Dual Core Laptop vs. Quad Core Desktop
Recently I purchased a dual-core AMD Turion laptop with 4 GB of memory running Win7. After installing Logos 4 on the new laptop I did a side-by-side comparison with my Intel i7 quad-core machine with 6 GB of memory also running Win7. This resulted in some interesting observations:
Startup: In starting Logos from a cold-boot, the quad-core beat out the dual-core hands down. I was still waiting for the home page to come up on the laptop.
Searching: This came as the biggest surprise to me - the dual-core laptop runs circles around the quad-core desktop when doing any sort of search. I did a lookup of James 1 on both machines - the laptop was done a full minute before the desktop.
At first I hypothesized that it was because of a fresh install of Logos vs. an entrenched install that has seen many updates and multiple indexes - but support assures me that the latest version of Logos always has one index file - so this is likely not the case.
I was wondering if anyone else out there has noticed this as an issue - why is my quad-core machine that much slower than a dual-core laptop with less (and slower) memory? Is Logos designed to work with multi-core processors, or does Logos get confused with multiple processors (especially with hyper-threading enabled)?
Would love to hear your experiences with this!
Comments
-
Chris Van Den Berg said:
Recently I purchased a dual-core AMD Turion laptop with 4 GB of memory running Win7. After installing Logos 4 on the new laptop I did a side-by-side comparison with my Intel i7 quad-core machine with 6 GB of memory also running Win7. This resulted in some interesting observations:
Startup: In starting Logos from a cold-boot, the quad-core beat out the dual-core hands down. I was still waiting for the home page to come up on the laptop.
Searching: This came as the biggest surprise to me - the dual-core laptop runs circles around the quad-core desktop when doing any sort of search. I did a lookup of James 1 on both machines - the laptop was done a full minute before the desktop.
At first I hypothesized that it was because of a fresh install of Logos vs. an entrenched install that has seen many updates and multiple indexes - but support assures me that the latest version of Logos always has one index file - so this is likely not the case.
I was wondering if anyone else out there has noticed this as an issue - why is my quad-core machine that much slower than a dual-core laptop with less (and slower) memory? Is Logos designed to work with multi-core processors, or does Logos get confused with multiple processors (especially with hyper-threading enabled)?
Would love to hear your experiences with this!
Hello Chris, and welcome to Logos' forums. Why L4 runs faster on one computer than it does on another has been a hot topic throughout these forums. Let us say that you are not the first, or the second, or the third, or the fourth, or the fifth, or the ... person who has stated that L4 is running better on a slower computer. For me personally, L4 runs slow on all of my computers.
0 -
Chris,
It would be helpful to have a little more information. Maybe you could tell us the exact search or searches you've performed. You might also let us know what if anything was running in the background of your newer machine. The size of your library would also be of interest, but the exact search and what group you ran it on and what output you specified (Ranked, By Title, or By Count) would be the most useful to us.
I have a new quad core laptop and find it to be faster in every way over my older duo-core laptop. This is especially noticeable during indexing and running searches.
IMHO no search should be taking you 1 minute.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Thanks Tom!
I've been using Logos for quite a while, and even though it does seem to run slow on all of my computers, it is still much much faster than me trying to look through a bunch of physical books to do that kind of research! I still think it's a fantastic program!
I am sure I'm not the first - and I won't be the last - hopefully we can all work together to help the developers figure stuff out to improve an already great product!
Chris
0 -
Hi Mark!
I did mention that I did a search for James 1 - just a basic passage guide search, nothing fancy.
I did not have anything (other than dropbox and Microsoft Security Essentials) running in the background - I keep a tight reign on programs starting up with Windows.
Both machines are running Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit with SP 1 installed.
I have an older AMD machine that only has 2 GB of memory, Win7 Home Premium 32 bit with SP 1, and is also a dual-core. Doing the same search on it took 1 minute 47 seconds. So having searches go over a minute is nothing new to me. As I mentioned in my response to Tom - this is still way faster then trying to go through a ton of books in a physical library - so despite the wait it's still fantastic!
I am also working with Scholar's Silver (ver 4) as well as a few addons including the Essential IVP Reference Collection (and a few other book titles).
I hope that helps - let me know if you would like more information
Thanks,
Chris
0 -
Chris Van Den Berg said:
just a basic passage guide search,
I'm glad you said this because search and passage guide are two separate things. True the passage guide uses search technology but when you said search I was thinking the specific search tool.
