HumbleChief

The RTX cards are recommended to run Real Time Ray Tracing (RTRT) but aren't needed if that's not a priority and any upgrade suggestions ALWAYS include getting the fastest and most of everything the budget will allow. My system in the sig below is pretty old now but runs Chief fine until plans get to a certain size. I don't do any RayTracing any more so the older 1080 video card works just fine - for me. One thing you could do is check other posters at random and check out their signatures as most have that filled out with the current computer specs. That could give you an idea of "What everyone else is using."

What are you using?

Which is, to me, the most important question, and almost impossible to answer without throwing down the cash to find out. I had an older dual Xeon machine that would chug through Ray Traces, which is what it was designed for, but was pretty slow through most of Chief's operations day to day. I upgraded to my current rig and it was way, way, faster but don't know where to go for an upgrade from here.

The only reason one might want to wait to get a new NVMe drive is the upcoming PCIe 5.0 protocol that will double throughput over the current PCIe 4.0. The current 4.0 drives will remain 4.0 drives even in a newer 5.0 system. And yes by all means use Macrium Reflect. Didn't work for me this time but has worked flawlessly in the past.

Same experience here. Didn't stop me from thinking that a new hard drive would be noticeably faster but sometimes I just like new stuff.

Not quite. You would need a new motherboard to support the faster Gen 4.0 PCIe protocol. That 4.0 will get you the faster NVMe M.2 PCIe speeds that Mick mentioned above. But they're working on Gen 5 now so...

Yeah same here P. Never really seen this crazy of a slowdown and it may be a material or some other factor that turning off auto framing is masking. The new hard drive required a new Windows and Chief install and when reopening the plan a few materials were missing and the plan was never this slow before that new hard drive and new install

Steve, this post is incorrect! I was curious why ASUS didn't simply list the PCIe generation in the marketing info but if you click on tech specs you'll see that the motherboard only support gen 3 PCIe speeds. They do note some kind of 4x PCIe info (which I've learned 4x is the number of 'lanes' available) but it's only gen 3 PCIe.

Here's a comparison between the 10700K and 11900K. https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-11900K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-10700K/4110vs4070

If the motherboard noted in the pic above is indeed the one you have than an M.2 drive will have access to (EDIT) PCIe 4.0 and faster speeds. Not true it's only Gen 3 PCIe. Took a while to find the info in the link below, it's a pic towards bottom of page. Click on the tech specs tab for further info. https://www.asus.com/Motherboards-Components/Motherboards/TUF-Gaming/TUF-GAMING-Z490-PLUS-WI-FI/

New gear is always fun but don't expect huge gains from any upgrade at this point in your computer world. Your current computer is very capable and most likely a new CPU and new M.2 drive will be faster but the gains will most likely not be worth the cost. It's fun and can be a bit of a placebo but performance gains from your current system will come in very small, maybe not even noticeable, increments.

Hey Perry, hope you're well! Turned out to be auto framing (roof and floor) that was causing the lag. Turned off auto framing and it was back to normal. Apologies as I should have posted that solution in this thread as well as another I started to address the issue.. I've always been an Intel guy but the AMD processor has been great and don't think it's a factor. The point of the last post was to illustrate that an upgrade to a fast drive might not be a magic bullet to get speed gains in Chief.

VERY helpful and will remember this for the future.

Yeah Chop I keep trying to get better performance from upgrades like that new M.2 hard drive but the performance stays pretty much the same, or is a small enough speed increase to be questionable as a purchase and upgrade. Of course that doesn't apply to older way underpowered rigs but if you've got a decent modern rig the upgrades to performance seem incremental and quite small.

REALLY appreciate the feedback and perhaps this was the problem in previous plans as well? I'm going to call it user error but hope this helps someone in the future. Also Joey, Dermot I think some materials/patterns/textures didn't make it from the previous plan and the new install to the new hard drive. I'll explore those as well and make sure they are at least available or replaced for this plan. Again, can't thank you guys enough, that has made me crazy for a while.

I turned off auto framing roof/floor and it's back to workable. THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

I turned off auto framing roof/floor and it's back to workable. THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

I've hit this wall many many times in Chief with no solution I've been able to discover. This plan now takes 18 second between any structural operation. Literally unworkable at this stage in the plan's development. I'll post a drop box link if someone's curious enough to open the plan and see what I might be missing. Thank you very much in advance. Drop Box Link https://www.dropbox.com/s/203u2ebda627ny5/UNWORKABLE PLAN.plan?dl=0

A quick update to the new hard drive install. For the most part very, very good and well worth the cost and effort but (you knew there was going to be a but didn't you) when Chief reaches a certain size and complexity no fast hard drive, CPU or fast GPU will fix the 'crawl' that those complex plans revert to. I have a plan now that takes 18 seconds between every change to any component. I'll post another thread seeing if it can be 'fixed' as it has become unworkable, no matter the speed of a hard drive.

I think we're talking a bit of apples and oranges and yes one should always copy (darn near anything you want preserved) a tool bar set instead of modifying an existing one. The point I was trying to make in the previous post was that my toolbar.bak file was dated 2016. I would have thought there would have been a more recent .bak file but perhaps I didn't change anything for 5 years? It's not a concern, only an observation.

Some truth to this Michael. The tool bars should never relocate or reconfigure themselves out of nowhere. It's a simple fix to reload the old tool bars back to sanity but your point is well taken. We should not have to do so.

THANKS

What/where do you back up to?

Smart no doubt. I have never had a problem with toolbars until the other day and it was awful. Mick, I think your advice is better than mine. I'm going to look into backing up the data folder.

Hey Rene, ALWAYS appreciate your posts and information but I just looked in my toolbars folder and the only Larrys.toolbar.bak file was dated 2016. There is now a Larrys.toolbar and a Larrys_copy.toolbar . Do you think that copy version serves the same function as the older .bak files? There's also a Larrys_copy.toolbar.bak dated June 2020. I thought the .bak files were updated as you suggest but I wonder if the _copy.toolbar has replaced that function?