Does Logos 4 take advantage of the WDDM 1.1 features in Windows 7?

Anybody know? I'm still trying to decide if I will see any performance benefit from upgrading my 4-year-old DirectX9-compliant 7600GT video card. I'm hoping for performance improvements in the population of the sections of the PG. When I do a PG search, my CPU usage hits 100%, but I'm wondering if any offloading to the GPU happens on a DirectX 10.1 or better card?

EDIT-Just wanted to add that the video card is the oldest component in my system by far. I have a 3GHz Core 2 Duo, 8GB RAM, and an Intel SSD hard drive. I've debated upgrading to a 3GHz Core 2 Quad, but have a hard time justifying that when I could upgrade to a Core i7 for about twice that price (which would involve replacing my motherboard and memory which are only 6 months old.)

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

NetworkGeek

First off you are going to get a ton of improvement in a graphics card that's four years newer. JUst comparing yours to the 9600GT, texture fill rate is 3x faster, and memory bandwidth ix 3x faster, I am sure you would find other performance advantages doing some research.

Additionally , Logos 4 PC uses Windows Presentaiton Foundation, which uses Direct3D for rendering, which uses the GPU for instructions. You can read a lay version of it here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Presentation_Foundation

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90354#Comment_90354

Any idea if the texture fill rate and higher memory bandwidth will translate to higher Logos performance though? I have no Aero performance issues or scrolling/refreshing performance issues with the 7600GT...and it scores a 5.something in the Aero Performance category on the Performance Index. That's why I'm unsure whether I'll truly see any performance increase.

NetworkGeek

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90358#Comment_90358

Just as an educated guess, and others may venture an opinion, but many here have thought that the performance of Logos 4 seems based more on graphics card capability than even memory or disk speed, the typical performance weak links. Current cards are quite a bit more robust than the one you have, the 9600GT class card, which is somewhat middle of the road, can be had for $100 or less if you shop around. That sure seems worth the investment if it was my machine, as long as you keep in mind this advice is free [8-|] If you want, do some Googling around to check out performance benchmarks of different video cards circa 1Q2006 (your card) and now. You can probably find games, CAD, etc. to see what the improvement is. I think you will find it's fairly substantial.

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90420#Comment_90420

Good deal, thanks for the input Dominick :-)

I have read a number of review articles and benchmarks and am well aware of the significant increase in gaming performance. I just couldn't find any benchmarks dealing with Aero performance or any other "2D" metrics. That's why I thought I'd ask here. It sounds like (both from your thoughts as well as the few video card related posts on the forum) it should make a decent difference...especially for the price. I think I may go ahead and take the plunge...if I do, I'll be sure to report back the results. I still have a hard time wrapping my mind around Logos being bottlenecked by my video card (as opposed to say 2 vs 4 processor cores,) but there does seem to be some anecdotal evidence of that around here :-)

Thanks again!

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90489#Comment_90489

Ronald,

I think we could all use Logos to chime in on this issue. They alone know the video demands Logos 4 is making. Their recommended video specs are above basic but not up at the gaming level.

From Logos: 512MB DirectX9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver

Various people have, as you pointed out, reported their own experiences. That isn't the best guideline.

We haven't heard anything from Logos that might help us isolate the graphics features that would benefit Logos 4 the most. I hope they can help answer this recurring question.

BTW: your other specs seem to indicate you would have top notch performance from Logos 4.

Rich DeRuiter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90420#Comment_90420

Just as an educated guess, and others may venture an opinion, but many here have thought that the performance of Logos 4 seems based more on graphics card capability than even memory or disk speed, the typical performance weak links

I suppose someone may have suggested that. Video capability is definitely a factor, and one often underestimated by people who think of Logos as primarily a text-based program (it's not, but that's another discussion). But I'm not sure it's the primary factor (unless it's the bottleneck for a particular computer, as you suggest). Other big factors are CPU and RAM. Fast Intel i7's seem to perform better than any others, and Intel usually beats out AMD. For RAM DDR3 is very good, but I'm not sure if more RAM would be better than faster RAM. If you're able, get 6GB of RAM, or more, but it will run on 3.2GB (the max for a 32bit environment).

