I remember getting good advice from stalwarts in this group when I configured
my current desktop - still completely meeting my needs after 9 years.

Until now. I've just bought an upgrade to some fancy architectural software**,
which now sneers at my graphics adapter and won't do the 3D views I want. (The
2020 version was fine.)

I guess I could ask for a refund, but maybe after 9 years I should get a new
graphics card? What would you recommend? I've zero interest in gaming, and I
can't think of what other ray-tracing applications I might potentially use, so
anything much more than the £74 I spent on the upgrade will start to feel
expensive. Any suggestions gratefully received for something I can simply plug
in.

Here's the spec of my Dell Vostro 470:
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
CPU
Intel Core i7 3770 @ 3.40GHz 28 °C
Ivy Bridge 22nm Technology
RAM
18.0GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 798MHz (11-11-11-28)
Motherboard
Dell Inc. 0NW73C (CPU 1)
Graphics
DELL (Monitor) ST2320L (1920x1080@60Hz)
1023MB NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 (NVIDIA)

There's a crude photo of the motherboard here:
https://1drv.ms/u/s!AlXNpaNwJ1cugdElnbBSAlqqCEyaxw?e=EY61Xu

.... and the spec is here:
http://www.findlaptopdriver.com/dell-0nw73c-mainboard-specifications/

Unless I'm deceived, the existing graphics card is in the PCI Express x16 slot
(164 pin). (You may sense I'm out of my comfort zone with this sort of
thing...)

**That software: Home Designer Architectural. Allows you to design, fit and
decorate buildings on-screen, then place a camera, and fly through a 3D
rendering. It's utterly marvellous!
--

Phil, London

Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> I guess I could ask for a refund, but maybe after 9 years I should get a new
> graphics card? What would you recommend? I've zero interest in gaming, and I
> can't think of what other ray-tracing applications I might potentially use, so
> anything much more than the £74 I spent on the upgrade will start to feel
> expensive. Any suggestions gratefully received for something I can simply plug
> in.

The GPU market is in a complete mess because of supply chain issues and
stock being bought up by miners. Every single NVIDIA card above the
bottom-end GT1030 from 2017 is out of stock on Scan, for example (that card
is roughly level with your budget, but I don't know if your application
would be happy with something that basic).

See what you can actually buy and come back and ask if it's any good.
(and be wary of used cards, because they may have been thrashed by miners)

> Unless I'm deceived, the existing graphics card is in the PCI Express x16 slot
> (164 pin). (You may sense I'm out of my comfort zone with this sort of
> thing...)

Any PCIe GPU should be fine. It'll run slower if your mobo is only PCIe Gen
1 or 2, but that's ok.

You will need to check your power supply can support the extra wattage and
has extra PCIe power connectors if the GPU needs more than the motherboard
can supply.

Theo

"Philip Herlihy" <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.3c0a03e7fc458217989984@news.eternal-september.org...
> I remember getting good advice from stalwarts in this group when I
> configured
> my current desktop - still completely meeting my needs after 9 years.
>
> Until now. I've just bought an upgrade to some fancy architectural
> software**,
> which now sneers at my graphics adapter and won't do the 3D views I want.
> (The
> 2020 version was fine.)
>
> I guess I could ask for a refund, but maybe after 9 years I should get a
> new
> graphics card? What would you recommend? I've zero interest in gaming,
> and I
> can't think of what other ray-tracing applications I might potentially
> use, so
> anything much more than the £74 I spent on the upgrade will start to feel
> expensive. Any suggestions gratefully received for something I can simply
> plug
> in.
>
> Here's the spec of my Dell Vostro 470:
> Operating System
> Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
> CPU
> Intel Core i7 3770 @ 3.40GHz 28 °C
> Ivy Bridge 22nm Technology
> RAM
> 18.0GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 798MHz (11-11-11-28)
> Motherboard
> Dell Inc. 0NW73C (CPU 1)
> Graphics
> DELL (Monitor) ST2320L (1920x1080@60Hz)
> 1023MB NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 (NVIDIA)
>
> There's a crude photo of the motherboard here:
> https://1drv.ms/u/s!AlXNpaNwJ1cugdElnbBSAlqqCEyaxw?e=EY61Xu
>
> ... and the spec is here:
> http://www.findlaptopdriver.com/dell-0nw73c-mainboard-specifications/
>
> Unless I'm deceived, the existing graphics card is in the PCI Express x16
> slot
> (164 pin). (You may sense I'm out of my comfort zone with this sort of
> thing...)
>
> **That software: Home Designer Architectural. Allows you to design, fit
> and
> decorate buildings on-screen, then place a camera, and fly through a 3D
> rendering. It's utterly marvellous!

The system requirements for Home Designer Architectural are here
- https://www.homedesignersoftware.com/products/system-requirements.html

PC Minimum1

Windows 10 / 11 64-bit
8 GB of RAM
Video Card2
2 GB of RAM
DirectX 123
5 GB of available hard disk space
Internet access4

PC Recommended

32 GB of RAM
512 GB SSD
PC
Desktops:
Intel i9 / AMD Ryzen 5000
8 GB NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 / AMD Radeon RX6800
Laptops:
Minimum 15" screen
Intel i7
8 GB NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070

--
Regards
wasbit

On 26 Nov 2021 at 09:29:13 GMT, ""wasbit"" <wasbitremove@hotmail.com> wrote:

