SketchUp and Windows XP [64 bit]
-
A friend of mine told me that if you want heavy applications [like sketchup to consume RAM beyond 4 gb. you should install a 64 bit operating system. If you're not using 64 bit OS, the rest of the RAM will go to waste.] Will SketchUp consume RAM in a better way if I install 64 bit win xp? I'm currently using Windows XP SP 3.
-
With the latest release of SketchUp 8, it is now Large Address Aware - which means that if you have a 64bit OS and at least 4GB of RAM SketchUp can use up to 4 GB of RAM as oppose to 2GB.
However, do not expect speed improvements. This is about being able to address enough memory.
I think exporting very large images from SketchUp is the only area where SketchUp itself has run into memory issues.
As a user of V-Ray for SketchUp, which runs inside the SketchUp process I have run into the memory limit many times when rendering. So the LAA has helped greatly.@rock1 said:
If you're not using 64 bit OS, the rest of the RAM will go to waste
Not quite true, SU won't be using 4GB of RAM in normal operation anyway. And what SU does not use is of use of the rest of the system - hardly a waste.
Basically, unless you can see, in the Task Manager, that SketchUp's memory consumption rise above 2GB then you have no gain.
-
But in rendering with V-Ray [still view render, i.e. a still photograph], won't vray consume more than 4gb of ram? Some of my colleagues have used max and revit and they say that a single scene took 2 hrs, 4 hrs and in some of the cases 8 hours. And what about other softwares? Is anything that consumes more than 4GB of RAM lets say 6 gb of RAM will run faster on a windows 64 as compared to 32?. And is windows xp 32 bit incapable of harnessing 6 GB ram? i.e. while using heavy graphics software.
-
@rock1 said:
But in rendering with V-Ray [still view render, i.e. a still photograph], won't vray consume more than 4gb of ram?
It might but not for sure. Normally not.
@rock1 said:
Some of my colleagues have used max and revit and they say that a single scene took 2 hrs, 4 hrs and in some of the cases 8 hours.
That is entirely relative to the scene, size of the model, size of the output image and what settings are used when rendering.
@rock1 said:
And what about other softwares? Is anything that consumes more than 4GB of RAM lets say 6 gb of RAM will run faster on a windows 64 as compared to 32?
Memory != Speed. 64bit does not mean things run faster. It might even run slower because the data you deal with are now doubled in size compared to 32bit.
Where you most likely notice performance issues is if you are using more memory than your available RAM (memory is not the same as RAM) and the computer has to page lots of memory back and forth between the HD and RAM. Then it would help to have more RAM to avoid paging to disk.@rock1 said:
And is windows xp 32 bit incapable of harnessing 6 GB ram? i.e. while using heavy graphics software.
Yes, due to the 32bit nature of it, it can address up to about 4GB - but some is always reserved for the system and applications will only be able to address up to 2GB.
Saying that, I recommend everyone to use 64bit OS these days. Even though a single application you are running might not be able to address the whole lot, it does mean your system has more resources available. And I do believe there is better 64bit support in Windows 7 than XP, as when XP was out 64bit was a rare and new thing.
If you want to gain speed for your renderings, get a couple of bare-bone motherboards with a couple of quadcores. That's what's going to give you the best boost, quickly and without much efforts.
-
V-ray builds into the app it is running from so if it is a 32 bit app, V-ray will also be limited to that. Since SU is a 32 bit app, there is your limitation. Other applications may have 64 bit versions, too.
From a 32 bit OS, you cannot access even 4Gb of ram (only some 3.4 Gb AFAIK) so there is no use to add more RAM at all.
Memory is not really related to speed (CPU and/or GPU will handle that part) but model complexity, size of used textures and the output resolution of the rendering application.
-
@gaieus said:
If you want to gain speed for your renderings, get a couple of bare-bone motherboards with a couple of quadcores. That's what's going to give you the best boost, quickly and without much efforts.
What does bare - bone motherboard mean? I dont know but is it really possible to have 2 motherboards each with its own RAM and processor, in one CPU cabinet?
@gaieus said:
V-ray builds into the app it is running from so if it is a 32 bit app, V-ray will also be limited to that. Since SU is a 32 bit app, there is your limitation. From a 32 bit OS, you cannot access even 4Gb of ram (only some 3.4 Gb AFAIK) so there is no use to add more RAM at all.
So I currently have 4GB RAM in my pc and Windows xp 32 bit. SU will use upto 4 gb only. [In the My Computer properties it shows as 3.01 GB of RAM. So, even if I have 64 bit OS and let's say 6 GB ram, SU and VRay will only be able to use till 4GB only? Isn't it? [Because you said that SU is 32 bit and so is Vray for SU].
