MDX tale 2 - one is much faster

Similar Questions

• Responsiveness of Windows XP is much faster than Windows 7

  According to this video

  http://www.YouTube.com/watch?v=Ay-gqx18UTM

  and MY personal experience, the xp desktop responsiveness is so much faster and less glitchy than windows 7 (e.g. open services.msc and play with the window, you will see black borders).

  You guys are going to solve this problem on Windows 8, to finally defeat xp in all aspects?

  Original title: why Microsoft, why?

  I have the same specification as Palcouk outside the video. Mine is a HD4250 integrated ATI and I get the black border.

  It may be safe to pin this one on the video card and drivers reasonbly

  Yes and also view the video uses Win 7, RTM, as in no current.

  I use two operating systems on Dells reasonably comparable...  I would say that in my experience 7 is faster than XP and not at all what I would call "glitch."

• Why disable SuperFetch on ssd, if the RAM is much faster than the ssd?

  Directed by Microsoft that SuperFetch and PreFetch must be disabled, if the OS is installed on an ssd, in accordance with article http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2727880. But SuperFetch is used for loading the data components of applications, which were very often used for RAM. Although the ssd is faster that a hard drive is not faster than the RAM. So, I do not understand why Microsoft suggest disabling this feature. The only reason why I want to understand, it's because of a limited RAM. If the RAM is sufficient beyond 6 GB, if we disable SuperFetch, then the boot time and increase the loading time of most used applications. I miss something here?

  The other question is about PreFetch. I feel, maybe wrong, it does the same thing with SuperFetch, with one major difference. It loads all the information data on the ssd or hard drive, instead of the RAM, in order to accelerate the launch of applications and time when the OS is installed on a hard drive to boot. If I'm right, let's disable the PreFetch it stores information for one ssd or hdd, while SuperFetch stores data of RAM information, which is much faster and so it must be enabled if there is a sufficient RAM.

  I look forward to reading the notice of a Microsoft software engineer.

  Hi Leventis,

  Prefetch copies frequently accessed files together into a contiguous on the disk area so that they can be located and loaded more quickly. That it takes a lot of old drives to recover data faster.

  SuperFetch predict what applications you run next and preload all the necessary data in the memory. She has also done that with startup files. And for all the three days he sends a defragmentation command to the OS drive that will cause problems in the SSD drives.

  In traditional hard drives (HDD) data are scattered throughout the disk, so that the operating system for access, it will take more time. It is suggested to perform a disk defragmentation. But storage technology is different in SSD, where, it records the data dynamically and it recovers more quickly. Who will be low down the burden on the RAM and the RAM can be used for uses such as for the opening of the games graphics high-end, etc..

  Hope this information is useful.

• Why is the Nightly build of so much faster and has better quality than the final product of Firefox features?

  The Nightly build is so much faster than Firefox, and the download feature is much better than the download feature in Firefox.

  The arrow next to the home button will appear in the version of Firefox in Firefox 20. All the features that are in every night thereafter will appear in liberation, when they are ready.

• HOW MUCH FASTER?

  Closer (if possible) percentages, please advise or just give me a rough idea: HOW MUCH FASTER IS WIFI at a SPEED of 18 Mbit/s and the QUALITY of the SIGNAL VERY GOOD (four out of five bars) compared to 18 MB/s SPEED and QUALITY of the EXCELLENT SIGNAL (5 bars).  I noticed fluctuations in continuous - even up to as high 54 Mbps and as low as 11 Mbps, but the signal is mainly around VERY GOOD to EXCELLENT in quality (i.e., four or five green bars) Notwithstanding the comings and goings, I use the WIFI N Protocol adapter (library, cafes hotspot, etc.).  Yes, sometimes, I moved to another part of the library, coffee, etc., but if not I can try improve the quality of signal and speed? The laptop is enough recent manufacturing (2009 or 2010), with 3G of RAM and 300 G hard drive and Windows VISTA.

  Thank you very much.
  Joe

  Hello

  It is likely to be only differences of minimum speed in these scenarios, if she would have certainly depends on
  the WiFi network that you accessed. Even if the WiFi signal you receive hard there may be a slow
  hose connecting WiFi to internet and/or a large number of computers sharing access.

