Duo core Atom Netbooks and Logos 4
Duo core Atom Netbooks does anyone run Logos on one of these 10 inch netbooks, if so does it run it fast enough?
In Christ,
Jim VanSchoonhoven
Comments
-
Or, any Novabench results?
Pastor, rural Baptist church
Notebook: Dell Precision 4400; Core 2 Duo, 2.5gh; 8Gb RAM; NVIDIA FX 770M w/ 512Mb; Win7 Pro 64-bit; Novabench 510; WEI 5.9
Netbook: MSI Wind 12: Novabench 198; WEI 3.1
0 -
Jim,
I run L4 on a Samsung NC110 on a single core CPU 1.6-GHz Intel Atom N270, with 2gb ram.
I do get sporadic freezes if I have over 5 tabs open, but on the whole performance is acceptable, it is fine for 90% of time, so I would imagine the dual core would rock, but think it would be better if ram could get to 4gb which is unlikely.
Never Deprive Anyone of Hope.. It Might Be ALL They Have
0 -
I have an 11.6" netbook: MSI U230 L-087 with a single-core AMD Athlon Neo MV-40, 1.6gh, 4gb RAM.
Does Logos 4 run? Yes, and better than I expected. But it is S-L-O-W. I would hate to count on it as my primary work (study) computer. It's a great little "carry-around" machine, but doesn't have the horsepower or video subsystem to perform L4 searches. Logos relies heavily on a computer's video system and netbooks tend to be light on video RAM. The small screen is also a liability, though that may be the fault of my fifty-something eyes. Maybe the Atom dual-core will do better.
BTW, bumping the RAM to 4gb in the netbook made a noticeable difference.
Pastor, rural Baptist church
Notebook: Dell Precision 4400; Core 2 Duo, 2.5gh; 8Gb RAM; NVIDIA FX 770M w/ 512Mb; Win7 Pro 64-bit; Novabench 510; WEI 5.9
Netbook: MSI Wind 12: Novabench 198; WEI 3.1
0 -
Has anyone done any measurements to see how many cores / sockets L4 will use during normal operation? I'm curious based on what I've seen during indexing on 2 different computers (admittedly *not* "normal operation").
On a dual core Core i7 laptop, indexing will take the CPU to around 90% (using the somewhat crude output of Task Manager). Note that the laptop is plugged in and in max-performance mode. However, the same indexing operation (same new resource download) only gets the CPU to about 10% on a quad core Core i7 desktop workstation. Interestingly, the indexing takes about the same amount of wall-clock time on each (workstation just a little faster). I know a mobile Core i7 isn't quite what a desktop Core i7 is, but I believe the CPU speeds are about the same.
It would seem that at some point in the performance characteristics of a computer, indexing goes from being CPU-bound (90% CPU on the laptop) to being I/O bound (10% CPU on the desktop). The relatively slower I/O of a laptop's disk subsystem makes this even more curious.
My point is that simply because a computer has multiple cores / CPUs doesn't mean it will use more than 1 of them for any particular application. That's almost completely the application's responsibility.
Donnie
0 -
I use L4 on a Asus 1001P duo-core Atom, with 2Gb Ram and a 5400RPM hard-drive. It's sufficiently fast for my needs, but I don't run any complex searches etc. on it, and I only have 600 resources.
It runs just fine though. No complaints, except the 10inch screen feels tiny compared to my 27" iMac
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected."- G.K. Chesterton
0 -
Hey Donnie,
I have an I-7 processor on my desktop and normally only one core runs at almost 100% and one other at a low percentage when it is indexing large files, the rest of the cores are idle. So much much for using all the cores to get a task done.
blessings,
danp
0 -
The Logos 4 Indexer is currently designed to use up to four cores when indexing; on my development Core i7-950 (hyperthreaded) and Xeon W3565 (basically an i7), it routinely achieves > 80% CPU usage (quad core) or > 40% (quad core, hyperthreaded) when indexing on a HDD (not a SSD). If you're seeing fewer than four cores active, I'd suspect either some kind of system configuration error limiting the number of cores that it can run on, or an excessively-slow IO subsystem that's causing the others core to stall by blocking on hard disk reads/writes.
Logos 4 itself has one dedicated UI thread (which has to perform all screen updates, user interaction, etc. due to the design of WPF); it will run as much non-UI work (searches, sync, DB queries) on as many background threads as your system can support.
(This only applies to the Windows version; some of the Mac threading code is written differently for the Mono platform.)
0 -
Bradley Grainger said:
The Logos 4 Indexer is currently designed to use up to four cores when indexing; on my development Core i7-950 (hyperthreaded) and Xeon W3565 (basically an i7), it routinely achieves > 80% CPU usage (quad core) or > 40% (quad core, hyperthreaded) when indexing on a HDD (not a SSD). If you're seeing fewer than four cores active, I'd suspect either some kind of system configuration error limiting the number of cores that it can run on, or an excessively-slow IO subsystem that's causing the others core to stall by blocking on hard disk reads/writes.
Logos 4 itself has one dedicated UI thread (which has to perform all screen updates, user interaction, etc. due to the design of WPF); it will run as much non-UI work (searches, sync, DB queries) on as many background threads as your system can support.
(This only applies to the Windows version; some of the Mac threading code is written differently for the Mono platform.)
Thanks Bradley for that information. Appreciate it very much.