It is a bit harder to compare passage guide results between people with different sets of resources, but from one machine to another with the same resources, you should expect to see the quad core machine work faster.
When I run a Passage Guide on my quad core I see three or more CPUs running under Task Manager. That means more than the two you have onn your dual core machine.
When I run a PG on James 1 on my quad core machine it finishes in 20 seconds (I have over 3500 resources, but may not be running all the sections of the PG you are). Running that same PG on my dual core machine takes over 2 minutes. In fact I am not sure how much over 2 minutes it takes as it freezes up a couple of times while running. It is probably more like 3 minutes.
I wonder if anything else is running and slowing down your quad core machine? You could check Task Manager and see what processes are running and if any are taking a significant portion of the CPUs' time.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Hey Mark,
Glad I was able to clarify that for you!
My PG search takes way more than 20 seconds - and other than those programs listed previously, I did not have anything else running in the background. In fact, when I get home I'll time it and see what the actual time is. I'll also be sure to watch and see how many cores are in use. With hyperthreading i have 8 threads available, will be interesting to see how well it makes use of those. As far as hardware on my quad-core goes:
- intel i7-920 (2.66 ghz)
- 6GB kingston hyperx pc3-16000 (ddr3 2000)
- 1.5 TB 7200 RPM seagate hard drive
- ASUS Geforce GTS 250 with 1 GB DDR3 pci-express video card.
- ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 Mobo
Oh - and my Novabench score is 1083 (laptop was only 247)
Ironically I built this rig for the sole purpose of running Logos faster ... heh0 -
Chris Van Den Berg said:
Ironically I built this rig for the sole purpose of running Logos faster ... heh
My Novabench score for the quad core is about 950 so yours tops mine. My dual core machine is about 320.
I was pleasantly surprised to find the PG running in 20 seconds. I am so used to glacial time spans that I rarely run it.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Chris Van Den Berg said:
I did not have anything (other than dropbox and Microsoft Security Essentials) running in the background - I keep a tight reign on programs starting up with Windows.
that reminded me... in this thread http://community.logos.com/forums/p/25696/190112.aspx Fred wrote about a significant slow-down caused presumably by MSE:
Maybe you can try disabling it - or turn in some detailed logs to the guru's here. The experience that some users are okay with Logos speed at slow machines and others are not with fast machines most often can be attributed to large libraries, large collections, note-files, internet access speed etc. that all shouldn't come in as factors in your situation.
Have joy in the Lord!
0 -
Chris Van Den Berg said:
In fact, when I get home I'll time it and see what the actual time is.
You should turn off web content in PG (sections labelled with .COM) if you want to compare hardware and ensure that other sections are exactly the same.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Hi Chris:
My guess would be:
1. The Desktop boots Logos quicker because it likely has a faster harddrive. Most Desktop Hardrives are 7200 rpm, while laptops often operate at slower speeds.
2. Logos 4 I believe (from memory) is not multi-core? If that is so, then the number of cores would not make as much difference as the speed of the individual cores. The Dual core processor may have fewer cores, but the cores may be faster individually, and if Logos 4 only can use one core, there would be a speed advantage.
0 -
Matthew Friend said:
1. The Desktop boots Logos quicker because it likely has a faster harddrive. Most Desktop Hardrives are 7200 rpm, while laptops often operate at slower speeds.
Actually - this particular laptop is also running a 7200 rpm hard drive - so that is not the issue.
Matthew Friend said:2. Logos 4 I believe (from memory) is not multi-core? If that is so, then the number of cores would not make as much difference as the speed of the individual cores. The Dual core processor may have fewer cores, but the cores may be faster individually, and if Logos 4 only can use one core, there would be a speed advantage.
On this thought - even though it is evidenced in performance monitor that it does use multiple cores - the laptop is running at 2.3 ghz while the desktop is running 2.66 ghz - so that again does not add up.
Thanks for the great thoughts though
0 -
Chris Van Den Berg said:
On this thought - even though it is evidenced in performance monitor that it does use multiple cores - the laptop is running at 2.3 ghz while the desktop is running 2.66 ghz - so that again does not add up.
