[mhertlzer]

I use a laptop with a 22" monitor on the side. All was well until I updated from ACAD 2008 to 2010. Now the 3D performance on the second monitor is impossibly slow. To orbit the drawing, I move the mouse, wait a few seconds for the mouse to show up on the screen so I know where I moved it, wait a few more seconds for the screen to update, then I fine tune the mouse location through several iterations until I get it where I need it. The performance on the laptop monitor is fine. Is there anything I can do to fix this problem?

Thanks.

[ReMark]

Could it be related to file size?

What GPU is installed in your laptop?

What are the laptop specs by the way?

[mhertlzer]

Thanks for the suggestions.

I don't think it is related to file size. I have no problem with this file in ACAD 2008. If fact, I went back to ACAD 2008 for now because it works fine. For now I will use ACAD 2008 on 3D and ACAD 2010 on 2D. Its the only way I can get my work done.

The file is 1.1M.

I have a NVIDIA Quadro NVS 135M display adapter. I have 2 Gz and 2GB of RAM.

[ReMark]

Then you might want to take a look at the minimum system requirements for 2010 as recommended by AutoDesk. Therein may lie the problem.

[mhertlzer]

The requirements for ACAD 2010 are:

Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional or Home edition (SP2 or later)
Intel® Pentium® 4 or AMD Athlon® dual-core processor, 1.6 GHz or higher with SSE2 technology
2 GB RAM
1 GB free disk space for installation

I have a Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor T7250 (2M Cache, 2.00 GHz, 800 MHz FSB). I'm not sure how that compares with those listed, but if it doesn't meet the processor specification, that would be my problem. I meet all the other requirements.

Thanks

[Glen Smith]

I'll admit that I have not searched for this, so it may be really easy to find - but -

Is there a list of processors, listed by 'horsepower' if you will, such that you find your processor and clock speed on the list, then look for the minimum processor spec'd for your SW to see which one is more powerfull that the other, and how close they are?

Extra internet brownie points if the processors are not just listed, but graphed to show relative 'horsepower'

Like mhertlzer, I don't know if an Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor T7250 (2M Cache, 2.00 GHz, 800 MHz FSB) is more or less powerfull than an Intel® Pentium® 4 or AMD Athlon® dual-core processor, 1.6 GHz

Back in MY day we just went by the processor number and the clock speed - and we liked it - 'cause we were stupid, and we didn't know any better!

Glen.

[Glen Smith]

Yes there is, and it looks like mhertlzer's processor meets the minimum requirements.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/common_cpus.html

Glen

[ReMark]

Thanks a lot Glen for that link. I already bookmarked it.

[mhertlzer]

Ok, so it looks like my CPU is fast enough, but the graphics don't work well in ACAD 2010 on my large monitor.

I tried changing the screen resolution form 1680x1050 to 1024x768. That definately helps, but it is still very poor response.

When I check out my monitor troubleshooting in control panel, it tells me to check DirectDraw and I get the following message:

No problems found.
DirectDraw test results: Failure at step 11 (Colorfill blit to primary): HRESULT = 0x88760096 (error code)
Could this have anything to do with the problem in ACAD 2010 (even though ACAD 2008 works fine?)