HumbleChief

Thanks Michael, That method solves a different problem. The 'points' that are left after shift selecting and moving the numbered dims to another layer are not on a unique layer, but instead share items on the same layer. It's easy to understand that the 'points' would not necessarily be on the same layer as the dims they refer to but when using the dimension tool it would be nice if they were and would change layers along with the numbered dims when group selected.

...behind. I have some point to point dims that I want to hide so I created a new layer. The dims moved to that new layer but the points remained behind on the original layer. I can't shift select them with the dim tool and now must select each one and change its layer individually. Ugh. X8. Am I missing something?

...uh maybe under Defaults>Cameras>Sun - Doh!

...can't figure out how to set the sun 'default' Thanks

This bug should have been fixed as soon as it was discovered IMO, which is now quite some time. It kills new wall type names which is crucial in almost any custom wall set-up. I also just did a presentation showing off CA to a kitchen design firm that I want to adopt Chief so we can work together more seamlessly. They bought Chief, with this bug, and can't create custom wall definitions. Not good. Needs fixing now.

I'm going to step away from this thread with one last chart comparing Quadro and GeForce video cards. Quadro cards work fine in Chief but do some research before you buy one. There are many articles explaining the differences and why they might not be the best choice for Chief. Best of luck. http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

By all means buy what you prefer, but Chief recommends the NVidia gaming cards, not the Quadros - just sayin'.

Quadro cards work fine in Chief and also have some specially written drivers for specialty 3D software like SolidWorks, 3D animation, and others, have more accurate rendering engines enabled, and command a higher price for that specialization. Chief doesn't take advantage of those drivers or capabilities and bases its rendering engine on the OpenGL standard of which the gaming cards take much better advantage of, and at a lower price. If you use Solid Works or another software program that takes advantage of, or needs the Quadro standard and precision then that might be a wise (and expensive) choice. If you are looking for a video card for Chief then save your money and get a nice OpenGL card like the NVidia or AMD Radeon chip sets.

Jerry, Check your wall definition and make sure the brick has the proper thickness.

Here's the current graphics champ - if your shopping for a Chief card. IMO it's only overkill if you can't afford it. There's never too much computer horsepower, again IMO. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gigabyte-980ti-xtreme-gaming-windforce,4391.html

Nice Dermot, I didn't expand the wall tools to find it - Thank You

Like it Joe - Forgot how to do that - Thanks so much.

If so, where? If not, can I make one?

Yeah that's the behavior. I sent in a bug report.

The scroll wheel moves way too much for each movement. Was living with it but I think it needs some attention. I have the actual mouse - not the 3D wheelie thingy. Anyone else seeing this?

Don't miss these charts when picking components CPU Benchmarks http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html Video Card BenchMarks http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

I recently ran a passmark test on my dual Xeon system (which I got for a very reasonable $2500 a couple years ago) versus the latest i7's as reported on the passmark web page and I think it was around 16,000 (computer thingys). My system is overclocked which requires a special motherboard (there was only one at the time that would allow OC) and the performance drops pretty fast without that OC. The person who built it had a couple of spare Xeon CPU's lying around and he did a bunch of testing to find a combination of hardware that would produce the most throughput (in gigaflops perhaps?) and he came up with what you see in my signature. I am looking forward to when a single, reasonably priced, CPU can at least match the speeds I'm seeing (for obvious reasons) because the hardware requirements for a dual CPU rig are a PIA. You should see the size of the necessary case - it is friggin' huge!! Dual fans dual everything and too hard to build myself, and in this case impossible to duplicate. I would never encourage anyone to over spend their budget but it's really really nice to have the extra horsepower when it comes to RayTracing. My older 760 780 video card which I spent well over $500 for needs replacing and it looks like I'll upgrade that before the CPU's if the system lasts that long.

Nothing quantitative or objective - just the subjective 'lag' I've experienced with a fast system.

....Or just build a large, complex, Chief model and watch the lag increase as the complexity increases. You may need to measure every small computing process to understand the problem with your particular computer but I posted my real world results to illustrate that a killer dual Xeon CPU system, which can be upgrade at GREAT expense, is still slow and lags in X7 and X8, when the model gets large/complex. There's only one more thing to do with my system as I see it and that's to spend a lot of money on a new graphics card which I will eventually do but if you think you need a faster CPU and are under the illusion that the lag will disappear on a complex model with that blazing fast CPU - think again. Chief just plain slows down when the model gets large. Maybe the final release will change that but I am not optimistic - and I'm not really complaining as the benefits of Chief outweigh the slow performance - to me.

John, I've got a pretty fast system, although my video card is is bit dated, and I have a couple large models (not in MB size but in square feet and complexity) that are VERY slow to respond. So slow that I can barely work in them in 3D. I have a LOT of CPU horse power but an older video card and am not willing to drop $500 plus on a new card so I've been (unhappily) living with the 'lag'. Nothing 'snappy' about X7 or X8 when models get large and I'm not sure it can addressed, or at least I don't know how. I sent the slow model in to Chief and they said it was something about rebuilding roof but the lag remains and I've struggled through completing the plans set. It might just be the price we have to pay for the 3D features and model building capabilities in Chief. Not saying it's good but Chief is just slow when the model gets large or complex.

Yeah this forum is the best - but only if you post the plan

Thanks SO much for quick and helpful responses. Robert, it was indeed the attic walls above that were set to be pony walls. Never saw that coming nor did I set them as such but this is a great tip and I hope it helps others. Thank you all again.

I've never seen this before and have rebuilt walls but the same thing happens. The windows and doors in this wall won't display properly. Any help appreciated. WINDOW DOOR ANOMALY.plan

Yeah Johnny brought up an 'option' I was thinking about but I'm a bit curious Scott, do you ignore the ceiling framing of the floor below and only set the floor above's floor framing? Or do you ensure both are the same? ...and any of it only makes in the world of Chief. Real world neither a floor or ceiling joist 'overrides' the other and in fact they are always the same size if they occupy the same space which is why I thought (not Chief think but real world think) that they should be spec'd the same in each dbx If not, then I'm learning.

I think I know which question you are answering a 'yes' to Perry - but not sure. Would it be desirable to have the floor joists of the floor above over ride and actually change the ceiling joists of the floor below? Or would that take away an option or two?