  I hope this helps.

  Rob Brown - Microsoft MVP<- profile="" -="" windows="" expert="" -="" consumer="" :="" bicycle=""><- mark="" twain="" said="" it="">

• Fonts: Selfhosting or Google much faster than Typekit/Edge?

  It is much faster font free host or use Google instead of Typkit fonts?

  I did a test by myself: my website http://DAS-werbeatelier.de now (since yesterday) use "Lato" Edge-Webfont.

  I m sure, this isn't the right way to test, but I took 'Google Page speed Insight' with a result of 47 (mobile) (bad) and 58 (desktop).

  Before yesterday the same website also used Lato - but as police auto-hébergées on my server.

  The result of speed Page was: 51 (mobile) and 64 (desktop).

  That's a significant difference - and it seems to be known.

  https://www.keycdn.com/blog/Web-font-performance/

  If this can be true? This means that, if you want a really fast site (-muse), Don t use Typekit oder Edge-Fonts?

  On the other hand, it is very convenient to use Typekit/Edge with Adobe Muse...

  I understand. 2 seconds "before opening" kill really!

  Have you tried to pass on the new option I mentioned above?

• New version of Premiere Pro (CS5.5) - that is how much faster?

  It seems that it is a new version of first Pro CS5.5 now,

  See:

  First Pro CS5.5 is here...

  One who has executed the PPBM5 using the new software, please post any pre/post results of upgrading CS5.5 comparison you might have. Surely I'm not the only one wondering how fast this new version is!

  Thank you

  Jim

  The problem is NOT CS5.5 (although not directly) it's the way we had built PPBM5.  If you take a clip of your choice and encode MPEG2-DVD, you will find that CS5.5 is faster than the CS5, here are a few figures of 3 second 1 minute full AVCHD clip with color correction made four different ways with all the same presets on my fast machine

  Direct Export first 5.0.3 174 seconds

  Through the sequence of import SOUL 5.0.1 142 seconds

  Direct Export first 5.5 seconds 103

  Import sequence through SOUL 5.5 seconds 96

  You see it's 5.5 first which is faster.  We think we know what the problem is with PPBM5 but don't know how to handle it without essentially invalidate all current non - 5.5 partitions (in other words, we will have to have a separate test and results page) whenever a new version of first pulled in the past, we had to make changes and start all over again.

  Post edited by: Bill Gehrke

  Well, you can see that evil and I are not in full sync or maybe there's a possible difference between quad-core (band) and hex-core (Bill) or who knows what?

• Is it possible to restore the previous features of the search box (press F4, first letter, go)? It is so much faster.

  The way the search box has been changed in the new version really slows change search engines. Is there any setting in order to restore the old feature? Be able to press F4 and then press the first letter of the engine that you want done things seriously fast. It was one of the main reasons I stuck with firefox. The same functionality can still be maintained with the new design. Even if I memorized the number of tabs between the search engines in the new system, it would be even heavier.

  Hello, I have suffered from a similar problem with the new search bar type. I found that you can go in about: config, then find the Boolean browser.search.showOneOffButtons and which switches. This should restore the old function. (You may have to restart your browser)

  Note that, as always, change your Subject: config at your own risk.

  credit: askvg.com

• Why is-C code so much faster? (Image processing)

  Hello!

  I'm working on a larger application but I reduced to show you a problem I encounter at the beginning. I join all the files needed to run.

  It is simple rgb2monochrome that I implemented in C code algorithm and code LabVIEW. I have not now why the C code is 4 times faster.

  In the code C transfer tables with pointers so I'm working on a given memory area. I thought that LabVIEW can be slower, because it creates unnecessary copies of berries. I tried to solve this problem with Structure elements instead and value reference data but no effect.

  I also tried to change the tunnels in the shift registers in some places (read in optimizing LabVIEW Embedded Applications). I changed options in the execution of the subVIs properties and I created EXE application to see if it will be faster. Unfortunately I can not yet reduce the difference time of execution.

