Gaming performance issues?

First of all, I'd like to ask that you bear with my nubness while I fumble my question out.  Hmm... ok.
In anticipation of HL2, I purchased all the parts I needed for a system and built one (my first and only time so far) in September 2003.  Having recently come into some money, I kind of went pretty far out.  Here are the main system specs, which have remained unchanged since September:
Intel P4 3.00 Ghz
MSI MS-6758 ( the 875P Neo)
Corsair TWINX1024-3200LLPT (2x512)
Turbolink 420 Watt PSU
PNY Geforce FX 5900 Ultra
Creative Soundblaster Audigy Gamer
Western Digital 160 GB HD
Sony CD-RW/DVD-R drive
Sony DVD drive
(XP Home Edition SP1)
Sounds pretty nice, doesn't it?  So when I get a 3dMark03 score of 4772 -- less than half of what most people with nearly identical systems got -- and an average framerate of 14 frames per second in Half Life at 1024x768 with no AA or other special junk running, well, I don't know what to think.
The first thing I did was check on all of my drivers.  I'm currently running the most recent official drivers for all of my hardware, and framerates are as low as before.  So, then I decided to bite the bullet and flash my bios (which was thankfully a lot easier than I had built it up to be), since it was nearly a year out of date.  The new and improved bios yielded no performance gains, but then I'm not quite sure if it should have or not.  As a nub, the general rule of thumb I follow is "the newer, the better."  I realize that it's not always so in some cases, but it's worked well enough for me so far....
So... I'm perplexed.  And because I don't know if it's an issue with a single component or anything, it's hard to find answers online.  So I bring it up to you to help a nub.  Please, if you have any idea what I'm talking about and what I could do to fix it, I would build a 50 foot stone statue of you and name my firstborn whatever you desire.
If you need any clarification, I'll be refreshing this thread all night.  Thanks... I hope.

Well, thanks for all of the replies.  I'm using the patched version of 3dMark03 and the 56.72 Forceware drivers.  I should have phrased my question differently.  It's still basically the same thing, but the focus isn't the benchmark test -- it's the abysmal framerates in games.  I can certainly understand a lower fps in games like Far Cry, but with stuff like Half Life... the computer I used two years ago was doing better than this one.  (Has anyone else experienced similar issues?)
And actually, as a matter of fact, this one used to do quite well.  I had a giant general f*ck-up, though, and was forced to reformat and basically restart everything from where I began, and I guess this is where the problem came in.  
As for OCing, I want to do some more research on that before I potentially kill my system trying to reach the 6000 mark ;o.  As it stands, I need to clean a lot of dust out of my PC (my idle temp is 44 C :X) or maybe get a cooler room to put it in.  That said, overall system performance has been a good deal better since I installed newer drivers, new bios, etc... it's just not affecting games as much.
And Sandra has been a big help in more ways than I can recount, Aaron, thanks.
Question:  What about my video card BIOS?  Is that something I should look into updating, or what?
Thanks once more.

Similar Messages

  • Brand new MSI GE70 major gaming performance issues

    Hello.
    I bought an MSI GE70-2OD notebook
    CPU: i7-4700MQ
    GPU: GTX760M/2 GB GDDR5
    RAM: DDRIII(L) 8
    OS:Windows Ultimate SP1
    I have a very weak gaming performance! Ive downloaded all of the drivers on the MSI site and installed them, still I got in Assassins Creed IV around 25-35 fps 1920x1080 resolution all other settings on MINIMUM (off)
    The prob. might be with my Nvidia driver, since the MSI afterburner cant recognize its driver version...after I unistalled my graphic driver (several times) I ve tried the Nvidias auto detect option on their official site and it said that it couldnt find any graphics card.
    I paid a lot of money for this notebook it would be a shame if it were for nothing, cuz that is what I get from it right now 

    Quote from: lypo119 on 14-February-14, 01:36:33
    Hello.
    I bought an MSI GE70-2OD notebook
    CPU: i7-4700MQ
    GPU: GTX760M/2 GB GDDR5
    RAM: DDRIII(L) 8
    OS:Windows Ultimate SP1
    I have a very weak gaming performance! Ive downloaded all of the drivers on the MSI site and installed them, still I got in Assassins Creed IV around 25-35 fps 1920x1080 resolution all other settings on MINIMUM (off)
    The prob. might be with my Nvidia driver, since the MSI afterburner cant recognize its driver version...after I unistalled my graphic driver (several times) I ve tried the Nvidias auto detect option on their official site and it said that it couldnt find any graphics card.
    I paid a lot of money for this notebook it would be a shame if it were for nothing, cuz that is what I get from it right now 
    If you go into Device Manager and look for the video card, is it there? Does it have any ! over it?
    It sorta sounds like the video card isn't working to be perfectly honest.
    When you play assassin's creed, what color is your power button? I'm guessing it is normally blue, and when you play a game it turns orange I believe.

