before to switch from NX11 to NX1859 we have changed all workstations to all NX users. So for a week we have used NX11 with new workstation. After installing NX1859 we have started to use NX1859 in the production and we had a little worsening in performance during rotation. It's a little difference, but exist. I will open an IR, but I would like to know why or maybe a clarification.
Hi @cubalibre00 !
In general, I've not heard any reports that people are seeing slower performance (and a few of the customers I work with sit down with a stop watch for each new release and time certain workflow, so I'm sure I'd have heard :-)). Not that I'm suggesting folks do that!
But a few thoughts...
Do your users use SpaceMouse, CADMouse or such?
If so, have you reinstalled the drivers after installing the new NX (1859)?
There are multiple docs on this topic, including a new FAQ on GTAC just last week (002-7009036).
As that FAQ mentions, one of the symptoms that can happen when you don't do this is slower graphics.
If that's not the case, another likely area would be some settings that might be different between NX 11 and the new release, since we are not yet re-using your old settings back to NX 11.
One example might be a setting to control how small your facet display is and perhaps you end up with finer/more facets in the newer models?
Good luck with the upgrade.
Hi @PatMcManus ,
we started NX11 and NX1859 on the same new workstation. Opened the same file and rotating on NX11 the assembly is little more fluent compared to NX1859. Visualization preferences that are consolidated in NX1859 are the same in NX11. Anyway I will open an IR.
By the way, everyone uses only the mouse.
Start NX and open new file
File-> Preferences -> Visulization Preferences
Go to Calibration
Press the Tune to Device button.
Let it run and do not do anything else on the machine while it runs.
Restart NX and do your timing test again. Any difference?
Hi @StevenVickers ,
I will do this test, but some question born :
It does not change the NX preferences. What it can do is change a registry entry that the graphics card driver users to tune it to work optimally with that application when it starts.
Hi @StevenVickers ,
thank you for the clarification, but I still don't understand why this slight deterioration.
Another strange behavior here.
You did not say what the result was doing the Calibration Check that @StevenVickers suggsested.
In addition to tweaking grahpics, as Steve said, it will give you suggested changes/non-changes. For example, I just did it on my machine with 1859 and got this:
Graphics data has been formatted for optimal performance on this configuration.
Two-sided light can reduce shaded rendering performance up to 25 percent.
Adding 3 extra distant lights can reduce rendering performance up to 24 percent.
The following options have little impact on rendering performance:
One extra light
Full scene antialiasing
I also used a large customer part that a customer user for Performance checks, rotating it in both 11.0.2 and 1859 on my laptop, and see no difference (you did not say what sort of data you used? perhaps it could be different for a large Assy vs. my large part?).
Finally, going back to my suggestion on settings, I looked at the web page where we document changes to see what might have been new in this area and see that since NX 11 we added 2 settings that might impact vis performance:
So there is at least one thing that will be different for you.
Although, as I said, I saw no difference, with the above settings, on my machine.
Finally, I looked at the other post you linked which is the same as this one, with the additional info that some items are temporarily HIdden (so I am thinking your case is large Assy not large Part?).
So I wonder if your Load settings are the same in 11 and 1859? Do you have Minimal Load set? (that is new from NX 11).
monday I will follow Steve's suggestions and report here results as the new rotation sensation after calibration. The slight deterioration on rotation as the hiding component on rotation occurs on big assembly.
Load assembly options are the same because we don't use TC as PDM, so minimal loading we can't use.