HumbleChief

...and in elevation it still shows a solid underside even with the 'air gap' spec'd...

Yeah, only kinda works but thought it might help somewhat...

Bill, You can define the 'underside' material as 'air gap insulation' which kinda works? Might be of some help.

++++ TOO TRUE...

Thanks Edward, I was in a bad place with my old rig, just outgrew its capabilities and it just couldn't keep up with every day usage. Very happy with the new set up but really haven't tested it yet on a new larger plan. I will if I do get a new NVMe drive I'll do some time tests for undo etc. and see if there's any discernible difference. Thanks gain for the update...

Thanks Mick, trying to avoid the 'buy new stuff because it's new stuff' bug that bites me pretty hard. The numbers are undeniable in favor of the NVMe drives and the prices are not outrageous but what real world change would be noticeable? If I need a new drive or more storage it will, of course, be an NVMe drive but for now I think the speed improvements won't be worth the effort. That could change tomorrow and I could find a reason for a new NVMe but for now I'll test my patience...

Appreciate the analysis Mark, however don't really understand any of it and how it relates to Chief's real world performance. Really wished they would/could publish some spec's that we could use to configure our systems for top performance. I understand why they won't/don't, but it would nice to know what hardware component affects which operation, similar to GPU for renders, CPU for RayTrace kinda info. Thanks again

Thanks Edward for the update, really appreciate you taking the time...No computer engineer here either and I wished I understood the technicalities a bit better. There's been more than one anecdotal "NVMe drives are great for Chief, post," and I can't make an argument against such claims and really can't wait to get an NVMe drive but the real world performance of the 4.0 drives leaves me a bit cold on them for now, plus I don't really need one other than new stuff is cool. Are you happy with your new system in general? My system is now acceptably fast which is a huge relief and have all the overclocking turned off as there seems to be no performance gains from that either as far as I can tell from reading a lot of tests. I do run the Ryzen Master software which seems to be faster at least on the hardware monitoring stuff but I don't know if I could tell a difference real world. I'll get a NVMe drive one of these days but for now it's just money I don't need to spend. Thanks again for the post

More food for thought...none of the new PCIe 4.0 SSD's outperformed the PCIe 3.0 drives in real world tests - smoked the synthetic tests, but didn't show any improvement in productivity, again, in real world tests. There's a few tests out there showing similar results. Kinda not so happy about that and waiting to upgrade to PCIe 4.0 when perhaps they show real world gains... "Curious about the 3 storage solutions? 1TB SSD PCIe 4.0; 500 GB SSD PCIe 3.0; and the 1 TB HDD? Can you share why and purpose of each? And how would you set up the Sabrent SSD for 'undo'?"

Nice rig, good price, my new spec's in sig below. So far very good and I already had my old SSD and 1080 video card so I only spent around $1200. Curious about the 3 storage solutions? 1TB SSD PCIe 4.0; 500 GB SSD PCIe 3.0; and the 1 TB HDD? Can you share why and purpose of each? And how would you set up the Sabrent SSD for 'undo'? Thanks

I thought you had a 9900 and good to know. Hope you get your problem solved.

The 2.6 GHz clock speed of the i9-7980XE chip is not " incredibly fast", it's actually quite slow for Chief which likes a fast clock speed versus more cores of which that chip has 18. Not saying that's your problem but it would be way down the list of chips I would choose for Chief. A Quadro card will probably not help as Graham suggests above and you already have (2) 2080 ti's? I thought you also had a i9 9900K system? If so try it on that and see what's different. If you want you can send me the plan and we can compare my current AMD 3900x to your CPU to see what we can see. Happy to help.

Thanks as always Rene, My system is so much faster everywhere right now that I don't see a problem that needs fixing, which is a really refreshing thing to post and a sentiment I could not share just a few days ago. Still curious about the RAMdisk and found a great video you did explaining same. When my curiosity gets the better of me I might explore but for now it might only solve a problem I do not have.

Thanks again Graham always appreciate your input/feedback.

Thanks Graham and I've learned over the years to keep my expectations low and am under no illusion that a new 4.0 SSD will have a noticeable effect. The challenge now is that my 1 TB 2.5" SSD is almost full and need more storage. Not today, but soon and am watching NVMe drive prices for a deal. both 3.0 and 4.0 PCIe. Will do nothing for as long as possible as that always been smart in PC world. I'm only mildly curious about a RAM drive and the first thing I read said be wary of them for various reasons. May explore but usually find my time better spent at other tasks. Do you have a RAM drive? They seem risky but am quite ignorant about such things...will research.

BBQ'S WITH CPU USEAGE. This might interest you Mark. The hardware monitor is with Ryzen's PBO single thread settings. You can see the CPU hit a high of 4591 and it uses 100% CPU to render that camera view. Interesting.

3900X

Results Ryzen 3900x signature system 1.) Open Standard Camera View = 16 seconds. 2.) Drag Wall Surface up = 18 seconds. 3.) Undo Drag Wall Surface up = 17 seconds. 4.) Build Roof Planes = 32 seconds. Add as much time as you feel I missed the timer start by. Undo Wall Drag, forgot to record the wall drag up but got 18 seconds again, adding in the time lag to get to the timer. Build roof planes

Nice David, yeah the structure is surprisingly simple to recreate.

Thanks Graham, did not know that...

Bob, I think your approach illustrates the importance of starting with accurate floor defaults and dimensions - to begin with. Trying to go back and re-adjust those things ("I needed to adjust the floor to ceiling heights on each floor to 10'") can cause a lot of headaches as you may be finding out. Number one with Chief is defaults, number two is defaults and number three is yes, defaults. Without that foundation you have no chance of getting an accurate, stable model. A couple other small things that I've learned. If the floors are not close enough to 'align above/below' you won't see the icon to do so. Also trying to duplicate another's approach without knowing why they used that approach can lead to running in circles trying to figure things out. Both Mick and Robert took different approaches, both work but without understanding why they work it's hard to simply duplicate their efforts. Learning the why with Chief can sometimes be more valuable than learning the how.

Nice PBR's as usual Graham but curious about the reference to only the generic sun? Do the other ceiling lights in the shot not account for any computing needs...or??

There does seem to be a way to use roof planes for the gable ends. Best way? Probably not, but doable. gable_walls.plan

Yeah nice work Tommy...

Really like those examples Eric, Tommy. Was a good exercise duplicating the design intent but I think to truly answer the OP's question I think it would be good to know how it is to be built if indeed an accurate material list with framing is the intent. Is the second floor structure and deck as thick as the illustration shows? Or is that a facade of sorts that hides the actual floor structure depth? Roof and ceiling structure? How will that be built? Without that info any example from the excellent Chief users here is a bit moot, again if an accurate build method and material list is the goal.