> "Philip Herlihy" <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.3c0a03e7fc458217989984@news.eternal-september.org...
>> I remember getting good advice from stalwarts in this group when I
>> configured
>> my current desktop - still completely meeting my needs after 9 years.
>>
>> Until now. I've just bought an upgrade to some fancy architectural
>> software**,
>> which now sneers at my graphics adapter and won't do the 3D views I want.
>> (The
>> 2020 version was fine.)
>>
>> I guess I could ask for a refund, but maybe after 9 years I should get a
>> new
>> graphics card? What would you recommend? I've zero interest in gaming,
>> and I
>> can't think of what other ray-tracing applications I might potentially
>> use, so
>> anything much more than the £74 I spent on the upgrade will start to feel
>> expensive. Any suggestions gratefully received for something I can simply
>> plug
>> in.
>>
>> Here's the spec of my Dell Vostro 470:
>> Operating System
>> Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
>> CPU
>> Intel Core i7 3770 @ 3.40GHz 28 °C
>> Ivy Bridge 22nm Technology
>> RAM
>> 18.0GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 798MHz (11-11-11-28)
>> Motherboard
>> Dell Inc. 0NW73C (CPU 1)
>> Graphics
>> DELL (Monitor) ST2320L (1920x1080@60Hz)
>> 1023MB NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 (NVIDIA)
>>
>> There's a crude photo of the motherboard here:
>> https://1drv.ms/u/s!AlXNpaNwJ1cugdElnbBSAlqqCEyaxw?e=EY61Xu
>>
>> ... and the spec is here:
>> http://www.findlaptopdriver.com/dell-0nw73c-mainboard-specifications/
>>
>> Unless I'm deceived, the existing graphics card is in the PCI Express x16
>> slot
>> (164 pin). (You may sense I'm out of my comfort zone with this sort of
>> thing...)
>>
>> **That software: Home Designer Architectural. Allows you to design, fit
>> and
>> decorate buildings on-screen, then place a camera, and fly through a 3D
>> rendering. It's utterly marvellous!
>
> The system requirements for Home Designer Architectural are here
> - https://www.homedesignersoftware.com/products/system-requirements.html
>
>
> PC Minimum1
>
> Windows 10 / 11 64-bit
> 8 GB of RAM
> Video Card2
> 2 GB of RAM
> DirectX 123
> 5 GB of available hard disk space
> Internet access4
>

So, on-chip Skylake or later.

> PC Recommended
>
> 32 GB of RAM
> 512 GB SSD
> PC
> Desktops:
> Intel i9 / AMD Ryzen 5000
> 8 GB NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 / AMD Radeon RX6800
> Laptops:
> Minimum 15" screen
> Intel i7
> 8 GB NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070

1000 UKP+ of video card there - if you can find one. Quite a difference in
requirements between minimum and recommended.

--
Cheers, Rob

In article <cPf*t9-zy@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk says...
> See what you can actually buy and come back and ask if it's any good.
> (and be wary of used cards, because they may have been thrashed by miners)
>
>

Thanks to Theo, wasbit and RJH for helpful replies. I'm really out of my depth
with all this!

I've done some digging, and following the link in the Home Designer error
dialogue leads to a stated requirement for DirectX 12 and Shader model 6. My
existing graphics card (NVIDIA GeForce GT 640) *does* meet both of these, as
reported by the application itself. However, it doesn't have the 2GB of
dedicated video memory. I guess that's the problem. The 2020 version still
works fine; rendering isn't quick at all, but we really don't need it to be.

One of the (comprehensive) Support pages has an example screenshot showing a
GTX 1050 Ti in use, and shown as meeting minimum requirements.
https://bit.ly/3nS6qmT

Aria.co.uk have a 1050Ti for £191.99. If this PC was upgradeable to W11, I
might well have gone for this, but it won't be, so it's appropriate to minimise
upgrade spending. They also have a GT1030 card for £86.99, and I'm thinking
that might be enough.
https://bit.ly/3ld1S9c

There are 2GB GT 730 cards out there from £57.98, but I figure those few more
quid is probably well-spent. (Until a new version demands 4GB, but by then
I'll be looking for a replacement desktop for W11).

Does that make sense? Is it worth paying a little more for a DDR5 card instead
of DDR4? The PC memory is DDR3.

As ever, grateful for the expertise and goodwill I find in this group.
--

Phil, London

RJH <patchmoney@gmx.com> wrote:
>
> > PC Recommended
> >
> > 32 GB of RAM
> > 512 GB SSD
> > PC
> > Desktops:
> > Intel i9 / AMD Ryzen 5000
> > 8 GB NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 / AMD Radeon RX6800
> > Laptops:
> > Minimum 15" screen
> > Intel i7
> > 8 GB NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070
>
> 1000 UKP+ of video card there - if you can find one. Quite a difference in
> requirements between minimum and recommended.

Those specs are a bit ridiculous IMHO. If it was an open-world first-person
shooter with fog and trees and fancy lighting and 120Hz 4K display, maybe.
But I don't imagine you're going to be shooting aliens in your kitchen.

Theo

Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> I remember getting good advice from stalwarts in this group when I configured
> my current desktop - still completely meeting my needs after 9 years.
>
> Until now. I've just bought an upgrade to some fancy architectural software**,
> which now sneers at my graphics adapter and won't do the 3D views I want. (The
> 2020 version was fine.)
>
> I guess I could ask for a refund, but maybe after 9 years I should get a new
> graphics card? What would you recommend? I've zero interest in gaming, and I
> can't think of what other ray-tracing applications I might potentially use, so
> anything much more than the £74 I spent on the upgrade will start to feel
> expensive. Any suggestions gratefully received for something I can simply plug
> in.

For that amount of money you're unlikely to find anything. The graphics
market is awful at the moment with astronomical prices caused by huge
demand and lack of supply.

> Here's the spec of my Dell Vostro 470:
> Operating System
> Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
> CPU
> Intel Core i7 3770 @ 3.40GHz 28 °C
> Ivy Bridge 22nm Technology
> RAM
> 18.0GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 798MHz (11-11-11-28)
> Motherboard
> Dell Inc. 0NW73C (CPU 1)
> Graphics
> DELL (Monitor) ST2320L (1920x1080@60Hz)
> 1023MB NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 (NVIDIA)

The current generation of nVidia cards are the RTX 30 series but are way
out of your budget.

I'd go for a 10 series if you can find any stock. A GTX 1050ti would be a
very decent upgrade for you. On ebay you might be able to find a GTX 950 or
960 within your budget.

One thing to watch is the physical size of the card, you need to check if
it'll fit in the case, and also the grunt of your power supply.

> There's a crude photo of the motherboard here:
> https://1drv.ms/u/s!AlXNpaNwJ1cugdElnbBSAlqqCEyaxw?e=EY61Xu
>
> ... and the spec is here:
> http://www.findlaptopdriver.com/dell-0nw73c-mainboard-specifications/
>
> Unless I'm deceived, the existing graphics card is in the PCI Express x16 slot
> (164 pin). (You may sense I'm out of my comfort zone with this sort of
> thing...)
>
> **That software: Home Designer Architectural. Allows you to design, fit and
> decorate buildings on-screen, then place a camera, and fly through a 3D
> rendering. It's utterly marvellous!

