Punch Holder Benchmark File
In your SolidWorks System Options under Performance, check to be sure Verification On Rebuild is Turned Off. (No check mark in box)
Open the punch holder file and do a Control-Q Rebuild. Post your results for Total Rebuild Time shown in SolidWorks under Tools > Feature Statistics after the Control-Q Rebuild of the model.
Download the files from the following link:
Click Here To Download Files
Files are available for SolidWorks 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011.
To submit your rebuild results use the form found at this link:
Click Here To Submit Results
The results are posted here for those of you using most anything but Internet Explorer:
Click Here For Benchmark Results
If you are using Internet Explorer you can get the results here:
Click Here For Benchmark Results if you are using Internet Explorer
Anna, I looked at the Punch Holder model and noticed the linear pattern that needed the most rebuild time did not have geometry pattern turned on. This option, when usable, greatly reduces the rebuild time. As an example, my system took 94 seconds with this turned off. With this turned on, it only took 47 seconds.
Wayne,
There are several other sins in the model. This model represents a worse case scenario on possible modeling techniques that can affect rebuild time.
Yes, I know that.
I have not corrected the model as that would skew the intent of the model to test rebuild time on various systems with a consistent dataset.
The model was the subject of a SWW breakout session by Phil Sluder and Ed Eaton a couple years ago. They were able to get the rebuild time under about 20 seconds with different modeling techniques.
Cheers,
Anna
I tested a Dell Latitude to see how it compared with the others in the benchmark list. While the results are not all that great, they surprised me. I assumed the laptop would do horribly since the clock speed is only 1.8GHz, but I suppose the dual cores helped.
Total rebuild time in seconds: 223.15
SW Version: sw2009sp0
Computer: Dell Latitude D620 (Laptop), not modified in any way.
System Cost: 540$
OS: Windows XP Pro, 32bit, SP2
Number of Cores: 2
Clock Speed: 1.83GHz
RAM: 2GB
interestingly, I have just run the benchmark on the punch holder on my windows 7 (32bit system) and it performed well at 57seconds. I have now just installed (on a seperate partition) windows 7 x64. Ran the same test on the same version and it came out a 90seconds?!? The system has 8Gb RAM installed – which is obviously recognised on the x64 side – but the 32bot side performs better? Any ideas?
Ed,
What are your computers specs?
Sometimes the Feature Statistics does not refresh properly. You may have seen this on the x32 bit install and where getting the time from when I last rebuilt the file when setting up the benchmark files for upload.
Cheers,
Anna
Anna,
Thanks for all your help. After building a system based on your data and advice, it ran the benchmark at 57 seconds. I overclocked it and it ran the second time in 52. I am very pleased that all the work reading reviews, specifying components and building the machine (and taking your advice!) paid off.
Your site is wonderful.
DP
Anna, it would be really useful (for me at least) if the motherboard spec was also on the spreadsheet.
Just ran the benchmark on SW2011-SP1;
Time was 6 seconds faster than SW2009-SP1.
No system upgrades were made in between tests.
Wow, that is fantastic. I will need to check that out on my computer. I haven’t upgraded to SP1 yet. Thanks for the update.
Greetings. I’m trying to download the benchmarks, but it is asking me for login info for a site I have never heard of, and no indication of how to register. I know I previously at work downloaded it without any login. What gives?
Jay, Try again. We did some updates on our document management system this weekend. The updates changed the url’s for the benchmarks. I have updated my blog with the new links so everyone can get to the files now.
Hello Anna, I also tried to download the punchholder files. But it takes very long for them to start downloading. And then I get a RAR file that’s only 36kb. And an error on opening. Hope to hear from you soon.
Dennis,
Not sure what is going on on your system. I have checked the link several times and it downloads the correct zip file (about 29megs). Try cleaning out your cache in your web browser, then download again.
Cheers,
Anna
Hello Anna, I built my machine based on your spreadsheet, which is now almost twice as fast as what I had. I love your website and thanks.
