KDanielsen

On my machine both performed identically (about 1.5 seconds). You are not crazy - it's just your computer is playing head games with you. I cannot explain why they would run different on your machine. I downloaded the latest version of Simio. Now they run at the same speed. Thanks for all your help, though. Correction. Just discovered: They run at same speed (FAST, about 1.3 secs) if I run it as experiment. In design mode (Fast-Forward), mine is SLOOW, yours stays same (FAST). Unfair.

On my machine both performed identically (about 1.5 seconds). You are not crazy - it's just your computer is playing head games with you. I cannot explain why they would run different on your machine. I downloaded the latest version of Simio. Now they run at the same speed. Thanks for all your help, though.

Did you run it exactly as I sent it, unmodified? Did you execute it from the experiment window, resetting before each run? Did you have anything else running on your computer? For example in such short runs if your email decided to download a big file it could take processor time. I believe that was due to the days versus week mistake I made. 1) I ran from the experiment window (no change). 2) I have other programs active, but they don't do anything that hog the cpu. 3) But, could you help me with a small comparison. Your model "ObjectApproach" runs VEEERY fast on my computer: Your model has a Source, a Connector and a Sink. I make the APPARENTLY SAME model "ObjectApproachKetil". It has a Source (1/hr), Connector and Sink, and 5200 weeks simtime. I also add a ModelEntity1 for the Source to generate (as DefaultEntity is not an available choice). I also turn off statistics for all 3 objects (Source, Sink, ModelEntity1). Here is the result: Yours: 1.14 seconds Mine: 50.8 seconds I enclose an .spfx. It is a copy of the one you posted most recently, PLUS the fifth model, the aforementioned "ObjectApproachKetil". In your spare time (?), could you try these two ObjectApproaches (yours vs mine) on YOUR computer, see if you get the same relative difference in runtime? AcademicTestModel-twoObjectApproaches.spfx

Thank you. I probably should/will stop now. I have learned very much from these last two days (seeing how you code the steps). But, I did run your most recent four models. And got wild results. I added a column to your results. Ketils runtime | RunTime Approach 1,4 sec | 42 sec Facility model (Source-Connector-Sink) 20,0 sec | 13 sec Process that creates objects (Create-Destroy) 1,3 sec | 3.2 sec Process with Tokens (no entity objects) created by Timer 1,6 sec | 1.7 sec Process with single Token (no entity objects) that recycles hourly Your facilitymodel (was "objectapproach") still runs VEERY fast. Recall, mine took 53 seconds, yours took 3 in my previous message. Was hoping you could elaborate how yours get the 10x faster time? I also downloaded/installed .NET 4.5. No change in execution times. Have to check to see if Simio actually loaded the correct DLL-files, I am a bit unsure of the way .NET installed (it is an in-place replacement, overwriting the DLL-files, but keeping the 4.0 version numbering, ... That's another story ...

Hmm. I wasn't disregarding your advice, I think. The M/M/1 (see post from feb 29, 2012) used process/token, which reduced runtime nicely from 120 to 30 sec. I downloaded your model (thank you). I have .NET 4.0.30319. Endtime set to 5200 weeks=100 years. About 873600 entities created/disposed. OBJECT APPROACH Your model (named "ObjectApproach") runs in 3 seconds on my computer. I try to make a similar model myself (Source-Connector-Sink). Mine runs in 53 seconds. I turn off Statistics for all three objects (Model Entity, Source, Sink). It runs in 51 seconds. PROCESS APPROACH I see your code (process steps). It is exceptionally fast. I run it for 52000 weeks (1000 years). Completed in 10 seconds. So 5200 weeks is 1/10 of that, would take 1 second. I try to make a similar model. Run it for 52000 weeks. It runs in 10 seconds. Same execution speed as your (relief). It creates about 8.7 million entities, I think (since there is a Create step). Am I right? I attach an .spfx-file with your two models and my two models. Perhaps (when you have time), you can find why my object approach is 10x slower than yours. AcademicTestModel2.spfx

I get your message, Sturrock. Simio (current version) cannot run faster. That was my question.

