Skip to main content
P
ptc-28890841-Visitor
1-Visitor
May 13, 2014
Question

OCUS Benchmark - Video Cards (Quadro, Firepro)

  • May 13, 2014
  • 14 replies
  • 9076 views
We are evaluating new workstations and video cards to run Creo Parametric 2.0 M100. I had some unexpected results and would appreciate some comments.

We use Dell workstations. We evaluated two T3610 workstations running Windows 7 64 bit:

1. Xeon E5-1650v2 6 core 3.5 GHz 12MB cache 64 GB (machine #1)

2. Xeon E5-1620v2 4 core, 3.7 GHz 10 MB cache 64 GB (machine #2).

Although the machines were connected to the network (for licenses), all software and data files were local on the C: drive. The machine were procured a few months ago.

The video cards:

1. Nvidia Quadro K2000 (vc #1)

2. AMD Firepro W5000 (vc #2)

3. Nvidia Quadro K4000 (vc #3)

Running the OCUS benchmark (64 bit) (Thanks, Olaf) using the latest, not PTC certified, drivers yielded the following results (times in seconds):
Machine #1: VC #1 VC #2 VC #3
This thread is inactive and closed by the PTC Community Management Team. If you would like to provide a reply and re-open this thread, please notify the moderator and reference the thread. You may also use "Start a topic" button to ask a new question. Please be sure to include what version of the PTC product you are using so another community member knowledgeable about your version may be able to assist.

14 replies

S
23-Emerald III
StephenW23-Emerald III
23-Emerald III
May 13, 2014
A couple years ago I had trouble with the video card performance until my IT guy figured out he had to upgrade the chipset drivers (motherboard drivers) so it could use the better video cards.

If your computer are older, you might try that.

I
iceblink11-Visitor
1-Visitor
May 14, 2014
It is never easy to explain benchmark results (let alone predict them),
so it's always good to benchmark.
I'll try and explain some of this below.

B
bgruman1-Visitor
1-Visitor
May 14, 2014
Well said Patrick!
I agree with everything Patrick pointed out and might only add one more
point.
In general, (I know there is some crossover so bear with me a bit...) Xeon
Processors require "server class" motherboards, and server class
motherboards are just plain slow. (on purpose... They are built for
reliability, not speed.)
Every Xeon based system I have ever built and tested is just slow compared
to an Overclocked i7 based system.
I do custom build Xeon based workstations for special applications like
heavy FEA, or multi-threaded rendering work. But in my opinion (and I have
many satisfied customers who agree) for the average everyday Pro/E user,
there is nothing faster than an Overclocked i7 based system.

Thanks
Bernie

Bernie Gruman
Owner / Designer / Builder
www.GrumanCreations.com



On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 2:47 AM, Patrick Asselman <-<br/>> wrote:

> It is never easy to explain benchmark results (let alone predict them),
> so it's always good to benchmark.
> I'll try and explain some of this below.
>
>
J
jcrockett-21-Visitor
1-Visitor
May 14, 2014

Bernie is absolutely correct. A Core i7 with the fastest clock speed will run ProE/Creo the fastest. However, overclocking is not really an option at manylarge companies. I push ProE pretty hard on my HP z420 workstation:



  • Intel Xeon E5-1620 3.6Ghz 10MB cache 4 cores

  • 16GB DDR3-1600 ECC (4x4GB)

  • 128GB SSD 1st drive, 500GB 10k SATA 2nd drive

  • NVIDIA Quadro K2000 2GB

    • ...and I'm pretty satisfied with performance, with a reasonable price.

    E
    EricVidra1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    June 4, 2014

    We are benchmarking (OCUSB6) Dell Workstations including a T1700. I find the same results with much higher overall score, nearly double the submitted result of #10 Dell T1700 @1153 we are reporting 2146. (64-bit version)


    Looking closer we find the last 2 tests PDF and DXF file create much higher scores in 550 range. This is obviously influencing the overall score. Any thoughts?


    Bob what scores did you have for the PDF and DXF file create?


    Thanks


    Eric Vidra




    “I am employed by Toyota but I am not speaking on behalf of the Company. These are my personal opinions only.”

    O
    ocorten-212-Amethyst
    12-Amethyst
    June 4, 2014
    Are you sure you use only the configuration of the benchmark?Remove all your own configuration files and start creo via a dos prompt in the ocusb6 folder (call the full path to parametric.exe)Hope this helps.