But, I have tried everything I can think of to get my computer to perform even faster. I am currently on the Punch Holder results spreadsheet at 86.38s (barnesj3) and am one of the slowest Xeon Wxxx times. I’ve tried drivers, SLDWRKs options, and am currently running 12GB RAM. Still not any faster though. I figure I should be running 10s to 20s faster. Any advice on my setup?
Jake,
Check your Power Options under the Windows Control Panel. Make sure it is set to High Performance. Also check the system bios to make sure hyper-threading is enabled and that your hard drive is running in high performance mode. Dell will sometimes have those toggled off or at lower settings. Let me know if that helps. If not ping me again.
Anna
Hi Anna,
Regarding your comment on Jan 26, 2011, how do you check to see if your bios has hyper-threading enabled?
Thanks!
Go into the system BIOS on your computer at start-up and check the settings. Or launch the Windows Task Manager, if you have a quad core computer you will see 8 threads under the Performance tab in the CPU Usage History. Each graph is a core, physical or virtual.
I turned off 3 of my 6 cores and lost a couple seconds or a 2.8% reduction in speed. It appears that SW is fully using about 1 1/2 cores during the test based on Task Manager. O/Cing the single core where most of SW is running above the others seems to hurt. SW use of the extra cores is sporadic indicating that just part of SW is using multiple cores. More work needs to be done to identify which part of SW rebuild is using the extra cores.
Anna,
In the SolidWorks User Forums, there are several threads which seem to say that we should NOT enable hyper-threading. Can you clear this up?
Just did some testing with an AMD Athlon X2 5000+ 2.2 GHz (AD5000ODJ22GI) . This is a rare cpu which is based on the AMD Deneb quad core that has 6 MB of L3 cache. AMD disabled 2 cores and all the L3 cache to sell it as an Athlon X2 5000+. With mine, I can unlock 1 core and all the 6MB of L3 cache. This gave me an opportunity to see if L3 cache really helps AMD chips or not for Solidworks.
At stock, 2.2 Ghz, 0 L3 cache, it took 186 seconds for the rebuild.
At the same speed, but with just the L3 cache enabled, it only took 133 seconds.
Enabling a 3rd core dropped the time down to 129, which is probably not statistically different at all.
So, yes, L3 cache makes a big difference for an AMD chip. If you are going the AMD route try to get a Phenom II chip with the full 6 MB of L3 cache. Note AMD has muddied the waters and has at least one Phenom II cpu now with 0 L3 cache. Watch specs carefully.
Ted,
The older Pentium 4 hyper-threading was not good and it was recommended to disable it. The new hyper-threading offered with the Core-i7 Nehelam cpu’s does not hurt core SolidWorks performance. It greatly enhances rendering performance. I have heard it does hurt some aspects of simulation performance. I believe it depends on what simulation tasks you are doing. Since I do not use the SolidWorks Simulation products I can’t confirm if that is true or not. Best way to find out is to do some testing on your own datasets and modeling techniques. All the higher end Intel cpu’s have hyper-threading. Just enable or disable in the system BIOS to test.
Paul,
Thanks for the report. Looks like we need to be looking for cpu’s with big L3 cache. Good to know when trying to sort through the various cpu specifications.
Anna,
I get to 37 of 48 in the rebuild and it stops. Or 77% complete. Waited about 10 minutes and nogo. Any ideas?
Puget Systems built in 2010
Intel (r) Core ™ i7 930 @ 2.8
12gb ram
64 bit
Solidworks 2011 sp3.0
I just ran it on a Dell M90 with the T7200 2.00GHz and 4 GB Ram.
Feature Statistics:
Punch Holder, sw2011 04/26/11 13:08:02
Features 36, Solids 1, Surfaces 0
Total rebuild time in seconds: 137.53
Mike,
Check to make sure you do not have Verification on Rebuild toggled on in the System Options.
Anna
Very nice. 57.44 sec.