There are some other factors involved that aren't fully understood.

As Dominick suggests, upgrading your video is probably a good idea, and you may see some improvements in L4 performance. If you don't, it could be another bottle-neck mentioned above, or one of those 'other factors' that no one seems to understand at this point.

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90500#Comment_90500

I think we could all use Logos to chime in on this issue. They alone know the video demands Logos 4 is making.

I agree, I would definitely like an "official line" so to speak.

From Logos: 512MB DirectX9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver

I do meet that, but only just. The 7600GT was the "mainstream" level gaming card 4 years ago and it's no slouch by any means. I don't do any gaming, so I'm talking general Windows and 2D performance.

BTW: your other specs seem to indicate you would have top notch performance from Logos 4.

By and large I am seeing top notch performance. In fact, I'm satisfied with the performance I'm seeing. Start up to the home page is decent...I haven't timed it, but it is somewhere between 10-20 seconds. Passage Guide comes up immediately with my Bibles and primary commentary, but then spends probably 30-45 seconds (again, haven't timed it) populating the PG sections. I'm fine with these speeds, but spoiled by my SSD since everything else on the PC is literally instantaneous. A full index (of my admittedly small library [I have the "Bible Study" base package]) only takes about 10 minutes. I've been back and forth about whether my bottleneck is the video card or the processor. When populating the PG, both cores of my processor are at 100%...that's why initially I was leaning toward moving to a quad-core...but the more I thought about it and read a few of the anecdotes, the more I wondered if my video card might be a bottleneck. Anyway, when I get home in a couple hours I'll spend a few minutes to time the program launch and PG launch and give more specific information.

Obviously, the "issues" (if you can even call them that) I'm experiencing are no big deal. I'm not dealing with anything that is painfully slow or that I can't live with. I just don't like waiting on my computer LOL. I'd definitely like an official response from Logos if possible to determine how much the program leans on or takes advantage of a decent, modern video card.

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90504#Comment_90504

If you're able, get 6GB of RAM, or more, but it will run on 3.2GB (the max for a 32bit environment).

That's only partially true. In a 32-bit OS, only 3.2GB of 4GB will be available (the rest is reserved for certain system functions, etc.) In a 64-bit OS where you have 6-8GB or more, a full 4GB can be allotted to a 32-bit program (such as Logos.)

As Dominick suggests, upgrading your video is probably a good idea, and you may see some improvements in L4 performance.

I think I'll probably go ahead and upgrade regardless of whether I get any L4 performance benefit from it. It is the oldest component in my system, and the more I read about WDDM 1.1, the more I think I'd like it for those benefits if nothing else.

Thanks for the input :-)

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90510#Comment_90510

@Mark

I was just noticing your specs in your signature. How does Logos perform for you? What kind of video card do you have? Most of your specs are weaker than mine, but I'm guessing (based on the age of your system) that your video card is probably newer. If you are seeing better performance than I am, that would be strong evidence in favor of the video card argument.

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90513#Comment_90513

My notebook is 2 1/2 years old. I'm slower all around than you are. I am stuck with on-board video on this machine. I think it probably only meets the minimum requirements if that.

The next system I purchase to run Logos 4 will have better graphics capability.

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90520#Comment_90520

OK, so here's what I've found:

It takes 10-15 seconds from startup to hit the home page (I don't have any problem with that...faster would be nicer, but no big deal. I realize that I could disable the home page if I wanted to as well.) During startup, the processor is at 50-60% for that 10-15 seconds.

Doing a 3 chapter PG (I know that is big, but I do it pretty regularly when we do our nightly family Bible reading so that I can show the kids the various maps, images, Biblical people, etc associated with the passage we read) takes 5 seconds for the first information to show and 40 seconds until all sections are fully populated. The processor is at 100% (both cores) for that full 40 seconds AND for another 30 seconds beyond the time that the sections are populated...I'm not entirely sure what it is doing for that remaining time (maybe populating the EG?). Doing a close all takes about 10 seconds.

