From: Peter Olcott on
I recently upgraded my computer hardware from a 2.4 Ghz
Celeron to a 2.66 Ghz Core i5 and an MFC application that I
developed runs only half as fast on the faster machine. What
could be causing this?

Both machines have identical sata hard-drives, and the fast
machine has much faster RAM 1333 ddr3 and 4.0 GB. The slower
machine has 2.0 GB of 333 ddr RAM. Why is the slower machine
twice as fast on the same executable?


From: Alexander Grigoriev on
Is the application multithreaded? Is it floating-point intensive,
memory-intensive, and what else?

"Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)SeeScreen.com> wrote in message
news:6PydnYAu9qOHgcfWnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>I recently upgraded my computer hardware from a 2.4 Ghz Celeron to a 2.66
>Ghz Core i5 and an MFC application that I developed runs only half as fast
>on the faster machine. What could be causing this?
>
> Both machines have identical sata hard-drives, and the fast machine has
> much faster RAM 1333 ddr3 and 4.0 GB. The slower machine has 2.0 GB of 333
> ddr RAM. Why is the slower machine twice as fast on the same executable?
>


From: Peter Olcott on
I is very memory intensive, thus much faster memory and much
larger cache should make it faster and not slower. It is
also single threaded and no floating point is used at all. I
bought the Core i5 specifically because it has faster access
to RAM.

"Alexander Grigoriev" <alegr(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:%23BWgrp9mKHA.1548(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Is the application multithreaded? Is it floating-point
> intensive, memory-intensive, and what else?
>
> "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)SeeScreen.com> wrote in message
> news:6PydnYAu9qOHgcfWnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>I recently upgraded my computer hardware from a 2.4 Ghz
>>Celeron to a 2.66 Ghz Core i5 and an MFC application that
>>I developed runs only half as fast on the faster machine.
>>What could be causing this?
>>
>> Both machines have identical sata hard-drives, and the
>> fast machine has much faster RAM 1333 ddr3 and 4.0 GB.
>> The slower machine has 2.0 GB of 333 ddr RAM. Why is the
>> slower machine twice as fast on the same executable?
>>
>
>


From: Alexander Grigoriev on
Do you see much disc activity when you run it? In your new computer, does
the CPU fan spin OK? CPU not overheated?

Note also that when processing large arrays, you want to avoid cache and TLB
thrashing. Better to read the array sequentially than scatter the reads all
over the place.

"Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)SeeScreen.com> wrote in message
news:tY6dnTjgpPqo8MfWnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>I is very memory intensive, thus much faster memory and much larger cache
>should make it faster and not slower. It is also single threaded and no
>floating point is used at all. I bought the Core i5 specifically because it
>has faster access to RAM.
>
> "Alexander Grigoriev" <alegr(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:%23BWgrp9mKHA.1548(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Is the application multithreaded? Is it floating-point intensive,
>> memory-intensive, and what else?
>>
>> "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)SeeScreen.com> wrote in message
>> news:6PydnYAu9qOHgcfWnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>>I recently upgraded my computer hardware from a 2.4 Ghz Celeron to a 2.66
>>>Ghz Core i5 and an MFC application that I developed runs only half as
>>>fast on the faster machine. What could be causing this?
>>>
>>> Both machines have identical sata hard-drives, and the fast machine has
>>> much faster RAM 1333 ddr3 and 4.0 GB. The slower machine has 2.0 GB of
>>> 333 ddr RAM. Why is the slower machine twice as fast on the same
>>> executable?
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


From: Peter Olcott on

"Alexander Grigoriev" <alegr(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:uwRS9k%23mKHA.2544(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Do you see much disc activity when you run it? In your new
> computer, does the CPU fan spin OK? CPU not overheated?
>
I did not notice any significant fan speed here. CPU is
constant 100% on the single core machine, and constant 25%
on the quad core.

> Note also that when processing large arrays, you want to
> avoid cache and TLB thrashing. Better to read the array
> sequentially than scatter the reads all over the place.

The aspect of the program in question creates 65 MB data to
be written to disk. Brand new identical disk drives on both
machines.

>
> "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)SeeScreen.com> wrote in message
> news:tY6dnTjgpPqo8MfWnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>I is very memory intensive, thus much faster memory and
>>much larger cache should make it faster and not slower. It
>>is also single threaded and no floating point is used at
>>all. I bought the Core i5 specifically because it has
>>faster access to RAM.
>>
>> "Alexander Grigoriev" <alegr(a)earthlink.net> wrote in
>> message news:%23BWgrp9mKHA.1548(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> Is the application multithreaded? Is it floating-point
>>> intensive, memory-intensive, and what else?
>>>
>>> "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)SeeScreen.com> wrote in message
>>> news:6PydnYAu9qOHgcfWnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>>>I recently upgraded my computer hardware from a 2.4 Ghz
>>>>Celeron to a 2.66 Ghz Core i5 and an MFC application
>>>>that I developed runs only half as fast on the faster
>>>>machine. What could be causing this?
>>>>
>>>> Both machines have identical sata hard-drives, and the
>>>> fast machine has much faster RAM 1333 ddr3 and 4.0 GB.
>>>> The slower machine has 2.0 GB of 333 ddr RAM. Why is
>>>> the slower machine twice as fast on the same
>>>> executable?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Thread Pool Class?
Next: Intellisense