Something that should ALWAYS be addressed as models grow in size is clean-up of all the needless cruft that accumulates over time. As medeek compares with his detailed model, that storage unit model is clean and neat with only 38k faces and no extraneous components. But if you import components from the 3D Warehouse and elsewhere, you’ll likely end up with a ■■■■-ton of extra cruft in your model because, frankly, most users don’t model very cleanly. And data converters can wreak havoc on your component list because some file conversion can restructure geometry where each face becomes a component… Trust me, I’ve run into this often with STEP files triangulated and brought into SketchUp where my model slows to a crawl thanks to thousands of added components created from each triangulated face. In these cases, clean up any necessary objects elsewhere before bringing them into your main model, or be diligent with model clean-up on a regular basis with plugins like ThomThom’s CleanUp3 or FixIt 101. That will at least address some of the areas of slow down that seriously affect SketchUp.
Well, we can simply try to import a high-poly ZBrush or MarvelousDesigner model to Sketchup and 3Ds Max. probably as a .obj or .fbx or what format suits best. this “doubling or even quadrupling” should be for both 3Ds Max and SketchUp, am I right? In fair circumstances, 3Ds Max can handle way more polygons than SketchUp before it starts to stutter.
Regarding 3D Studio vs SketchUp…
3D Studio is single-threaded for modeling just like all the others.
Okay, we understand that. multi-threading is not an option. This is equal for Both packages.
BUT…
The Simple Question is, why navigating in the viewport, editing, texturing, auto-saving, etc in SketchUp (with high-poly models, of course) are so slower than 3ds max?
If you want to rig and animate characters, you might consider 3DS as a better choice. If you want to do ArchViz animations, 3DS might also be more suited to your needs.
Obviously we’re not talking about those features, which is not important in SketchUp as a modeling tool. we’re comparing “modeling capabilities” in those two 3d packages. What I mean by modeling capabilities is not even about modifiers (which is arguable that Sketchup needs it or not). We’re talking about handling geometry, which is a must have in any 3d package. I don’t think users ask too much in this area.
That’s a smart philosophy when you don’t want to achieve photorealism. Although many of us use Sketchup’s power (alongside V-Ray, Thea or Enscape) for ArchViz. For us, it is important to have a strong viewport that can handle high-poly models. You see, we can have a column with 6 (or even less) faces, and we can have one with 100k or more. each one has its level of detail and value in different cases.
Sometimes cleaning up a model (especially removing so-called unnecessary edges with CleanUp3 of Fixit101) can cause changing models shadows in surfaces with soften edges, and sometimes can mess up UV mapped surfaces. In these cases, I don’t recommend using those extensions.
Are you prepared to compare costs, as well?
Well, Autodesk offers Indie license which costs 250$/year. It’s just started and is in the testing phase in a few countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US) before going global.
But hey, Blender is free 
and it has so many features like 3ds max (some says max cutting their prices because Blender catching up) and it is less bloated than max, Blender’s installation package is about 150mb, Max’s is about 2GB! I’m not gonna compare these things, this is not a software war after all.
I don’t think the idea is comparing packages. Maybe more like “I need SketchUp to do […], please, or I must buy a more expensive software or face the Blender interface” etc.
I understand the detail required for photorealism but if you are standing 10-15 feet back from some object (thinking architectural models here) all of that detail is not discernible anyways. If your eyes can’t resolve the details then all of those details are useless and you are better off simplifying the geometry.
This one’s from Bentley Context Capture, default format 3MX. Not many export formats available, and OBJ crashed on import to SKP. So we went through Realworks and created a tiled series of OBJs which worked on import to SKP.
I design multi-unit housing developments. These involve architecture, civil design and landscape design all prepared in a comprehensive model. Most of the objects I use aren’t individually massive, but the sheer quantity of them adds up.
My basic workflow is this:
The model is developed in SKP initially up to a basic concept design stage; street layouts, plots, retaining walls house types as block models/floor plans, basic landscaping, etc.
Then the Civil Engineers prepare a detailed 3d surface based on my 3d layout, and send that back to me as a much more detailed 3d surface (kerblines modelled utilities, etc). This is referenced in and updated as the project evolves.
The Architects produce the detailed house models (usually in Archicad or Revit). They export an ‘exterior’ shell version as SKP which I then reference. We may have 15-20 house models which are used multiple times, up to 150 houses total. The ‘shells’ have 3d cladding, downpipes, slabs, etc.
All landscape components are arranged in SKP including objects such as bins, mailboxes, fences, etc in 3d. Soft landscaping is all designed in SKP but uses dummy/proxy components and simple surfaces.
The final stage is to render, where proxies are swapped out and cars, people, etc are added to bring life to the model.
For Plans/cross-sections/etc, Layout files (about 10 of them, each with 3-10 sheets) take the SKP model and produce shadow studies, site plans, retaining wall setouts, etc. Each LO file is about 400mb.