  • Re: Qosmio xX770-11W - gaming performance issues

    Hello
    I bought a Qosmio x770-11w and I have some bad fps in nearly every game I played. Even in games wich work well at my 3 years old Desktop PC. Some examples are: Left 4 Dead 2, The Witcher 2, Starcraft 2, Trine, The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim and many more.
    In some games like Skyrim it doesnt even matter which graphic options I choose.
    Do you have any idea what's the problem?

    Hi AluinKali
    Here is a thread about the same theme.
    http://forums.computers.toshiba-europe.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=63615
    It seems that BIOS downgrade to version V1.10 might help to solve the fps issue while gaming but not sure if this would be a real solution since the graphic card temperature might increase to a higher level.

  • Worse gaming performance than Kubuntu 12.10?

    Title.
    I'm using KDE 4.10 (installed kdebase package), Pulse, nVidia propietary drivers with VSync disabled, same programs than on Kubuntu, compositing manually suspended, yet performance is worse on TF2 and Serious Sam 3: BFE. FPS is high... enough, but the games stutter every few seconds, making them extremely annoying to play.
    Any ideas why this happens?
    And no, nothing strange on the console output.
    Not using a low latency kernel on Kubuntu, nor will I use one on Arch. Plus, according to Phoronix benchmarks, those usually reduce gaming performance.
    Thanks in advance for any help.

    frank604 wrote:
    Have you compared processes/services between arch and kubuntu?  Could you monitor cpu for spikes and see if any background processes is causing the stutter? 
    when you say nothing useful is output to console do you mean you are running 'steam' command in terminal and watching the output there?
    Any cpu frequency scaling?
    Double check the archwiki at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ga … g_policies
    Special highlight to core affinity and schedule daemon/policy.
    Sorry I'm not much help, just doing some "what ifs" with you.
    Compared to my laptops' Kubuntu 12.10 (I don't have Kubuntu installed anymore on my main machine) the only extra thing I had was Akonadi since I forgot to disable it. Disabled everything, file indexing, plus a couple of stuff I found I didn't need. No change in performance.
    Yup, running steam into terminal. Games launched by steam output on there too.
    CPU's not scaling, it's a regular Phenom II X2 on a desktop and nothing's wrong on BIOS.
    I did not need to do any scheduling on Kubuntu for the game to run. I am not aware of Kubuntu using some sort of daemon that does that automatically, if there is, I'll install it, but ferk no I will not mess with it for every game I want to play. This is a global issue, plus I've tried running TF2 with multiple multithreading settings and that didn't do anything (plus on Kubuntu I had it set up to use my cores on the most efficient way, and I'm on the same settings on Arch).
    Thanks.

  • Low ping yet online gaming performs poorly

    This has always been an issue with my BT ADSL connection. On paper it looks perfect for gaming; a solid ~23ms ping to UK servers (FastPath) with practically no jitter, a constant 4.5/0.25 mbps throughput yet online gaming (Xbox Live) shows way more lag than the ping figures would suggest, it's pretty poor.
    Any suggestions as to why this could be? It's as if either my hardware (HomeHub4) or BTs network has a very low priority for gaming traffic (I game mainly during peak hours, as do most people I expect)
    I'm currently testing a non BT router to see if the issue lies with the Home Hub. It's definitely looking better so far gaming wise (will need to test more though) but actual web browsing is noticeably slower with the same speedtest/ping results!?
    All other hardware is removed from the network, cable to the Xbox has been swapped. Gaming performance is my primary concern and the BT connection is almost putting a stop my enjoyment of online play. 
    My exhange is Infinitiy enabled but my cabinet not and seemingly no way to find out when it will be.

    The current BT homehub which is Homehub3 is a very poor router in my opinion but I dont have any issues with online gaming when my connection works correctly.
    Can you go to http://speedtester.bt.com/ and do a speed test
    Also go http://192.168.1.254
    then go to settings, advanced, broadband then connection and copy and paste the ADSL connection information here. 

