selecting the hardware (computer) to use - page 11
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
Here are more recent tests from ixbt
http://www.ixbt.com/cpu/amd-r7-1800x.shtml
I'll write tomorrow, the process is in the works today. Matlab is given a one-month trial, and there are some benefits for students, I'm not going to lie, I'm not a student, I'll have to look it up.
There won't be a Matlab picture, am I right?
A.Dick is so vindictive, I'll have to run Matlab))
What A.Dick is vindictive, I'll have to run Matlab))
And you wanted to do me harm by throwing Matlab at me, but then you changed your mind?)
You said that I don't need optimization, there's a miracle program - Matlab, which can answer questions, so I reminded you, I'm very interested because.
And you wanted to do me harm by throwing Matlab at me, but then you changed your mind?)
You said that I don't need optimization, there's a miracle program - Matlab, which can answer questions, so I reminded you, I'm very interested because.
Andrew, I am very angry because of my breath the plaster falls off, crows fly away and the wallpaper comes off )) I broke the part of the program that outputs the data under the cursor, here is the part that draws the graphs. The function at the bottom, which displays the data under the cursor, something is not working now, but the meaning is clear. In general, matlab is not a panacea, you can just quickly visualize what's going on in the guts of the program. I seldom use it now, since tests on tick data have been introduced, I do almost everything at once in MQL5.
This is the log of the simulated trades, I ran it for a day or so, the profit is in the natural value of the quote:
ticket= 487 cmd= 0 oProfit= 0.000180 mProfit= 0.029050 openCount= 42 closeCount=42 openTime= 01-21:02:26 closeTime= 01-21:07:45
ticket= 488 cmd= 1 oProfit= -0.000780 mProfit= 0.028270 openCount= 42 closeCount=49 openTime= 01-21:13:01 closeTime= 02-22:00:00
ticket= 489 cmd= 0 oProfit= 0.000150 mProfit= 0.028420 openCount= 43 closeCount=43 openTime= 01-21:19:00 closeTime= 01-21:22:07
ticket= 490 cmd= 1 oProfit= 0.000160 mProfit= 0.028580 openCount= 43 closeCount=44 openTime= 01-21:31:32 closeTime= 01-21:35:55
ticket= 491 cmd= 1 oProfit= 0.000170 mProfit= 0.028750 openCount= 44 closeCount=44 openTime= 01-21:31:33 closeTime= 01-21:35:55
ticket= 492 cmd= 1 oProfit= 0.000170 mProfit= 0.028920 openCount= 45 closeCount=46 openTime= 01-21:31:34 closeTime= 01-21:34:02
ticket= 493 cmd= 1 oProfit= 0.000160 mProfit= 0.029080 openCount= 46 closeCount=43 openTime= 01-21:33:40 closeTime= 01-21:36:39
ticket= 494 cmd= 0 oProfit= 0.000260 mProfit= 0.029340 openCount= 43 closeCount=48 openTime= 01-21:57:28 closeTime= 01-22:40:44
ticket= 495 cmd= 1 oProfit= 0.000300 mProfit= 0.029640 openCount= 44 closeCount=45 openTime= 01-22:00:01 closeTime= 01-23:01:54
ticket= 496 cmd= 1 oProfit= 0.000350 mProfit= 0.029990 openCount= 45 closeCount=45 openTime= 01-22:21:58 closeTime= 01-23:01:54
ticket= 497 cmd= 1 oProfit= 0.000290 mProfit= 0.030280 openCount= 46 closeCount=45 openTime= 01-22:25:23 closeTime= 01-23:01:54
ticket= 498 cmd= 1 oProfit= 0.000290 mProfit= 0.030570 openCount= 47 closeCount=45 openTime= 01-22:25:24 closeTime= 01-23:01:54
ticket= 499 cmd= 1 oProfit= 0.000290 mProfit= 0.030860 openCount= 48 closeCount=45 openTime= 01-22:25:25 closeTime= 01-23:01:54