The main 3d SKP model is updated a lot through the design process - often 40+ iterations as more and more detail is gradually resolved and refined. Clients, local authorities, contractors, etc review the 3d model at various stages.
I find this workflow is brilliant for this type of project as it keeps everything in one place - no conflicts, or crosschecking plans. It’s all there in the model where the team can collaborate and have input.
One of the issues with this process however is that lots of data needs to be stored - including superceded info (previous Civil3d surface, vs proposed). Layout updates are very slow and SKP can become difficult to manage (50 scenes, 80 layers, cross sections, many styles, dashes, etc).
1gb is not uncommon at the mid to tail end of the project. Of course it begins at 1mb and grows and grows 
The concept of splitting the model up and working on pieces in isolation has been tested, but doesnt fit with the style of housing/site layout that we do - we have very tight tolerances and it’s a puzzle of fitting everything together.
the renders show the full picture (just a few random shots -I would produce maybe 30-40 renders plus animations if desired). The plan view shows the same 3d model - one o fthe sheets of outputs -(NB no annotation is drawn in LayOut, except the Legend. Fences, for exampke are modelled in 3d with a 2d version sitting over top and controlled via layers/scenes/styles.
Hope that gives you some insight into my world 
See my response above
Thanks for the suggestion, I’ll give it a try. Reducing detail is a difficult thing to do, as we put so much effort into capturign and recording detail during surveys and in the design process - it has become necessary.
The use of a tool like Skimp could really help to reduce polys within my 1gb model by having them swap out to low poly versions until needed. For example my streets and footpaths dont need to be high poly while I’m modelling the houses and vice versa. I would need to do a lot of swapping back and forth so a quick component replacement (‘‘hot swap’’) system is also needed. Whether it saves more time (and mental load) than it saves is a nother question but will have value as the model approaches the '‘computational wall.’
I wonder if Skimp could become a 3dWarehouse feature - allowing a user to download a high, medium or low detail version of any component?
I’m with you - the rendering is getting faster, and it actually runs a 1gb model well on my high-spec system. That’s certainly appreciated…when I started in SU (v3) we aimed to keep files under 30mb and now 1gb is actually not uncommon (and that’s after I’ve removed a lot of detail and use proxies for vegetation, rendering, etc) . I only see this getting larger and larger. I could break my 150 houses into multiple smaller sketchup files but I lose so much of the valuable context and add so much time in managing updates and connecting them all together. The design approach is to consider the street and block as a whole, not half a street or block.
The point I was making wasnt so much the speed (grunt) of SU to render and model with higher fps, but the possible tools that would enable it to ‘handle’ large projects and files, formats KarinSkaug’s original post (and others) are talking about both the rendering side (fps) and what I could call the ‘‘management’’ side. We may not need better rendering grunt if the correct model management tools are in place.
Google Earth doesnt need to load then entire planet, just the bit you’re focussed on.
Would it be helpful to performance if we could have objects in the SU model that are rendered, but not editable? Eg a terrain I’m using essentially as a passive object - I need to see the detail but I dont need to edit or snap to it.
And would low quality and high quality version of components and textures (or automated and user-selectable LOD) be helpful and possible?
I’ve been using an extension to explode all internal groups/components within a component - this saves a lot of SU performance on larger models and imported data. I would recommend that approach a basis for creating light-weight proxies. The method needs to be automated since it’s not time-efficent for me to run this extension 100s of times and also manage backups of the original componets that I need to re-load in if I wish to edit them.
I’ll try the combo of Skimp (mentioned above) and one of the Component Library/Swapping extensions
to see if this saves time through the use of Proxies, but this is basically forcing me to manage data via a clunky workaround, not an automated routine within SU.
Cheers
Sam
In a sense you can do that already. That is, if different people have modeled the same thing in different levels of detail, you can use the advanced search to specify how many polygons you want.
Skimp is about $70 per user per year, and can be demanding. I doubt they would offer it to 3D Warehouse as a feature, and it could lead to more support calls for me!
Now sam that is a great idea, seriously killer idea. I hope @Whaat and @Mark get together to atleast look at it as a possible solution. Would you guys do that? To me, collaboration in the right areas at the right times is absolutely key to success and achieving success in innovating. At the end of the day, innovating is the real key.
Well as someone on the Sketchup team Colin, you might have had doubts with that comment when you made it, but why not band together with your fellow mates and reach out to developers and start initiatives or start the conversation insated of raising doubts as your initial comments? Also to your comment about more support calls, which I’m sure you were kind of joking about. If sketchup doesn’t have the resources to answer customers and partners/developers in a reasonable amount of time, than you’ll need more staff.
Things have improved in the 21 months since I wrote that. I’ve been in the QA team since the start of the year, and support has added more people.
All good news.
Hey folks,
Just checking in! It took a while (4 years, I guess!), but glad to see the improved viewport handling in SketchUp 2024. It’s not my main 3D software anymore, but you never forget your first love, right? Anyway, congrats to current users; this is a big win for you!