In article <snqqnc$cl6$1@dont-email.me>, ithinkiam@gmail.com says...
>
> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> > I remember getting good advice from stalwarts in this group when I configured
> > my current desktop - still completely meeting my needs after 9 years.
> >
> > Until now. I've just bought an upgrade to some fancy architectural software**,
> > which now sneers at my graphics adapter and won't do the 3D views I want. (The
> > 2020 version was fine.)
> >
> > I guess I could ask for a refund, but maybe after 9 years I should get a new
> > graphics card? What would you recommend? I've zero interest in gaming, and I
> > can't think of what other ray-tracing applications I might potentially use, so
> > anything much more than the £74 I spent on the upgrade will start to feel
> > expensive. Any suggestions gratefully received for something I can simply plug
> > in.
>
....
>
> I'd go for a 10 series if you can find any stock. A GTX 1050ti would be a
> very decent upgrade for you. On ebay you might be able to find a GTX 950 or
> 960 within your budget.
>
> One thing to watch is the physical size of the card, you need to check if
> it'll fit in the case, and also the grunt of your power supply.
>

Thanks, Chris. I had zoomed-in on cards in that sort of range, and I'm glad to
hear that the 1050Ti would be a decent upgrade. (I've registered the need to
look at profile, and power.) However, I'll only use it for this one
application; I don't need great performance, as the rendering is only done
every now and than and if it takes 25 seconds instead of 5 that really won't
matter, and it goes against the grain to splash out on a machine that'll be
junk in the foreseeable future (gee, thanks, Microsoft). So do you think a 1030
would do the job?

--

Phil, London

Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> In article <snqqnc$cl6$1@dont-email.me>, ithinkiam@gmail.com says...
>>
>> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
>>> I remember getting good advice from stalwarts in this group when I configured
>>> my current desktop - still completely meeting my needs after 9 years.
>>>
>>> Until now. I've just bought an upgrade to some fancy architectural software**,
>>> which now sneers at my graphics adapter and won't do the 3D views I want. (The
>>> 2020 version was fine.)
>>>
>>> I guess I could ask for a refund, but maybe after 9 years I should get a new
>>> graphics card? What would you recommend? I've zero interest in gaming, and I
>>> can't think of what other ray-tracing applications I might potentially use, so
>>> anything much more than the £74 I spent on the upgrade will start to feel
>>> expensive. Any suggestions gratefully received for something I can simply plug
>>> in.
>>
> ...
>>
>> I'd go for a 10 series if you can find any stock. A GTX 1050ti would be a
>> very decent upgrade for you. On ebay you might be able to find a GTX 950 or
>> 960 within your budget.
>>
>> One thing to watch is the physical size of the card, you need to check if
>> it'll fit in the case, and also the grunt of your power supply.
>>
>
>
> Thanks, Chris. I had zoomed-in on cards in that sort of range, and I'm glad to
> hear that the 1050Ti would be a decent upgrade. (I've registered the need to
> look at profile, and power.) However, I'll only use it for this one
> application; I don't need great performance, as the rendering is only done
> every now and than and if it takes 25 seconds instead of 5 that really won't
> matter, and it goes against the grain to splash out on a machine that'll be
> junk in the foreseeable future (gee, thanks, Microsoft). So do you think a 1030
> would do the job?

I really don't know. nVidia normally have x60, x70, x80 spec cards within
each series. Having an x50 is unusual and an x30 must be really cut down. I
would avoid it, I think.

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> > Thanks, Chris. I had zoomed-in on cards in that sort of range, and I'm
> > glad to hear that the 1050Ti would be a decent upgrade. (I've
> > registered the need to look at profile, and power.) However, I'll only
> > use it for this one application; I don't need great performance, as the
> > rendering is only done every now and than and if it takes 25 seconds
> > instead of 5 that really won't matter, and it goes against the grain to
> > splash out on a machine that'll be junk in the foreseeable future (gee,
> > thanks, Microsoft). So do you think a 1030 would do the job?
>
> I really don't know. nVidia normally have x60, x70, x80 spec cards within
> each series. Having an x50 is unusual and an x30 must be really cut down. I
> would avoid it, I think.

Those sort of cards are basically for people who want to connect more
monitors to their computer, rather than any rendering prowess. Here's the
10 series comparison:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_10_series

Note how the 1030 is 384 cores and 2GB RAM, while the specs rapidly go up
from there (GTX1050 640/768 cores and 2-4GB RAM, GTX1070 1920 cores and 8GB
RAM). And that series was released in *2016*, so is now 5 years old - they
just recycle crippled older chips as 'budget' cards.

A 1030 should *work*, but expect 1 FPS in fancy games. Which perhaps won't
matter if all you're doing is rendering some video overnight. It'll also be
at the bottom end of the memory range so you might have to scale down
quality to reduce the amount of resources (textures etc) in memory.

Also to note that lower end cards are limited in their outputs - at some
point you had to go up to a *50 to get Displayport, for example. I haven't
checked the 1030.

Ordinarily I'd suggest going with a used card from a previous generation,
but it's a bit risky with ex-mining cards being sold off, as some of those
are worn out through being hammered 24/7. If you know anyone selling off a
card you know hasn't been used for mining, that could be a good option.
If you go too old you start dropping off the support lifetime, so I'd check
what DirectX version a card supports.