    Eric Vidra --- [proesys] - RE: OCUS Benchmark - Video Cards (Quadro, Firepro) ---
    From:"Eric Vidra" <->To" <->Date:Wed, Jun 4, 2014 23:05Subject[proesys] - RE: OCUS Benchmark - Video Cards (Quadro, Firepro)

    We are benchmarking (OCUSB6) Dell Workstations including a T1700. I find the same results with much higher overall score, nearly double the submitted result of #10 Dell T1700 @1153 we are reporting 2146. (64-bit version)
    Looking closer we find the last 2 tests PDF and DXF file create much higher scores in 550 range. This is obviously influencing the overall score. Any thoughts?
    Bob what scores did you have for the PDF and DXF file create?
    Thanks
    Eric Vidra


    “I am employed by Toyota but I am not speaking on behalf of the Company. These are my personal opinions only.”
    Site Links: View post online View mailing list online Start new thread via email Unsubscribe from this mailing list Manage your subscription


    Use of this email content is governed by the terms of service at:
    E
    EricVidra1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    June 4, 2014
    Thanks, Yes, clean OCUSB6 folder, with no configs other than yours. I was using the alternative method described in readme file with creo shortcut start script edited to start in OCUS benchmark folder.




    [cid:image002.jpg@01CF8000.760CA810]
    O
    ocorten-212-Amethyst
    12-Amethyst
    June 5, 2014
    Hi Eric,

    How much RAM does your system have?
    If it's 8Gb or less you might experience problems with memory becoming full.
    Then you would actually see the last tests become extremely slow, like you see now.

    Which build of Creo 2.0 are you using?
    Maybe it's a specific build issue.


    Kind regards,

    Olaf Corten




    Olaf Corten | CAD/PLM Manager

    Besi Netherlands B.V. | Ratio 6| 6921RW Duiven| The Netherlands
    T: +31 26 3196215 | M: +31 644548554
    - | www.besi.com



    From: Eric Vidra <eric_vidra@toyota.com>
    To: Olaf Corten <->
    Cc: "-" <->
    Date: 04-06-2014 23:24
    Subject: RE: Re:[proesys] - RE: OCUS Benchmark - Video Cards (Quadro, Firepro)



    Thanks, Yes, clean OCUSB6 folder, with no configs other than yours. I was using the alternative method described in readme file with creo shortcut start script edited to start in OCUS benchmark folder.





    P
    ptc-28890841-VisitorAuthor
    1-Visitor
    June 5, 2014
    Eric, PDF 91 sec, DXF 74 sec

    Based on Bernie Gruman's comments, I tested a Dell M6800 laptop which has an i7 processor with 32GB main memory, a Quadro K4100M graphics card and a 500GB solid state hybrid drive. Compared to the T3610 overall score of 1628, the M6800 came in at 978 seconds with an external monitor set to full resolution. That is about 60% less. A dell T1700 desktop can be configured with an i7; I am hoping to be able to test one.

    A word of caution. I had some of our engineers replicate everyday design tasks. In general, the times on the M6800 were typically only 10-20% faster. One set of tests was faster on the T3610. The insight gained from the OCUS benchmark needs to be combined with your design practices.

    Bob Monat
    E
    EricVidra1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    June 5, 2014
    Olaf,

    3 test machines system RAM 16GB, 32GB, 64GB.
    CREO 2.0 M110

    Each machine was very slow for last 2 tests. Yes Jered also suggested this could be build specific. I will run again with another build to verify.

    Interestingly during my preparations and setup for OCUS, I did remote connection to machine and ran initial test, of course the graphic scores were way off, but the PDF DXF are very good:

    (T1700 16GB remote)
    04-Jun-14 03:56:04 = 62 seconds = 1 PDF file creations (CP+DI)
    04-Jun-14 03:56:55 = 51 seconds = 1 DXF File creations (CP+DI)

    (T1700 16GB direct login)
    Later during the real testing logged in at machine I get very poor scores for same tests. All others test good:

    04-Jun-14 07:17:03 = 558 seconds = 1 PDF file creations (CP+DI)
    04-Jun-14 07:26:11 = 548 seconds = 1 DXF File creations (CP+DI)

    Corrected total score would be in the 1150 range….and compares well with submitted results.



    Thanks
    Eric





    “I am employed by Toyota but I am not speaking on behalf of the Company. These are my personal opinions only.”
    Show more replies
    Terms & ConditionsCookie settingsAccessibility statement