  • MSI NF980-65 SLI performance issues

    Hello,
    I have performance issues with the MSI NF980-65 with AMD Phenom II x6 in SLI and QUAD SLI mode.
    I have a pair of Geforce 9800 GX2 and Geforce GTX 295. I install the Geforce 9800 GX2, install Nvidia drivers 258.6 for windows vista 32-bit. Restart, run 3dmark and I get a score.
    I shut down, install the second Geforce 9800 GX2. Windows Vista installs drivers. I restart. Nvidia control center notifies me that the cards can run better in SLI. I click and follow instructions to enable quad SLI. I run 3dmark 2006 1.0.2. I do not see any performance gain.
    I uninstall all both cards. Repeat the same procedure for the Geforce GTX 295. Again. No performance gain. The 295 is not much better than the 9800.
    What am I doing wrong? Do these cards suck?
    What is worse is that the performance gain of SLI is marginal as opposed to the cost.
    Compare the cost of one Geforce 9800 GX2 or Geforce GTX 295 vs Quad SLI of both cards.
    This performance is just not worth the cost.
    Geforce 9600 GSO (Nvidia Vista drivers 258.96 32bit) ( X4 965 )
    Geforce 9800 GX2 (Nvidia Vista drivers 258.96 32bit) ( X4 965 )
    Geforce 9800 GX2 Quad Sli (Nvidia Vista drivers 258.96 32bit) ( X6 1090T / MSI NF980-65)
    Geforce GTX 295 Quad Sli (Nvidia Vista drivers 258.96 32bit) ( X6 1090T / MSI NF980-65)
    When it comes to Computer digital content creation, I cannot believe that the 9800 GX2 performs the same as the GTX 295. Both render a preset picture in about the same amount of time. (Rendering the same picture with 826 objects, 13,932 polygons, 2 light sources, anti-aliasing for objects & textures, 1600x1200:
    X6 1090T / MSI NF980-65
    Geforce 9600 GSO - 9 mins
    Geforce 9800 gx2 - 9 mins
    Geforce GTX 295 - 9 mins
    This baffles me because I do not know what is the need for SLI or quad SLI? Why buy the latest and greatest if the performance is marginal?
    Does any one have similar performance issues with the same or similar hardware?
    AMD Phenom II x6 1090T 3.2Ghz
    MSI NF980-G65
    Corsair Gaming series 2x2GB 4GB total - 1333Mhz
    Western Digital Green 1tB, 1tB, 1.5tB, 2tB, 2tB (4 Hard disks)
    PSU OCZ GameXStream 850W +3.3V@30A, +5V@30A, +12V1@20A, +12V2@20A, +12V3@20A, +12V4@20A, -12V@1A, [email protected]
    Geforce GTX 295 x 2 (quad sli) Nvidia Vista drivers 258.96 32bit
    Windows Vista Ultimate SP2 32-Bit
    Windows Performance Index : 5.9

    OK.....
    #1: The 9800GX2's should NOT be using the 256.xx+ series drivers... stick with 197.xx or less for better performance...(I like the 191.xx series for benching)
    #2: SLI performance is based on resolution....if not CPU limited....
    #3: 3dMark 06' is CPU biased and you will not notice a diff. w/ SLI enabled unless you increase cpu speed. Vantage is a bit better and is more geared toward the GPU. Use benchmarks by Ungine
    or "built-in" game demo/benchmarks.
    #4: Chambus...remove the middle slot GPU... it lowers the performance of the SLI'd gpu's...remember only the top and bottom pci-e slots are 16x, but only if there is nothing installed in the center slot, at which case only the top gpu will run at 16x all others perform at 8x. Another thing to keep in mind..... the more GPU's installed the higher the CPU will have to be clocked...Over at nvidia we usually recommend a range of 3.4-3.6Ghz (quad-thread)CPU clock speed for 2-way SLI of the 9800 series- 200 series GPUs...at a minimum. The scale shows us to add ~250mhz per GPU after that (even if the GPU is just used for dedicated physX). Of course with the new FERMI GPUs that scale increases significantly. This is called the "bottle-neck" effect and seems to occur more so with nvidia GPUs than ATI/AMD GPUs of the same caliber.
    Go into the NVCP (Nvidia Control Panel) and enable the "SLI Indicator" run a game benchmark of your choice and keep an eye on the indicator. If the indicator frequently drops below 50%...you have a CPU bottle-neck.. if it stays @ the 70%+ at all times than you are GPU limited (which is were you want to be).
    View This Link to learn more about "proper" SLI

  • Report Performance Issue - Activity

    Hi gurus,
    I'm developing an Activity report using Transactional database (Online real time object).
    the purpose of the report is to list down all contacts related activities and activities NOT related to Contact by activity owner (user id).
    In order to fullfill that requirment I've created 2 report
    1) All Activities related to Contact -- Report A
    pull in Acitivity ID , Activity Type, Status, Contact ID
    2) All Activities not related to Contact UNION All Activities related to Contact (Base report) -- Report B
    to get the list of activities not related to contact i'm using Advanced filter based on result of another request which is I think is the part that slow down the query.
    <Activity ID not equal to any Activity ID in Report B>
    Anyone encountered performance issue due to the advanced filter in analytic before?
    any input is really appriciated
    Thanks in advanced,
    Fina

    Fina,
    Union is always the last option. If you can get all record in one report, do not use union.
    since all records, which you are targeting, are in the activity subject area, it is not nessecery to combine reports. add a column with the following logic
    if contact id is null (or = 'Unspecified') then owner name else contact name
    Hopefully, this is helping.

