Paul Buckhiester:Graphics Tests (Score: 36)- 3D Frames Per Second: 124
That is an integrated graphics score - the same as I get on my Power-Saving GPU. Did you run the test on battery power? Your NVidia High-Performance GPU should be capable of a score around 150-160, similar to my ATI "middle class" video card. I can right click the Windows Desktop to switch between GPU's.
Dave===
Windows 10 & Android 8
Eat your heart out.
georgegfsomsel
יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
Lots of interesting scores. What can we take from this - other than Nova score envy?
Is there any agreement on what Nova score it takes to run Logos 4 effectively? Or what system requirements are needed? Any suggestions for someone looking to buy a new laptop?
I would be interested in people's thoughts on this.
"In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church," John Wesley
Michael Childs: Lots of interesting scores. What can we take from this - other than Nova score envy? Is there any agreement on what Nova score it takes to run Logos 4 effectively? Or what system requirements are needed? Any suggestions for someone looking to buy a new laptop? I would be interested in people's thoughts on this.
I think any score in the 200s and up will serve. I had hoped that by getting a faster machine with 8 Gb of memory I would eliminate a problem which I have experienced with adding to notes files. I still, however, experience the greyed screen and the spinning pizza from time to time. I'm not sure what causes this, but it seems that having a more powerful machine does not cure it. I have a 12 yr old Gateway computer with a Pentium 2 processor and 750 Mb of memory which is admittedly somewhat slow in running L4, but which does manage to do so without too many problems.
Michael Childs:Is there any agreement on what Nova score it takes to run Logos 4 effectively?
If you're buying in a store get a machine with Windows Experience index at least 5.9, otherwise get a machine similar to those with a Novabench score at least 300 (Graphics component should be at least 30 and RAM at least 100, even for a laptop).
George Somsel:I have a 12 yr old Gateway computer with a Pentium 2 processor and 750 Mb of memory which is admittedly somewhat slow in running L4, but which does manage to do so without too many problems.
George, that is the same one that George Washington used.
Everything ever written in Religion and Theology formatted for Logos Bible Software.Logos Youtube Channel
Lynden Williams: George Somsel:I have a 12 yr old Gateway computer with a Pentium 2 processor and 750 Mb of memory which is admittedly somewhat slow in running L4, but which does manage to do so without too many problems. George, that is the same one that George Washington used.
Really? I thought it was Martin Van Buren's.
For comparison:
Old laptop: Core 2 Duo @ 2 GHz, 4 MB RAM, Integrated graphics, Win 7
New laptop: i-7 2630QM @ 2 GHz, 8 MB RAM, discrete graphics, Win 7
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
Mark A. Smith:Old laptop: Core 2 Duo @ 2 GHz, 4 MB RAM, Integrated graphics, Win 7New laptop: i-7 2630QM @ 2 GHz, 8 MB RAM, discrete graphics, Win 7
Nice improvement! Does L4 running faster & smoother?
QLinks, Bibl2, LLR, MacrosDell Insp 17-5748, i5, 1.7 GHz, 8G RAM, win 8.1
steve clark:Does L4 running faster & smoother?
Yes it does. I'll have to do some side-by-side testing, but subjectively start-up, searching, and indexing are faster. I forgot to enable diagnostic logging before the indexer started so don't know how much time it took, but is was a lot faster than on the older machine.
It used all four threads at times while indexing, often running at 2.6 GHz turbo speed. Here's a shot of CPUs during indexing:
Having a Quad has definitely sped up indexing! There is NO comparison!
But I was surprised that after upgrading that I found the actual closing of Program Guides and collections to still be "quite slow."
I assume it is because Logos WPF "graphics" are memorizing everything?
Regards, SteveF
SteveF:But I was surprised that after upgrading that I found the actual closing of Program Guides and collections to still be "quite slow."
I haven't checked that. I doesn't seem to be 'delayed' from casual observation.
I just ran comparison Passage Guides on the old and new machines (see: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/32881.aspx ) and noticed a huge improvement in the generation of the tested PG.
Mark A. Smith: I doesn't seem to be 'delayed' from casual observation.
I was able to speed up the passage guide opening and closing by taking DAve Hooton's advice -ie. to close the ".com" sections in the passage guide.
Closing collections is still slow.
