Phoenix 2007 (new thread) - page 42
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Hi Hendrick,
Is NEXXT still the best performing broker?
rgds.EdI think NEXXT is ok but I know from others that North Finance is good as well. What you need is a broker that has no (significant) differences between their data feed for demos and live accounts. I think North Finance and NEXXT are ok to start with. Anyone else?
By the way, are there any approximate dates for Phoenix '07? Just curious
Hi Diamond!
I have a day off tomorrow (wahoo!) so I have the time to finish version 5 (or version 2007 if you want). Back and forward testing look great!
For processors, I prefer AMD over Intel. I have tried both for years and we actually sat down and benchmarked a few machines. AMD processors have more registers (can hold more values in the processor) and cost less for more performance. Some of the biggest performance gains for AMD (especially multiprocessor although not necessarily as much multicore) is the memory management.
I *always* advise against RAID0. There is no reason to use it, and loosing either drive means you loose all of your data. RAID0 is only designed to make 2 or more physical drives appear as one drive. Depending on striping (horrible concept for raid0) you *may* increase read speed. Usually the extra time spent managing the striping gives a net loss. Say No to RAID0. Maximum read speed for small data sets: RAID1. RAID1 doesn't have striping overhead either. Data writing takes additional time, so it is better to have more memory, and less swap space on disk used.
There are several reasons to have independent disks over Raid0: smaller chunk size on disk, less memory overhead to manage the disk tables/logs, better deeper and faster defrag, better read speed if OS and data are separate (like having one disk for OS, one disk for Graphics/Games/Simulations/etc), easier backup and cleaner data management.
I'm going to be doing a ton of backtesting soon, I will probably make a timer so we can compare benchmarks of backtesting.
Hi Alta! Please keep me informed about your findings with back testing! The E6700 is a great processor!! (and I really love your 4GB DDR 4200). Great specs for a home pc (but why 10.000 hard drives and not 15.000?).
I chose the 10,000 RPM drives because they were the fastest available in the SATA format (SATA is all that is available in the Dell XPS 410). To get the 15,000 RPM drives I would have had to step up to the SCSI drives and something like the Dell Precision 490 or 690 workstation.
Ultimately the choice came down to what the warden (I mean wife) would let me spend. This actually turns out to be a pretty good PC for only $1299. I got it from the Dell Outlet store. I was thinking of building this one but would have spent closer to $2000 putting all the components together.
what about interbankFX?
I think NEXXT is ok but I know from others that North Finance is good as well. What you need is a broker that has no (significant) differences between their data feed for demos and live accounts. I think North Finance and NEXXT are ok to start with. Anyone else?
What about interbankFX?
For processors, I prefer AMD over Intel. I have tried both for years and we actually sat down and benchmarked a few machines. AMD processors have more registers (can hold more values in the processor) and cost less for more performance. Some of the biggest performance gains for AMD (especially multiprocessor although not necessarily as much multicore) is the memory management.
AMD vs. Intel.... I love this argument, it the eternal struggle of good vs. evil in the silicon industry. We will just have to agree to disagree on who has the best processor.
We could spend weeks going back and forth comparing benchmarks such as this one http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2014646,00.asp and never convince each other that one is better than the other. It really doesn't matter anyway, Intel is king right now with the Core 2 Duo's, next month AMD will be king with the X2 AM2 in the 65 nanometer flavor, and Intel will win it back with the QX6700 that they just announced (the Dual Core 2 Duo chip) http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2049683,00.asp
I *always* advise against RAID0. There is no reason to use it, and loosing either drive means you loose all of your data. RAID0 is only designed to make 2 or more physical drives appear as one drive. Depending on striping (horrible concept for raid0) you *may* increase read speed. Usually the extra time spent managing the striping gives a net loss. Say No to RAID0. Maximum read speed for small data sets: RAID1. RAID1 doesn't have striping overhead either. Data writing takes additional time, so it is better to have more memory, and less swap space on disk used. There are several reasons to have independent disks over Raid0: smaller chunk size on disk, less memory overhead to manage the disk tables/logs, better deeper and faster defrag, better read speed if OS and data are separate (like having one disk for OS, one disk for Graphics/Games/Simulations/etc), easier backup and cleaner data management.
You are right in a sense about the RAID 0. Out of the box it gives you minimal performance gains over RAID 1 or a single hard drive. This is because the implementation that is used by default on most systems uses rather large block sizes. Smaller sets of data are only read from one disk and do not use the performance of both drive to increase speed.
This can be fixed though by changing the striped block size to something smaller like 64k. This forces data to be split in two and written to both drives thus increasing both read and write speeds as two hard drives are reading/writing data at the same time.
I am not too concerned about the possible loss of data as I keep all my critical data on my server in the garage that is automatically backed up offsite everynight to Iron Mountain's datacenter. If I lost a drive or the drives were to loose sync for some reason the only thing I would have to recover is the operating system.
I'm going to be doing a ton of backtesting soon, I will probably make a timer so we can compare benchmarks of backtesting.
I have a copy of PassMarks Performance Test 6.0 and would be happy to post benchmarks of both a RAID 1 and RAID 0 configuration to show the differences in performance.
Hi all
I've tried to copy the Phoenix_EA_v4_2_03.mq4 to C:\Program Files\MetaTrader 4\experts\indicators.. tried to click the indicator but nothing happened.
Please help. Thanks!
* I'm testing it on a demo with InterbankFx.
maria77:
Phoenix is an Expert, not an indicator. It trades for you instead of giving hints when to trade. Use C:\Program Files\MetaTrader 4\experts\ instead. Then use the "Navigator" window to drag the expert onto a chart. You should get a smiley face in the upper right. If you don't have one, click the Expert Advisor button on the top of the screen. There are also threads about how to set up Expert Advisors if these simple instructions don't work.
altapowder:
It is a classic argument, and I lived a few miles from Intel. I debated processor architecture with engineers actively working at Intel. After the Itanic 2 they went the same way AMD did. Intel sometimes has better benchmarks, AMD sometimes has better benchmarks. For the same money I pushed several companies to order AMD servers that did work 3-5x as fast as Intel machines. Please note, I said *same money*. The performance of AMD64 on Windows-64 is crippled by MS but two things are always good though: on chip memory controller, more registers to fill with data. I doubt MT4 is disk bound. We can debate raid levels all day in private (advantage of RAID 55 over 0+1 5, etc) but my suggestions for building a new box to people who want backtesting: No RAID0, AMD. For desktops, RAID1, JBOD, RAID0 is my preference. My preferences, my recommendations, that's all.
Back to the code!
Fxdd
I think NEXXT is ok but I know from others that North Finance is good as well. What you need is a broker that has no (significant) differences between their data feed for demos and live accounts. I think North Finance and NEXXT are ok to start with. Anyone else?
FXDD told me that their demo & live feeds are identical as well, however I don't have a live account to validate their claim.
FXDD and Fxlite
FXDD told me that their demo & live feeds are identical as well, however I don't have a live account to validate their claim.
I have a real account on Fxlite which is FXDD in french : don't see any differnece between demo and real account.