  • Report performance Issue in BI Answers

    Hi All,
    We have a performance issues with reports. Report is running more than 10 mins. we took query from the session log and ran it in database, at that time it took not more than 2 mins. We have verified proper indexes on the where clause columns.
    Could any once suggest to improve the performance in BI answers?
    Thanks in advance,

    I hope you dont have many case statements and complex calculations that you do in the Answers.
    Next thing you need to monitor is how many rows of data that you are trying to retrieve from the query. If the volume is huge then it takes time to do the formatting on the Answers as you are going to dump huge volumes of data. Database(like teradata) returns initially like 1-2000 records if you hit show all records then even db is gonna fair amount of time if you are dumping many records
    hope it helps
    thanks
    Prash

  • BW BCS cube(0bcs_vc10 ) Report huge performance issue

    Hi Masters,
    I am working out for a solution for BW report developed in 0bcs_vc10 virtual cube.
    Some of the querys is taking more 15 to 20 minutes to execute the report.
    This is huge performance issue. We are using BW 3.5, and report devloped in bex and published thru portal. Any one faced similar problem please advise how you tackle this issue. Please give the detail analysis approach how you resolved this issue.
    Current service pack we are using is
    SAP_BW 350 0016 SAPKW35016
    FINBASIS 300 0012 SAPK-30012INFINBASIS
    BI_CONT 353 0008 SAPKIBIFP8
    SEM-BW 400 0012 SAPKGS4012
    Best of Luck
    Chris
    BW BCS cube(0bcs_vc10 ) Report huge performance issue

    Ravi,
    I already did that, it is not helping me much for the performance. Reports are taking 15 t0 20 minutes. I wanted any body in this forum have the same issue how
    they resolved it.
    Regards,
    Chris

  • Interested by performance issue ?  Read this !  If you can explain, you're a master Jedi !