Doing a more reasonable PG (Malachi 1:6-14) takes about 2 seconds for the first information to show and about 25 seconds for all sections to populate. The processor still stays at 100% for 30 seconds beyond that though.

Finally, I also discovered that my 7600GT video card only has 256MB of onboard video memory...so I technically don't meet the minimum requirements for video hardware (I believe they say 512MB, don't they?)

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90619#Comment_90619

Finally, I also discovered that my 7600GT video card only has 256MB of onboard video memory...so I technically don't meet the minimum requirements for video hardware

Actually you do. Here is the info:

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90621#Comment_90621

Actually you do. Here is the info:

Ahhh...good deal, thanks for the clarification. I only saw the recommended, not the minimum.

Mike Priest

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90621#Comment_90621

How can I find out how much video memory I have on my computer? I have a Dell XPS, M1330 running Windows Vista. I searched all over the control panel and system info but I guess I'm just missing something.

Rich DeRuiter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/91927#Comment_91927

How can I find out how much video memory I have on my computer? I have a Dell XPS, M1330 running Windows Vista. I searched all over the control panel and system info but I guess I'm just missing something.

You'd have to look at your system documentation, or go to Dell and search for your exact model number.

Gary O'Neal

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/91927#Comment_91927

How can I find out how much video memory I have on my computer? I have a Dell XPS, M1330 running Windows Vista. I searched all over the control panel and system info but I guess I'm just missing something.

Mike

I don't know if Vista included this or not, but in Windows 7 there is a feature called Windows Experience Index which you get to from the Control Panel. If you view this, there is an option underneath your score which will give you detailed information about your system--including your graphics memory.

SteveF

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/91927#Comment_91927

How can I find out how much video memory I have on my computer?

If you go to "Start"/Run a little window pops up. Type in dxdiag and a window will appear with information about your memory, video etc.

John Hapgood

I had the 7600GT and got the 9600 because the 7600 died. I did not notice ANY difference in performance. I actually liked the 7600 better because now, if it turn up the brightness on my monitor, I get green shadow on my text while I'm scrolling and the darn utility that's suppose to correct this does not work. If I did not get the 9600 for free (life time warranty) I would send it back.

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/92045#Comment_92045

That's great to know John...thanks! Which version of Windows are you running would be my only other question...only Windows 7 uses the new WDDM 1.1 that takes advantage of DirectX10 capabilities that the 9600 has.

Gary O'Neal

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/92000#Comment_92000

If you go to "Start"/Run a little window pops up. Type in dxdiag and a window will appear with information about your memory, video etc.

DxDiag doesn't distinguish between dedicated memory and shared. Does this make a difference? As you can see from my screen shot below, DxDiag shows that I have almost 1400 mb, but the Control panel shows I only have 256 dedicated to graphics. This is actually below the recommended. L4 isn't fast on my system by any means, but it is usable.

Jonathan West

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/92167#Comment_92167

This may not help a lot - but my experience is as follows:

I upgraded to L4 on my desktop which is specced with Windows XP, a Pentium 4 3GHz CPU (shows as 2 CPUs but not I think dual core - probably one of the Hyperthreading ones a couple of years old), 2 GB RAM and a Radeon X300 128MB video card. Performance is slow but acceptable. Takes a couple of minutes or so to get going to the home page but reading is no problem and even running PG is OK (just timed a PG on Malachi 1 - c. 60s with all sections open, sections set to show Commentaries, Cross References, Parallel Passages, Topics and Interesting Words - with Bible Study edition).

I decided to buy a new laptop, which is a Windows 7 64-bit, P7450 dual core 2.13GHz, 4GB DDR3 RAM and a 1GB Nvidia GeForce GT 240M video card. (Windows Experience level 5.6 due to slower 5400rpm hard disk.) This runs a lot better as you might expect. Startup to home page in around 30s. For comparison, PG on Malachi 1 just took 15s for most sections but Topics arrived after about 25s!

I normally collapse all sections apart from commentaries and save that as My Passage Guide - that helps PG startup and then I can open the sections I really want to look at when I want to look at them.