  I know that my algorithm can be better optimized, but this isn't the main problem. Now the two algorithm are implemented in the same way (you can check in cpp file) when it should have a similar execution times. I think I made a mistake in the LabVIEW code, maybe something with memory management?

  And I know more... Maybe nothing wrong with LabVIEW code but something too good in C code ? It is 64 b library, implementation of usual way without forcing the parallelism. Moreover I brand performance in the thread of UI in COLD LAKE. But perhaps nevertheless CPU manages this function with multi hearts? I have 4 cores then the difference in execution time would be good . But it's impossible, right?

  I know that the notice that LabVIEW is sometimes slow, but approximately 15%, not 4 times. So I had to make a mistake... Anyone know what kind of ?

  Kind regards
  ksiadz13

  Well, here are a few things that make faster LabVIEW code, there are other improvements that could be made, but I would need to do several tests to see if they are better based on your input data.  First of all, I would like to enforce the VI Inline, not subroutine.  Also, I'd work with arrays of data instead of scalar values.  Also, you know the number of rows and columns because it is the size of the array, why keep this information?  Oh and if you are working with curls you can try parallel for loops to work on more than one processor at a time.

  And also, I'm not sure that all this work is in any way necessary.  If you have a double and turn it into a U8, it will be 255 If the value was greater than that to start with.  Attached is an updated release with several possible options to try.

  

  Oh and another improvement, why are you even unbundling the data in Unbundle_imageCPU1.vi?  Why not work with this table 2D-Red Green Blue?  I realize that even VI is called in LabVIEW code options both C but with LabVIEW just deal with other data could make faster together.  In particular, in view of the fact that regroup you after you're done anyway.

• Remote Desktop is very slow on one another and fast on a single computer

  While I'm at work, I use remote desktop to connect to my home computer. I did this for a long time without any problem.
  I just finished building my new computer yesterday and install a new copy of Windows 7 Pro x 64. When I went to connect to my new computer today via desktop remotely, it is really slow and jerky. I thought maybe it was just my connection but I tried to connect to an older computer which is also on my network home and it was really smooth and fast. So I have 2 computers on the same network, and they have significantly different results when you connect via RDP. The old computer is significantly less powerful than my new.
  Is there something I need to do on my new computer (the server) to speed things up? Maybe tweaks, I have neglected or forgotten to start because it is a new installation of windows?
  All of the involved computers, Client and server (s) running Windows 7 Pro x 64 and my remote desktop settings are the following:
  Display:
  16-bit color
  Local resources:
  Remote - audio does not play
  Keyboard - computer
  Local devices - printers [x] Clipboard]
  Experience
  composition of the Bureau
  persistent bitmap cache implementation
  (all other options unchecked)
  Thank you in advance for your help!

  I got it to work.

  I went through internet and found a registry tweak which fixed my problem 100%
  I navigated to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters
  and a new value called DisableTaskOffload DWORD value, and then set its value 1.
  
  
  Please look in my problem though!

• T500 T8700 processor work much faster than on the current of a battery!

  My colleagues and I are having a very annoying problem with our thinkpad t500 (approximately 200 laptops or more). the problem is that the CPU is intel core 2 duo T8700 2.53 ghz works only with 1.6 ghz speed on idle and load the State with alternating current and never jump higher than speed and jumps only to 2.53 ghz speed if and only if the battery is connected to the laptop, the laptop is faster using the battery that is strange indeed.

  My own opinion on this issue, it is that it is a bug in the bios that is the switching in a different way processor modes (processor with power supply ofc should be faster than with battery) I've already updated my bios of the laptop to 3.09 version, but always without success. The serial number of my laptop is "*".

  I hope that fix you this very soon.

  Moderator edit: number masked to prevent improper use.

  Hi mtaher and welcome to the Lenovo user community!

  Connected to a 65W power adapter, the T500 is relies on the battery to power during peak load. If you remove the battery, he's choking back the CPU at a level that the 65W adapter can handle alone. It probably won't happen if you use a 90W Adapter (I don't have anyone around to test - maybe someone can confirm).