    This is the question we will try to answer...
    What si the bottle neck (hardware) of Adobe Premiere Pro CS6
    I used PPBM5 as a benchmark testing template.
    All the data and log as been collected using performance counter
    First of all, describe my computer...
    Operating System
    Microsoft Windows 8 Pro 64-bit
    CPU
    Intel Xeon E5 2687W @ 3.10GHz
    Sandy Bridge-EP/EX 32nm Technology
    RAM
    Corsair Dominator Platinum 64.0 GB DDR3
    Motherboard
    EVGA Corporation Classified SR-X
    Graphics
    PNY Nvidia Quadro 6000
    EVGA Nvidia GTX 680   // Yes, I created bench stats for both card
    Hard Drives
    16.0GB Romex RAMDISK (RAID)
    556GB LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i SATA3 6GB/s 5 disks with Fastpath Chip Installed (RAID 0)
    I have other RAID installed, but not relevant for the present post...
    PSU
    Cosair 1000 Watts
    After many days of tests, I wanna share my results with community and comment them.
    CPU Introduction
    I tested my cpu and pushed it at maximum speed to understand where is the limit, can I reach this limit and I've logged precisely all result in graph (See pictures 1).
    Intro : I tested my E5-XEON 2687W (8 Cores Hyperthread - 16 threads) to know if programs can use the maximum of it.  I used Prime 95 to get the result.  // I know this seem to be ordinary, but you will understand soon...
    The result : Yes, I can get 100% of my CPU with 1 program using 20 threads in parallel.  The CPU gives everything it can !
    Comment : I put 3 IO (cpu, disk, ram) on the graph of my computer during the test...
    (picture 1)
    Disk Introduction
    I tested my disk and pushed it at maximum speed to understand where is the limit and I've logged precisely all result in graph (See pictures 2).
    Intro : I tested my RAID 0 556GB (LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i SATA3 6GB/s 5 disks with Fastpath Chip Installed) to know if I can reach the maximum % disk usage (0% idle Time)
    The result : As you can see in picture 2, yes, I can get the max of my drive at ~ 1.2 Gb/sec read/write steady !
    Comment : I put 3 IO (cpu, disk, ram) on the graph of my computer during the test to see the impact of transfering many Go of data during ~10 sec...
    (picture 2)
    Now, I know my limits !  It's time to enter deeper in the subject !
    PPBM5 (H.264) Result
    I rendered the sequence (H.264) using Adobe Media Encoder.
    The result :
    My CPU is not used at 100%, the turn around 50%
    My Disk is totally idle !
    All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
    The transfert rate seem to be a wave (up and down).  Probably caused by (Encrypt time....  write.... Encrypt time.... write...)  // It's ok, ~5Mb/sec during transfert rate !
    CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
    RAM, more than enough !  39 Go RAM free after the test !  // Excellent
    ~65 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Good, thread is the sign that program try to using many cores !)
    GPU Load on card seem to be a wave also ! (up and down)  ~40% usage of GPU during the process of encoding.
    GPU Ram get 1.2Go of RAM (But with GTX 680, no problem and Quadro 6000 with 6 GB RAM, no problem !)
    Comment/Question : CPU is free (50%), disks are free (99%), GPU is free (60%), RAM is free (62%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process.  Why ????  Is there some time delay in the encoding process ?
    Other : Quadro 6000 & GTX 680 gives the same result !
    (picture 3)
    PPBM5 (Disk Test) Result (RAID LSI)
    I rendered the sequence (Disk Test) using Adobe Media Encoder on my RAID 0 LSI disk.
    The result :
    My CPU is not used at 100%
    My Disk wave and wave again, but far far from the limit !
    All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
    The transfert rate wave and wave again (up and down).  Probably caused by (Buffering time....  write.... Buffering time.... write...)  // It's ok, ~375Mb/sec peak during transfert rate !  Easy !
    CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
    RAM, more than enough !  40.5 Go RAM free after the test !  // Excellent
    ~48 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Good, thread is the sign that program try to using many cores !)
    GPU Load on card = 0 (This kind of encoding is GPU irrelevant)
    GPU Ram get 400Mb of RAM (No usage for encoding)
    Comment/Question : CPU is free (65%), disks are free (60%), GPU is free (100%), RAM is free (63%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process.  Why ????  Is there some time delay in the encoding process ?
    (picture 4)
    PPBM5 (Disk Test) Result (Direct in RAMDrive)
    I rendered the same sequence (Disk Test) using Adobe Media Encoder directly in my RamDrive
    Comment/Question : Look at the transfert rate under (picture 5).  It's exactly the same speed than with my RAID 0 LSI controller.  Impossible !  Look in the same picture the transfert rate I can reach with the ramdrive (> 3.0 Gb/sec steady) and I don't go under 30% of disk usage.  CPU is idle (70%), Disk is idle (100%), GPU is idle (100%) and RAM is free (63%).  // This kind of results let me REALLY confused.  It's smell bug and big problem with hardware and IO usage in CS6 !
    (picture 5)
    PPBM5 (MPEG-DVD) Result
    I rendered the sequence (MPEG-DVD) using Adobe Media Encoder.
    The result :
    My CPU is not used at 100%
    My Disk is totally idle !
    All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
    The transfert rate wave and wave again (up and down).  Probably caused by (Encoding time....  write.... Encoding time.... write...)  // It's ok, ~2Mb/sec during transfert rate !  Real Joke !
    CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
    RAM, more than enough !  40 Go RAM free after the test !  // Excellent
    ~80 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Lot of thread, but it's ok in multi-thread apps!)
    GPU Load on card = 100 (This use the maximum of my GPU)
    GPU Ram get 1Gb of RAM
    Comment/Question : CPU is free (70%), disks are free (98%), GPU is loaded (MAX), RAM is free (63%), my computer is pushed at limit during the encoding process for GPU only.  Now, for this kind of encoding, the speed limit is affected by the slower IO (Video Card GPU)
    Other : Quadro 6000 is slower than GTX 680 for this kind of encoding (~20 s slower than GTX).
    (picture 6)
    Encoding single clip FULL HD AVCHD to H.264 Result (Premiere Pro CS6)
    You can look the result in the picture.
    Comment/Question : CPU is free (55%), disks are free (99%), GPU is free (90%), RAM is free (65%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process.  Why ????   Adobe Premiere seem to have some bug with thread management.  My hardware is idle !  I understand AVCHD can be very difficult to decode, but where is the waste ?  My computer want, but the software not !
    (picture 7)
    Render composition using 3D Raytracer in After Effects CS6
    You can look the result in the picture.
    Comment : GPU seems to be the bottle neck when using After Effects.  CPU is free (99%), Disks are free (98%), Memory is free (60%) and it depend of the setting and type of project.
    Other : Quadro 6000 & GTX 680 gives the same result in time for rendering the composition.
    (picture 8)
    Conclusion
    There is nothing you can do (I thing) with CS6 to get better performance actually.  GTX 680 is the best (Consumer grade card) and the Quadro 6000 is the best (Profressional card).  Both of card give really similar result (I will probably return my GTX 680 since I not really get any better performance).  I not used Tesla card with my Quadro, but actually, both, Premiere Pro & After Effects doesn't use multi GPU.  I tried to used both card together (GTX & Quadro), but After Effects gives priority to the slower card (In this case, the GTX 680)
    Premiere Pro, I'm speechless !  Premiere Pro is not able to get max performance of my computer.  Not just 10% or 20%, but average 60%.  I'm a programmor, multi-threadling apps are difficult to manage and I can understand Adobe's programmor.  But actually, if anybody have comment about this post, tricks or any kind of solution, you can comment this post.  It's seem to be a bug...
    Thank you.

