Performance testing of individual text labels and bitmaps on a chart - page 2
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
Am I the only one who gets the graph frozen while running the third test?
Strange behaviour of the terminal, both on 794 build and 803.
During passing 3 tests the graph and marks "freeze". Also the time of passing it is very short (relative to other measurements). At the same time no errors are published in the logs.
During the third test, am I the only one who has the graph frozen?
The previous build was 794. Here's a test with 803.
If you can explain to me, please, practical the meaning of tests 2 and 3?
And one more question. Can I briefly explain the difference betweenCOLOR_FORMAT_ARGB_RAW andCOLOR_FORMAT_ARGB_NORMALIZE?
I explained in the original thread:
Another thing you can see from the label test is that there is a very economical one-way operation of the labels on write without read. In this case it's as fast as possible to pipeline the command stream per write (we purposely use efficient system in this case).
But if instead of writing we use reading of object data, which is often the case in real work, then the speed will drastically decrease.
I've intentionally added in the third test method ObjectGetInteger(0,name,OBJPROP_XDISTANCE) to show pipeline mechanism's reaction.
COLOR_FORMAT_ARGB_NORMALIZE allows you to further align superimposed colours by aligning the background with the original image. It's not a good idea to use this mode in yournormal work.
As I understand it, the floating results are directly dependent on the speed of the memory, processor, video driver and the graphical subsystem of the operating system itself.
And the influence is separate by component, which doesn't give a chance to think "all methods should be comparable within one assembled computer". Therefore, on one computer one method wins, and on the other one - the second method.
For information: in XP architecturally simple and the fastest graphical system, then in Vista the system was dramatically complicated with a huge loss of speed (adding new layers), then in Windows 7 again architecturally rewritten. The changes were precisely at the architectural level, which ordinary users are not even aware of.
In general, all the tests show that bitmaps are somehow slower.
+ I have doubts about the correctness of reading the marker coordinates.
Of course, it's up to each person to decide which component to use in which case.
In particular, although the statistics are small so far, 4 out of 5 tests confirm my conclusion that text labels are superior to bitmaps in terms of chart output.
Let's wait for more results.
Renat, thanks for your help in finding the truth.
In general, all the tests show that bitmaps are somehow slower.
+ I have my doubts about the correctness of having the marker coordinate reading.
As a chart statistic, text labels are superior to bitmaps.
But I would draw charts with a bitmap. because there are no options :) also multiobject tables.
A bitmap has as many advantages as objects.
Posted an updated test. It now shows the resolution used and with a hint on how to test.