Theo

On 26 Nov 2021 at 21:26:12 GMT, "Theo" <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
wrote:

> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks, Chris. I had zoomed-in on cards in that sort of range, and I'm
>>> glad to hear that the 1050Ti would be a decent upgrade. (I've
>>> registered the need to look at profile, and power.) However, I'll only
>>> use it for this one application; I don't need great performance, as the
>>> rendering is only done every now and than and if it takes 25 seconds
>>> instead of 5 that really won't matter, and it goes against the grain to
>>> splash out on a machine that'll be junk in the foreseeable future (gee,
>>> thanks, Microsoft). So do you think a 1030 would do the job?
>>
>> I really don't know. nVidia normally have x60, x70, x80 spec cards within
>> each series. Having an x50 is unusual and an x30 must be really cut down. I
>> would avoid it, I think.
>
> Those sort of cards are basically for people who want to connect more
> monitors to their computer, rather than any rendering prowess. Here's the
> 10 series comparison:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_10_series
>
> Note how the 1030 is 384 cores and 2GB RAM, while the specs rapidly go up
> from there (GTX1050 640/768 cores and 2-4GB RAM, GTX1070 1920 cores and 8GB
> RAM). And that series was released in *2016*, so is now 5 years old - they
> just recycle crippled older chips as 'budget' cards.
>
> A 1030 should *work*, but expect 1 FPS in fancy games. Which perhaps won't
> matter if all you're doing is rendering some video overnight. It'll also be
> at the bottom end of the memory range so you might have to scale down
> quality to reduce the amount of resources (textures etc) in memory.
>

I wonder if the OP could drop a Skylake or later graphics-equipped CPU in?

I rather generously gifted my GTX 780 graphics card to my nephew at the start
of lockdown, leaving me with the on-chip graphics of my i3 6100 3.7 CPU. I
haven't missed the 780 at all - but then I only play the occasional 20+ year
old games on the PC (I've a PS4 for when I can be bothered). I did try Doom
2016 just to see - and it did actually run on low settings. Not pretty, but it
did run . . .
--
Cheers, Rob

RJH <patchmoney@gmx.com> wrote:
> I wonder if the OP could drop a Skylake or later graphics-equipped CPU in?

That would be new PC time. The motherboard won't support a newer CPU, so
you need a new mobo. Then Skylake won't support DDR3 so you need new RAM.
Then I don't know if the Dell has one of those non-standard cases they like
where the power supply is wired in a strange way and the PCI cards are in a
different place, which might mean a new case and/or a new PSU.

That said, Ivy Bridge is pretty long in the tooth and it might not make
sense to throw money at an old PC. So if a newer one were to turn up on the
used market it might not be a terrible idea.

> I rather generously gifted my GTX 780 graphics card to my nephew at the start
> of lockdown, leaving me with the on-chip graphics of my i3 6100 3.7 CPU. I
> haven't missed the 780 at all - but then I only play the occasional 20+ year
> old games on the PC (I've a PS4 for when I can be bothered). I did try Doom
> 2016 just to see - and it did actually run on low settings. Not pretty, but it
> did run . . .

I would expect even a GT 1030 to have better graphics performance than Intel
integrated graphics, although Intel Xe graphics on the current Tiger Lake
CPUs is a big improvement.

Theo

In article <aPf*G1hAy@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk says...
>
> RJH <patchmoney@gmx.com> wrote:
> > I wonder if the OP could drop a Skylake or later graphics-equipped CPU in?
>
> That would be new PC time. The motherboard won't support a newer CPU, so
> you need a new mobo. Then Skylake won't support DDR3 so you need new RAM.
> Then I don't know if the Dell has one of those non-standard cases they like
> where the power supply is wired in a strange way and the PCI cards are in a
> different place, which might mean a new case and/or a new PSU.
>
> That said, Ivy Bridge is pretty long in the tooth and it might not make
> sense to throw money at an old PC. So if a newer one were to turn up on the
> used market it might not be a terrible idea.
>
> > I rather generously gifted my GTX 780 graphics card to my nephew at the start
> > of lockdown, leaving me with the on-chip graphics of my i3 6100 3.7 CPU. I
> > haven't missed the 780 at all - but then I only play the occasional 20+ year
> > old games on the PC (I've a PS4 for when I can be bothered). I did try Doom
> > 2016 just to see - and it did actually run on low settings. Not pretty, but it
> > did run . . .
>
> I would expect even a GT 1030 to have better graphics performance than Intel
> integrated graphics, although Intel Xe graphics on the current Tiger Lake
> CPUs is a big improvement.
>
> Theo

Thanks everyone, once again. The gist of replies is that the 1030 is a bit
weedy for any significant rendering - which is not what I'd hoped to hear. The
1050Ti is almost £200, and I think that money would be better put towards a new
machine in a couple of years, given that the 2020 version of the software runs
fine on my existing GT 640. I've had a response from customer service (I'd
floated the idea of a refund) and they want me to talk to support (Monday now)
so I'll follow that up and see what they suggest. They've offered to add the
2021 version to my 'Key' to see if that runs, and I might try that.

--

Phil, London

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks, Chris. I had zoomed-in on cards in that sort of range, and I'm
>>> glad to hear that the 1050Ti would be a decent upgrade. (I've
>>> registered the need to look at profile, and power.) However, I'll only
>>> use it for this one application; I don't need great performance, as the
>>> rendering is only done every now and than and if it takes 25 seconds
>>> instead of 5 that really won't matter, and it goes against the grain to
>>> splash out on a machine that'll be junk in the foreseeable future (gee,
>>> thanks, Microsoft). So do you think a 1030 would do the job?
>>
>> I really don't know. nVidia normally have x60, x70, x80 spec cards within
>> each series. Having an x50 is unusual and an x30 must be really cut down. I
>> would avoid it, I think.
>
> Those sort of cards are basically for people who want to connect more
> monitors to their computer, rather than any rendering prowess. Here's the
> 10 series comparison:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_10_series
>
> Note how the 1030 is 384 cores and 2GB RAM, while the specs rapidly go up
> from there (GTX1050 640/768 cores and 2-4GB RAM, GTX1070 1920 cores and 8GB
> RAM). And that series was released in *2016*, so is now 5 years old - they
> just recycle crippled older chips as 'budget' cards.
>
> A 1030 should *work*, but expect 1 FPS in fancy games. Which perhaps won't
> matter if all you're doing is rendering some video overnight. It'll also be
> at the bottom end of the memory range so you might have to scale down
> quality to reduce the amount of resources (textures etc) in memory.
>
> Also to note that lower end cards are limited in their outputs - at some
> point you had to go up to a *50 to get Displayport, for example. I haven't
> checked the 1030.
>
> Ordinarily I'd suggest going with a used card from a previous generation,
> but it's a bit risky with ex-mining cards being sold off, as some of those
> are worn out through being hammered 24/7.

Actually it's not that risky. Although, they will have been run
continuously they tend to underclock them a bit to increase stability and a
good setup will have thorough cooling. Borderline cards will fail early so
a card that's been used for a while could be a decent buy.

