Are the Benefits Worth the Inconveniences?

MSI K9A2VM Motherboard, AMD Athlon X2 250 2.99 Ghz CPU, 2 gig RAM, Nvidia NX8400GS Graphics. Windows 7 Pro.

Well, I brought up L4 today knowing what would likely happen. I wasn't to be disappointed, my screen literately froze. Too many windows were already open; Thunderbird, Firefox, Picasa. Even had trouble with Task Manager When will I learn to reboot first, bring up L4, then add programs one at a time? Okay, I realize my video card is not the best on the planet and it's on the list for replacement, but it should be able to handle what I'm throwing at it!

Then, as I anticipated, L4 tells me it's going to go through an upgrade. So I get away for the computer for awhile. I return to barely be able to read a message telling me it wants to reboot the system. Clicking on that avails me nothing, so I close what programs I'm able to and reboot Daniel.

Now L4 wants to download 38 megabytes of something or other, so I work around it with just Firefox open. What a pain; I can barely move my pointer on the screen! Bring up Task Manager. Would you believe?

Okay, it's two hours later. I'm sorry; I realize L4 is the program of the year. I couldn't ask for any more features. It does everything I can ask for.

But! It wants to run on its own computer and that's one sacrifice I can't make! Logos software isn't my entire life.

Gerry

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Rosie Perera

I'm sorry you're struggling so much with slow performance, but I think it's due to not having enough memory. Logos lists 3 GB of RAM minimum in its recommended system requirements. Others have found that 3 GB makes it run OK but not blazingly fast. In my opinion 4 GB is better. Do you have the ability to upgrade your PC, adding an additional 2 GB of RAM to it? If that is not an option, check out these other suggestions for improving performance: http://wiki.logos.com/Logos_Running_Slowly

Gerald P. Swetsky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104375#Comment_104375

My system has a three gig RAM limitation. Right now, it's using one just using barely over one gig. There's no reason to add more.

Gerry

NetworkGeek

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104386#Comment_104386

It's hard to read, but in the image you posted does it show Free memory 1 MB?

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104375#Comment_104375

Others have found that 3 GB makes it run OK but not blazingly fast. In my opinion 4 GB is better.

I don't understand the logic behind this. I have Logos 4 open at the moment and the indexer is running and it is only using 250MB between the two of them. I've NEVER seen my Logos 4 using more than a couple hundred to a few hundred MB. Granted I don't have a huge library (Bible Study base) and I'm not a heavy duty Logos 4 power user, but still...does anybody see Logos utilizing 1GB+ of RAM at any given time? It'd be nice to see a few people pull up their task manager during a normal Logos 4 workload and see how much logos4.exe is actually using.

EDIT: Just wanted to add, I just finished indexing and ran a PG while watching task manager. Logos4.exe memory utilization peaked at 250MB while opening the PG and dropped back below 200MB once it was open. Along with Logos 4, I've currently got Firefox (2 tabs), OneNote, eSword, Outlook, and Word (ISV Bible) open...all together I'm using 2GB out of the 8GB available in my system.

EDIT 2: Sorry, one more test...I just opened every commentary I have on the passage I'm studying (Malachi 2:17-3:5)...a total of 18 commentaries in a second floating window. Logos4.exe is still only using 243MB. Unless I'm really, really missing something (entirely possible...I'm a hardware guy, not a programmer,) I don't see the fact that he's got 2GB instead of 3 or 4 being the issue.

Gerald P. Swetsky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104404#Comment_104404

Well I don't think the readings in Task Manager are meant for mortal man to understand. My readings are:

Total 2047 mb
Cached 811 mb
Available 763 mb
Free 1 mb

I cannot deny adding memory would help, I'm only saying I can turn on everything in my computer at once and not suffer the inconvenience that L4 running by itself causes. In other words, it has nothing to do with my resources but everything to do with L4!

Gerry

Wes Saad

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104386#Comment_104386

My system has a three gig RAM limitation. Right now, it's using one just using barely over one gig. There's no reason to add more.

If your software won't run with the available ram, you need more.

That said, I run Logos inside a virtual machine that is given 2 gig ram and it runs fine. I suspect something else is going on with your system to cause such a slowdown. I normally have a few apps running on my Mac, plus the Windows virtual machine running Logos, and things move at a pretty fair clip.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104428#Comment_104428

Gerald,

Your system spec isn't ideal, but it's good enough. But it's impossible to know what's causing the slowdown without more detail. For example, a screenshot of the processes tab showing Logos CPU and memory use, together with the Logos and indexer logs at the same timestamp.

It sounds to me as though your machine updated to Logos 4.0b in two stages - possibly pre-requisites first, requiring the reboot, then the program proper (that's the 38Mb download). If so, then the next thing that happens is a big indexing (about an hour or so) as Logos creates the new bible index required in 4.0b. Your CPU usage is exactly what I'd expect if that was happening. Remember you can pause it by right-clicking on the Logos icon in the taskbar.