Hey Mark - you just asked me to do a Novabench and post it in this forum. Here it is! Thanks! Dan
5/31/2011 9:18:45 PMMicrosoft Windows 7 ProfessionalIntel Core i72720QM 2.20GHz @ 2192 MHzGraphics Card: NVIDIA Quadro 1000M 16272 MB System RAM (Score: 231)- RAM Speed: 10829 MB/sCPU Tests (Score: 545)- Floating Point Operations/Second: 202669024- Integer Operations/Second: 524425672- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 734799Graphics Tests (Score: 32)- 3D Frames Per Second: 110Hardware Tests (Score: 31)- Primary Partition Capacity: 281 GB- Drive Write Speed: 111 MB/s
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
Dan,
Compare your specifics with mine posted on this same page above you.
Your RAM score is higher, but RAM speed is slightly slower.
Your CPU test score is surprisingly slower than mine. All the individual scores are lower. And I have a slower processor (2.0 GHZ).
Your graphics score is much slower. Try running the program again forcing the use of the graphics card. It should be much higher when you do that.
Your hardware score is also lower than mine by a good bit. Your write speed is about the same which is probably all that counts.
Overall graphics is testing low because you are using the on-board graphics during this test. The CPU scores are puzzling.
Newish Dell Outlet XPS L702X Quad Core i7 laptop after uninstalling Anti-Virus Software:
6/1/2011 12:02:01 AMMicrosoft Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit with Service Pack 1)Intel Core i72630 QM 2.00GHz @ 2001 MHzGraphics Card: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family
8107 MB System RAM (Score: 195)- RAM Speed: 11901 MB/sCPU Tests (Score: 635)- Floating Point Operations/Second: 204093328- Integer Operations/Second: 657884064- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 917545Graphics Tests (Score: 29)- 3D Frames Per Second: 100Hardware Tests (Score: 47)- Primary Partition Capacity: 582 GB- Drive Write Speed: 127 MB/s
6/1/2011 1:02:28 AMMicrosoft Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit with Service Pack 1)Intel Core i72630 QM 2.00GHz @ 2001 MHzGraphics Card: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family
8107 MB System RAM (Score: 195)- RAM Speed: 12052 MB/sCPU Tests (Score: 635)- Floating Point Operations/Second: 204078288- Integer Operations/Second: 657236272- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 920089Graphics Tests (Score: 98)- 3D Frames Per Second: 308Hardware Tests (Score: 48)- Primary Partition Capacity: 582 GB- Drive Write Speed: 131 MB/s
After installing Avast Anti-Virus Software (Free), NovaBench Score decreased 4 points:
6/1/2011 1:41:09 AMMicrosoft Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit with Service Pack 1)Intel Core i72630 QM 2.00GHz @ 2001 MHzGraphics Card: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family
8107 MB System RAM (Score: 195)- RAM Speed: 11972 MB/sCPU Tests (Score: 632) -- down 3 points- Floating Point Operations/Second: 204060280- Integer Operations/Second: 654584080- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 908925Graphics Tests (Score: 98)- 3D Frames Per Second: 307Hardware Tests (Score: 47) -- down 1 point- Primary Partition Capacity: 582 GB- Drive Write Speed: 126 MB/s
Mark Smith: Dan, Compare your specifics with mine posted on this same page above you. Your RAM score is higher, but RAM speed is slightly slower. Your CPU test score is surprisingly slower than mine. All the individual scores are lower. And I have a slower processor (2.0 GHZ). Your graphics score is much slower. Try running the program again forcing the use of the graphics card. It should be much higher when you do that. Your hardware score is also lower than mine by a good bit. Your write speed is about the same which is probably all that counts. Overall graphics is testing low because you are using the on-board graphics during this test. The CPU scores are puzzling.
Concur CPU scores are puzzling; wonder about anti-virus on-demand scanning ?
To improve my graphics score, used NVidia control panel to change graphics default for NovaBench program (3D frame rate tripled).
By the way, some web pages influenced my free Anti-Virus choice => http://free.antivirusware.com/ , http://www.freeanti-virussoftware.net/ , and http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/collection/5928/2011_free_av.html
Keep Smiling
Logos Wiki Logos 7 Beta Free Support
I find the scores of the new Sandy Bridge systems quite intersting, I am running an older quad-core system (Q8400) that I have overclocked by about 20% and it scores in the same range as the newer systems. Knowing what I know about the new systems I am inclined to question the validity of Novabench scores in determining a systems true capabilities.
Hi Mark - Well, I ran four tests based on your speculation and here is the results. Must be something else! NEW LAPTOP, RIGHT?