I'd be interested in buying one but they're still really expensive.

> If you know anyone selling off a
> card you know hasn't been used for mining, that could be a good option.
> If you go too old you start dropping off the support lifetime, so I'd check
> what DirectX version a card supports.
>
> Theo
>

Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> Thanks everyone, once again. The gist of replies is that the 1030 is a bit
> weedy for any significant rendering - which is not what I'd hoped to hear. The
> 1050Ti is almost £200, and I think that money would be better put towards a new
> machine in a couple of years, given that the 2020 version of the software runs
> fine on my existing GT 640. I've had a response from customer service (I'd
> floated the idea of a refund) and they want me to talk to support (Monday now)
> so I'll follow that up and see what they suggest. They've offered to add the
> 2021 version to my 'Key' to see if that runs, and I might try that.

Sounds fair. One thing you could do is seek out forums for this particular
software and see what users recommend in real life. The specs they quote
seem somewhat excessive for what it seems the program actually does.

I see they're recommending RTX cards for the realtime ray tracing features,
which is fair enough, but it's quite possible you can still make use of the
program by just skipping a few of the whizzy features, downscaling the
resolution or running renders overnight. Especially if you're not an
architect using the program all day for professional purposes, for whom time
is money and spending a few hundred on hardware is nothing.

Theo

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
[buying ex-mining GPUs]
> Actually it's not that risky. Although, they will have been run
> continuously they tend to underclock them a bit to increase stability and a
> good setup will have thorough cooling. Borderline cards will fail early so
> a card that's been used for a while could be a decent buy.
>
> I'd be interested in buying one but they're still really expensive.

Thing is you don't know what life it's lead, and whether it's still
functional. It could 'work' but be glitchy or unstable under load, for
example, or have memory errors. Since the vendor is unlikely to offer you a
warranty, it's hard to test for these things and you don't get much comeback
if it's anything other than DOA.

Theo

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> [buying ex-mining GPUs]
>> Actually it's not that risky. Although, they will have been run
>> continuously they tend to underclock them a bit to increase stability and a
>> good setup will have thorough cooling. Borderline cards will fail early so
>> a card that's been used for a while could be a decent buy.
>>
>> I'd be interested in buying one but they're still really expensive.
>
> Thing is you don't know what life it's lead, and whether it's still
> functional. It could 'work' but be glitchy or unstable under load, for
> example, or have memory errors. Since the vendor is unlikely to offer you a
> warranty, it's hard to test for these things and you don't get much comeback
> if it's anything other than DOA.

ebay are very good at giving your money back if the product doesn't match
the description. In fact from some sellers I've heard it's too good so
fraudsters claim a perfectly good item is faulty and ebay give them the
money back no questions asked.

In article <aPf*+7iAy@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk says...
>
> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> > Thanks everyone, once again. The gist of replies is that the 1030 is a bit
> > weedy for any significant rendering - which is not what I'd hoped to hear. The
> > 1050Ti is almost £200, and I think that money would be better put towards a new
> > machine in a couple of years, given that the 2020 version of the software runs
> > fine on my existing GT 640. I've had a response from customer service (I'd
> > floated the idea of a refund) and they want me to talk to support (Monday now)
> > so I'll follow that up and see what they suggest. They've offered to add the
> > 2021 version to my 'Key' to see if that runs, and I might try that.
>
> Sounds fair. One thing you could do is seek out forums for this particular
> software and see what users recommend in real life. The specs they quote
> seem somewhat excessive for what it seems the program actually does.
>
> I see they're recommending RTX cards for the realtime ray tracing features,
> which is fair enough, but it's quite possible you can still make use of the
> program by just skipping a few of the whizzy features, downscaling the
> resolution or running renders overnight. Especially if you're not an
> architect using the program all day for professional purposes, for whom time
> is money and spending a few hundred on hardware is nothing.
>
> Theo

Certainly performance hasn't been an issue on the earlier version of the
software. I'll check the user forums - thanks for the reminder.

--

Phil, London

In article <MPG.3c0edf37d091abe5989988@news.eternal-september.org>,
thiswillbounceback@you.com says...
>
> In article <aPf*+7iAy@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
> theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk says...
> >
> > Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> > > Thanks everyone, once again. The gist of replies is that the 1030 is a bit
> > > weedy for any significant rendering - which is not what I'd hoped to hear. The
> > > 1050Ti is almost £200, and I think that money would be better put towards a new
> > > machine in a couple of years, given that the 2020 version of the software runs
> > > fine on my existing GT 640. I've had a response from customer service (I'd
> > > floated the idea of a refund) and they want me to talk to support (Monday now)
> > > so I'll follow that up and see what they suggest. They've offered to add the
> > > 2021 version to my 'Key' to see if that runs, and I might try that.
> >
> > Sounds fair. One thing you could do is seek out forums for this particular
> > software and see what users recommend in real life. The specs they quote
> > seem somewhat excessive for what it seems the program actually does.
> >
> > I see they're recommending RTX cards for the realtime ray tracing features,
> > which is fair enough, but it's quite possible you can still make use of the
> > program by just skipping a few of the whizzy features, downscaling the
> > resolution or running renders overnight. Especially if you're not an
> > architect using the program all day for professional purposes, for whom time
> > is money and spending a few hundred on hardware is nothing.
> >
> > Theo
>
> Certainly performance hasn't been an issue on the earlier version of the
> software. I'll check the user forums - thanks for the reminder.

There wasn't much on the user forums, surprisingly (before my update tonight).
Support were helpful, though. Apparently it's a major upgrade in terms of 3D
rendering, and the minimum spec is DirectX 12, Shader Model 6, and 2 GB
graphics memory, or the 3D rendering is simply disabled. That is likely to hit
a lot of people purchasing or upgrading, I figure. They said the 1030 card
will just about do it, but with rapidly deteriorating performance as you add
more twiddles to your design. So I've just ordered a GTX 1050 Ti at £215 from
Amazon. Prices are clearly soaring (even for a relatively old card like this)
and availability is very, very thin.

No excuses now, I have to design that extension...

