CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > Software User Forums > Siemens > STAR-CCM+

Videocard for Star-CCM+

Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   November 27, 2019, 10:06
Default Videocard for Star-CCM+
  #1
cwl
Senior Member
 
Chaotic Water
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 136
Rep Power: 9
cwl is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to cwl
Hi everyone

Can anyone give some recommendations/feedback on a videocard for Star-CCM?

I'm asking this - because i still don't understand which one would provide decent framerate in scene (or 3D-CAD module mode) containing assembly consisting of about a hundred of CAD objects. Currently with my GTX 650 Ti (sounds old, but ...) performance is slow and frustrating - although the same assembly can be viewed and edited without any freezes in SpaceClaim, for example.

Another part is rendering (Resampled Volumes, opacity, Advanced Rendering) - is it CPU-based (since there is a "Client Render Threads" setting) or is it GPU-based?
If it works through CPU - then is there actually any benifit in having a powerful videocard?

Any comment/advice/feedback would be appreciated since I'm pretty confused.
__________________
I'm a rare guest on the forum. Got questions? - Skype: cwl.net
cwl is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 28, 2019, 01:13
Smile
  #2
Senior Member
 
Ashok Chaudhari
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Pune, India
Posts: 227
Rep Power: 6
ashokac7 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to ashokac7
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwl View Post
Hi everyone

Can anyone give some recommendations/feedback on a videocard for Star-CCM?

I'm asking this - because i still don't understand which one would provide decent framerate in scene (or 3D-CAD module mode) containing assembly consisting of about a hundred of CAD objects. Currently with my GTX 650 Ti (sounds old, but ...) performance is slow and frustrating - although the same assembly can be viewed and edited without any freezes in SpaceClaim, for example.

Another part is rendering (Resampled Volumes, opacity, Advanced Rendering) - is it CPU-based (since there is a "Client Render Threads" setting) or is it GPU-based?
If it works through CPU - then is there actually any benifit in having a powerful videocard?

Any comment/advice/feedback would be appreciated since I'm pretty confused.
There is section in Steve Portal and it is mentioned that Star CCM does use GPU for rendering. Check for the setting in Star CCM if it is using dedicated GPU for rendering.
May be this can be a limitation of Star CCM to handled such a large number of CAD objects.
In CCM, get into Tools>>Options>>Visualization
Select Unmanaged and see if there is any improvement.
Unmanaged option let graphics driver allocate GPU for the task based on usage.

If you have budget, you can go for better card.
ashokac7 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 28, 2019, 16:38
Default
  #3
cwl
Senior Member
 
Chaotic Water
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 136
Rep Power: 9
cwl is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to cwl
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashokac7 View Post
There is section in Steve Portal and it is mentioned that Star CCM does use GPU for rendering.
In CCM, get into Tools>>Options>>Visualization
Select Unmanaged and see if there is any improvement.
Unmanaged option let graphics driver allocate GPU for the task based on usage.
In my case I observed no difference between Default/Unmanaged/Opportunistic.

Again - what's then the "Client Render Threads"? - Which can be set to number of cores max, so it points to CPU.


Quote:
If you have budget, you can go for better card.
Sure. But the question is what is a sufficient better card? - GTX 1070, GTX 2080 or should I get Quadro?

PS I realize that hardware requirements depend on the complexity of the simulation, so I'm just trying to figure out some kind of milestone/benchmark ...
__________________
I'm a rare guest on the forum. Got questions? - Skype: cwl.net
cwl is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 28, 2019, 18:26
Default
  #4
New Member
 
ONTARIO
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 3
Rep Power: 2
m0j0jojo is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwl View Post
In my case I observed no difference between Default/Unmanaged/Opportunistic.

Again - what's then the "Client Render Threads"? - Which can be set to number of cores max, so it points to CPU.



Sure. But the question is what is a sufficient better card? - GTX 1070, GTX 2080 or should I get Quadro?

