2004 speed sucks bigtime

We have implemented 2004 with more problems than any other version. It is a huge memory hogger, we have to reboot every time it crashes or we do a taskmanager stop. (frequently) Loading and manipulating large assemblies is a total pain, I spend more time loading and recovering from crashes than actually doing any work. Dont get me wrong, 2004 works great with piddly details, but get into large assy mode and it just stops. We are going back to 2001 Plus, we had very few problems with this version. We will seriously consider upgrading to Catia rather than put up with all this downtime, it will be cheaper in the end.

Note from teacher to Solidworks "Could do better'

Reply to
Phil Evans
Loading thread data ...

Are you looking for help or just to "vent"?

If you are looking for help some of your hardware config and settings used would help.

If you are looking to vent, then sorry. That sucks.

--Todd

Reply to
Todd

well, if SW HQ might might wake up one day and allow time for testing/debugging prior to release, they need some *help* LOL

Dom ;)

Todd wrote:

Reply to
Flipper

Well... we have just implemented 2004 over the last month. We completely skipped 2003 because of all the problems I found with it and 2001+ was great.

We have had no problems with 2004 in regards to crashing (maybe twice or three times a week using it full time) and are finding the performance good.

BUT.... one problem we have come across is with sheet metal flat patterns not staying good to the parent when there are multiple configurations.

For example: We have a sheet metal part, 2 configs: A + B each with a flat pattern that was generated automatically in the drawing. Sometimes (randomly and so far not reproducable) A's flat pattern shows in the drawing as B's flat pattern. opening the part produces the same view when going through all the configs. Sometimes stopping and restarting SolidWorks fixes it and sometimes not.

Has anyonme had this problem? It is very scary when a child config doesn't stay good to the parent.

Cheers D

Phil Evans wrote:

Reply to
D. Short

Phil,

Instead of venting maybe the group can help. I am not having any of the same problems you have. In a few small assemblies that files have not been converted yet the speed of loading is slow but after that they are fine. We also sped up after I got our IT manager to finally ignore SolidWorks Files from being checked by our virus scan. The virus scan was the worst part. Are these anythings you are having problems with? Have you tried pulling the assemblies you are having trouble with all local to see if speed is still a problem? We would all like to help.

Ken

Reply to
CSWP

Heard about it, tested it, and the bug reproduces itself consistently. Service pack 1 fixes that; until then, if you want to take the time to manually activate each config, and then immediately activate it's flat pattern, this wont happen. You just have to make sure, that on opening the model, that you immediately activate the flat pattern of whatever configuration is active when opened. Myself, I did this a few times then loaded the service pack.

Reply to
rocheey

before you jump to catia, be sure you check out how long it takes to rebuild things. my experience with both v4 and v5 (which has a great gui) is that they are by far the slowest rebuilders of the major cad programs i've used (catia, pro, solidworks, ideas)

Reply to
flyboy 2160

this is exactly the type of tip that bob z. likes to read!

how does bob z. persuade the IT genius to do this?

-- bob z.

"people with less brain power than you are doing more difficult things everyday"©

Reply to
bob zee

they had a beta program prior to this release. did *you* get involved?

-- bob z.

"people with less brain power than you are doing more difficult things everyday"©

Reply to
bob zee

Try loading a large assembly with you antivirus ON and scanning all SWX documents. Next, load the same assembly with antivirus ON and set to not scan SWX documents. Then, load the assembly with all antivirus OFF.

We found that just by doing step 2 above, load time was DRAMATICALLY reduced (using Norton).

Also, not sure how this works, but if the server has antivirus, and the users all have antivirus, each time a file is openened, it could actually be scanned twice, further slowing things down.

Reply to
Arlin

bob z. is positive the IT genius has it set exactly the way you just described.

-- bob z.

"people with less brain power than you are doing more difficult things everyday"©

Reply to
bob zee

nope sorry, I'm not involved anymore into SW much because I've found a job where they still use the good old proe2000i2. Fairly annyoing version to pattern things, but elsewise it's quite robust.

...but I do know about testing and the dudes at SW who are involved into it. ;o) sometime I which I was there

Dom

bob zee wrote:

Reply to
Flipper

Well Phil, Whatever the problems. It must be a lot better than the drawing board at the Atlas Aircraft Company :-)

Reply to
Wallaby

When upgraded on a test machine to 2004 sp0 I found that my video card (Radeon) was incompatible with it to the extent that I had to turn off all OpenGL acceleration. Radeon chips work acceptable (with minor annoyances like dims in sketches not always showing) with '03, but seemed to be unacceptable with '04.

See additional threads below your message, virus scanning definitely slows things down.

M

"If you predict the future, be prepared to predict often."

Reply to
Mike S

"Mike S" wrote in news:jxMtb.16928$ snipped-for-privacy@fe3.columbus.rr.com:

Radeon has always been a questionable card for SolidWorks, and I suspect any OGl application. Check out the SW website

formatting link

Look at the tested cards. Most of the ATIs are either yellow (not good) or red (really not good) for SW01+, 03 and 04

Reply to
matt

I know someone who recently ran into trouble with a Radeon card and SW 04. IIRC, he cleared his problem by reverting to drivers from fall of 2002. I don't know exactly which version they were. No guarantees, but it an avenue you might explore.

Reply to
Dale Dunn

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.