I run L4 on an ASRock ION based nettop (dual core N330 and nVidia 9400 integrated) with 4GB and Win 7 x64. The indexing is not the problem with this system, it is the rendering. L4 does its best to bring this system to its knees.

For a basic reader system, an ION based computer is OK, but anything beyond that tends to cause it to run VERY slowly.

The problem is the fact that the Intel Atom processor is a linear processor, not an asynchronous processor like most other modern processors (imagine the N330 as four 1.6GHz Pentiums (as in the original Ps). The raw power is kinda there (1.6GHz is a bit of a limitation), but you have to wait for the processors to be fed data in a linear fashion (full series of instructions at a time), not data fed as required (async). The ION has a limitation on the amount in instructions it can handle at once before it chokes. L4 sends a LOT of instructions for the rendering all at once (at least that is what appears to happen) and the ION starts to choke and cause L4 to run like molasses in January, in Alaska.

Jim,

The problem is the CPU, not the graphics. The nVidia 9400 chip that the Atom processor is coupled with to make the ION has more than enough horses to run L4 (most modern graphics intensive games run on the 9400 without a problem. I know for a fact that Valve's "Source" engine and the UT3 engine run fine on this nettop - I am a recovering game addict).

The bottleneck for L4 seems to be the amount of information that is "thrown" at the CPU for the rendering. L4 does not take advantage of the CUDA capabilities of the 9400 chip to offload some of the CPU based rendering to the GPU. Plus there is a lot of HD activity when there is a change on the screen.

The N330 Atom processor, while it is dual-core and has Hyper-threading capabilities, does not multi-task well. L4 requires a lot of multi-tasking to run as more than just a Bible reader.

The way the Atom processor handles data is much different than other processors from Intel or AMD. Other processors can handle instructions by "chopping" them in to smaller, bite-sized chunks and easily split these chunks between cores/threads. The Atom processor cannot split the instructions like this and each core/thread must handle a full instruction set before it starts another one.

Think of it this way, the Atom processor cannot sing well in rounds (if you don't follow, think of how a group sings "Row, Row, Row Your Boat", layering the verse at different points).

The ION can run L4, but more than a couple of windows open in L4 will bring scrolling to a crawl (about 2-3 second lag). There have been improvements as Logos has been releasing updates to L4, so I'm sure in time, the L4 code will reach a level of optimization that will run well on an ION based system. But until then, I really can only use the ION installation as just a plain Bible reader, or for a static display for teaching.

Jim,

Unfortunately, I'm not too up to date with laptops. I will say that I run L4 without a problem on an almost 2 year old ACER 5520 without any problems. Here are the specs for you:

Hi Jim,

Not sure what you mean by small computers...

However, most of the Windows folks buying high performance machines are looking at a PC based the i7 chip. Sales circulars this weekend for local shopping offered several.

You might also search the forums, as there are several threads on this general topic (minimum / optimum configuration for L4 performance, etc.)

Blessings!

Greg Gray said:

I would recommend the Acer  AS1410.  It is small enough to be very portable (the size is the same as a 8x11 piece of paper), substantially faster than an atom based  netbook (about 2-3 times faster with the base U3500 CPU).  The graphics card is adequate for rendering - Not great but miles ahead of a netbook (I have a netbook as well so I have directly compared them).  Scrolling is smooth no mater how many tabs I have open - the only place that a lag is distracting is when using the information tool.

I have a new quad core computer that runs L4 really great and I have a netbook that is usable, but barely.  The AS1410 comes right in the middle of them.  If you were to get one with the SU2300 that would be your best price vs. performance deal - A dual core with a very reasonable price tag.

I would second this.  I have the AS1410 with SU3500 (single core 1.4GHz processor) that came out last fall.  I really like Logos 4 on it, runs well. Obviously indexing will take much longer vs. a desktop, but I picked mine up for a good bit under $400, and with various discounts/sales/Bing cashback promotions, you can probably get a good price on one of these.  Other companies make similar products (ie Asus and Toshiba) but their versions are $100+ more than the Acer AS1410. 

Comparison to netbook:  Netbooks win (usually) on price, battery life (my Asus netbook got 6+ hours), and portability.  Ultralight notebooks (like AS1410) win on processing speed, expansion, and screen resolution (1366x768 vs. 1024x600 on my netbook - I know you can get high-res netbook screens, but that makes it even more sluggish usually).  Also Windows 7 on netbooks is often Starter version (which has some limitations).

Note on processing speed: I did an MP3 encoding test.  On my netbook, it took about 15 minutes.  On my AS1410, it took about 6 minutes.  So a significant jump in performance.

Thank you--this information has been helpful!