Hello.
I have to make a low-cost configuration that can handle large assemblies and simulation on Solidworks.
At the processor level, I'm interested in AMD processors.
Examples:
AMD A6 6400K Black Edition 4.1GHz (approx €50 incl. VAT)
AMD A8 6600K Black Editio 4.3GHz (approx €85 incl. VAT)
AMD FX 4350 Black Edition 4.3GHz (approx. €80 incl. VAT)
Do you have any feedback on this type of process?
Thank you
Julian
Hello
For an older version of 2011 the processor used was an Athlon 3'2 and there were no problems compared to its Intel counterpart
in 2014 I don't know having an Intel I7 myself it's not the most solicited
we are still in the same process the bigger the graphics card and the more ram the better it is
Hello
This may help you =)
@Bart
This is the minimum system required so to draw a piece it's very good.... but as soon as it is a big assembly we are in trouble
As already mentioned @gt22 in another post solidworks is monocorp so the processor doesn't have to be an octocor or a monster
I still noticed that since 2014 my 16GB of RAM at frequency 1333 is a bit low and I had to upgrade my NVQ 600 video card for an NVQ K2000 all this for assemblies of 1000 to 5000 parts
when in the end we do the math.... To buy a ready-made workstation from an authorized SW dealer is the same price as to make it yourself.
Hello
Thank you for your answers.
I've been working on SW for 16+ years. I always hear the same things. It's an arms race on graphics cards, trials, on disks, memory, .....
In my opinion, in recent years, the most important advances / SW have been:
- Switch to 64-bit (RAM)
- SSD (+work on the disk and not on the network)
- A little bit about the processor (frequency)
- Some improvements on SW / management of large assemblies.
I saw lots of machines, "fighter planes", "war machines",.......
The results of the races, very often, "blah".
For those who don't work in realistic rendering, these workstations are not very useful.
No need to invest xxx € on cards and processors.
Lately, we had AMD V4900, K2000, K4000, FX3700, .... I didn't see any difference/older models.
For example, on a simple laptop with a 2.1 Ghz celeron + card.... Intel 965, the display was slightly worse than on the pro workstations, ................bcps of EF calculations went over it, while it crashed on ......
By examining the different recommended configurations, off-screen, W7, POS office pack, ..... For a central unit, you have prices that range from 650 € to 3000 € approx.... and more
Does anyone have any feedback on these AMD processes? (reduced cache). Volume 3D use and simulations.
Thank you.
Have a good Sunday everyone.
Hello
I tested the FX type processors, and I can confirm that these are very good processors:)
for having built a pc in AMD FX (8 cores)
For the other 2 I can't answer you I never mounted them :/
On the other hand I don't install my solidworks license on the FX machine since I mount them 2 years later
Hello
As shown here: http://www.lynkoa.com/forum/solidworks/configuration-pc-pour-solidworks2014
For the simulation, it is the number of hearts that is the most important! And a basic configuration can still be simulated, but will take longer!
SolidWorks has been offering an official benchmark for a few years:
http://www.solidworks.com/sw/support/shareyourscore.htm
On the other hand, I'm afraid that values that are too low are biased.
By entering AMD A6 or AMD A8 in the search, you find results, and the CPU value is quite high (= bad). But does the test really reflect usage?