My Laptop is slightly slower than Desktop generating a PG (see specs below), but I don't use sections with web content. Note that Logos 4 is multi-threaded so will use multiple cores as needed. The difference between quad core and dual core is more evident with the proper (timed) Searches and when indexing your library.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Hi Chris, I recently updated from a core duo 3.2ghz with 3gb of ram running vista to a quad core i5 3.1ghz with 8gb of ram desktop machine running windows 7. I noticed that the new machine runs rings around the older one. Since I am using the 64 bit operating system I chose to get 8gb of ram ot maximise performance. Perhaps you would find your new PC would operate faster on 64 but with a bit more ram.
Steve Caswell
0 -
Edit I ran a passage guide on James 1 and the whole thing was populated in about 35 seconds.
0 -
I am running 64bit Win7 on both machines - I could definitely up the memory and it might help, but it still seems odd that it is slower on the Desktop. Still doing some tests to figure out why that might be
Thanks for all of your input - appreciate it greatly!
0 -
My comp with i7 2600, 16gb ram, 1gb graphics card, 7200rpm hd, blows away my dual core lap top.
The i7 comp with 7200rpm is almost instant with L4, I can't imagine what it would do with a ssd.
0 -
@Stave Clevenger
Yeah - I would love to upgrade to an SSD - I am sure that would definitely give L4 a boost
16 gb of memory eh? Nice!
0 -
Chris,
Until you figure out what is slowing down you desktop system, may I suggest that you close all you PG sections before you close Logos. There is no point in populating PG sections until you are ready to use them.
As for your speed issue, your desktop should not be running that slowly, even with all my sections open and on a slower system, my computer completes the PG under 1 minute. Something is not right with your desktop system somewhere.
0 -
tom collinge said:
For me personally, L4 runs slow on all of my computers.
Hi Tom & Chris,
I have one of those slow Core 2 Duos that L4 runs faster on--albeit slow.... but still faster than I do. [;)]
Grace & Peace,
Bill
MSI GF63 8RD, I-7 8850H, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 2TB HDD, NVIDIA GTX 1050Max
iPhone 12 Pro Max 512Gb
iPad 9th Gen iOS 15.6, 256GB0 -
Steve Clevenger said:
The i7 comp with 7200rpm is almost instant with L4, I can't imagine what it would do with a ssd.
It might start guessing your next research question. [;)]
0 -
Did some poking around on my quadcore system this past weekend and discovered something that helped improve performance exponentially! At some point in time I had installed IIS on my computer in order to do some web development testing and had forgot that it was running in the background. After uninstalling it my performance with L4 jumped up considerably. Now passage guide search happens within 10-15 seconds with all resources scoured. So for those of you who thought it was something running in the background - you were right - it just wasn't a process, but a service
0 -
Hey Chris,
Just bought a Thinkpad W520 quadcore with 16G RAM and dedicated graphics. While it is much faster than it was, it is still slow.... I bought this computer because tech support said I needed dedicated graphics, so I replaced my T61 duo core with 4 GB RAM with this one so it would fly.... well, if this is flying I need a new bible software package! I really miss my old Logos. Much less functionality, but it did get a couple searches done done before my coffee got cold! Ok, I am stretching the truth a bit, but not too much!
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Hi Daniel!
Welcome to the Logos Forums!
Wow - the machine you got should be able to handle Logos without a problem! At least from a hardware point of view! I wonder why it is running so slow for you! Do you know how fast the hard drive in your new machine is? Also, what are you running for Anti-virus/Malware protection? Wondering if those are causing you to have some major slowdowns.
Chris
0 -
Chris Van Den Berg said:
I was wondering if anyone else out there has noticed this as an issue - why is my quad-core machine that much slower than a dual-core laptop with less (and slower) memory? Is Logos designed to work with multi-core processors, or does Logos get confused with multiple processors (especially with hyper-threading enabled)?
It would be interesting to see logs of both machines doing the same task. You'd need to run the tasks the first time you run Logos after boot, to make sure caching doesn't become a factor.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Thanks Chris!
I am running ESET. My computer is a 64 bit Windows 7 machine. I received some tips and tweaks and asked ESET to disregard my Logos 4 file. I am still wondering where the bottleneck is? Perhaps I would have been better off purchasing a gamily laptop with a 4GB graphics card. Apprarently my more powerful processor, more system memory, and larger cache was not the answer. Logos techincal support has not shared the secrets yet... but I hope to get an answer at some point... Don't get me wrong, my system is supporting Logos, but I want it to be much more responsive...