Bohuslav
0 -
Donnie Hale said:
Has anyone done any measurements to see how many cores / sockets L4 will use during normal operation?
I upgraded my CPU from a 3.0 Ghz Pentium 4 to a 2.53 Ghz Dual Core Pentium E5200 and the difference in performance with Logos 4 was tremendous. I don't have any indexing statistics to compare but I know my load time and time to perform various searches are much shorter than with the old CPU.
Your point about core usage being dependent upon the application is true. But I suspect an operation such as indexing would be more dependent on hard drive and memory speed than it would on CPU cores and speed. Also, available memory would be a major factor.
0 -
Donnie Hale said:
However, the same indexing operation (same new resource download) only gets the CPU to about 10% on a quad core Core i7 desktop workstation. Interestingly, the indexing takes about the same amount of wall-clock time on each (workstation just a little faster). I know a mobile Core i7 isn't quite what a desktop Core i7 is, but I believe the CPU speeds are about the same.
How many resources were being indexed because I see 4 cores active during a re-index on my Desktop (see below) and it is considerably faster than my laptop which uses all 2 cores? ie. if only 2 resources were being indexed then both computers would use 2 cores!
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
I'm willing to initiate a "reindex" as a test. I'd just need a comfort level around: a) that it won't end up with me having a non-working L4 when it works quite well right now.; b) how long I could expect the entire reindex to take (~1,900 resources).
Donnie
0 -
Donnie Hale said:
I'm willing to initiate a "reindex" as a test. I'd just need a comfort level around: a) that it won't end up with me having a non-working L4 when it works quite well right now.; b) how long I could expect the entire reindex to take (~1,900 resources).
Donnie
a) a rebuild is very safe!
b) My quad core took 52 minutes for 963 resources, so allow about 2 hours. Use the command rebuild library index because that was what I used (it avoids doing the Bible index).
EDIT: a rebuild is safe provided your hardware (CPU and HDD) is up to the rigour of a 2 hour stress test; laptops are more susceptible than desktops without adequate cooling!
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Jim, have we completely lost sight of your original question? I'm LOVING the discussion of cores, threads and sockets ( I really am!), but anyone besides Ben using an Atom dual-core? [;)]
Pastor, rural Baptist church
Notebook: Dell Precision 4400; Core 2 Duo, 2.5gh; 8Gb RAM; NVIDIA FX 770M w/ 512Mb; Win7 Pro 64-bit; Novabench 510; WEI 5.9
Netbook: MSI Wind 12: Novabench 198; WEI 3.1
0 -
A picture of my 4-core laptop doing a Rebuild All on 4.2a Beta 3...
0 -
Steve Johnson said:
Jim, have we completely lost sight of your original question? I'm LOVING the discussion of cores, threads and sockets ( I really am!), but anyone besides Ben using an Atom dual-core?
No, but I'm testing Logos 4 on a Z540 1.86 GHz single core Atom. Can't complain too much yet, but I haven't really put it through it's paces yet.
0 -
Jeffrey Glen Jackson said:
...I'm testing Logos 4 on a Z540 1.86 GHz single core Atom. Can't complain too much yet, but I haven't really put it through it's paces yet.
Jeffrey, I'll follow your evaluation with interest.I'm occasionally using Logos4 on an AMD single core, Neo MV-40, 1.8 GHz netbook. Performance is better than I expected. It doesn't freeze, and with a little patience I can get anywhere in Logos 4 that I want to go. The "reading pane" function seems especially useful. Usually when I am using the netbook I don't have my (rather hefty) print Bible with me.
I'm cheating a bit with the netbook. I discovered that the processor defaults to 1/2 speed on battery. I found a workaround in BIOS that lets it clock at the full 1.6Ghz when I'm unplugged. [8-|] I also had a spare memory stick lying around and was able to upgrade it to 4Gb RAM.
One thing that is painfully slow: indexing. I try to start this as I go to bed at night. It can take a l-o-n-g time.
Perhaps one reason the netbook performance seems
acceptable is that my "full size" notebook is no speed demon, either.
Really, I'm satisfied with how both of them handle Logos.Pastor, rural Baptist church
Notebook: Dell Precision 4400; Core 2 Duo, 2.5gh; 8Gb RAM; NVIDIA FX 770M w/ 512Mb; Win7 Pro 64-bit; Novabench 510; WEI 5.9
Netbook: MSI Wind 12: Novabench 198; WEI 3.1
0 -
I have an HP Mini netbook, Intel Atom, and Windows 7 Starter. Its got a single ram socket, and currently only the original 1 gb ram.
Logos4 installs and runs, but its not fast. The index of the 2000+ resources took maybe 24 hours, so no rushing that part.
I hope I can replace the 1 GB ram module with a 2 in due course, but it works OK without; just not fast.
Intel CPU id tool reports its got an Intel Atom N455 @1.66 GHz. Windows Task Manager shows two cpu graphs, so I guess its dual-core.
0 -
Tim, have you run Novabench's benchmark? Or know what the Windows Experience Index is? (Right-click Computer, Properties)
Pastor, rural Baptist church
Notebook: Dell Precision 4400; Core 2 Duo, 2.5gh; 8Gb RAM; NVIDIA FX 770M w/ 512Mb; Win7 Pro 64-bit; Novabench 510; WEI 5.9
Netbook: MSI Wind 12: Novabench 198; WEI 3.1
0