    Patrick,
    I can't explain everything, but let me give you some background as I understand it.
    The first issue is that CS6 has a far less efficient internal buffering or caching system than CS5/5.5. That is why the MPEG encoding in CS6 is roughly 2-3 times slower than the same test with CS5. There is some 'under-the-hood' processing going on that causes this significant performance loss.
    The second issue is that AME does not handle regular memory and inter-process memory very well. I have described this here: Latest News
    As to your test results, there are some other noteworthy things to mention. 3D Ray tracing in AE is not very good in using all CUDA cores. In fact it is lousy, it only uses very few cores and the threading is pretty bad and does not use the video card's capabilities effectively. Whether that is a driver issue with nVidia or an Adobe issue, I don't know, but whichever way you turn it, the end result is disappointing.
    The overhead AME carries in our tests is something we are looking into and the next test will only use direct export and no longer the AME queue, to avoid some of the problems you saw. That entails other problems for us, since we lose the capability to check encoding logs, but a solution is in the works.
    You see very low GPU usage during the H.264 test, since there are only very few accelerated parts in the timeline, in contrast to the MPEG2-DVD test, where there is rescaling going on and that is CUDA accelerated. The disk I/O test suffers from the problems mentioned above and is the reason that my own Disk I/O results are only 33 seconds with the current test, but when I extend the duration of that timeline to 3 hours, the direct export method gives me 22 seconds, although the amount of data to be written, 37,092 MB has increased threefold. An effective write speed of 1,686 MB/s.
    There are a number of performance issues with CS6 that Adobe is aware of, but whether they can be solved and in what time, I haven't the faintest idea.
    Just my $ 0.02

  • Performance Issue for BI system

    Hello,
    We are facing performance issues for BI System. Its a preproductive system and its performance is degrading badly everyday. I was checking system came to know program buffer hit ratio is increaasing everyday due to high Swaps. So asked to change the parameter abap/buffersize which was 300Mb to 500Mb. But still no major improvement is found in the system.
    There is 16GB Ram available and Server is HP-UX and with Netweaver2004s with Oracle 10.2.0.4.0 installed in it.
    The Main problem is while running a report or creating a query is taking way too long time.
    Kindly help me.

    Hello SIva,
    Thanks for your reply but i have checked ST02 and ST03 and also SM50 and its normal
    we are having 9 dialog processes, 3 Background , 2 Update and 1 spool.
    No one is using the system currently but in ST02 i can see the swaps are in red.
    Buffer                 HitRatio   % Alloc. KB  Freesp. KB   % Free Sp.   Dir. Size  FreeDirEnt   % Free Dir    Swaps    DB Accs
    Nametab (NTAB)                                                                                0
       Table definition     99,60     6.798                                                   20.000                                            29.532    153.221
       Field definition     99,82      31.562        784                 2,61           20.000      6.222          31,11          17.246     41.248
       Short NTAB           99,94     3.625      2.446                81,53          5.000        2.801          56,02             0            2.254
       Initial records      73,95        6.625        998                 16,63          5.000        690             13,80             40.069     49.528
                                                                                    0
    boldprogram                97,66     300.000     1.074                 0,38           75.000     67.177        89,57           219.665    725.703bold
    CUA                    99,75         3.000        875                   36,29          1.500      1.401          93,40            55.277      2.497
    Screen                 99,80         4.297      1.365                 33,35          2.000      1.811          90,55              119         3.214
    Calendar              100,00       488            361                  75,52            200         42              21,00               0            158
    OTR                   100,00         4.096      3.313                  100,00        2.000      2.000          100,00              0
                                                                                    0
    Tables                                                                                0
       Generic Key          99,17    29.297      1.450                  5,23           5.000        350             7,00             2.219      3.085.633
       Single record        99,43    10.000      1.907                  19,41           500         344            68,80              39          467.978
                                                                                    0
    Export/import          82,75     4.096         43                      1,30            2.000        662          33,10            137.208
    Exp./ Imp. SHM         89,83     4.096        438                    13,22         2.000      1.482          74,10               0    
    SAP Memory      Curr.Use %    CurUse[KB]    MaxUse[KB]    In Mem[KB]    OnDisk[KB]    SAPCurCach      HitRatio %
    Roll area               2,22                5.832               22.856             131.072     131.072                   IDs           96,61
    Page area              1,08              2.832                24.144               65.536    196.608              Statement     79,00
    Extended memory     22,90       958.464           1.929.216          4.186.112          0                                         0,00
    Heap memory                                    0                  0                    1.473.767          0                                         0,00
    Call Stati             HitRatio %     ABAP/4 Req      ABAP Fails     DBTotCalls         AvTime[ms]      DBRowsAff.
      Select single     88,59               63.073.369        5.817.659      4.322.263             0                         57.255.710
      Select               72,68               284.080.387          0               13.718.442             0                        32.199.124
      Insert                 0,00                  151.955             5.458             166.159               0                           323.725
      Update               0,00                    378.161           97.884           395.814               0                            486.880
      Delete                 0,00                    389.398          332.619          415.562              0                             244.495
    Edited by: Srikanth Sunkara on May 12, 2011 11:50 AM