--

Phil, London

Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> There wasn't much on the user forums, surprisingly (before my update tonight).
> Support were helpful, though. Apparently it's a major upgrade in terms of 3D
> rendering, and the minimum spec is DirectX 12, Shader Model 6, and 2 GB
> graphics memory, or the 3D rendering is simply disabled. That is likely to hit
> a lot of people purchasing or upgrading, I figure. They said the 1030 card
> will just about do it, but with rapidly deteriorating performance as you add
> more twiddles to your design. So I've just ordered a GTX 1050 Ti at £215 from
> Amazon. Prices are clearly soaring (even for a relatively old card like this)
> and availability is very, very thin.

Hope that does the trick. Sadly the GPU market is a complete mess - sooner
there's a crash in crypto prices the better, IMHO.

> No excuses now, I have to design that extension...

How do you find that software, by the way? I've seen various similar, but
I'm wondering what they do beyond simply a bit of floorplanning and 3D
rendering. Will they help with, say, load calculations or where to run
services? Will it generate drawings sufficient for submitting for planning,
or do you still need to pay someone to do that?

(I suppose people like renders on planning applications these days...)

Theo

In article <bPf*R1SAy@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk says...
>
> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> > There wasn't much on the user forums, surprisingly (before my update tonight).
> > Support were helpful, though. Apparently it's a major upgrade in terms of 3D
> > rendering, and the minimum spec is DirectX 12, Shader Model 6, and 2 GB
> > graphics memory, or the 3D rendering is simply disabled. That is likely to hit
> > a lot of people purchasing or upgrading, I figure. They said the 1030 card
> > will just about do it, but with rapidly deteriorating performance as you add
> > more twiddles to your design. So I've just ordered a GTX 1050 Ti at £215 from
> > Amazon. Prices are clearly soaring (even for a relatively old card like this)
> > and availability is very, very thin.
>
> Hope that does the trick. Sadly the GPU market is a complete mess - sooner
> there's a crash in crypto prices the better, IMHO.
>
> > No excuses now, I have to design that extension...
>
> How do you find that software, by the way? I've seen various similar, but
> I'm wondering what they do beyond simply a bit of floorplanning and 3D
> rendering. Will they help with, say, load calculations or where to run
> services? Will it generate drawings sufficient for submitting for planning,
> or do you still need to pay someone to do that?
>
> (I suppose people like renders on planning applications these days...)
>
> Theo

I'm really impressed with it, and I certainly haven't seen anything to touch
it, outside what our architect used. Our refurbishment + extra floor project
is complex, and (frankly) a bit challenging for our limited experience. It's a
large detached (currently 3-bed) house, and there are simply so many possible
options for what we could do with it that the choice has boiled down either to
engage an interior designer and just hand them design control, or attempt to
specify what we want in this extensive project. We're going for the latter -
this is to be our forever home. Home Designer has already helped us avoid what
could have been ghastly design mistakes: at one point we were more or less
settled on a slightly unconvential layout for the master bedroom, which looked
fine in the 2D plans, but once rendered into a "live" 3D representation we both
said "Heavens: NO!" within two seconds of the first moment of rendering.

Have a look at the "Time Lapse" shown on the Home Page - about 3 minutes.
https://www.homedesignersoftware.com/

"Home Designer" is from the stable of "Chief Architect" which is a much more
expensive package squarely aimed at the professional market. HD comes in
several offerings, all for the amateur/DIY market, quite neatly segmented into
price points with different levels of capability. We've gone for the
"Architectural" version, having started (a few years ago) with a now-defunct
version focused mainly on interior design. For what you get it's not that
expensive, though the latest upgrade has brought the hardware upgrade cost
described above. The previous version (2001) runs happily on my 12-year-old
PC, though I guess rendering would slow as we add more detail. I think the
GPU-intensive rendering only takes place when "compiling" the 3D views, which
then whizz about responsively, so I think Chief Architect may need to have
another look at their marketing - I'm a fan, but if they want a presence in the
lower segments of the overall market they may need to maintain a less
processing-hungry offering or it may not sell.

As for whether HD will generate drawings suitable for planning applications -
we've relied on professionals for this, as our project *definitely* isn't
"permitted development" and we only got permission at the sixth application,
and with the aid of a planning consultant. But I think it would be perfectly
possible to create drawings acceptable to planners (though this may depend on
the version). It can create service layouts but I haven't seen anything that
suggests it'll do load calculations. We have 23 pages of mathematics sent to
us by our Structural Engineer, and I think that sort of thing is best left to
qualified professionals. Our experience generally is that the local planning
authority will make arbitrary demands and decisions faced only with a
householder or even an architect; it took someone with specific "planning"
knowledge (beyond that even of our architect) to get them to sign off on what's
actually an inoffensive project. (Meanwhile, they spend their time thudding
vast and hideous tower blocks on every square foot of space they can find - but
that's another story.)

If you're at the early stages of any new home project, you might also be
interested in this:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.dirkfarin.imagemeterpro

It's an (Android) app (IOS?) which allows you to annotate photos with
measurements, which it can capture from a bluetooth-enabled laser measure. One
of the best and most useful apps on my mobile.

--

Phil, London

Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> In article <MPG.3c0edf37d091abe5989988@news.eternal-september.org>,
> thiswillbounceback@you.com says...
>>
>> In article <aPf*+7iAy@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
>> theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk says...
>>>
>>> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
>>>> Thanks everyone, once again. The gist of replies is that the 1030 is a bit
>>>> weedy for any significant rendering - which is not what I'd hoped to hear. The
>>>> 1050Ti is almost £200, and I think that money would be better put towards a new
>>>> machine in a couple of years, given that the 2020 version of the software runs
>>>> fine on my existing GT 640. I've had a response from customer service (I'd
>>>> floated the idea of a refund) and they want me to talk to support (Monday now)
>>>> so I'll follow that up and see what they suggest. They've offered to add the
>>>> 2021 version to my 'Key' to see if that runs, and I might try that.
>>>
>>> Sounds fair. One thing you could do is seek out forums for this particular
>>> software and see what users recommend in real life. The specs they quote
>>> seem somewhat excessive for what it seems the program actually does.
>>>
>>> I see they're recommending RTX cards for the realtime ray tracing features,
>>> which is fair enough, but it's quite possible you can still make use of the
>>> program by just skipping a few of the whizzy features, downscaling the
>>> resolution or running renders overnight. Especially if you're not an
>>> architect using the program all day for professional purposes, for whom time
>>> is money and spending a few hundred on hardware is nothing.
>>>
>>> Theo
>>
>> Certainly performance hasn't been an issue on the earlier version of the
>> software. I'll check the user forums - thanks for the reminder.
>
> There wasn't much on the user forums, surprisingly (before my update tonight).
> Support were helpful, though. Apparently it's a major upgrade in terms of 3D
> rendering, and the minimum spec is DirectX 12, Shader Model 6, and 2 GB
> graphics memory, or the 3D rendering is simply disabled. That is likely to hit
> a lot of people purchasing or upgrading, I figure. They said the 1030 card
> will just about do it, but with rapidly deteriorating performance as you add
> more twiddles to your design. So I've just ordered a GTX 1050 Ti at £215 from
> Amazon. Prices are clearly soaring (even for a relatively old card like this)
> and availability is very, very thin.

