Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Drive Read/Write speed for Revit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Drive Read/Write speed for Revit

    Hello,

    Has anyone done testing on the Revit performance gain for going after read/write speed on SSD?

    For instance: https://www.bimboxusa.com/hardware

    Thanks!

    #2
    Originally posted by yrokkim View Post
    Hello,

    Has anyone done testing on the Revit performance gain for going after read/write speed on SSD?

    For instance: https://www.bimboxusa.com/hardware

    Thanks!
    From what I have generally seen is that Revit files are not large enough to make use of that much throughput. NVME drives themselves are an improvement because of the faster read/writes in the smaller 4k file size BUT BUT I would not upgrade storage to NVME until a great CPU is already in use. Putting them in a RAID does not improve the 4k file size performance (from my experience on other SSD) because the files are too small to split across the disk like a RAID array would do.

    So honestly something like a 7700k CPU will do WAY more for you on Revit than a single NVME or even a NVME RAID array. If you do a lot of rendering off the same machine the new intel x299 family adds more cores and higher clocks than we saw with Broadwell-e (x99).
    Remis Computer Solutions
    Las Vegas, NV
    www.remiscs.com

    Comment


      #3
      BIMBox is going after folks with YUGE data-sets (point clouds and the like) I believe.
      Greg McDowell Jr
      about.me/GMcDowellJr

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by GMcDowellJr View Post
        BIMBox is going after folks with YUGE data-sets (point clouds and the like) I believe.
        Quite - but sadly then the trend moves to #MUSTHAZMOAR from everyone and the purchase requests for 1080Ti back up your inbox!

        I've an m.2 in my new home PC and it's astonishingly quick, but have yet to show it any AECO applications - but even in my home environment the #gainz to be had with exotic components are immediately laid bare when you factor a network. So at home, when my LAN chugs, so does my PC - so one can only presume in a professional setting you'll be working off of a LAN also - and no amount of raw-at-desk speed will counter laggy over-network central-file accessing -so the cost benefit will need serious consideration.

        Comment


          #5
          Right. I also would think most point cloud analysis is being handled in the cloud.


          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
          Greg McDowell Jr
          about.me/GMcDowellJr

          Comment


            #6
            M.2 is absolutely worth it in AEC, just for the general performance increase. My entire C drive is a 512GB M.2. One of my clients has the IDENTICAL machine to mine, except he doesnt have the M.2 drive. And we open the same files, side by side. Its a night and day difference.
            Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
            @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Twiceroadsfool View Post
              Its a night and day difference.
              Question is, is it night & day between m.2 & NVMe?

              Comment


                #8
                Oh, sorry. I read your post quickly about m.2 and not having used arch applications.

                Sent from my Phablet. Please excuse typos... and bad ideas.

                Aaron Maller
                Director
                Parallax Team, Inc.
                Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
                @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

                Comment


                  #9
                  Yeah I mean personally I now run NVME on both my personal builds because there is a difference. My concern is I would rather see someone go i7 with AHCI SSD (traditional SSD with SATA or M.2 [ex: Crucual mx300 m.2]) than i5 and an NVME.
                  Remis Computer Solutions
                  Las Vegas, NV
                  www.remiscs.com

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by snowyweston View Post
                    Question is, is it night & day between m.2 & NVMe?
                    Just to add to Remiscs point, and to clarify for everyone since there's a lot of confusion around this (please feel free to clarify/correct/add)...

                    M.2 is a form-factor/connector. It's beneficial because the form-factor is very compact, versus both the traditional 2.5" laptop drive that most consumer SSD's came as until a couple years ago, and also over SSD PCIe cards (many of which have several M.2 connectors on a single card).

                    PCIe and SATA are bus standards. We usually think of PCIe as a form-factor (i.e. PCIe slots), but it's used as an interconnect for all sorts of tech, including NVME. SATA was used for most SSD drives up until recently, either via an SATA cable (i.e. the 2.5" drive) or the M.2 connector/slot.

                    NVME is a protocol specifically developed for SSD technology. It "replaces" AHCI, the older protocol developed specifically for SATA hard drives (which replaced IDE for PATA HDD). NVME allows for SSD performance to reach its current full potential.

                    As alluded to above, M.2 can use either AHCI/SATA and/or NVMe/PCIe (dependent on the motherboard). So just saying it's an M.2 device doesn't specify which protocol/bus standard it's using.

                    NVMe is mostly being implemented via M.2 or chips that are soldered directly to the MB (in laptops), but also via PCIe expansion cards, which is what the OP referred to. The latter is really only necessary to provide NVMe SSDs to older computers without a NVMe M.2 connector, or for those that need multiple NVMe M.2 connectors. However most legacy motherboards cannot boot the computer from a NVMe PCIe card, so you need to have a separate boot drive (some newest MB's have overcome this limitation, but it's firmware dependent).

                    Speed-wise, ACHI/SATA is limited to about 500MB/s in real-world usage, where NVMe/PCIe (3.0 x4) is hitting 3GB/s (and faster), and can skyrocket past that with RAID configurations and specialized PCIe cards.

                    None of this affects Revit usage perceptibly in my experience, though SSD's obviously greatly increase general system performance. If it was just loading data off the drive into RAM, then even a "slow" SATA SSD would load a 1GB revit file in a few seconds... which it obviously does not. I did a fair bit of Revit testing years ago when I first got an SSD, and I found that it really didn't benefit the opening or saving of Revit files in any perceptible way.

                    Aside from read/write throughput on large files, as Remiscs brings up, IOPs (4KB reads/writes) is what really makes SSD's seem so much faster than HDD's. E.g. the IOPs for a traditional HDD maxes out around 100, while your typical modern SATA SSD can hit 100,000, and a typical NVMe SSD can double that (and way more... there are some enterprise-level setups hitting 1,000,000 IOPs). But while obviously there is a massive jump from HDD to SDD, once you're at 100,000 IOPs, it's no longer a bottleneck on a single-user workstation (for the foreseeable future). Enterprise servers need that kind of throughput, not a Revit workstation.

                    While NVMe/PCIe (over AHCI/SATA) won't perceptibly open Revit any faster, it's just part of the ever-rising tide of tech, where someday, it probably will be perceptible. At present, the largest advantage to consumer-level computers is memory management and battery life (and niche use-cases with very large local files, e.g. video editing). As SSD's get faster and faster, the computer can cache memory in physical RAM to the SSD without it being perceptible to the user. The other increasing benefit is battery usage - if the computer can transfer data in less time for the same amount of energy usage, that increases battery life.

                    Bottom line - while NVMe/PCIe is the future, there's no point in spending a bunch of money on it just for Revit... it won't make Revit usage any faster. As Remiscs suggests, if it's between a faster CPU and an NVMe SSD (instead of an SATA SSD), you're much more likely to benefit from a faster CPU.
                    Last edited by iru69; September 10, 2017, 06:22 PM.

                    Comment

                    Related Topics

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X