Chopsaw

My Message Log.txt reads the same as yours except you have a newer driver. Not quite sure where you do CTRL+F from but Nvidia and Windows read it as 8192MB but I did see another program recently that read it also as 4GB and I was surprised at the time but now I can't remember what software it was. It does seem to be a known issue that chief does not report it properly.

Yes I have the same card and it reports 4095MB in Preferences > Video Card Status. How are you accessing this "Message Log"

Yes X9 is slower as there is more library content and higher resolution symbols. For me it is the larger folders that take the most time. If you want to time how long it takes to open one of the specifically larger slower folders. Maybe someone with a comparable system will test with you as your system specs look pretty fast. P.S. Looks like it is time to update your signature... You can also put your comp specs in there so they are quickly referenced.

Yes that is always helpful to have working layer sets that are set up with just what you need for each type of view. I am assuming that you have looked at all the options discussed here : https://www.chiefarchitect.com/support/article/KB-00521/troubleshooting-slowness-in-chief-architect-plans.html We really have not heard back as to how your time lags compare to the testing that Mark and I did with your plan file. This will help determine if your old hard drive really is the weak link or not. The other thing I was wondering about is your Maximum undo setting in Preferences> General. I think this can slow things down just by being set too high.

Try selecting the railing and making it Invisible. You need to keep it there to maintain the opening but you don't have to see it. Not exactly sure what type of built ins but you can build a wall under the stair rail and then do what you want with that.

You sure are a funny guy Alan, I down loaded your plan just for kicks because as I said about 20 minutes ago I am no stair expert but it must be getting late even in California because you have the Ceiling Finish turned off for your Open Below Room. I just hit the default for (J) and it was all fixed.

Yes X9 is the Professional version and has many more features but costs a lot more money. There is a special forum for HD users also where you can get better software specific help. https://hometalk.chiefarchitect.com/

I am not really a stair expert but I was able to get the Auto Stairwell tool to create an opening with X9 by moving the stairs over against the Garage foundation wall. If that works for you you could then move the stairs back the 5 11/16" and edit the opening manually.

Are you getting an error message using the Auto Stairwell tool ? (#272017017)

I have not noticed that but will now be looking out for it, but I have definitely noticed and posted about Rich Text and Standard Text set to the exact same colour not being the same colour. Quite noticeable when there is some deficiency with one system or the other and a side by side substitution has to be done. So yes there is much work to be done with Text.

I think the Orthographic view might be better some mornings.

Mike did you give the "Manual Ceiling Planes" a try ? They are in the Build Roof drop down. Snap to drywall layer.

Mike I always forget what version you are running, you should take the time to put at least that in your signature. If I am guessing correctly what you are after you will need to place some 8 and 10' manual ceiling planes into a 12' room being careful what layer you snap to so that it frames properly. Use the ceiling planes to frame the ceiling joists.

Yes there was an in depth discussion on the forum a few months ago and then I saw in the update notes that it was fixed but obviously there is still something wrong so if it is reproducible then I am sure tech would love to know about it because it would be better if this sort of thing did not happen all the time. Things should not change by saving the plan and reopening it. Just did a quickie test plan but could not reproduce. Could you record or describe in more detail your procedure. It may have something to do with the snap points of the 3 way cad block vs. the standard one.

There should not be any problem laying a roof plane perfectly flat if necessary. Can you post a screen shot of your issue ? And it would also be helpful to know what version you are using.

My observations suggest that your statement quoted above is incorrect and with "Build Wall Framing" deselected in the Build Framing>Wall DBX the only way to get a wall to reframe is manually. This below is how it seems to work for me as shown in previous video and illustration. Either of these could also be used to preserve an auto framed condition from future changes that might cause an unwanted rebuild. However it seems that you have reason to disagree with this ? Once this is sorted out then maybe we can theorize on the speed of deletes and redo's.

Joe, I am sorry but I agree with almost everything you have said but I am still using X9 and am going to have to respectfully disagree with your statement as I just can't figure out how to make the software function the way you are describing. You are correct in saying that wall framing should be left until the end for several reasons but I hope even in X10 they allow us to continue to be able to turn that off and make manual corrections until they figure out how to make the software frame to code.

PC Part Picker is a good way to make sure computer components are compatible: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/ http://www.samsung.com/semiconductor/minisite/ssd/product/consumer/ssd960.html

Joe, Maybe you can help me out as I am not seeing the logic. If there is no way to turn off Auto Wall Framing without deleting the details then how are we to custom frame a wall. My understanding is that there is two ways to turn off Wall framing from rebuilding. By deselecting it in the Build Framing> Wall DBX or by selecting each wall individually and selecting "Retain Wall Framing" in the Wall Specification>Structure DBX which will preserve a custom or non framed condition. Possibly the reason I did not see a noticeable difference was that I was working in 3D camera view and wall framing happened to be off.

The extra $59 is definitely worth it but if you are replacing your motherboard shortly you should look at the 960 series in M.2 that is faster. Also when I first tested your plan file in X9 I did not notice that Mark had turned off auto wall framing and then I did that and retested and really did not notice any significant difference.

Downloaded and ran some of the same tests as Mark and got results consistent with his only a little slower but all within about 1 second. Likely consistent with my older slower single SSD (Samsung PM830) or maybe RAM but I think undo's have to be read off the hard drive and that is why they are a little slow. I tested in X9 as I am assuming Mark did also. Curious what your colleagues computer has for a hard drive and how it compares to yours and also how your time lag numbers compare to Mark's. Also extremely curious what sequence of commands you used to max out your CPU on this plan file as deleting and then undoing a main roof plane only caused a short CPU spike to 82% for me. From what I could see your plan file size seems consistent with what I am used to and did not find any obvious issues.

If you want them to be sharp in layout you can zoom way way in and select the layout box and hit refresh as this seems to be dependent on current screen resolution and magnification. Just be aware this will use resources to display this way and may slow things down on you.

I think that a SSD should definitely help but you also said a few other things that might be worthwhile looking into first. This is happening with larger files. How large and do you notice any lag with a brand new file with minimal content. It might be worth posting a sample to see if the delays are similar on a comparable computer setup or even a slower one like mine. I am unfortunately hardly ever able to max out CPU using Chief other than while Ray Tracing. So it would also be good to test that on another machine exactly what causes that to happen and if it does the same thing on someone else's computer. As for SSD's it seems that Samsung is worth the extra money and a good place to start for specification and price comparison. What you choose will depend on your budget and expected life of your current system as well as available connections for your motherboard. You could possibly make use of a 64GB or 128GB drive but once you have it you will probably get impatient with anything that is not on that drive and will only want to use your 2TB 5900RPM as an Archive drive which it should preform fine for. I would suggest starting with a 256 or 500GB drive if you can find room in your budget or larger if money is not an issue. Do a search for SSD on this forum as there have been some worthwhile discussions on the topic as it applies to Chief recently.

Yes, I think we have found the issues now. Not sure which one is slowing you down the most but personally I would use Onedrive only as a backup system and make sure you are running Chief on your own Hard Drive. I would grab a SSD that is large enough for your operating system and Chief and then use your 2TB for archived files and then back those up on Onedrive. Get the fastest SSD setup you can for your current system and and it should help a lot.

Did tech ask about your hard drive. You did not list that in your specs. Your build looks new but is your hard drive ? If you are running a M2 SSD you should not notice much lag but it all goes down hill from there.