currently I have an i5 processor and 16gb of rapeon a ssd.
if i upgrade to an i7 and 32gbs of ram, will logos be faster???
or have I already maxed out my top speed
currently I have an i5 processor and 16gb of rapeon a ssd. if i upgrade to an i7 and 32gbs of ram, will logos be faster??? or have I already maxed out my top speed
Assuming you mean you currently have 16GB of RAM, you'll barely notice an upgrade to 32GB. The switch from i5 to i7 may give you some speed increase, but that rather depends on which i5 and which i7. Some i7s are slower than some i5s. The type of SSD you have also has a big impact, but I wasn't clear what you meant about the SSD.
The switch from i5 to i7 may give you some speed increase, but that rather depends on which i5 and which i7. Some i7s are slower than some i5s.
Concur, CPU benchmark list => http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html
Logos is a resource intensive application that benefits from fast processor, graphics, and quick storage along with adequate memory; Solid State Disk (SSD) is noticeably faster than hard disk. SSD models have a wide range of read and write speeds.
Keep Smiling [:)]
Open Task Manager to the Resource tab. Run Logos as you normally would.
Note how much time the CPU spends at 100%
If it spends a lot of time at 100%, then you might see a small increase in performance by upgrading the processor.
I now have the relative luxury of four different late model computers to use with Logos. Unless you have a lot of stuff open at the same time, the only time Logos really seems to eat RAM is during indexing.
For the most part, almost any decent computer now seems perfectly capable of running Logos. You can save your money for more Logos resources.[8-|]
Remember that the OS will cache files in RAM. When it caches Logos files it makes a huge difference to performance, especially on computers with slow drivers. This type of RAM usage will show up as being used by the system, rather than Logos, but you'll benefit from having at least a gig or two just for that process. Personally, I noticed the benefit of RAM upgrades up to about 8GB, and would recommend 4-8GB for Logos. Going up to 16GB didn't make much difference in comparison.
I noticed the benefit of RAM upgrades up to about 8GB, and would recommend 4-8GB for Logos. Going up to 16GB didn't make much difference in comparison.
This is a help. Can you quantify in some way the difference between 8 and 16?
Can you quantify in some way the difference between 8 and 16?
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. Truthfully, I can't quantify the difference between 8 and 16. Once, when I fitted a new hard drive, I had to remove one of the memory chips in order to get the drive in, and I forgot to put it back, so I was only running on 8GB. I only noticed about three weeks later when I had to send my PC specs to a tech support guy, and I couldn't understand why Windows was reporting only 8GB.
So in my case, even with a large library, 8GB is enough. If you were doing a lot of multitasking with other resource-hungry apps, then perhaps you would benefit more, but when I'm using Logos, I usually only have Outlook, Word, and Chrome open.
Right now, according to RAMMAP, around 4GB of RAM is 'active', nearly 5GB is on 'standby' and nearly 8GB is 'free' or 'zeroed'. And more than 2GB of that 'standby' RAM is being held by the Windows SearchIndexer, which has just finished reindexing a bunch of files.
The Logos process itself is using only 261MB. I've also got hundreds of Logos files cached by the system (this is the most important use of RAM, as far as Logos is concerned). I can't be sure exactly how much RAM this is using, but it's substantially less than 2GB.
In other words, of my 16GB of RAM, half is not being used at all, and Logos is only benefiting from around 1.5GB to 2GB.
Thanks again, Mark. That is a help. I'm needing to replace an old computer. I am looking at a laptop (so I can use at school and home) with the new generation (Haswell) Intel processor. I'm still thinking through the dedicated graphics processor versus the new generation Intel 4600 HD integrated graphics part of the equation. As you are well aware, its a balance between budget and the most effective hardware upgrades. Every dollar counts and I would rather invest in an SSD. Forgoing the cost of additional RAM beyond 8GB makes a difference to my wallet.
[:)]
... dedicated graphics processor versus the new generation Intel 4600 HD integrated graphics ...
If you get an i7, the integrated graphics are not that bad. 3rd generation (HD4000) was a huge improvement in graphics performance.
I bought an Ivy Bridge i7 laptop with 8GB. It has a small cache SSD. It screams. Just over $500 refurb shipped. Look around there are lots of good deals because sales have been very soft on Win8.
... a small cache SSD.
What do you mean? Are you talking about a hybrid hard drive with a small (8, 16, 32 MB) SSD cache? Or one of those mSSD modules (24+ GB) that plugs into a memory slot?
Can you quantify "scream"? (Perhaps versus non-SSD cache performance of one of the implementations mentioned.)
What do you mean? Are you talking about a hybrid hard drive with a small (8, 16, 32 MB) SSD cache? Or one of those mSSD modules (24+ GB) that plugs into a memory slot? Can you quantify "scream"? (Perhaps versus non-SSD cache performance of one of the implementations mentioned.)
I haven't tested a hybrid drive, but I did run some tests on SSD vs traditional drives. The results are here, if you're interested: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/65814/462436.aspx#462436
I believe the SSD is a separate drive set up to make the frequent memory moves run faster. The regular HD is a pedestrian 5400 RPM drive. I can't quantify scream, but I have to say this machine startles me with its speed. For Logos, it's a delight!