1) baseline before changes (bios set to direct graphics processor to optimus)
Score = 837
RAM = 231, CPU = 545, GRAPICS = 31, Hardware 30
2) score with bios set to discrete only
Score = 838
RAM = 231, CPU = 545, GRAPICS = 32, Hardware 30
3) score with bios set to discrete only AND intel turbo boost turned on
4) score with bios set to discrete only AND intel turbo boost turned on AND ESET Anitvirus turned off
RAM = 231, CPU = 544, GRAPICS = 32, Hardware 30
Both of my laptops (a 4-year old Dell Inspiron 1520 and a HP mini 110 netbook which is pretty new but is an older model) run Logos 4 admirably well I think. I certainly don't have amazing NovaBench scores, but I think there are optimizations you can make. (Particularly in the realm of RAM/memory and hard drive - I upgraded my Dell to a 7200-RPM drive with a good amount of cache and the difference was night and day.) I've always operated on a budget of $500 or less for computers (I usually build my own desktops) and have yet to surpass the performance of my Dell.
My Dell laptop:
6/1/2011 5:56:30 AMMicrosoft Windows XP Home EditionIntel Pentium DualT2370 1.73GHz @ 1729 MHzGraphics Card: Mobile Intel(R) 965 Express Chipset Family3062 MB System RAM (Score: 87)- RAM Speed: 2013 MB/sCPU Tests (Score: 176)- Floating Point Operations/Second: 46805060- Integer Operations/Second: 99523692- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 561801Graphics Tests (Score: 4)- 3D Frames Per Second: 18Hardware Tests (Score: 20)- Primary Partition Capacity: 298 GB- Drive Write Speed: 43 MB/s
My HP netbook:
6/1/2011 6:04:13 AM
Microsoft Windows 7 StarterIntel Atom N455 1.66GHz @ 1666 MHzGraphics Card: Intel(R) Graphics Media Accelerator 31502036 MB System RAM (Score: 98)- RAM Speed: 2096 MB/sCPU Tests (Score: 61)- Floating Point Operations/Second: 17736512- Integer Operations/Second: 28083282- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 219031Graphics Tests (Score: 1)- 3D Frames Per Second: 3Hardware Tests (Score: 7)- Primary Partition Capacity: 133 GB- Drive Write Speed: 14 MB/s
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :): NovaBench Score: 976 (using NVidia Geforce GT 550M GPU and beta 275.27 video drivers) 6/1/2011 1:02:28 AMMicrosoft Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit with Service Pack 1)Intel Core i72630 QM 2.00GHz @ 2001 MHzGraphics Card: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family 8107 MB System RAM (Score: 195)- RAM Speed: 12052 MB/sCPU Tests (Score: 635)- Floating Point Operations/Second: 204078288- Integer Operations/Second: 657236272- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 920089Graphics Tests (Score: 98)- 3D Frames Per Second: 308Hardware Tests (Score: 48)- Primary Partition Capacity: 582 GB- Drive Write Speed: 131 MB/s
NovaBench Score: 976 (using NVidia Geforce GT 550M GPU and beta 275.27 video drivers)
Partitioned 640 GB hard drive into F: (Fast - 40 GB), C: (WIndows 7 - 208 GB), M: (Medium - 192 GB), and S: (Slow - 156 GB), then moved Windows 7 Page File to S: drive. Disabled Tablet PC Input and Windows Media Player Network Sharing service, then ran NovaBench:
NovaBench Score: 960 (using NVidia Geforce GT 550M GPU and 275.33 video drivers)
6/3/2011 5:52:15 AMMicrosoft Windows 7 Enterprise (clean install without Microsoft updates and anti-virus software)Intel Core i72630 QM 2.00GHz @ 2001 MHzGraphics Card: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family
8107 MB System RAM (Score: 196) -- Up 1 point- RAM Speed: 12141 MB/sCPU Tests (Score: 638) -- Up 3 points- Floating Point Operations/Second: 204072448- Integer Operations/Second: 664646152- MD5 Hashes Generated/Second: 922295Graphics Tests (Score: 97) -- Down 1 point- 3D Frames Per Second: 305Hardware Tests (Score: 29) -- Down 19 points (faster transfer, but smaller C: capacity)- Primary Partition Capacity: 208 GB- Drive Write Speed: 138 MB/s
Plan to custom install Logos 4 on my F: drive, which should keep fastest transfer rate for Logos as other files are placed on C:, M:, or S: drives.