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Daniel,
I, recently bought the computer with the specs at the bottom of this post. It is doing very well, and I would not say it is slow at all. I wonder if something else is going on.
You probably know this but 12 GB of RAM will not benefit you much in Logos. Even with a few other programs running and doing a full indexing of Logos, I have never seen 5 GB of RAM in use. So you are in great shape there and you will basically only see an increase in speed due to buss speed on the RAM not the increase in the amount of RAM itself.
Second, on my machine there was a utility that allowed me to adjust the way the graphics card was used. The default was to use the on-board graphics processor for almost all programs. However I could choose to use the discrete graphics on a program by program basis. Of course, I enabled that for Logos. (The function is made to help save battery life on a laptop. Wouldn't be there on a desktop.)
Third, hard drive speed makes a difference. You didn't tell us, but is your hard drive 5400 RPM or 7200 RPM?
Fourth, other programs running in the background (like indexing) will slow you down. If you read Chris' posts here you see how something like that affected him.
There is a thread on the wiki about changing how you use Logos to speed things up as well. Don't know if there's anything there that might help: http://wiki.logos.com/Speeding_up_Logos_4_responses See also: http://wiki.logos.com/Logos_Running_Slowly
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Sorry Chris, forgot the harddrive. I have a 7200rpm 300GB harddrive. Was thinking about an Intel 510 SSD, but can't stomach the price right now!
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Daniel Hathaway said:
Perhaps I would have been better off purchasing a gamily laptop with a 4GB graphics card
My graphics card is 1 GB and as I said Logos 4 is quite responsive.
Would you please download and run NovaBench and post the results here and also on this thread: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/24555.aspx?PageIndex=13
Novabench is free and is available here: http://novabench.com/
Thanks.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Thanks Mark!
I posted as you asked in the other forum. My score was a 838 - sounds respectable, but if I need to RMA this unit and buy something else, what do I buy to see a whole lot better? I saw a 1138 - that was nice! How about a 1500 or something?
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Hello Mark,
Yes, I can manually ask the program to use discrete graphics at start up and this helps. I have not found a way in my system to make this permanent. But really, with all of this horsepower it is still only marginally faster than my T-61 with XP. Perhaps I was expecting to much when I upgraded....
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Dan, take a look at the other forum where you posted your Novabench score.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Also, the utility I have for the discrete graphics was supplied by the card maker (in my case Nvidia). You might check for something like this in a folder in Program Files with the card manufacturer's name on it.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Daniel Hathaway said:
Yes, I can manually ask the program to use discrete graphics at start up and this helps.
Look at my laptop scores on page 7 of the benchmark thread and the discrete graphics card score(159). That goes down to 36 with integrated graphics chip but I have no issues (eg. switching tabs, F11 reading mode). My old laptop with a graphics score of 12 was slower but acceptable (and acceptable overall). As you should outperform me on Search speed, what is the area of performance that concerns you? How big is your library?
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
I will look at your scores...., but my hope was that a searches and guides would take less time. Perhaps the thing that I find maddening , though, is a simple right click to copy a highlight verse or two can take an average of 10 seconds (sometimes 20) to bring up the dialogue box so I can make the copy. So, what piece of hardware needs to be improved?
I bought a $2000 laptop that can't perform a quick copy/paste? I do have a USB problem that the Lenovo tech thinks is system board related, so I have an opportunity to RMA my unit. (I have owned it for 10 days). If I do return it I am asking, 'so what is the ultimate Logos 4 laptop?'
I have spent waaaay tooooo lonnnnng on a 'tool' that just needs to do it's job so I can get on with ministry. Perhaps, someone can tell me what the bottleneck in Logos is so I can purchase a system equipped best to deal with it.... I am currently wondering if a SSD is the answer... Is the bottleneck is the ability to read quickly than a SSD with a marginal graphics card may be the answer... I digress.... Thanks for your interest! If I am reading it right, my library is 1,163.
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Daniel Hathaway said:
Perhaps the thing that I find maddening , though, is a simple right click to copy a highlight verse or two can take an average of 10 seconds (sometimes 20) to bring up the dialogue box so I can make the copy.
I'm on Mac, but I'm pretty sure you can use a normal Ctrl-C to copy, instead of waiting for the right-click menu to populate.