Good luck with it. I've been waiting over a year for a £200 card to improve
on my current 1060...

> No excuses now, I have to design that extension...

Can you do mine as well please? ;)

In article <sofsro$dll$1@dont-email.me>, ithinkiam@gmail.com says...
>
> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> > In article <MPG.3c0edf37d091abe5989988@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > thiswillbounceback@you.com says...
> >>
> >> In article <aPf*+7iAy@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
> >> theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk says...
> >>>
> >>> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> >>>> Thanks everyone, once again. The gist of replies is that the 1030 is a bit
> >>>> weedy for any significant rendering - which is not what I'd hoped to hear. The
> >>>> 1050Ti is almost £200, and I think that money would be better put towards a new
> >>>> machine in a couple of years, given that the 2020 version of the software runs
> >>>> fine on my existing GT 640. I've had a response from customer service (I'd
> >>>> floated the idea of a refund) and they want me to talk to support (Monday now)
> >>>> so I'll follow that up and see what they suggest. They've offered to add the
> >>>> 2021 version to my 'Key' to see if that runs, and I might try that.
> >>>
> >>> Sounds fair. One thing you could do is seek out forums for this particular
> >>> software and see what users recommend in real life. The specs they quote
> >>> seem somewhat excessive for what it seems the program actually does.
> >>>
> >>> I see they're recommending RTX cards for the realtime ray tracing features,
> >>> which is fair enough, but it's quite possible you can still make use of the
> >>> program by just skipping a few of the whizzy features, downscaling the
> >>> resolution or running renders overnight. Especially if you're not an
> >>> architect using the program all day for professional purposes, for whom time
> >>> is money and spending a few hundred on hardware is nothing.
> >>>
> >>> Theo
> >>
> >> Certainly performance hasn't been an issue on the earlier version of the
> >> software. I'll check the user forums - thanks for the reminder.
> >
> > There wasn't much on the user forums, surprisingly (before my update tonight).
> > Support were helpful, though. Apparently it's a major upgrade in terms of 3D
> > rendering, and the minimum spec is DirectX 12, Shader Model 6, and 2 GB
> > graphics memory, or the 3D rendering is simply disabled. That is likely to hit
> > a lot of people purchasing or upgrading, I figure. They said the 1030 card
> > will just about do it, but with rapidly deteriorating performance as you add
> > more twiddles to your design. So I've just ordered a GTX 1050 Ti at £215 from
> > Amazon. Prices are clearly soaring (even for a relatively old card like this)
> > and availability is very, very thin.
>
> Good luck with it. I've been waiting over a year for a £200 card to improve
> on my current 1060...
>
> > No excuses now, I have to design that extension...
>
> Can you do mine as well please? ;)

As far as I can see the 1050Ti may be a better card than the 1060? The former
has only 3GB of RAM compared with 4GB for the 1050Ti, but I'm no expert in
these things!

I rather think I'd find doing yours easier than doing mine! (Too much at
stake!). One thing I would say is that getting expert advice (architect) made
a *vast* difference. Our original contractor (high-end interior designer with
a stable of preferred trades) did a "design" for us which we thought clearly
inadequate - it used only a fraction of the space, and the positioning of the
staircase was highly questionable. Much to his chagrin, we brought in
'specialist' loft conversion contractors to quote, but even they seemed to want
to drop standard solutions onto what's quite a big roof space. Eventually we
went to a local architect, and the difference was worth every penny - a really
striking, imaginative design. But of course that was what led to the battles
with the planners...

By the way, this thread surely can't be OT if the group is called "homebuilt"!

--

Phil, London

Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> In article <sofsro$dll$1@dont-email.me>, ithinkiam@gmail.com says...
>>
>> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
>>> In article <MPG.3c0edf37d091abe5989988@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> thiswillbounceback@you.com says...
>>>>
>>>> In article <aPf*+7iAy@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
>>>> theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk says...
>>>>>
>>>>> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks everyone, once again. The gist of replies is that the 1030 is a bit
>>>>>> weedy for any significant rendering - which is not what I'd hoped to hear. The
>>>>>> 1050Ti is almost £200, and I think that money would be better put towards a new
>>>>>> machine in a couple of years, given that the 2020 version of the software runs
>>>>>> fine on my existing GT 640. I've had a response from customer service (I'd
>>>>>> floated the idea of a refund) and they want me to talk to support (Monday now)
>>>>>> so I'll follow that up and see what they suggest. They've offered to add the
>>>>>> 2021 version to my 'Key' to see if that runs, and I might try that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds fair. One thing you could do is seek out forums for this particular
>>>>> software and see what users recommend in real life. The specs they quote
>>>>> seem somewhat excessive for what it seems the program actually does.
>>>>>
>>>>> I see they're recommending RTX cards for the realtime ray tracing features,
>>>>> which is fair enough, but it's quite possible you can still make use of the
>>>>> program by just skipping a few of the whizzy features, downscaling the
>>>>> resolution or running renders overnight. Especially if you're not an
>>>>> architect using the program all day for professional purposes, for whom time
>>>>> is money and spending a few hundred on hardware is nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Theo
>>>>
>>>> Certainly performance hasn't been an issue on the earlier version of the
>>>> software. I'll check the user forums - thanks for the reminder.
>>>
>>> There wasn't much on the user forums, surprisingly (before my update tonight).
>>> Support were helpful, though. Apparently it's a major upgrade in terms of 3D
>>> rendering, and the minimum spec is DirectX 12, Shader Model 6, and 2 GB
>>> graphics memory, or the 3D rendering is simply disabled. That is likely to hit
>>> a lot of people purchasing or upgrading, I figure. They said the 1030 card
>>> will just about do it, but with rapidly deteriorating performance as you add
>>> more twiddles to your design. So I've just ordered a GTX 1050 Ti at £215 from
>>> Amazon. Prices are clearly soaring (even for a relatively old card like this)
>>> and availability is very, very thin.
>>
>> Good luck with it. I've been waiting over a year for a £200 card to improve
>> on my current 1060...
>>
>>> No excuses now, I have to design that extension...
>>
>> Can you do mine as well please? ;)
>
> As far as I can see the 1050Ti may be a better card than the 1060? The former
> has only 3GB of RAM compared with 4GB for the 1050Ti, but I'm no expert in
> these things!