PS I realize that hardware requirements depend on the complexity of the simulation, so I'm just trying to figure out some kind of milestone/benchmark ...
I'm using a GTX780 Ti paired with a i7 4770k, and its butter smooth...But for simulations i would put my focus on a decent cpu, Starccm+ isnt really graphic intensive.
m0j0jojo is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 28, 2019, 20:12
Default
  #5
cwl
Senior Member
 
Chaotic Water
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 136
Rep Power: 9
cwl is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to cwl
Quote:
Originally Posted by m0j0jojo View Post
I'm using a GTX780 Ti paired with a i7 4770k, and its butter smooth...But for simulations i would put my focus on a decent cpu, Starccm+ isnt really graphic intensive.
I wonder, would it be also smooth - if you create a scene with:
- Scalar Displayer on Resampled Volume with semi-transparend ColorBar (like "blue-red highpass");
- Geometry Displayer with semi-transparent surfaces;
- set Transparency Mode of the Scene to Depth Peeling instead of default value of Alpha-Blending.

Because in my case this reduces fps almost to zero on 2 x Xeon E5-2683 v3 with Client Render Threads set to 28 (max cores), so I'm pretty confused about rendering.
__________________
I'm a rare guest on the forum. Got questions? - Skype: cwl.net
cwl is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 29, 2019, 01:29
Smile
  #6
Senior Member
 
Ashok Chaudhari
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Pune, India
Posts: 227
Rep Power: 6
ashokac7 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to ashokac7
Don't get RTX 2080 or GTX 1070 foe CAD workload. The Cuda architecture of Nvdia is not good CAD workload. CAD load favor OpenGL architecture. If you are on tight budget then get AMD RX 580 8GB or Vega 56 or Vega 64 if available. AMD RX 5700 or 5700XT is also good budget choice.

For more budget we can get a Quadro card. Quadro p5000 is very good or you can settle for p4000 as well. you can even get newer RTX quadro cards but I think they are pricey.

You can check your graphics performance by,

on scene section in simulation, right click and test the graphics. Post the output window here.
It should look like
"OpenGL supported, direct rendering, OpenGL hardware/Os based rendering detected."

Hope you have turned off hyper threading on your CPUs.
As you know multiple cores doesn't help in carrying volume rendering. Volume rendering needs single CPU and a GPU. (Check if you are using monitor with cable plugged into graphics card)
I too don't have an idea about client render threads. It is set to 12 on my 12 core desktop.
I do work with Resampled volume, and it works perfectly on my Quadro m5000.

Last edited by ashokac7; November 29, 2019 at 02:37.
ashokac7 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 29, 2019, 07:50
Default
  #7
cwl
Senior Member
 
Chaotic Water
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 136
Rep Power: 9
cwl is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to cwl
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashokac7 View Post
Don't get RTX 2080 or GTX 1070 foe CAD workload. The Cuda architecture of Nvdia is not good CAD workload. CAD load favor OpenGL architecture. If you are on tight budget then get AMD RX 580 8GB or Vega 56 or Vega 64 if available. AMD RX 5700 or 5700XT is also good budget choice.
Hm .. I might be missing something, but I do not understand how is Quadro better than RTX 2080 Ti - since according to specifications it looks more powerful:
Code:
                   Quadro P4000   RTX 2080 Ti
GPU Memory         8 Gb GDDR5     11 Gb GDDR5
Memory Interface   256 bit        256 bit
CUDA Cores	   1792           4352
OpenGL Version     4.5            4.6

Quote:
You can check your graphics performance by, on scene section in simulation, right click and test the graphics. Post the output window here.
It should look like "OpenGL supported, direct rendering, OpenGL hardware/Os based rendering detected."
I did it on desktop (GTX 650 Ti), cluster node (GT 720) and laptop (Intel HD 520) - can't see any difference in output that would actually allow to tell which is fast and which is slow; except for list of OpenGL extensions of course.

