AnsweredAssumed Answered

NEW WORKSTATION ISSUES DELL T3400

Question asked by JAMES PARE on Mar 10, 2008
Latest reply on Mar 19, 2008 by Gary Garrison

Like • Show 0 Likes0
Comment • 21

Hi
any information or suggestions would be very much appreciated
I am working on a new work station & I am finding that the performance of this new workstation not to be to my expectations
Dell Precision T3400
Intel core duo cpu
2.66 GHz. 3.00 GB of ram
quadro FX1500 or Fx3500
(have tried both graphic cards in my station)
Hyper thread turned off & 3gb switch turned on

When I first received this work station the performance seemed to be exceptional
Designing a door check fixture for tier 1 automotive company which requires me to have their (catia) translated door ass'y files in my SWX session

after a week of working on this project the performance of my workstation seemed to drop off substantially, load times grew exponentially & crashes seem to multiply

randomly after crashing my graphics driver would be turned off,, after many restarts the driver would eventually kick back on,

my first attempt at a fix was to install the latest graphic driver, which seemed to work, but after a few days of working on this project, the performance dropped off again.

i am no computer expert, but the problem seems like that the memory or graphics card is not erasing its memory, thats its filling up,

suggestion was that it could be a the graphics card, so I changed the 3500fx for a 1500fx, once again the problem seem to be fixed, but after working on the project for the day, the performance dropped as usual

I am not sure what to try next, I have contacted dell tech service & their only suggestion was to turn all services off other then the required Microsoft services

this fix does not seem to have any benefit to performance

i am including below a copy of my boot file

[boot loader]
timeout=30
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /noexecute=optin /fastdetect /3GB

It is imperative I determine what my next step should be
Is there any suggestions for a work station, i should have purchase ??? or will purchase in the future

Anyone with any knowledge or advice please contact me
thank-you very much in advance

James Pare

No one else has this question

Outcomes

21 Replies

Michael Cudnik Mar 10, 2008 3:38 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Probably need to limit your /3GB switch with the /USERVA=2900 switch after the /3GB. I have read about video card driver errors without this enabled. Also, just to try, turn off the /3GB switch and see if your problems go away.

Also, I know a lot of people taut the /3GB switch here. I have had nothing but problems with it. Little anomolies here and there.

ALSO, very interested in your reply because I just ordered a T3400.

See: https://forum.solidworks.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=14&threadid=6496&highlight_key=y&keyword1=userva
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- Pete Yodis @ Michael Cudnik on Mar 10, 2008 4:53 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  you might even have to adjust the 2900 value to something lower - like 2800, 2700, etc... I have had to do this on a few machines here until the grpaics card properly is initialized at start-up.
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
JAMES PARE Mar 10, 2008 7:28 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
IS THERE ANY SET WAY TO DETERMINE THE SETTING OR IS TRIAL & ERROR???
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- Wayne Tiffany @ JAMES PARE on Mar 10, 2008 8:13 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  No way that I know of. When I came up with that number a few years ago, it ws the result of running test after test after test. I found that with the full 3gb taken, then I was seeing some system issues. One time it said it couldn't access the network Z: drive. I thought it was some fluke until I remembered that I had booted that time with the full 3gb taken. I worked my way back down until I stopped seeing system issues, and for that set of hardware & software, where I stopped was 2900. However, I also didn't spend the time to test 2946 or so.
  
  WT
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
  - Kirk Jess @ Wayne Tiffany on Mar 10, 2008 8:37 PM
    Mark Correct
    Correct Answer
    I am using a similar machine. But I am using XP 64 to allow me to use 4 gigs without the switch. Is this a possibilty to do?
    Like • Show 0 Likes0
    Actions
    - Gary Garrison @ Kirk Jess on Mar 11, 2008 2:28 PM
      Mark Correct
      Correct Answer
      
      Kirk Jess wrote:
      
      I am using a similar machine. But I am using XP 64 to allow me to use 4 gigs without the switch. Is this a possibilty to do?
      
      The /3GB switch is only used on 32 bit systems. It is just a way to trick windows into releasing a bit more RAM than it wants to.
      Like • Show 0 Likes0
      Actions
JAMES PARE Mar 11, 2008 10:10 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
UPDATED MY BOOT FILE AS SHOWN BELOW
[boot loader]
timeout=30
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /noexecute=optin /fastdetect /3GB /USERVA=2900

WILL PROVIDE SOME FEEDBACK
THANKS
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
JAMES PARE Mar 11, 2008 3:08 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
DOES IT MATTER WHERE THE /3GB IS,,,I'VE NOTICE CERTAIN PEOPLE HAVE IT BEFORE THE FASTDETECT & SOME AFTER?
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- Wayne Tiffany @ JAMES PARE on Mar 11, 2008 4:35 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  No, the order is not important.
  