BTW, just because you have lots of free RAM doesn't mean it wouldn't be useful to have more. Windows decides whether to store memory in RAM or on disk depending on how much free RAM you have. If you don't have much free RAM, Windows won't use the RAM (as you'll need it soon enough), but swaps it out to disk.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104388#Comment_104388

In Windows Vista and Windows 7, having a low amount of "free" memory is not a problem. These operating systems make much better use of (what would otherwise be) free memory by filling it with programs and data that (based on historical usage) you might be using soon. If you launch those programs, they're already in memory so they can open very quickly. The Task Manager display in Vista was a little confusing, so Windows 7 adds an "Available" line. To the best of my knowledge, this figure indicates memory that has currently been used, but can instantly be freed up if a running program needs more memory now. Since Gerry has > 500MB of "Available" memory, I think that he's not currently hurting on the memory front. The almost-pegged CPU indicates that CPU speed might be his limiting factor.

Gerald P. Swetsky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104448#Comment_104448

Well Mark is correct in that the upgrade process seemed to take two steps to complete, and a reboot was necessary halfway through. But my complaints are L4 takes over the computer when I start it. First it grinds my video to a halt - that probably necessitates a fresh video card even though, besides L4, I have no reason to buy a new card.

The other complaint is the frequent need to reindex and the length of time involved. Though my programming days ended when CP/M gave way to MS-DOS, I still can't help but believe there is something that can be done to L4 to make this easier for computers that are used for more than just running Logos. I expected the numerous suggestions that I needed more RAM. That's human nature, however when the machine was built I was told that two gig was plenty for 32 bit Windows 7 unless I was running special cases and they didn't seem to think L4 was a special case.

Finally there's the CPU. I had been running an AMD Athlon X2 5000+ on this computer, but when I went to 7 Pro I wanted to run XP in the virtual mode and the CPU rev level wasn't high enough to allow for the virtual OS. So I switched to the X2 250, not knowing anything more than I could run my XP mode. I haven't done a lot of research on the chip other than it would do what I needed. Was the 2.99 ghz. 250 a faster chip or did I simply make a lateral move? Am I now starved for power with my new chip?

Gerry

Jacob Hantla

What's weird is that on my ASUS Eee Pc netbook with 1.7 GHz Atom and 2 GB of RAM Logos does not "Take of the computer."

So on a computer that is probably far more overwhelmed by L4 than your computer, the benefits far outweigh the inconvenience of a slow update process and a slow index time. Once the initial setup is done, understanding some limitations imposed by my system, I love it, even on a netbook

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104460#Comment_104460

That's human nature, however when the machine was built I was told that two gig was plenty for 32 bit Windows 7 unless I was running special cases and they didn't seem to think L4 was a special case.

Wasn't a Virtual OS considered "special"? What was this running during this time?

The Athlon II X2 250 is faster than Athlon X2 6000+ from the test I read, so you need have no fear. It should be faster than my Core 2 Duo 2 GHz laptop CPU, and L4 doesn't max my CPU unless it is indexing. I also run 2 GB memory, which was sufficient for Win 7 RC when it was installed and running L4.

Andrew Hughes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104501#Comment_104501

From what I have read, and I think Bob may have commented on this at some point, many of the performance problems people experience seem to be related to the Microsoft WPF which L4 uses. If that's the case this could really point to graphics cards, chipsets, and memory management as a source of the problems. This would have less to do with how much memory one has and more with how efficient and/or current the components are. This would help explain why people using netbooks or even virtual servers with limited hardware resources would see acceptable performance compared to someone with seemingly sufficient but older hardware.

For what it's worth as an example... When I first installed L4 I had significant performance problems with the laptop Installed on. It was a Core 2 Duo w/ 2GB RAM, but it was a few years old. I tried installing on my wife's laptop which was a new laptop at the time, and also Core 2 Duo w/ 2GB RAM. Performance was significantly better. The only major difference between the two would have been an updated graphics card and motherboard/chipsets. I now have a new laptop from work which is again a Core 2 Duo, and newer still newer, and it runs L4 fast. The difference here is with 4GB RAM Windows 7 allocates almost 1GB of RAM for things like video and other behind the scenes hardware stuff, so while L4 never uses any significant amount of memory itself, I am sure the WPF performance benefits from the extra available memory for video.

IMHO, I think adding memory will often help as it can improve the ability of the OS to efficiently handle video. Though where I suspect most people will see greater performance improvements is on newer hardware which will have better graphics processing and memory management.

Andrew

Gerald P. Swetsky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104541#Comment_104541

First of all Dave - The virtual OS runs only when I need it for old XP programs which won't run on 7. One of these btw, is FTPSync. Oh, and thank you for the info on the AMD cpu's - Appreciated!

Andrew, I believe you've nailed it. First of all, my MSI motherboard came with built in ATI graphics which didn't co-exist nicely with my KVM switch. So we added the Nvidia board which has only 250 meg of on board RAM.

