selecting the hardware (computer) to use - page 3
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
And where do I have contradictions and misconceptions? Why speak in riddles? If you have a concrete objection, go ahead, put your thoughts out there and we'll discuss it.
Woman (the optimization algorithm) is looking for a husband(the result of the optimization), guided by the following search criteria: not drinking, with a beard, does not use foul language, loves children, does not go to women, does not go to pubs with friends, nice, gentle in nature in dealing with women.
Eventually, a man who meets these criteria is found. Optimal optimization? - Yes. But it turned out that the man is gay and this option is not suitable for a woman. So it's not optimal after all? What was the mistake?
The answer is simple. If not a suitable option is found (by the optimization criteria it is optimal), then either not complete description of the criteria or the selection of contradictory criteria, the other is not given. This means that there cannot be a woman "slightly pregnant" just as there cannot be "optimal" but not "maximum/minimum". So you have to describe the search criteria so that the maximum/minimum of the function (peak) coincides with the "optimal" value. And it's not the search algorithm's fault the function is "torn", it's just the way we described it in terms of criteria.
Red highlighted contradiction, there should be "==" and not "!=" between "optimum" and "maximum/minimum".
When no planes were shot down and oil was at 88, and it seemed that it would never fall, and the stock was constantly going up, before the 2008 mortgage crisis, when to stand on an uptrend was fashionable and prestigious, and the advisers were sold for $1,500 - $2,000, and the cheapest ones retailed for $500.
It was a golden time!
I bought my I7 960, overclocked up to 3.3, 12 gigs of RAM with plenty of power, a power supply 1000w zalman - all shiny with silk wires.Nice expensive and spacious case, 140mm fans on the CPU, 2 more 140mm fans in the case and on the side even more, and space for my hard drives - now I have 12 terabytes of hard drive space. I bought SSD for my operating system and terminals a few years ago and now I have it all running on x64 windows, now windows 7, and I don't really fancy windows 10. I don't see the point in changing this old monster yet. I've only done SSD and terabyte harddrive for 10 years.
And what's interesting is that EVERYTHING is BEAUTIFUL and FLYS. My friend within 10 years changed computer about three times, he invested 3 times more quid and the output was about the same in terms of performance. Since then I've had 2 laptops "blown", and this desktop hardware is alive. I think there needs to be a technological breakthrough - to make sense to change the hardware.
Only a server farm can significantly increase the speed of testing. You can get some laptops on i7, they are not as noisy as desktops and take up little space, thankfully the vendors are stagnant and there are discounts everywhere.
What can I say - it is very convenient to use such solutions for IT kickbacks!
1 Firstly it is cheaper to use a cloud !
2 If you have a lot of servers at work, it is possible to use it (if no objections).
3 You can make an arrangement with friends and run agents on their machines - you can put a router doorway for yourself - I often use this.
And calculations in my local network from my friendly machines ---- fly!
What is the problem with gully functions?
Do you have examples to prove the superiority of algorithms other than genetic ones? And exactly for complex stepped functions with wide horizontal segments, with sharp peaks and troughs, such as optimized functions in programs operating with discrete data (Expert Advisors)?
Rationale functions are usually used to compare different algorithms for solving variational problems. I'd expect examples of comparison of algorithms from Expert Advisor's help, not from users of this optimizer.
Oh, well, where have you seen any developers give examples of their competitors in their product's help? I don't think anyone does that, implying that their product is the best.
The algorithms were developed a long time ago, they are not the product of developers or competitors. Software implementation of the algorithms is fine, let them compete. But I meant the user. Why don't they explain the ideas of finding an extremum using the method of half division or the golden ratio? If they were implemented in the optimizer...
You can make your own algorithm. You set the optimization criterion in the code and go through the values in the code as you like.
When working according to this scheme:
That's all from the tester side. The rest is implemented by the program part written in MQL5.
The enumeration of Expert Advisor's parameter values and analysis of the result is done programmatically with due regard for the required algorithm. (At every iteration, the tester just obediently spits out trading results with changed parameters into frames - see the help)What is going on in the program part?
When it is time to finish, we switch the Expert Advisor to stop and the optimizer quickly finishes the required enumeration of the service parameter.
The algorithms were developed a long time ago, they are not the product of developers or competitors. The software implementation of the algorithms is fine, let them compete. But I was referring to the user. Why not explain to the user the ideas of finding an extremum using the method of half division or the golden ratio. If they were implemented in the optimizer...
But the efficiency of each algorithm depends very much on the implementation, on the specific features that the developers applied, and no one will disclose these very features in their commercial product.
A long time ago at the end of 2007 = when it was $30, when it smelled like roses in the air. And we used to go on holiday every year abroad,
When no planes were shot down and oil was at 88, and it seemed that it would never fall, and the stock was constantly going up, before the 2008 mortgage crisis, when to stand on an uptrend was fashionable and prestigious, and the advisers were sold for $1,500 - $2,000, and the cheapest ones retailed for $500.
It was a golden time!
I bought my i7 960, overclocked up to 3.3, 12 gigs of spare RAM, a nice vidyushu for those days, power supply 1000w zalman - all shiny with silk wires.Nice expensive and spacious case, 140mm fans on the CPU, 2 more 140mm fans in the casing and on the side even more, and space for my hard drives - now I have 12 terabytes of hard drive space. I bought SSD for my operating system and terminals a few years ago and now I have it all running on x64 windows, now windows 7, and I don't really fancy windows 10. I don't see the point in changing this old monster yet. I've only done SSD and terabyte harddrive for 10 years.
And what's interesting is that EVERYTHING is BEAUTIFUL and FLYS. My friend within 10 years changed computer approx 3 times, he invested 3 times more quid and the output was the same in performance. Since then I've got 2 laptops ruined, and this desktop hardware is still alive. Technology breakthrough is required to make sense to change the hardware.
AMD ryzen is coming out soon. there is no point in buying Intel for three times the price. It will be possible to build productive hardware 1.5-2 times cheaper. Well Intel should lower the price as there will be competition.
AMD does not inspire confidence.