000, WinPro64. I will definitely put in a SSD for the system and programs drive, but probably just a normal HDD for data due to cost. Probably 16Gb memory since RAM is comparatively cheap. I've read your links... to me it seems there isn't a whole that that can be done about devices needing memory - you just have to account for it and be aware of the system limits? Right? I'd be interested in comments about the graphics card (it has openGL 4.0), some say go with a consumer card, others say go with a workstation card because the drivers are better - this has been one of my biggest conundrums.
Heat is one thing that has been really bugging me lately, I have a dell studio laptop that pumps heat out the back like a hairdryer, and I've noticed also the power supply warms up quite significantly. Obviously can't be good for the machine - so getting a laptop cooler for that one, and will make sure the new computer is well cooled.
Cheers
- Mick
Make sure you look at the sku version of windows7 64/32 bit installed. Although 64 bit machines could address TB MS does not have test capability for that and some version limit down to as low as 2GB.( That is for W7 32 bits though). Looks like you are OK. Here is the memory limits for various releases but would have to check for updates http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778%28v=vs.85%29.aspx Make sure you check the current state. SSD split is correct way. Crucial( I don't have a link so check their web site) has a set up wherein you can make a clone of the present drive and then it is just a mechanical switch.They supply the software, conversion rails and the SBU cable. Make sure you take the time to partition the new drives so it is easy to separate the two. You may have to do a reorginization of your present file tree. This may help http://www.techsuportalert.com and look for "Never re-install Windows Again" Part 1, 2 and 3. A 256 GB SSD maybe ok?
Isn't it ironic lap tops are small for portability and now you need a cooler
I have not done enough reading on the deprecation of OpenGL and what the implications to SU are. I think that is some thing Google owes their users to answer and especially the MAC users. I think I'll post a question to them on their help forum -
thanks Mac1, it certainly is good practice to take a disk image of a working system - something I used to do, but complacency has stepped in over the last year or 2. One utility I've read about recently is "sandboxie" which I think may really suit my situation where I'm often trying out all sorts of software/downloads, etc. Cheers - Mick
Advertisement