2005 SP3.1 faster than 2004 SP5...Hooked

Well, I should have made the switch sooner. But I knew what I was in
for before I started, as I've done the whole install-from-scratch
routine before.

I bought a new 60 gig 7200 Hitachi HD (same as before) for my Dell M60
laptop.

I partitioned & installed XP Pro from CD & then the SP2 from CD, then
MS updates, Dell's 2dozen plus updates, then MSOffice & updates, and
finally a few applications (Inspiration, Winzip, Quickeys) & SWks 2005
SP 3.1. This only took about 22 hours or so including all the
downloads and installers (not all of which worked, even though
recommended).

Old HD = Win XP SP1 as rec'd from Dell w/no interent activity & SWks
2004 SP5 (all tests w/same updated BIOS & firmware updates on M60).

Some basic times + or - 1 sec: using a 30 meg mold assembly

Old ---->Then ----> New
66 sec --Startup-------39 sec
14 sec --SWks Launch--2 sec
59 sec --File Open-----26 sec
18 sec --File Save------11 sec

Obviously reasons for the time differences are spread all over the
place due to older OS w/o updates & w/o SP2 & in use crap & corruption
on the WinXP Pro SP1 system.

But it gives a real-world set of numbers to judge whether getting an
"old" 1.5 year old machine up-to-date means anything or not (even
without internet crap).

Bo

 

If I understand you you are comparing SW2004 SP5 running on XP SP1 old
installation to SW2005 SP3.1 on a clean install of XP SP2 with all
recommended updates. What would make this comparison more interesting is if
you installed SW2004 now on the new OS and compare it to SP1. This is
because when I run SW2004 against SW2005 on without fiddling with the OS I
find that SW2004 is for the most part faster.

 

I agree, you are probably right in your assessment.

Feature and code bloat means a newer version is almost always slower
even if by just a bit, because the coders always assume more CPU power
is just around the corner.

The overly simplified "test" I did wasn't meant to be an exact
comparison, but something that more approximated what happens when you
"clean up" a machine.

It means that OS & Hardware maintenance can be more important than what
is actually done with SolidWorks, as crap and corruption outside
SolidWorks is most important of all.

Maintaining Windows and a PC's hardware tends to consume quite a few
hours each year. I don't know what it is, but I know I don't like to
do it, as it is excruciatingly time consuming when done right, and you
need to keep track of 'everything'.

Given the value of man-hours, I am definately of the opinion, that when
the time comes for the cleanup AND appropriate data protection, just
take the old hard drive out for an 'archive', and put in a new hard
drive and start the install from scratch.

Bo

 

Just out of interest,

Has anyone tried installing everything on their machine and then
creating a 'Ghost' of this, storing it somewhere and then periodically
doing a flat re-install from this Ghost?
I would imagine that it would have much the same effect as a new
install and could be complete in a much shorter time period.
If there are any stats available I'd be interested in seeing them.

Will

 

Yes, it takes about 15 minutes to get a fresh Windows 2k instead of
installing everything again and using atleast 2 evenings to get all the
settings right. I have done this for Windows + basic softwares that I
use but not with SW installed, but there is no reason why it should be
excluded from the image. There are several softwares for this.

Anyway, the reason why I don't have image
available for my pc right now is that, in any case, after 6 months you
have to update Windows/antivirus/different kind of utilities/SW and
you don't want to use software A from the image anymore but you want to
replace it with software B and so on. So it's pretty hard to deside what
you want to put into the image. And then you have to plan how to handle
emails etc...so after all, maybe you don't save time that much with 6
months period...maybe it should/could be shorter.


regards
markku
www.markkulehtola.net

 

Mark, what you note is why I have chosen not to let my CAD machine go
on the Internet.

I've chosen to do all other work on a 2nd machine to keep SolidWorks up
as close to 100% as possible.

My choice for the 2nd machine is an Apple PowerBook, and that works
great, because it is up 100% of the time and has virtually minimal
yearly maintenance to keep it tip top.

Bo

 

Mark, what you note is why I have chosen not to let my CAD machine go
on the Internet.