Not real sure why I’m getting such low bench scorers on the punch holder. I think my system should be doing much better.
i7 980 extreme 6 core cpu
asus p6x58d-e mobo
24 gig ddr3 1600 9-9-9-24 patriot sector 7 RAM
win 7 ultimate
quadro fx4000
crucial c300 64 gig ssd on SATA6.0 (@350mbs) clocked with cristal
but my rebuild time was still 186 sec ?
any help would be greatly appreciated
Anthony,
Make sure you have Verification ON Rebuild Turned OFF under System Options > Performance
Cheers,
Anna
Hi Anna,
After a long search for information I want to ask you (as a Solidworksexpert) if my future system does have benefit from an approximately 300 dollar workstation card. The opinions I find on the internet and the results in various benchmarks are very mixed. I was wondering if a power setup: like 2x high end radeon cards could perform better?
Thanks in advance,
Robin
Robin,
No, SolidWorks is CPU bound. It needs the most modern cpu architecture at the highest clockspeed. You want a Core i7 2600 or 2600K if you plan to overclock. A lower end cpu with a high end video card will be a very poor performer. Spend the money on the cpu and get yourself a Nvidia Quadro 600 or ATI FirePro V4800, with minimum of 8 gigs of RAM.
Cheers,
Anna
Anna
Thanks for the reply Anna,
I’m happy to hear that my choice of the i 7 2600K is the right one!
But my issue is not choosing between an expensive cpu or an expensive gaming gpu. It’s more: will Solidworks perform smoothly (navigating in large assemblies by example)with gaming gpu’s or do I have to make sure I have a pro card under my hood. I’ll do a lot of CAD work for my final thesis, but the system will also be used for gaming.
Thanks in advance!
Robin
Robin,
It is a crap shoot as to whether the gaming card will work. Some do, many do not. If your computer is for professional work, get the pro card. If your main use is school homework and gaming, get the gamer card, but know you will run the risk of having issues with SolidWorks.
Wish I could give you a better answer,
Anna
I do have the Verification on rebuild turned off.So I’m still not sure what it could be. Any other ideas?
When you check you feature statistics there is a button you can push to clear results. Try that, maybe the results are not refreshing properly.
I tried to refresh and it’s is still 185 seconds.
now it only takes 55.5 sec to open the punch holder file from go,
but a Ctrl-Q takes 185 seconds
Pattern 5 takes 89 seconds
Pattern 4 takes 49 seconds
Does that help
Anthony,
I have no idea what might be happening on your computer.
Sorry,
Anna
Well I did get a 44.7 sec Q-Ctrl rebuild today.
But only after an OC to 3.9ghz on my cpu
and Pushing my RAM to 1600.
That did it I guess as long a my core temp’s stay around 40°-50°c I should be OK.
Thanks for trying anyway and don’t worry this is my last post on the matter.
Anthony, Excellent….. Sounds like a good rebuild speed for the OC you have applied. Cheers, Anna
Anna,
I performed the test and the result in SolidWorks Feature Statistics was 62.3. When I performed the test I also timed the test with a stop watch, the time was significantly longer 85.44. Why would there be a differnece?
Regards
Shannon
What you are likely waiting for is the graphics to update after the rebuild. There can be a lag there as SolidWorks and the video card regen’s the image on screen. The cpu calculates the vectors, then it has to pass the info to the gpu, The gpu needs to process that info then repaint your screen.
rebuild time 150s
proc- Intel Core 2 2,33Ghz
GTX 460
RAM-4GB DDR2
win 7 x64
solidworks 2011 x64
hey guys, ran the benchmark on my home pc. Athlon II x4 build as i saw there aren’t any AMD cores listed. the time was a little disappointing at 157.76s. rebuild appears to only be a single threaded process, is this true?
bad times..
AMD chips are not really competitive in single threaded applications.
even being beaten by a core 2 duo
It is true AMD cpu’s are just not up to snuff for speed in SolidWorks. They haven’t been since 2006 and the first release of the Core 2 Duo’s by Intel.
Hi Anna,
Ive just bought a Dell Precision with an Xeon Quad 3.3GHz, Quadro 2000 and 8 gb ram. Punch holder benchmark came back at 57 secs, but when scrolling in and out there is lag and the rotating is a little jerky even with single parts. Ive tried setting the power option to high performance but problems still there. Im running SW2010 sp0. Heeeelp
Paul