  WT
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
JAMES PARE Mar 11, 2008 5:15 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
ADJUSTED TO 2800, SEEMS TO BE WORKING BETTER
THE PAGE FILE SEEMS TO BE MORE CONSISTENT

BUT, NOT WORKING ON A LARGE PROJECT TODAY
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
JAMES PARE Mar 13, 2008 3:08 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
BACK TO MY LARGE PROJECT TODAY
BACK TO CRASHING
I EXPECTED A LOT BETTER PERFORMANCE FROM SWX & MY NEW WORK STATION
ANY SUGGESTIONS ON A SYSTEM
MY 3D FILE IS APPROX 20,000 KB
BUT MY 2D FILE KEEPS CLIMBING,NOW AT 100,000KB
IN MY TRADE I HAVE TO DEAL WITH A LOT OF DIFFERENT CUSTOMER GEOMETRY
THIS SEEMS TO BE MY BIGGEST HURDLE
GETTING CLEAN CAD IN SWX TO WORK AROUND
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- Kirk Jess @ JAMES PARE on Mar 13, 2008 4:52 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  One suggestion I have would be to get more RAM and move over to XP64 or Vista 64. Get away from the 32 bit OS. I don't care what others have said. I run XP64 here and haven't had driver issues like everyone keeps saying. And we are using some old printers here, ie Epson Stylus 1520, HP940c.
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
JAMES PARE Mar 17, 2008 4:45 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
QUESTION
IF I WAS TO ORDER A NEW COMPUTER FROM DELL
ONE WITH A HIGH OR MEDIUM END GRAPHICS CARD & ONE WITH A LOW LEVEL GRAPHICS CARD
THEN I SUBSITUTED THE LOW LEVEL GRAPHICS CARD WITH THE SAME ONE THATS IN STATION #1
WOULD I EXPECT TO SEE SIMILIAR PERFORMANCE FROM BOTH
OR, WOULD DELL PUT LESSER COMPONENTS OR SETTINGS IN THE MODEL I ORDERED WITH THE LOWER END GRAPHICS CARD
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- Pete Yodis @ JAMES PARE on Mar 17, 2008 5:46 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  James,
  
  Be careful with this approach. You would want to make sure the components are the same except for the graphics cards. With a low end card, Dell might want to build with a smaller power supply as opposed to one used with a higher power card (wattage).
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
JAMES PARE Mar 17, 2008 5:56 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
WASN'T MY IDEA, BUT THAT IS THE APPROACH WE TOOK, I AM LOOKING TO CHANGE THAT IN THE FUTURE
IS THERE A WAY TO CHECK THIS?
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- 1-7YLSBT @ JAMES PARE on Mar 18, 2008 9:45 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  James,
  
  We just purchased (4) of the Dell T3400, with 3.25 Gb of the E8500 Memory and the NVidia FX3700 cards. I have had a few issues, but nothing like what you are experiencing. One thing that we haven't tried, is the 3GB switch because we don't believe in it yet. We are under the understanding that it only removes allocated memory from other windows tasks and makes it available. With the speed and RAM that you have in your system, that shouldn't be necc, especially if you are opening a 20Mb file. We are opening 30 and 40 Mb files all day, and it does not seem that slow to us enough to be concerned with.
  
  One thing that I am here to look for is a fix for why my computer seems to be studdering when I go to file open from within SW. It annoys me when I am listening to my Godsmack mp3's while working and it skips.
  
  Anyhow, some things that I would start looking into for your issues:
  
  Temp file usage, where is the folder actually at. Make sure that it is truly on your C: drive and not in your user folder which a net admin could map to the server.
  
  Icon display when file and folder browsing. Do you display your model images as the file icon, or just the sw part and assy default icons.
  
  Network Available space, easy to overlook.
  
  I too updated my graphics driver.
  
  Are you always opening in lightweight mode?
  
  Are you always resolving your subassemblies?
  
  I also did this: Right Click on "My Computer", pick properties, go to advanced, pick perfomance settings, and select adjust for best performance.
  
