johnny

I've not used Mac for yeas - so im having to relearn. When I right click on the app I don't see where that is located:

So I just bought a 16" MacBook and I have to report the same slowness in the video on the 3D model. What I feels like to me is that Chief isn't using the dedicated graphics chip but the integrated Intel UHD. Why I think this: I had a 2015 MSI laptop with both an integrated Intel and a 1060 GTX - and when I was using the integrated graphics the visual was exactly the same as what I am getting from the MacBook Pro....very "stuttery" graphics in 3D view. Since in Windows you can manually switch between those graphics sources I could dictate. In Mac OS you don't really have that control.

Honestly it was just a quick sketch and I never re-aligned the footing since I was trying to focus on the upper area. The real footing would typically be centered unless the wall height increased and we needed to cantilever the footing.

I'm sure the new Mac Pro will be fast, but the main problem will be with Chief itself. Unless an app is designed to take advantage of certain things like Apple Afterburner (which is mostly related to Video) and other aspects of this beast, the increase in performance simply won't begin to justify the cost. If you do a search on YouTube about people disappointed with the Apple Mac Pro - you will see they say a similar thing. As an unrelated point, I really wish the folks at Chief would find a away to align the app for use with Nvidia's Quadro products. https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/design-visualization/quadro/

awesome - thank you.

Hello - I have a project I am working on where we've conceptualized a concrete skirt (exposed) around the perimeter of the house - its a modern design. I feel the only way to make it work in Chief is to just falsify the visual and then make 2D adjustments for sections/details. I was curious if anyone had an idea to make this actually work with the wall tools.

Interestingly - i haven't actually messed with using the Square Pad tool since we've been able to control the layer sequence. I filled the pad with "background" and adjusted the layer stacking order...its not too terrible anymore (still not perfect, but i think doable). What they do need to give us is the offset ability so we can properly center the point load in certain circumstances, but 99% of the time i just center it on the wall anyways.

I used the term "joined" loosely....i thought it was faster than saying "coplanar line getting removed". ...and yes, that is the action id prefer too most of the time. The problem being if this is really how Chief wanted us to deal with this common condition its kinda a PITA due to this rule of thumb. Id personally rather use the Square Pad tool but have it graphically cut the footing line (maybe a checkbox option) so it shows properly in 2D plans.

What I find odd is a foundation wall with a different footing width, yet will still auto-join with adjoining foundation walls. Changing the footing width should be enough to make the walls "different". Doctrinally speaking, Chief should only auto-join with objects of the same settings - right?

Just an FYI i think you should consider how those eaves will wrap around your beams....in real life.

Pretty slick solution there.

Keep in mind that 90% of the Chief Architect versions on eBay are illegal versions. Yes, you seem to get a code to use but its not real from Chief.

Id personally place the 2nd story roof plane on first and then reshape to cover the lower level.

Thanks for the input - is there a way to "open below room" for an exterior stairs? Here is a quick snap-shot of what i am trying to get done. Obviously i am still working on the particulars of the ADU design - but i'd like to show the stairs on the upper level.

What is the best way to show stairs on a floor other than what they are created on? Kinda like the "show roof floor above" for roof planes, is there a way to show the stairs on the next level? Thanks.

Just sharing some recent work on a new/refreshed plan series - all done in Chief, but I rendered in Lumion. Obviously same plan different styles.

I personally think MSI laptops are the best due to thermal handling which becomes a major issue with Laptops. https://us.msi.com/Laptop/Products#?tag_multi_select=5389

Someone is going to ask you to upload your model file here so they can look at it to see why you're having a problem with this. If you do that people are more willing to jump in and help instead of guess at the issue.

In all reality this is a fairly common window treatment for budget builders, so it seems like perhaps we should ask Chief to look at helping us get this without the difficulty...?

I'm trying to figure out what you mean, since if I reshape the polyline on the Z axis and run a material report on the object it calculates for the me the total (including Z)...? You got me curious about this, but CA seems to calc that on my end. You might mean that it doesn't automatically take that into consideration, but if you actually model the Z runs using the break tool it does work (thought also a bit of extra work). ____ Added: I just realized as Chopsaw mentioned i was using a 3D molding line.

Its not a coincidence that the forums are starting to be filled with performance issue subject matter in Chief. Either Chief took a step backwards in performance or relative to other apps we use Chief feels very slow.

I've played with this and it feels to me that Mac version of CA runs a bit better. It's not super noticeable, but after spending some time in the app it just felt a bit snappier. So you know, I was using the exact same processor in the PC as Mac (it was a hackintosh). The graphics card in the PC was theoretically better even.

Because Chief is poorly optimized for current hardware. Its a real shame.

You might be better off looking into Lumion or Twinmotion for these services. I've seen Chief's VR and its no-where near what those other companies provide...and Twinmotion is free right now (though currently Lumion is higher quality).

I believe in Chief those cards would handle themselves fairly similarly. I've actually had good success with both Nvidia and AMD cards, and it may be just me but if I was doing an AMD processor built I would probably keep that theme throughout.