ticket= 500 cmd= 0 oProfit= -0.001070 mProfit= 0.029790 openCount= 48 closeCount=49 openTime= 01-22:41:32 closeTime= 02-22:00:00
ticket= 501 cmd= 0 oProfit= -0.001190 mProfit= 0.028600 openCount= 49 closeCount=49 openTime= 01-22:41:34 closeTime= 02-22:00:00
ticket= 502 cmd= 0 oProfit= -0.000820 mProfit= 0.027780 openCount= 45 closeCount=49 openTime= 01-23:07:38 closeTime= 02-22:00:00
ticket= 503 cmd= 1 oProfit= -0.000400 mProfit= 0.027380 openCount= 46 closeCount=49 openTime= 01-23:28:21 closeTime= 02-22:00:00
ticket= 504 cmd= 0 oProfit= -0.000540 mProfit= 0.026840 openCount= 47 closeCount=49 openTime= 01-23:32:23 closeTime= 02-22:00:00
ticket= 505 cmd= 1 oProfit= -0.000620 mProfit= 0.026220 openCount= 48 closeCount=49 openTime= 01-23:59:05 closeTime= 02-22:00:00
Всего ордеров= 505 Buy= 179 Sell= 326 stopCount= 0 profit= 0.026220
% Display the position of the data cursor
% obj Currently not used (empty)
% event_obj Handle to event object
% output_txt_dMA Data cursor text string (string or cell array of strings).
global normData
global yMaBid
global yMaDiff
global yMaAngle
global yMaDiffAngle
global maLenSize
global profitData
pos = get(event_obj,'Position');
idx = 1;
time = pos(1);
for idx = 1:length(normData(1, :))
t = normData(1, idx);
if t >= time
break;
end
end
output_txt_dMA2 = { ['X: ',datestr(pos(1), 'dd-HH:MM:SS')], ...
['spr : ', num2str(normData(3,idx) - normData(2,idx), '%10.3e')], ...
['d8 : ', num2str(yMaDiff(1,idx), '%10.3e')], ...
['d15 : ', num2str(yMaDiff(2,idx), '%10.3e')], ...
['d30 : ', num2str(yMaDiff(3,idx), '%10.3e')], ...
['d60 : ', num2str(yMaDiff(4,idx), '%10.3e')], ...
['d120: ', num2str(yMaDiff(5,idx), '%10.3e')], ...
['d240: ', num2str(yMaDiff(6,idx), '%10.3e')], ...
['d480: ', num2str(yMaDiff(7,idx), '%10.3e')], ...
['d960: ', num2str(yMaDiff(7,idx), '%10.3e')]};
***
Sorry for the possibly silly question, but why isn't there a discussion on the cheapest ggz cost ?! all other elements being equal ?
ZSY: from my experience dwelled on the older 2600k - and fretted easily to 5.5GHz - but also overtakes 3770k and I bought myself a 4790k (its safe to heat up just impossible prots does not have time to cool down) and he lost his tests overclocked 2600k, the more recent version the worse it gets)))) certainly in specific tests generation is very helpful but mostly have no more than usual tasks, and then again there is the question of cheap gHz
all fifth generation Intel's are some kind of servers with up to 900GB RAM it's way too expensive for a ghz
the sixth - but the feeling is that they have gone the way of anti-overclocking, the CPU getting smaller and smaller - the real shitty problem is what's under the lid of the CPU - and that something transfers heat worse and worse. As a result we get that no matter how we cooled the CPU - the very CPU badly exchanged heat with the box in which it is sealed, actually in it and chip that 2600k - not being cold CPU but because it is the biggest CPU on the size - its heat exchange area higher and it sucks all future generations.
ZZZY: if we compare the proscias it makes sense to compare the maximum that can be squeezed out of it (ie, the test processors without overclocking will not even look)
if amd has something that hard reduces ghz cost it's more than interesting, i will go and study the amd lineup
Sorry for the possibly silly question, but why isn't there a discussion about the cheapest ggz cost here ?! all other elements being equal ?