We've also been told the right-click menu will be considerably faster in the next upgrade.
Daniel Hathaway said:Perhaps, someone can tell me what the bottleneck in Logos is so I can purchase a system equipped best to deal with it....
I suspect no one can give you a conclusive answer, because, oddly, it seems to be different for each user. Some people with slow computers report Logos runs great, while other people with "monster" machines find it excruciatingly slow. And even those who agree it's slow encounter that slowness in completely different places. My tiny little Mac Mini, for example, brings up the right-click menu in 2-7 seconds, while the dropdown where I select what resource[s ] to search often takes half a minute.
Mac Pro (late 2013) OS 12.6.2
0 -
quote user="fgh"] I'm on Mac, but I'm pretty sure you can use a normal Ctrl-C to copy, instead of waiting for the right-click menu to populate.
I suspect no one can give you a conclusive answer, because, oddly, it seems to be different for each user. Some people with slow computers report Logos runs great, while other people with "monster" machines find it excruciatingly slow. And even those who agree it's slow encounter that slowness in completely different places. My tiny little Mac Mini, for example, brings up the right-click menu in 2-7 seconds, while the dropdown where I select what resource[s ] to search often takes half a minute.
Thanks fgh,
I was considering either a Macbook Pro or Thinkpad W520 with the new faster, yet energy saving Sandy Bridge Processors in them. Now, I am wondering if I ought to just try my wifes cheap (but she loves to brag and its dependability) Toshiba Satillite and see what it does with Logos 4. It will probably be much faster and she wil say, 'see, I told you so.' Pride before the fall, right? (Smile) I had just decided if I needed a new laptop, I would buy one that would last a few years, but now I am doubting this.... Well, gotta go sermonize! Thanks for everything!
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Daniel Hathaway said:
If I am reading it right, my library is 1,163.
Sorry about "big". My library is similar (1022 books) but that is only relevant for Entire Library searches. However, I'm confounded by the 10s dialogue box times for verses. In 4.2b the box comes up quickly & I can select Copy. There is an issue with right-clicking common single words, and I note that a multi-word selection may pick one word for manuscript, lemma, etc information, so it should be good news that the issue has been addressed in the 4.3 beta.
Given the price and the opportunity to RMA, I would get my money back & get a cheaper unit (mine would be under $1000 in the US). SSD is not necessary as a big 7200 RPM drive should give a Windows Experience Primary hard disk score better than the 5.9 of my 640 GB @ 5400 RPM! But if you can afford one research its life expectancy (if it is 5 years you may only be satisfied for 2-3 years as performance degrades over time). A graphics card similar to mine with 4 GB memory - classed as "medium" performance - should be OK.
In short, there is no 'ultimate" machine - an i7 is not guaranteed to be "better" than an i5, except when it comes to indexing all your resources or a wild card search of them (what importance do you place on those?).
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Daniel Hathaway said:
I was considering either a Macbook Pro or Thinkpad W520 with the new faster, yet energy saving Sandy Bridge Processors in them. Now, I am wondering if I ought to just try my wifes cheap (but she loves to brag and its dependability) Toshiba Satillite and see what it does with Logos 4. It will probably be much faster and she wil say, 'see, I told you so.' Pride before the fall, right? (Smile) I had just decided if I needed a new laptop, I would buy one that would last a few years, but now I am doubting this.... Well, gotta go sermonize! Thanks for everything!
Looking at benchmark scores => http://community.logos.com/forums/t/24555.aspx?PageIndex=13 am puzzled by CPU scores (low), wonder about motherboard bottlenecks ?
Looking at mobile graphics => http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html noticed NVIDIA Quadra 1000M is # 88 (appears changing BIOS setting is not causing NovaBench to use more powerful graphics, may need to use NVIDIA's control panel 3D settings). By way of comparison, Intel HD Graphics 3000 is # 182.
By the way, Apple has some refurbished February 2011 model MacBook Pro's => http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/macbook_pro
Daniel Hathaway said:I bought a $2000 laptop that can't perform a quick copy/paste? I do have a USB problem that the Lenovo tech thinks is system board related, so I have an opportunity to RMA my unit. (I have owned it for 10 days). If I do return it I am asking, 'so what is the ultimate Logos 4 laptop?'