In another MSI based computer, which I retired when I went to 7 is an Nvidia 8500GT with a gig of RAM. Despite the temptation to switch the two Nvidia cards, I think my best route is to go to a brand new video card which is familiar with and constructed for Windows 7.

Thanks to all for the education.

Gerry

Paul Davey

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104553#Comment_104553

Have you updated your graphics card drivers?

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104668#Comment_104668

It's probably worth saying that there are lots of things that can slow Logos down even on a fast system (too many open resources, guides linked to bibles, an ill-configured info panel, etc.) If you wanted to post a screenshot of your layout, it might be possible to determine if the cause is within Logos.

Gerald P. Swetsky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104671#Comment_104671

Paul, the computer was just set up with Win 7. It has all the latest drivers on it.

Mark, I don't see how some of the things you list can affect L4 while it's updating or indexing. The operation speed of L4 is fine. Searches are incredible. I'm concerned with how it is affecting my other programs and slowing the computer down. Also I don't understand what layout you're referring to. A screenshot of my L4 desktop?

Gerry

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104686#Comment_104686

Gerald,

I'm obviously confused as to what's causing the slow down. If it's indexing, that's all about CPU and disk speed - not graphics cards. So all the discussion about graphics, and your comments that the problem is caused when you start Logos led me to assume the problem was with Logos in operation, not Logos indexing.

If this issue is just indexing, there's a simple solution. Pause it until you're finished using the computer, then let it run overnight.

Mark

Randy Murphy

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104686#Comment_104686

Update Your Video Drivers After Installing Windows 7

Rick Broida

Feb 24, 2010 10:40 am

I just installed Windows 7 on a Compaq laptop that was previously running Vista. It was a clean install, meaning I wiped the hard drive rather than simply upgrading the OS. (I had my reasons for doing so, but I won't bore you with them here.)

The install went perfectly, with one exception: the display wasn't running at its maximum, native resolution (which on this system is 1,200 by 800). Instead, it was stuck at a rather chunky 800 by 600, and when I went to increase it (by right-clicking the desktop and choosing Screen resolution), the only option was 1,024 by 768--still shy of optimal.

What happened? Simple: Windows 7 had failed to detect and download drivers for the laptop's ATI Radeon video hardware. Thus, I had to grab them manually, which was surprisingly easy:

This is from PCworld.com

Gerald P. Swetsky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104700#Comment_104700

As I posted before, there are two issues. Bringing up L4 when I have other processes running can bring my graphics to their knees necessitating a restart. This is what I believe can be resolved with a newer graphics card.

The indexing problem will likely not be resolved with a graphics card, though one can never tell these days. Postponing the indexing and/or leaving the computer on overnight is not a solution, it's a workaround, not to mention, an inconvenience. Microsoft indexes my system occasionally without inconvenience as does Google, iTunes and Norton Ghost. My comment was, is and will continue to be, "There's gotta be a better way!"

Gerry

Gerald P. Swetsky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104710#Comment_104710

Thank you Randy. My computer was upgraded from Vista two weeks ago. It was a clean install, done by professionals. ALL my drivers were updated. That is the reason I let someone do it who makes a living at it.

Gerry

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104710#Comment_104710

The indexing problem will likely not be resolved with a graphics card, though one can never tell these days. Postponing the indexing and/or leaving the computer on overnight is not a solution, it's a workaround, not to mention, an inconvenience. Microsoft indexes my system occasionally without inconvenience as does Google, iTunes and Norton Ghost. My comment was, is and will continue to be, "There's gotta be a better way!"

Gerry,

With indexing there is always a trade-off between speed and performance. Google/Microsoft indexing takes a looong time, but doesn't disrupt your work. Logos is very intensive, but finishes much quicker as a consequence.* They assume (rightly I think) that we don't really want to wait days until we have a useable index, so they 'take over' your computer to make sure it's done quickly, but give you the option to pause it.

In an ideal world, there'd be a slider like there is in Ghost were I can slow down the backup to make my computer more responsive. But then I run Ghost every day, and only re-index Logos very occasionally. There are no magic bullets here, and I still think Logos made the right design decision.

Mark

* By quicker I mean quicker than Logos otherwise would. Logos is probably indexing far more data than any other application on your computer.

LaRosa Johnson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/104722#Comment_104722

I agree with you Mark. The reason that Logos' indexing slows down your computer is because it takes over the majority of your system's resources to build the index in a much quicker manner than Microsoft/Google does. If it went any slower, then it'd be days/weeks before a user was able to do any kind of searching in Logos, which I'm sure 100% of users would find unacceptable.

I can see why it would be a problem, but I guess I came into it knowing that building an index would considerably slow down my computer & eat up a lot of resources (probably because I constantly write a lot of scripts/programs that slow my computer to a crawl when run because it uses all of my resources); therefore, I was ready to just leave my computer sitting while Logos builds the index (or only do stuff that doesn't require a lot of resources).