ZSY: from my experience dwelled on the older 2600k - and fretted easily to 5.5GHz - but also overtakes 3770k and I bought myself a 4790k (its safe to overclock just impossible CPU does not have time to cool down) and he lost his tests overclocked 2600k, the more recent version the worse it gets)))) certainly in specific tests generation is very helpful but mostly have no more than usual tasks, and then again there is the question of cheap gHz
all fifth generation Intel's are some kind of servers with up to 900GB RAM and the ghz cost is horrendously expensive there
the sixth - but the feeling is that they have gone the way of anti-overclocking, the CPU getting smaller and smaller - the real shitty problem is what's under the lid of the CPU - and that something transfers heat worse and worse. As a result we get that no matter how we cooled the CPU - the very CPU badly exchanged heat with the box in which it is sealed, actually in it and chip that 2600k - not being cold CPU but because it is the biggest CPU on the size - its heat exchange area higher and it sucks all future generations.
ZZZY: if we compare the proscias it makes sense to compare the maximum that can be squeezed out of it (ie, the test processors without overclocking will not even look)
if at amd something that tightly reduces the cost of ghz is more than interesting, I will go to study the line of amd
I will give you my point of view. We are trying to evaluate the PROs from the point of view of their use in MQL5. For 99% of them it is, of course, the speed of the optimizer. The optimizer in MT5 is perfectly parallelized and allows using all local cores (+ cloud, but it's not the point). A few posts ago I posted a link to Ryzen tests from ixbt? Still these are tests from a respected resource, not from Vanya Pupkin. We can assume that on average 8-core Ryzen somewhere outperforms, somewhere lags behind 4-core Intel.
But there is a big BUT! Programmers with experience will understand me, I will explain a little bit for the rest. Sometimes it is VERY difficult, and sometimes simply impossible, to effectively parallelize a program to efficiently use all the cores. The tasks of video, photo, sound processing etc. are paralleled very effectively. That is, what can be split into small subtasks, the result of which does not affect the input of other tasks. Well, for example, a photo can be split into 8 squares and each square can have its own data processing thread. Of course there is a need for operating system support (hi folks who still use XP, the OS was developed back when there were no multi-core computers).
Moreover, the support of programmers is needed. And who is the meat of the programming world in the west now? Asia (by the way, I know a lot of smart guys), Indians (no comments here, or you will be banned :), and
Andrew, I'm a very angry man, my breath makes plaster crumble, crows die on the fly and wallpaper comes off).
That's all right, we all have flaws.
I broke the part of the program that outputs the data under the cursor, here is the part that draws the graphs. Below is the function that outputs the data under the cursor, now something is not working, but the meaning is clear. In general, matlab is not a panacea, you can just quickly visualize what's going on in the guts of the program. I'm rarely using it now, as they've implemented tickwise data tests, so I'm doing almost everything at once in MQL5.
This is a trade simulator log, I ran it for a day or so, profit in kind of a quote:
***
I read it. I have thought for a long time. I still did not see the connection between the marked colour:
Alexey Volchanskiy:
Why do you need a farm? WhenI look at the Matlab, I see typical areas and the Matlab program displays parameters in a place where the cursor is located. When you see all of this visually, you start to understand the primitive nature of this very pseudo-optimization. It's enough to move the cursor along the timeline and a lot of things become clear.
And I've never seen any confirmation that Matlab can replace conventional optimization.
In short, blah blah blah.
Sorry for the possibly silly question, but why isn't there a discussion about the cheapest ggz cost here ?! all other elements being equal ?
ZSY: from my experience dwelled on the older 2600k - and fretted easily to 5.5GHz - but also overtakes 3770k and I bought myself a 4790k (its safe to overclock just impossible CPU does not have time to cool down) and he lost his tests overclocked 2600k, the more recent version the worse it gets)))) certainly in specific tests generation is very helpful but mostly have no more than usual tasks, and then again there is the question of cheap gHz
all fifth generation Intel's are some kind of servers with up to 900GB RAM it's way too expensive for a ghz
the sixth - but the feeling is that they have gone the way of anti-overclocking, the CPU is getting smaller and smaller - the real shitty problem is that under the lid of the CPU - and that something transfers heat worse and worse. As a result we get that no matter how we cooled the CPU - the very CPU badly exchanged heat with the box in which it is sealed, actually in it and chip that 2600k - not being cold CPU but because it is the biggest CPU on the size - its heat exchange area higher and it sucks all future generations.