Apologies, Dell Outlet XPS laptop with discount coupon (twitter or facebook) was bit less than $ 1,000
Dave Hooton said:SSD is not necessary as a big 7200 RPM drive should give a Windows Experience Primary hard disk score better than the 5.9 of my 640 GB @ 5400 RPM!
Observation: 640 GB drive with 7200 RPM has a Windows Experience Index of 5.9 for hard disk (lowest rating on a Dell XPS L702X laptop: graphics is 6.7 and CPU is 7.4). Looking at SSD drives in list view => http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCategory.aspx?SubCategory=636&name=SSD&Order=PRICE&Pagesize=50 noticing range of read and write speeds. Appears SATA II max speed is 285 MB/sec while SATA III max speed is 525 MB/sec (substantially faster than 131 MB/sec disk write in NovaBench testing).
Noticed 115 GB SATA II SSD for $ 169.99 => http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233160 (TRIM needs OS support)
Noticed 60 GB SATA III SSD for $ 149.99 => http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227725 (TRIM needs OS support)
Dell XPS L702X has second hard drive bay; have option to add SATA III drive.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Daniel Hathaway said:
Perhaps the thing that I find maddening , though, is a simple right click to copy a highlight verse or two can take an average of 10 seconds (sometimes 20) to bring up the dialogue box so I can make the copy. So, what piece of hardware needs to be improved?
Like Dave I find this very puzzling. My right click menu comes up in less than a second. In fact it is virtually instantaneous (it wasn't on my older machine).
This really makes me think something is going on in the background. Your hardware should be giving you better results. I don't think it is Logos. It can be quite hard to discover what is going on. The user who started this thread (Chris) was able to figure out what was slowing his system down, so it can be done. I know you mentioned your anti-virus software. How about disabling that? How about using Windows System Configuration to try to eliminate as much as you can from the background?
Try using the Diagnostic startup available on the General tab of System Configuration. Try to time a specific task before you do this and after so you have something to go on besides the subjective feel.
If you are tired of all this and just want to return your unit, mine is working very well. Its a Dell XPS 17 with the specs below.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
Hey Daniel,
I have often found that if there is one possible system board issue, then it can cause a multitude of problems. It is possible that your system has a faulty board and is the reason you are currently frustrated. I can completely understand that. I would definitely not rule that out as a potential culprit.
Background services/processes/programs are definitely a good place to begin looking. If you go to your "start" orb and type "msconfig" in the search program and files box and hit enter you will see a nifty little utility that can help you determine what Windows is all loading up when you boot your machine. You can uncheck items and save the configuration, and try it out with a restart. Just make sure that you aren't disabling your antivirus or any other essential programs. If you are not sure what a process/service is - a quick internet search query can definitely give you some good information.
One other thing I found is that my HP printer software installed a lot of non-essential startup programs and services - not sure what you are using for printer software - but that might be a possible place to look too.
Good luck - let me know if there is anything else I can help with
Chris
0 -
Thanks Chris! My Thinkpad W520 is shipping out for service today. Sales at Lenovo has extended there typical 21 day RMA policy to see if the unit indeed has a defective system board. I added to the service form a request they take a look at the GPU, too, Regardless, I am still desiring to know what Logos needs to run fast. My brother, who has some expereince in computer science has suggested harddrive read/write speeds are probably the culprit. Since my W520 is said to support sata III, I will investigate that possibility when (and if) it returns. Thanks again! In the meantime, I am loading Logos on an ancient toshiba core duo! Blessings, Dan
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Daniel Hathaway said:
Regardless, I am still desiring to know what Logos needs to run fast.
Wiki page Logos 4 Mac includes: "Logos 4 is resource intensive on Mac & PC – benefits from fast processor, graphics, and disk along with adequate memory (i.e. newer hardware since Logos 4 being designed for use over 5 to 8 years)."
Specific bottleneck depends on what want Logos 4 to do. Faster disk (e.g. SSD) should improve Logos 4 performance (time improvement depends on amount of disk usage).
A novel, "The Goal", discusses Theory of Constraints => http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Goal_%28book%29 (learned bottlenecks move around based on usage and scheduling, which also shows in some hardware benchmarking).
