Hi tomot, Quad core is not of any use for most software since only very few applications are truly multi-threaded. Only a single processor will be used for most of the work done by both Rhino and Grasshopper combined.
What do you mean by "it's knees"? Is the display of Grasshopper geometry slow? Does it take a long time to update a definition when you drag a slider? Is the redraw of the Grasshopper canvas not smooth? All grasshopper geometry is drawn by Grasshopper itself, after Rhino finishes drawing its own objects. For some geometry types (such as points) Grasshopper is much faster than Rhino. For other types (especially if they have custom openGL shaders attached) Grasshopper is slower because it cannot use any of the caching operations that are used for existing (and thus predictable) geometry. You are right of course in your observation that as processing power accumulates, software counteracts this by requiring more of it to run. Adobe products are historically very memory intensive (don't know why, but it's quite likely that it's because they want to develop for Mac and Windows simultaneously and thus use very few platform specific functions). Grasshopper 0.6 contains a number of optimisations that /should/ make it run faster (they do, I profiled it). The base package is larger than 0.5, but that shouldn't mean it will run slower. I think the only change between 0.5 and 0.6 that could affect performance is the data- tree logic. It now takes more function calls to populate and parse the data inside parameters. If you have a file which runs notably faster in 0.5, please send it to me so I can profile it over here. -- David Rutten [email protected] Robert McNeel & Associates On Apr 25, 5:37 pm, tomot <[email protected]> wrote: > I have a Quad core CPU running at 2.4GHz with 4gb of ram, and a > Geforce 8800GT video card with 512mb of ram. It becomes the family > computer at night so my Sonny Bunny can play his computer games on it. > > I have never seen my system brought to its processing knees. Till I > started using Grasshopper. I'm not a computer programmer, but there > appears to me to be a huge disconnect between Grasshopper and Rhino > which is trying to display the 3d information. ParaCloud Gem is vastly > faster in processing 3d information. > > It reminds me of the days when I bought an 8086 Math Co-processor for > $800.00 so I could run AutoCad faster. It appears to me, we are losing > computing power, through the trend of build application specific > API's, and by stacking one scripting language, on top of another,etc. > > Its beyond comprehension why it now take 126mb of HDD space for Adobe > Reader to read PDF files? The list goes on. Its not my intent to > create a rant. The above is simply intended as a general observation. > > On Apr 24, 4:45 am, andres m <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi david, > > > Thanks for the quick response. > > I am really finding gh 6.0 slower. but at the end has being good as i > > have pass throwout my whole definition and make it work faster. > > > i will make my definition more user friendly and send it over. i am > > new in vb.net and my scripts are rather messy which does not help. > > > About saving. i always have the impression that things does not get > > saved. i hardly ever use ctrl + s for the same reason. i am actually > > used to it. > > > Maybe is the network. my rhino file is on a network. but my xml is on > > my local hard drive. > > > On Apr 24, 12:16 pm, David Rutten <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Andres, > > > > it should actually be faster, I added a bunch of optimisations in 0.6. > > > If you can give me a ghx file that seems to run slower, I can profile > > > it more accurately. > > > > Saving should obviously work, if it doesn't, it's a bug. If you save > > > through the menu, it will always call the Save function. If you save > > > via Ctrl+S, then it only calls save if Grasshopper is the active > > > window (otherwise it saves the Rhino file). > > > > Are you saving to a local disk or a network drive? > > > > -- > > > David Rutten > > > [email protected] > > > Robert McNeel & Associates > > > > On Apr 24, 12:36 pm, andres m <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > I am finding a couple of things strange in grasshopper 6. > > > > > first Is it really slower than gh 5 or is it just my imagination. my > > > > current definition is heavily scripted. (Which i have not optimized > > > > and i will not do it any time soon) > > > > > second, i feel that no change is ever saved. if i do something and i > > > > want to make sure it will be saved i have to save as. otherwise no > > > > change is saved. > > > > > any idea why?