  Also, while you are there check your paging file size by clicking the tab next to visual effects called advanced. Mine is set at a custom level of 2046 to 4092.
  
  If you are working with surface data, do you have your edges turned off?
  
  Close Solidworks at lunch and empty your temp file, and see if it still slows down throughout the day.
  
  I honestly think that the problem is with SW SP5 in combination with these computers, for some reason I don't know yet. My last Dell, with SP4, is one year old, and runs better. We may uninstall SP5 and try that.
  
  Thanks,
  
  Bret Slocum
  COE Press Equipment Co.
  
  P.S. Anyone looking for a job?
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
  - 1-7YLSBT @ 1-7YLSBT on Mar 18, 2008 10:13 PM
    Mark Correct
    Correct Answer
    Hey... update.... I went back to "allowing windows to choose what's best for my computer" and the skipping went away. Strange. It helped me with my old dell, but hurt me with the new one... I will let you know if anything else needs to be different than what I previously mentioned.
    
    Bret Slocum
    COE Press Equipment Co.
    Like • Show 0 Likes0
    Actions
    - Gary Garrison @ 1-7YLSBT on Mar 18, 2008 10:32 PM
      Mark Correct
      Correct Answer
      There is something to consider the E8500 processors are the latest things going from Intel. They have been available for what a month now?
      
      I had similar sound issues until I located an updated sound driver for my HP (older system) it may be that the drivers that run your aren't quite fully ironed out yet given the newness of the Wolfdale core processors.
      Like • Show 0 Likes0
      Actions
JAMES PARE Mar 19, 2008 4:34 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE 3gb SWITCH IS A GOOD THING?
I NEVER USE LIGHT WEIGHT MODE, HAVE HAD NOTHING BUT ISSUES WITH THAT
DID THE MY COMPUTER THING A LONG TIME AGO, SET TO PERFORMANCE
TEMP DIR IS IN ROOT C, CLEAN IT OUT DAILY

NOW PAGE FILE SETTINGS, I HAVE HEARD A COUPLE DIFFERENT THINGS
SOME SAY SET IT TO 1.5x'S YOUR RAM, HAVE THE START & MAX THE SAME (THIS IS HOW MINE IS SET UP)
HAVE ALSO READ THAT YOU SHOULD USE A 2X'S YOUR RAM
WISH SWX WOULD LIST THE BEST SETTINGS OR VARIABLES TO ACHIEVE THE BEST PERFORMANCE
NOT EVERYONE CAN UPDATE TO 64 BIT WITH OUR OLD HP PLOTTERS
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- 1-7YLSBT @ JAMES PARE on Mar 19, 2008 4:47 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  I haven't had any problems with lightweight mode.....I have worked with some pretty crazy surface data stepped in from Catia v5 and always have to clean up the model or else recreate the surface data (the later of which works best). As far as your pagefile, it is just a rule of thumb, not something that has to be perfect, but I have had the best luck with the bottom being 1.5 to 2 times my ram, and the upper being double that, but that was before when I only had 1Gb of RAM. Now with 3 GB, and more CPU on board cache, how much should we need?
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
- Gary Garrison @ JAMES PARE on Mar 19, 2008 4:58 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  For me the /3GB switch has been a benefit. It allowed me to squeak out some more memory to complete a Cosmos run.
  
  As far as SW issuing a "best config" this will vary per computer. Each hardware configuration will net different results. Some users have performed stability testing on the switch and their numbers have been posted in other threads.
  
  The same goes for overclocking processors. Two of the same model can have differend OC'ing results just from what position on the wafer then were made. The Xeon and normal Intel procesors are selected in the same way. Those that test above a certain spec statistically come from certain regions of the wafer of 300 or so processors. These go into Xeon's, the rest that meet spec go into mainline Intel's.
  
  The pagefile on my machine (XP Pro 32-bit) is capped at 4096, this was the case when I had 3.5GB RAM installed as well. Setting to system managed may not be a bad way to go now that RAM today is relatively cheap. It's not uncommon to have somewone who has maxed out their computer like I have (4GB). 32 bit XP won't allow any more than that to be used effectively. On startup my machine lists (3.3GB RAM) which = 4GB minus whatever WinXP wants to hang on to.
  
  As far as minimum numbers I don't know what to set that at.
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions

NEW WORKSTATION ISSUES DELL T3400

Outcomes

Related Content

Recommended Content