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
My Lenovo W520 is working great. I did need to go to the NVIDIA section
in Control Panel and tell it use use the discrete graphic card for Logos
(this may be because I am using dual monitors and do not use the laptop
display as the primary screen.) That change did make a difference. I
have also implement the suggestions from the Wiki. Turning off tablet PC functions in Windows did make a noticeable difference.Visual filters also had me running slower for a while.I also avoid complex dynamic collections since I feel that they slow things down. I have ALL my books tagged (about 1100) and in only a few cases do I need to use a dynamic collection to "lump" some of the tags together for certain purposes. This seemed to make a difference. Sorry, these changes were done over time in an ad hoc manner so I can not really say what did the most good.Also many of them were made on and 2007 version of dual core Acer Travelmate.
Below are the system config and NovaBench score. I have not gotten NovaBench to test with the discrete graphics card.The NVIDIA card is a Quadro M1000 with 2 Gig of DDR3 memory.The lower then expect Windows Experience index seems to be based on the fact that I have half of the 500 Gig. hard drive full. It is a 7200 RPM device.
0 -
That was what I may have hoped for Frank! You can find my Novabench somewhere else.... The reason I am thinking the GPU is involved (and btw mine is only the 1 GB Nvidia), is that I can no longer find the control panel for it... I did go into the bios and selected discrete only instead of Optimus and had less than a 40 on graphics... I was pretty disapointed... So, thanks for the info on the W520. I RMA'd my first one in April after a intermitent fingerprint reader problem and now after receiving my second one 11 days ago I am having an intermittent 'unknown device' driver issue... perhaps it is my vidoe card? Anyway, sales has extended the 21 day RMA window to allow them a chance to replace the system board and try it again. If it comes back and fails again, i am seriously thinking about getting a desk top and a I-pad 2 for travelling email... I just had hoped for a workstation class laptop...but I digress! Thanks for 'speaking up' and giving me a reason to think the W520 is a good choice! You are a blessing! Dan
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Frank Fenby said:
The lower then expect Windows Experience index seems to be based on the fact that I have half of the 500 Gig. hard drive full. It is a 7200 RPM device.
Suspect Windows Experience Index is showing 5.9 for disk drive with higher scores for processor and graphics.
As disk drive fills up, transfer speed for new files slows down (disk heads need to move more often). In contrast, SSD controller should spread storage usage to avoid speed degradation (and level wear). Newer SSD's are much faster along with lower cost per gigabyte of storage.
The NovaBench scores show Quad Core i7 2720QM being about 10 % faster than i7 2630 QM for Integer Operations and MD5 Hashes (bit surprised by Floating Point score, expected faster).
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Daniel Hathaway said:
I just had hoped for a workstation class laptop.
That is exactly what I am planning to do. The Lenovo will be my primary machine used with a docking station when I happen to be home. Also at home will be an "always on" "back-up computer". The back up will have a lot of disk storage (for both my wife and I) and will always be available for live syncing for active files when on the road. Right now I am using the free Windows Mesh service.When I get home and again just before I leave I will do a full system backup to the "back-up" machine. The back-up will also house many gig's of photos, videos, audio recordings, all my old seminary student work, etc.
0 -
With regards to the Windows Experience Index - I have found that it is not a very good representation of what a system is truly able to do. It also goes by your lowest score (Not an average) to determine your overall WEI number.
I also found out that if you have a 7200 rpm hard drive, the max you will ever get in the WEI is 5.9 - you need an SSD to go above that number. That's what my desktop caps out at.
Chris
0 -
Hello All,
After receiving my W520 back the depot service and still having the same problem, I just RMA'd it. Sad, it is a great machine on paper, but it was the second W520 I returned with bugs since April 10. After discussing the problem with my computer savvy brother, I went to the Apple store and bought a new IMAC and IPOD and loaded them with Logos and PRESTO, Logos just flies! Thanks for all of your advice and helpfulness! You were all a big blessing to me!
IMAC - 2.7GHz Intel Core I5 - 12GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Mac OS X - Logos 4 Gold
0 -
Daniel Hathaway said:
After discussing the problem with my computer savvy brother, I went to the Apple store and bought a new IMAC and IPOD and loaded them with Logos and PRESTO, Logos just flies!
[Y][:D]
macOS, iOS & iPadOS |Logs| Install
Choose Truth Over Tribe | Become a Joyful Outsider!0 -
Daniel Hathaway said:
I went to the Apple store and bought a new IMAC and IPOD and loaded them with Logos and PRESTO, Logos just flies!
It's a shame you had to resort to a Mac[:D] but the important thing is that you are satisfied.
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0