Desktop:
Code:
***Water Droplets Track [View = Iso] Report***
OpenGL:  supported
rendering:  direct
library:  native
OpenGL vendor string:  NVIDIA Corporation
OpenGL renderer string:  GeForce GTX 650 Ti/PCIe/SSE2
OpenGL version string:  4.6.0 NVIDIA 391.35
OpenGL extensions:  ...
pixel format:  8
class:  TrueColor
buffer size:  32
level:  0
renderType:  rgba
double buffer:  True
stereo:  False
rgba:  redSize=8greenSize=8blueSize=8alphaSize=8
depth size:  24
stencil size:  0
aux buffers:  4
accum:  redSize=16greenSize=16blueSize=16alphaSize=16
***End Water Droplets Track [View = Iso] Report***
Cluster Node:
Code:
***Water Droplets Track [View = Iso] Report***
OpenGL:  supported
rendering:  direct
library:  native
OpenGL vendor string:  NVIDIA Corporation
OpenGL renderer string:  GeForce GT 720/PCIe/SSE2
OpenGL version string:  4.5.0 NVIDIA 385.69
OpenGL extensions:  ...
pixel format:  8
class:  TrueColor
buffer size:  32
level:  0
renderType:  rgba
double buffer:  True
stereo:  False
rgba:  redSize=8greenSize=8blueSize=8alphaSize=8
depth size:  24
stencil size:  0
aux buffers:  4
accum:  redSize=16greenSize=16blueSize=16alphaSize=16
***End Water Droplets Track [View = Iso] Report***
Laptop:
Code:
***Scene Report***
OpenGL:  supported
rendering:  direct
library:  native
OpenGL vendor string:  Intel
OpenGL renderer string:  Intel(R) HD Graphics 520
OpenGL version string:  4.6.0 - Build 26.20.100.6913
OpenGL extensions:  ...
pixel format:  5
class:  TrueColor
buffer size:  32
level:  0
renderType:  rgba
double buffer:  True
stereo:  False
rgba:  redSize=8greenSize=8blueSize=8alphaSize=8
depth size:  24
stencil size:  8
aux buffers:  0
accum:  redSize=16greenSize=16blueSize=16alphaSize=16
***End Scene Report***

Quote:
Hope you have turned off hyper threading on your CPUs.
As you know multiple cores doesn't help in carrying volume rendering. Volume rendering needs single CPU and a GPU. (Check if you are using monitor with cable plugged into graphics card)
Thank you, sure I'm aware of this :>

Quote:
I too don't have an idea about client render threads. It is set to 12 on my 12 core desktop.
And here we are both confused

Quote:
I do work with Resampled volume, and it works perfectly on my Quadro m5000.
Can you by any chance set Transparency Mode of the Scene to Depth Peeling instead of default value of Alpha-Blending? - If that won't reduce fps - it would be a good sign.
Unless I just expect too much from hardware - like real-time rendering.
__________________
I'm a rare guest on the forum. Got questions? - Skype: cwl.net
cwl is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 4, 2019, 00:44
Smile
  #8
Senior Member
 
Ashok Chaudhari
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Pune, India
Posts: 227
Rep Power: 6
ashokac7 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to ashokac7
There is a benchmark video on Youtube (By Gamer Nexus) for workstation graphics cards. There are some optimizations done workstation cards which largely influence the CAD performance.

If you are confused then if there is return window period available, buy RTX 2080 Ti, try it in you system, if it works then good or return it.

Otherwise it is better to go ahead with Nvdia RTX 5000. Price is more, but you will not miss on workstation GPU optimizations.
ashokac7 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 4, 2019, 01:00
Smile
  #9
Senior Member
 
Ashok Chaudhari
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Pune, India
Posts: 227
Rep Power: 6
ashokac7 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Skype™ to ashokac7
I tried Depth peeling instead of alpha blending. There is some stutter. May be because of reduction in FPS.

Again it will depend on mesh size as well I guess.

May be you are expecting too much from the hardware.
ashokac7 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   December 4, 2019, 13:07
Default
  #10
Senior Member
 
Lucky Tran
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Orlando, FL USA
Posts: 3,629
Rep Power: 45
LuckyTran has a spectacular aura aboutLuckyTran has a spectacular aura about
I would not recommend dumping a lot of $ into a graphics card if displaying a part is the issue you want resolved.

The rendering is slow because you have too many objects to keep track of. A lot of small things will add up. Not saying that better hardware will not help, but it won't be as helpful as you might like. A lot of advances are needed in hardware and libraries for rendering large assemblies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cwl View Post
I did it on desktop (GTX 650 Ti), cluster node (GT 720) and laptop (Intel HD 520) - can't see any difference in output that would actually allow to tell which is fast and which is slow; except for list of OpenGL extensions of course.
It should say OpenGL: supported and rendering: direct (which it does). That means it is being rendered on the graphics card using OpenGL.
LuckyTran is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
problem when imported geometry from 3D CAD to star ccm, TAREK GANAT STAR-CCM+ 1 May 21, 2013 23:15
Problem In Star CCM Plus ramarya STAR-CCM+ 1 July 10, 2011 06:59
Fluent Vs Star CCM firda Main CFD Forum 3 February 26, 2011 03:51
problem with export ccm from starccm+ yan Siemens 0 July 22, 2008 06:06
error in star ccm maurizio Siemens 3 October 16, 2007 06:17


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 16:56.