I've chosen to do all other work on a 2nd machine to keep SolidWorks up
as close to 100% as possible.

My choice for the 2nd machine is an Apple PowerBook, and that works
great, because it is up 100% of the time and has virtually minimal
yearly maintenance to keep it tip top.

Bo

 

I somewhat agree with this assessment: "It means that OS & Hardware
maintenance can be more important than what is actually done with
SolidWorks, as crap and corruption outside SolidWorks is most important
of all." However, given that two workstations are configured
"correctly" and one has SW2004 and the other SW2005 you will see a 10%
difference in preformance and maybe more if you could take into account
some of the sluggishness of the UI.

I don't agree with throwing out the baby with the bathwater approach.
It is possible to find the reasons that Windows is slowing things up
and fix them. I use XPTC to good effect in this area and have made
seemingly old sluggish machines come to life again. Changing the oil
is almost always going to be cheaper than buying a new car.

 

I have taken this approach also. My other machine runs Win98 and my
file server runs LInux/Samba. Can't afford Windows Server.

 

I agree with your note on SWks 2004 vs 2005.

I agree that bringing "sluggish machines come to life again" makes
sense, and the real question is the best way that wastes the least
time.

Hard drives are so inexpensive, in general, that either installing the
OS from another form of archive of a clean install seems like a method
that offers the least wasted time. If the likes of XPTC can do it
faster than something like GHOST or similar, great. I tend to trust
clean installs more than "fixer-uppers".

Then come the hardware updates, the MSOffice updates, & the Win XP
updates. It is not always easy to figure out what update applies to me
or whether I would even want the update (if I don't use Internet Remote
Access or Wi-Fi for instance).

When I moved my Apple PowerBook from Mac OS 10.3.9 to 10.4.1, it took
less than 2 hours to put it on a new HD from CD, transfer settings in
the process, download the 10.4.1 update, & transfer applications, and
everything ran fine. I hope to gosh Microsoft can do better on
LongHorn with regard to installs & updates, but I will never hold my
breath on this.

 

XPTC is an acronym for XP Tweaking Companion, a pdf based book. It is
one of the most complete and well done guides to installing a healthy
Windows OS and keeping it healthy. It covers most of the OS points in
the SW Guides and a lot more that SW won't get into.

http://www.tweakguides.com/XPTC.html

No doubt when MSoft comes out with the next OS it will take a lot more
horsepower to run it.

 

Top, thanks for the note on XPTC.

Given my normal small part work, I don't require massive horsepower to
run my SolidWorks projects, so I've not done extensive 'tweaks' and did
not know of XPTC. I'll go through it in time, though at nearly 200
pages, that will take awhile, though I've perused the first 3 dozen
pages.

My major source of help in keeping SolidWorks running w/o problems has
always been to keep my SolidWorks on a machine reserved exclusively for
SolidWorks. I did this even when I had a desktop PC doing Internet
access, and kept my Dell Inspiron running SolidWorks.

Today my Apple PowerBook exchanges info back and forth with my Dell M60
via BlueTooth without interrupting other network stuff on the PowerBook
for external HDs, Ethernet & WiFi for the Internet. It basically keeps
the Dell isolated and efficient.

Sounds like XPTC can help me get more efficient over time. One thing
noted by Koroush Ghazi in XPTC as a source is blackviper.com, but as
has been noted here, that site was taken down months ago, and I have no
idea whether its content will come back up.

Bo

 

We'll have to get into the habit of running wget against such sites
just in case.

 

I wonder if anyone still has a copy of the BlackViper content.

It was so extensive, I didn't bother copying it out for offline reading
at the time, and never thought the plug would be pulled on it.

Bo

 

Actually it is still available here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20041009203141/www.blackviper.com/WinXP/xpprofiles.htm

 

Another member AW, sent me an additional mirror or maybe it is now the
"new" location for Black Viper, or so it seems. Info seems more
current up to fall 2004 or so. Worth looking at.

http://dhost.info/kyeu/mirror/blackviper/WinXP/servicecfg.htm

Bo