  The research community and you will find this discussed many times - that's the behavior designed most of the models.

• How much faster 16 GB 1600 RAM will be more 8 GB 1333?

  I get just in the business of video editing, and I'm still finding my bearings. I just built a computer for use with the first, but I think to upgrade the ram have little more. Currently, I have 8 GB 1333 (4x2Go), and I see this first uses almost all of it. That grows in my video, im worried my ram will become more of a bottleneck. Is it wise for me to update my 16 GB 1600 ram (it should cost me about $125)? im just tired of playing with hardware components at the moment, but if he's going to provide a performance histaria gain I'll do. It's my building right now:

  Core i5 2500

  simple 2 TB drive (please don't kill me, I know im supposed to do an entire raid configuration, I don't have the time to do, ive got a huge delay to come and I don't know the first thing about raid, he prolly do after that)

  Gigabyte gtx 470 overclocked Edition

  OCZ ModXStream Pro 600W

  I will do the entire raid thing at some point (hopefully soon), claim that I have a decent Setup on this front.

  I usually change the raws 1080 p 30 / 60 fps, btw.

  What do you think?

  Your i5 2500 is probably an important bottleneck and very probably more than the 8 GB of RAM.

  Upgraded to an i7 2600 k will give you twice the effective cores (adds hyperthreading "nuclei") for the treatment and accelerate many aspects of CS5 or CS5.5 (assuming that you have one or the other).

  From 8 GB of RAM, 16 GB of RAM might help a little, probably for the most part with coating once a project is completed. This is useful, but I suspect that you are suffering with a normal use of 1080 p on the timeline and timeline with your current configuration.

  You can use the Task Manager to see where your bottlenecks are; If the CPU usage history shows that you use 95 + % of your 4 hearts for those times where you feel it lacks performance, CPU power is probably your most important bottleneck.

  About your big date limit, you can buy additional disks and simply share the load (i.e. projects, cache of media and media cache db on the files on another, scratching still one) for the performance immediately; then, once you have completed your project, you can configure the new drives in RAID 0 and have first rebuild the cache and scratch your files to the new RAID 0 array.

  Jim

• Since the update for Firefox 4, I am no longer offers the possibility to save the tabs when closing making it much faster to access these sites when starting the next day. Why this possibility has been removed? It's a favorite feature.

  Since the update for Firefox 4, I offer more the ability to save tabs on shutdown - makes more rapid access to these sites when commissioning the next day. Why this possibility has been removed? It was a feature favorite and saved a lot of time.

  Firefox 4 records the previous session.
  
  You can use "Firefox > history > restore previous Session" for the previous session.
  
  There is also a button 'Restore previous Session' on the default on: Home home page.

  Another possibility is to use:

  • Tools > Options > general > startup: "When Firefox starts": "show my windows and tabs from last time '.

  You can set the preferences of warning on the topic: config page true via the context menu or toggle the value with a double click of the left.

  • browser.showQuitWarning, see http://blog.zpao.com/post/3174360617/about-that-quit-dialog
  • browser.tabs.warnOnClose, see http://kb.mozillazine.org/About%3Aconfig_entries
  • browser.warnOnQuit, see http://kb.mozillazine.org/browser.warnOnQuit
  • browser.warnOnRestart, see http://kb.mozillazine.org/browser.warnOnRestart

  To open the topic: config page, type Subject: config in the address bar (address) and press the 'Enter' key, as you type the url of a Web site to open a Web site.
  
  If you see a warning then you can confirm that you want to access this page.

• Battery life lasts only as long as normal (die much faster) and actually fan of sounds he doesn't usually do?

  I got my MacBook Pro 13 "in October. Normally, the battery life will last all day or most of the day. Yesterday it started making noises of fan that she doesn't normally and then when I turned it on this morning it was 68% battery and after about an hour and a half, it decreased by 16%. He has never done this before.

  A know why this is happening and how / if I can fix it?

  Thank you.

  Hi klsym:

  Try to reset the system management controller (SMC) and see if that helps. Reset the management system (SCM) controller on your Mac - Apple Support

• Color property of multiline string is too slow, why is-console so much faster?