  • RE: Case 59063: performance issues w/ C TLIB and Forte3M

    Hi James,
    Could you give me a call, I am at my desk.
    I had meetings all day and couldn't respond to your calls earlier.
    -----Original Message-----
    From: James Min [mailto:jminbrio.forte.com]
    Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 2:50 PM
    To: Sharma, Sandeep; Pyatetskiy, Alexander
    Cc: sophiaforte.com; kenlforte.com; Tenerelli, Mike
    Subject: Re: Case 59063: performance issues w/ C TLIB and Forte 3M
    Hello,
    I just want to reiterate that we are very committed to working on
    this issue, and that our goal is to find out the root of the problem. But
    first I'd like to narrow down the avenues by process of elimination.
    Open Cursor is something that is commonly used in today's RDBMS. I
    know that you must test your query in ISQL using some kind of execute
    immediate, but Sybase should be able to handle an open cursor. I was
    wondering if your Sybase expert commented on the fact that the server is
    not responding to commonly used command like 'open cursor'. According to
    our developer, we are merely following the API from Sybase, and open cursor
    is not something that particularly slows down a query for several minutes
    (except maybe the very first time). The logs show that Forte is waiting for
    a status from the DB server. Actually, using prepared statements and open
    cursor ends up being more efficient in the long run.
    Some questions:
    1) Have you tried to do a prepared statement with open cursor in your ISQL
    session? If so, did it have the same slowness?
    2) How big is the table you are querying? How many rows are there? How many
    are returned?
    3) When there is a hang in Forte, is there disk-spinning or CPU usage in
    the database server side? On the Forte side? Absolutely no activity at all?
    We actually have a Sybase set-up here, and if you wish, we could test out
    your database and Forte PEX here. Since your queries seems to be running
    off of only one table, this might be the best option, as we could look at
    everything here, in house. To do this:
    a) BCP out the data into a flat file. (character format to make it portable)
    b) we need a script to create the table and indexes.
    c) the Forte PEX file of the app to test this out.
    d) the SQL staement that you issue in ISQL for comparison.
    If the situation warrants, we can give a concrete example of
    possible errors/bugs to a developer. Dial-in is still an option, but to be
    able to look at the TOOL code, database setup, etc. without the limitations
    of dial-up may be faster and more efficient. Please let me know if you can
    provide this, as well as the answers to the above questions, or if you have
    any questions.
    Regards,
    At 08:05 AM 3/30/00 -0500, Sharma, Sandeep wrote:
    James, Ken:
    FYI, see attached response from our Sybase expert, Dani Sasmita. She has
    already tried what you suggested and results are enclosed.
    ++
    Sandeep
    -----Original Message-----
    From: SASMITA, DANIAR
    Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 6:43 PM
    To: Pyatetskiy, Alexander
    Cc: Sharma, Sandeep; Tenerelli, Mike
    Subject: Re: FW: Case 59063: Select using LIKE has performance
    issues
    w/ CTLIB and Forte 3M
    We did that trick already.
    When it is hanging, I can see what is doing.
    It is doing OPEN CURSOR. But not clear the exact statement of the cursor
    it is trying to open.
    When we run the query directly to Sybase, not using Forte, it is clearly
    not opening any cursor.
    And running it directly to Sybase many times, the response is always
    consistently fast.
    It is just when the query runs from Forte to Sybase, it opens a cursor.
    But again, in the Forte code, Alex is not using any cursor.
    In trying to capture the query,we even tried to audit any statementcoming
    to Sybase. Same thing, just open cursor. No cursor declaration anywhere.==============================================
    James Min
    Technical Support Engineer - Forte Tools
    Sun Microsystems, Inc.
    1800 Harrison St., 17th Fl.
    Oakland, CA 94612
    james.minsun.com
    510.869.2056
    ==============================================
    Support Hotline: 510-451-5400
    CUSTOMERS open a NEW CASE with Technical Support:
    http://www.forte.com/support/case_entry.html
    CUSTOMERS view your cases and enter follow-up transactions:
    http://www.forte.com/support/view_calls.html

    Earthlink wrote:
    Contrary to my understanding, the <font face="courier">with_pipeline</font> procedure runs 6 time slower than the legacy <font face="courier">no_pipeline</font> procedure. Am I missing something? Well, we're missing a lot here.
    Like:
    - a database version
    - how did you test
    - what data do you have, how is it distributed, indexed
    and so on.
    If you want to find out what's going on then use a TRACE with wait events.
    All nessecary steps are explained in these threads:
    HOW TO: Post a SQL statement tuning request - template posting
    http://oracle-randolf.blogspot.com/2009/02/basic-sql-statement-performance.html
    Another nice one is RUNSTATS:
    http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/ASKTOM.download_file?p_file=6551378329289980701

  • Is there a recommended limit on the number of custom sections and the cells per table so that there are no performance issues with the UI?