It may be, but not enough to warrant the expense. I had my eye on a 1660
card last year, but thought it too expensive at ~£250...

> I rather think I'd find doing yours easier than doing mine! (Too much at
> stake!). One thing I would say is that getting expert advice (architect) made
> a *vast* difference. Our original contractor (high-end interior designer with
> a stable of preferred trades) did a "design" for us which we thought clearly
> inadequate - it used only a fraction of the space, and the positioning of the
> staircase was highly questionable. Much to his chagrin, we brought in
> 'specialist' loft conversion contractors to quote, but even they seemed to want
> to drop standard solutions onto what's quite a big roof space. Eventually we
> went to a local architect, and the difference was worth every penny - a really
> striking, imaginative design. But of course that was what led to the battles
> with the planners...

Not even there yet. We're still at the agreeing with SO regarding plans
stage.

> By the way, this thread surely can't be OT if the group is called "homebuilt"!

heh

In article <sogabs$du3$1@dont-email.me>, ithinkiam@gmail.com says...
>
> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> > In article <sofsro$dll$1@dont-email.me>, ithinkiam@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> >>> In article <MPG.3c0edf37d091abe5989988@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >>> thiswillbounceback@you.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>> In article <aPf*+7iAy@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
> >>>> theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk says...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Philip Herlihy <thiswillbounceback@you.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Thanks everyone, once again. The gist of replies is that the 1030 is a bit
> >>>>>> weedy for any significant rendering - which is not what I'd hoped to hear. The
> >>>>>> 1050Ti is almost £200, and I think that money would be better put towards a new
> >>>>>> machine in a couple of years, given that the 2020 version of the software runs
> >>>>>> fine on my existing GT 640. I've had a response from customer service (I'd
> >>>>>> floated the idea of a refund) and they want me to talk to support (Monday now)
> >>>>>> so I'll follow that up and see what they suggest. They've offered to add the
> >>>>>> 2021 version to my 'Key' to see if that runs, and I might try that.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sounds fair. One thing you could do is seek out forums for this particular
> >>>>> software and see what users recommend in real life. The specs they quote
> >>>>> seem somewhat excessive for what it seems the program actually does.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I see they're recommending RTX cards for the realtime ray tracing features,
> >>>>> which is fair enough, but it's quite possible you can still make use of the
> >>>>> program by just skipping a few of the whizzy features, downscaling the
> >>>>> resolution or running renders overnight. Especially if you're not an
> >>>>> architect using the program all day for professional purposes, for whom time
> >>>>> is money and spending a few hundred on hardware is nothing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Theo
> >>>>
> >>>> Certainly performance hasn't been an issue on the earlier version of the
> >>>> software. I'll check the user forums - thanks for the reminder.
> >>>
> >>> There wasn't much on the user forums, surprisingly (before my update tonight).
> >>> Support were helpful, though. Apparently it's a major upgrade in terms of 3D
> >>> rendering, and the minimum spec is DirectX 12, Shader Model 6, and 2 GB
> >>> graphics memory, or the 3D rendering is simply disabled. That is likely to hit
> >>> a lot of people purchasing or upgrading, I figure. They said the 1030 card
> >>> will just about do it, but with rapidly deteriorating performance as you add
> >>> more twiddles to your design. So I've just ordered a GTX 1050 Ti at £215 from
> >>> Amazon. Prices are clearly soaring (even for a relatively old card like this)
> >>> and availability is very, very thin.
> >>
> >> Good luck with it. I've been waiting over a year for a £200 card to improve
> >> on my current 1060...
> >>
> >>> No excuses now, I have to design that extension...
> >>
> >> Can you do mine as well please? ;)
> >
> > As far as I can see the 1050Ti may be a better card than the 1060? The former
> > has only 3GB of RAM compared with 4GB for the 1050Ti, but I'm no expert in
> > these things!
>
> It may be, but not enough to warrant the expense. I had my eye on a 1660
> card last year, but thought it too expensive at ~£250...
>
> > I rather think I'd find doing yours easier than doing mine! (Too much at
> > stake!). One thing I would say is that getting expert advice (architect) made
> > a *vast* difference. Our original contractor (high-end interior designer with
> > a stable of preferred trades) did a "design" for us which we thought clearly
> > inadequate - it used only a fraction of the space, and the positioning of the
> > staircase was highly questionable. Much to his chagrin, we brought in
> > 'specialist' loft conversion contractors to quote, but even they seemed to want
> > to drop standard solutions onto what's quite a big roof space. Eventually we
> > went to a local architect, and the difference was worth every penny - a really
> > striking, imaginative design. But of course that was what led to the battles
> > with the planners...
>
> Not even there yet. We're still at the agreeing with SO regarding plans
> stage.
>
> > By the way, this thread surely can't be OT if the group is called "homebuilt"!
>
> heh

I checked the Home Designer website, and they don't seem to be offering older
versions (2021 was the last one which would run on my 12-year-old Dell with a
GT 640). That may be a marketing mistake. Otherwise, I'd encourage you to
give it a try (you can still play with a trial download, but you won't get 3D
rendering without a 2GB DirectX12 graphics card). Otherwise, for getting ideas
these shows around the UK are very useful, and you can get good advice from the
one-to-one adviser sessions.
https://www.homebuilding.co.uk/news/homebuilding-and-renovating-show

--

Phil, London