ZZZY: if we compare the proscias it makes sense to compare the maximum that can be squeezed out of it (ie, the test processors without overclocking will not even look)
if at amd something that tightly reduces the cost of ghz is more than interesting, I will go to study the line of amd
In general, there is no clear relationship between frequency and performance in modern processors. Performance depends more on architecture, cache size, cache algorithm, memory bus.
I have already said that the only criterion for estimating "performance" of processors can be their performance/cost ratio. There is no other criterion. But stereotypes are so strong that even people with wide experience of programming and being advanced PC users with many years' experience who are fluent in the world of modern computer science insist that "Intel is more powerful". Such is the power of stereotypes and thinking patterns; stereotypes often set the vector of technological development for many years ahead.
To understand the true state of affairs in the modern processor development one only needs to know some things. Over the years of development of computing technology it happened so that Intell became a leader in sales, the stars were aligned. Now, the company, using its share of a leader in sales of processors for server and desktop solutions, can simply afford to sell processors which passed the tests better than all the rest in the batch, which is something like 0.000001 percent of all the chips, these samples are marked as top-of-the-line processors. Of course, the price of such processors is exorbitant, because they are single copies, but such processors are sold, because Intell is a leader and because thinking patterns of users are strong. Also, it should be noted that AMD also has such single copies in the batch, but AMD can not sell such processors, because no one will buy them, because the processor market has been divided long ago and everyone has his place. I.e., all other things being equal, performance, price, the buyer will prefer Intell for the aforementioned reasons just as the same quality and functionality Sony televisions are always more expensive than LG televisions. Therefore, it simply does not make sense for AMD to sell comparable in performance and higher than Intell, they can only sell on the second line of top processors and at a price lower than Intell. So AMD's overall performance/cost ratio is always higher.
It's marketing people, don't you understand that? Panasonic will always cost more than Ponasonic or Panasonik with the same performance and functionality, even though both are made in China in almost the same factories.
Intell has already lost the battle in the mobile processor market, PC stone sales have been steadily going down year on year, eventually the same thing could happen to HTC for example. Intell is unlikely to die out for good though, more likely to live on like Nokia the Immortal Kashchey sitting on its patent coffers, Intell may stay afloat even if it stops making processors for good. So does the user need to fill with fresh blood in the form of his money the veins of all sorts of Kashchei? Of course, the choice is up to each user, but in any case it is not proper to say out loud "Intell more powerful!", because we are not teenage pioneers hanging out here, such phrases among programmers are simply illiterate.
There was a great magazine called Game EXE a long time ago... Magazines sold out in cities in a matter of minutes so it was virtually impossible to find a new issue. I had to receive subscriptions by mail. Journals arrived often 1-3 months late and when I received a notice from the post office about a parcel it was a holiday... The magazines were literally reread to tatters. The descriptions of the games in the magazine looked like art, they were entire stories, and it often happened that it was more interesting to read about the game than to play it. But the most favourite were a few pages at the end where hardware was described, new products, history of technology, many people grew up with these magazines and assembled their first PC following the instructions, those were the great dualap times when they played Need for Speed Porsche Unleashed 1:1 on beeping modems.... That's the late 90s early 00s. I can still remember my Duron 600 with its ceramic case. I got it assembled without any problems, but it wasn't uncommon for people to have cases where the fragile case of the stone cracked when installing the cooler. Then there was Athlon 1700, I remember installing wire jumpers on two legs of the stone, which allowed to unlock the multiplier and get Athlon 1900, they say sometimes it was even 2300....
So, there are archives of these magazines on the web, and those who want to learn about the history of computer science in a fascinating way can read them. Unfortunately, the magazine first died, then convulsed, not even the glossy cover helped in recent years, and all because, in my opinion, the format of the magazine changed, they started to write about god-awful consoles, and the magazine simply became uninteresting to the pissed-off pissists...