    Is there a recommended limit on the number of custom sections and the cells per table so that there are no performance issues with the UI?

    Thanks Kelly,
    The answers would be the following:
    1200 cells per custom section (NEW COUNT), and up to 30 custom sections per spec.
    Assuming all will be populated, and this would apply to all final material specs in the system which could be ~25% of all material specs.
    The cells will be numeric, free text, drop downs, and some calculated numeric.
    Are we reaching the limits for UI performance?
    Thanks

  • IOS 8.1+ Performance Issue

    Hello,
    I encountered a serious performance bug in Adobe Air iOS application on devices running iOS 8.1 or later. Approximately in 1-2 minutes fps drops to 7 or lower without interacting with the app. This is very noticeable in the app. The app looks like frozen for about 0.5 seconds. The bug doesn't appear on every session.
    Devices tested: iPad Mini iOS 8.1.1, iPhone 6 iOS 8.2. iPod Touch 4 iOS 6 is working correctly.
    Air SDK versions: 15 and 17 tested.
    I can track the bug using Adobe Scout. There is a noticeable spike on frame time 1.16. Framerate drops to 7.0. The App spends much time on function Runtime overhead. Sometimes the top activity is Running AS3 attached to frame or Waiting For Next Frame instead of Runtime overhead.
    The bug can be reproduced on an empty application having a one bitmap on stage. Open the app and wait for two minutes and the bug should appear. If not, just close and relaunch the app.
    Bugbase link: Bug#3965160 - iOS 8.1+ Performance Issue
    Miska Savela

    Hi
    Id already activated Messages and entered the 6 digit code I was presented with into my iPhone. I can receive txt messages from non iOS users on my iMac and can reply to those messages.
    I just can't send a new message from scratch to a non iOS user :-s
    Thanks
    Baz

  • Returning multiple values from a called tabular form(performance issue)

    I hope someone can help with this.
    I have a form that calls another form to display a multiple column tabular list of values(needs to allow for user sorting so could not use a LOV).
    The user selects one or more records from the list by using check boxes. In order to detect the records selected I loop through the block looking for boxes checked off and return those records to the calling form via a PL/SQL table.
    The form displaying the tabular list loads quickly(about 5000 records in the base table). However when I select one or more values from the table and return back to the calling form, it takes a while(about 3-4 minutes) to return to the called form with the selected values.
    I guess it is going through the block(all 5000 records) looking for boxes checked off and that is what is causing the noticeable pause.
    Is this normal given the data volumes I have or are there any other perhaps better techniques or tricks I could use to improve performance. I am using Forms6i.
    Sorry for being so long-winded and thanks in advance for any help.

    Try writing to your PL/SQL table when the user selects (or remove when deselect) by usuing a when-checkbox-changed trigger. This will eliminate the need for you top loop through a block with 5000 records and should improve your performance.
    I am not aware of any performance issues with PL/SQL tables in forms, but if you still have slow performance try using a shared record-group instead. I have used these in the past for exactly the same thing and had no performance problems.
    Hope this helps,
    Candace Stover
    Forms Product Management

Maybe you are looking for

  • CS4 Bridge Preview stops working

    While in Bridge, if I press the space bar to zoom in on an image preview, the image enlarges just fine to full screen, but when I press the space bar again to return to the normal preview, the normal preview window is blank. It remains blank when I c

  • Show only with error messages

    How can I have this: <div class="userMessage"> show up in my page only if there are any error messages to display? I have tried to to bind an outputText to my backing bean like this: JSF page: <h:outputText value="<div class=userMessage>" id="userMes

  • Problem Getting Output Dot on ICON

    Attached is a VI that reads the light sensors on our Robot and converts the values to a state that should be easy to use in Case blocks. Obviously, we don't know what we are doing because none of us can get the 'State' output to actually be an output

  • Take 2 update, restore

    Has anyone tried restoring after the Take 2 update? I would like to know if it reverts back to 1.0, or does the restore get an update too?

  • WRT54G V7 Frequent Disconnections

    I've read alot about frequent disconnections using wireless routers but i've tried all sorts of different settings and find it disappointing that the wireless router (WRT54G V7) won't 'keep alive' the connection when it should. I'm on a WinXP Pro SP2