-
Yes, basically.
With the "motherboards" (I don't know where you found that old post though) I probably meant thah you can build a render farm without too much cost if you build some machines whose relevant parts are capable but they do not really need to have expensive peripherals.
TT is more experienced in this kind of render farming...
-
With bare bones I mean simple motherboards which has graphic and network card built in - so you only need to plug in a CPU, RAM and a HD.
Not sure if I can ti two motherboards in one case - doubt it. But I have seen some DIY solutions where people fitted a renderfarm inside an IKEA filing cabinet.
We just went for a small formfactor motherboard and got a couple of smaller cases. -
okay, so it's not a good idea to install RAM more than 4GB specially for sketchup render on a 32 bit windows xp. actually i have an old hard disk 80gb. so, not willing to buy another hard disk for windows 7 64 bit as it will take a lot of space.
I'm planning to buy win xp 64 bit for a performance boost.But tell me would I need to buy new softwares as well?
The softwares that I'm using that use up a lot of RAM are:
%(#4000FF)[AutoCAD 2008
CorelDRAW 12
SketchUp 8 pro [renderers too]
Photoshop CS3 extended.]are these compatible with windows xp 64 bit ?
-
@rock1 said:
okay, so it's not a good idea to install RAM more than 4GB specially for sketchup render on a 32 bit windows xp.
No, a 32bit Windows will never be able to utilize more than 4GB RAM.
@rock1 said:
I'm planning to buy win xp 64 bit for a performance boost.
Buy an 10 year old OS that is no longer supported by Microsoft? Even lots of applications are dropping XP support. I'd really not recommend anyone buying that. Bite the bullet and get Win7 - it really is a good OS.
@rock1 said:
I'm planning to buy win xp 64 bit for a performance boost.
What performance boost are you expecting? Remember 64bit != is speed.
@rock1 said:
But tell me would I need to buy new softwares as well?
32bit software can be run on 64bit OS. The only thing that won't work is drivers - 64bit OS requires 64bit drivers. (And this is where I suspect Win7 got better support.)
-
microsoft has support for windows xp. i update my windows regularly. what kind of support are you talking about? Man, i would need to buy a new hard disk too. my current one is 80gb sata.
Don't have much money to spend -
It has gotten End of Life declaration: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/products/lifecycle
Mainstream support ended in 2009 - though extended support is still active, until 2014. But as I mentioned, software developers are starting to drop support as well. -
. so i'll have 2 buy a new hard disk. but how come i got my updates? maybe i had an old cd so got updates. haven't received any updates alert in few days. -
Support ended 2009, that means Microsoft is not anymore obliged to provide any new features or Service packs or bug-fixes.
The fact that you still get updates is because they only fix serious security vulneribilities (no other bugs), which is still too often the case.
-
XP 64 is already a problematic OS. Try, for instance, to find a security package that supports it - the major players like Symantec or F-secure don't. It's not anymore a supported OS for Microsoft Office either, you have to use workarounds to be able to install it. And it's slower than Win7.
Anssi
-
@anssi said:
XP 64 is already a problematic OS. Try, for instance, to find a security package that supports it - the major players like Symantec or F-secure don't. It's not anymore a supported OS for Microsoft Office either, you have to use workarounds to be able to install it. And it's slower than Win7.
Anssi
I'm currently using ESET smart security 4. it has both 32 bit and 64 bit versions. xp 64 slower than win 7?
. i thought a lighter OS would be faster than a heavier OS. -
i have xp64 running on my render nodes and it's working great!
It is NOT slower than win7 and it consumes LESS memory than 7. Which is good for rendering large scenes.
I have Kaspersky IS running on them for years without any problems - no workarounds!The only thing that can be problematic with xp64 is the printer driver support and pdf writer compatibility because it installs some kind of printer too.
But if you need it for a workstation i would take win 7 x64 because it "feels" much better. I have 7 x64 running on my workstation (24GB) and macbook pro (4GB)
-
i don't care about the look
my printer is supporting winxp 64 bit. i think i should go 4 win xp. will save disk space too. donno the place where i can buy this OS. -
it's not only the look... it's more comfortable and has some useful features - e.g. better wifi- and network support.
If you wan't to buy a new license now for aworkstation, i would say get win 7 x64! Better take some more Ram if you need it - it's cheap now! -
XP is a dead end road.
W7 needs ~1gb working memory instead of the ~512mb of XP, nothing one should care of on a 4gb+ system.
if you wanna use XP64 anyhow, check that drivers for every piece of hardware you are using are avail before buying it...
@rock1 said:
...save disk space...
who cares?
Norbert
Advertisement