OK. Forget programming sims in C/Java. Arena is a competitor to Simio. Has many of the same advantages as mentioned by Sturrock. Arena executes 6x faster for M/M/1. They ought to be similar in speed? I still insist that I must be doing something wrong in the way I set up my Simio experiments. Just tried something even simpler this morning. Set up a Source/Create that generates 1 job/hr for 100 years. 876000 jobs. Jobs go to a Sink/Dispose via a connector/link. Simio: 53 sec (can be reduced if using tokens) Arena: 2 sec ?????

[quote="ASagan" I would expect an simulation executed entirely in a traditional programming language to be many times faster than a simulation created in a seperate software package. Wasn't Simio written in C#? Any simulator X is written in a "separate software" package Y.

Still hoping to speed up Simio. Any suggestions? I MUST be doing something "wrong"; as described earlier, My (token-optimized) Simio is 6x slower than Arena or my Javasim or my Csim for the M/M/1 running 1 million jobs. My colleagues say "why are you so obsessed with speed"?

Just tried Arena ... 1M jobs completes in 5-6 seconds runtime...

Tried free eval version of Csim20, the included console M/M/1 demo. CPU-time reported is 2.5 secs (same computer) for 1M jobs. A bit faster than the Javasim. Csim obviously does book-keeping of all arrival/departure times to show queueing averages, but this can be turned off, which is what I now want to do in SIMIO. Turn on statistics only for specified objects.

Thanks for the suggestion. It now takes 30 seconds runtime for 1 million ... tokens, I guess that would be. First time I try this low-level approach. I followed your instructions (begin-seize-delay-release-tally). Read the Reference PDF as well. Added a Resource1 though (so there was something to seize?). Can see utilization of Resource1 (seems correct at .8321), but no queueing stats and cannot find any results from that Tally Statistics. Will continue to try. Still, I find it slow. I have a Javasimulation of an M/M/1 that takes only 4 seconds to run 1 million customers (=tokens/entities in Simio). Each customer has to be generated, wait for a resource (seize), delay, release it and ends up in a sink (that tallies). Same computer. The javasim has none of the GUI that Simio has, but then, there's no GUI processing overhead in FastForward/experiment mode. And, the Javasim reports queue and worker statistics (mean, variance). Perhaps Simio is collecting excessive statistics (if so, can it be turned off)? Or is it that I made a mistake by adding a Resource1 (to be seized)?

I see that the EXPERIMENT MODE is 2-4 times faster. I try this (one replication) and it runs slightly faster (109 runtime seconds compared to 115). One CPU ran at 90 %, the other at 10 %. I try to run two replications, now both CPUs run at 100 %. Runtimes are 121 and 124 seconds (wall clock time is about 125 seconds). So, I can see that experiment mode on my dual core CPU halves my waiting time when running experiments. But, each individual simulation is still 110-115 seconds runtime on a dual core CPU that is about 50 % utilized. I assume there is no way to speed up Simio further than this.

I have a source (exp(1)) --> Server (exp(1/1.2)) --> sink. This way, the Server gets a load of lambda=1 and serves at a rate of mu=1.2, giving a util of rho=1/1.2 = 0.833.. Endtime is set to 1 million seconds, so nbr. of jobs to the server is 1 million. Simio computes a rho of .833, so the sim is correctly set up, I believe. But, to run this takes me 115 seconds in Simio (I clicked on Fast-Forward, Trace is turned off). Are there ways to make Simio run this any faster? (I have searched the Intro PDF and the Reference PDF for things such as "fast-forward", "fastest" ... but found nothing new) I have an average Windows-7 64 bit Dual Core E8400 @3ghz, 4GB Ram Thanks. --Ketil