I want to build a PC to work with MT5, what do you advise and why? - page 18
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
At what frequency isthe AMD Phenom II X6 1055T runningand what is the memory frequency?
What speeds doesAMD Phenom II X6 1055T run atand what is the memory frequency?
Frequency is standard 2800, memory seems to be 1333.
The important thing is that this PR is false - added agent for a working PC
The FX-8350 is clearly faster than the previously mentioned phenoms, and clearly faster than the FX-8320. The frequency is not graded 4000, the memory is 1600.
So the big question is how this PR counts - the only thing is that the internet is slightly slower on the FX-8350.
A little later I'll check 2 more CPUs with internet the same as FX-8350.Frequency standard 2800, memory seems to be 1333.
The important thing is that this PR is false - added agent for a working PC
The FX-8350 is clearly faster than the previously mentioned phenoms, and clearly faster than the FX-8320. The frequency is not graded 4000, the memory is 1600.
So the big question is how this PR counts - the only thing is that the internet is slightly slower on the FX-8350.
A little later I'll check 2 more CPUs with internet the same as the FX-8350.My 8320 is also running at 4000 so they are in the same position here but your memory is 1600, it could make a big difference. I checked that fast memory affects my proces in proportion to the increase in frequency. That is, with 1600, a single run takes about 15% longer. And phenoms kinda have to work on the same level as FX, there's not much difference in throughput per thread. Although strange, because its frequency is much lower and memory is slower. Or have you checked in tests that fenom is slower?
Well, someone wrote here that they take into account the speed of the Internet in calculating the rating.
In general, we need more results to share with other participants to complete the picture. By the maximum PR of all, we can assess what the system is capable of
Frequency standard 2800, memory seems to be 1333.
The important thing is that this PR is false - added agent for a working PC
The FX-8350 is clearly faster than the previously mentioned phenoms, and clearly faster than the FX-8320. The frequency is not graded 4000, the memory is 1600.
So the big question is how this PR counts - the only thing is that the internet is slightly slower on the FX-8350.
A bit later I'll check 2 more cpu's with internet the same as FX-8350.Phenom had a terrific series until the company realised they released something too early...
The 4-core Phenom from 6-7 years ago was putting everyone on their backs in terms of overall performance. Some of the hardware (either the motherboard or the stone) is dead. And I can't find an adequate replacement - there just isn't one.
Any alternative is better either in computing (when it's necessary to chase numbers and matrices) or in virtualization (yes, I have a lot of virtuals at once) or - what a pity - in 3-dimensional dynamic shooters :-)
My 8320 also runs at 4000, so they're in the same position here, but your memory is 1600, that could make a big difference. I checked that fast memory affects my procesor in proportion to the frequency increase. That is, with 1600, a single run takes about 15% longer. And phenoms kinda have to work on the same level as FX, there's not much difference in throughput per thread. Although strange, because its frequency is much lower and memory is slower. Or have you checked in tests that fenom is slower?
Well, someone wrote here that they take into account the speed of the Internet in calculating the rating.
In general, we need more results to share with other participants to complete the picture. According to the maximum PR of all, will be able to assess what the system is capable of
If you have the opportunity, then reset the frequency - see how this affects the PR. I don't think it has much of an effect...
Regarding phenom - it really can't be all that bad there, I really was comparing 960T with fixed frequency 3500 raised and core unlocked, but even in this case 1 agent is slower, which is confirmed by optimization as well.
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and testing trading strategies
I need Benchmark MT5 - easy for developers, useful for users
Aleksey Vyazmikin, 2018.06.16 20:55
Did some tests today in different programs to determine performance.
FX-8350 performed better on new mother. Didn't think that so much could depend on the mother.
I want to point out that MT5 for phenom I tested on old build from May, and there is a suspicion that it was slower than the latest 1755.
It also makes a difference SSD or normal drive, on the same configuration with SSD 5.88 on HDD 5.2 passes per minute and for the 760G chip it was 4.9.
You can see from the table that it's not all that obvious. However, the closest test for our purposes in my case was CINEBENCH R15, although it doesn't really load memory and data channels. I'd like to specifically mention that because all data transfer channels are loaded it's sometimes difficult to regain control of the computer (the mouse can barely move), this is especially noticeable for an SSD drive, while on an Asus 760G chipset mother this unpleasantness becomes apparent for an HDD drive as well, and only by lowering task priority for agents and increasing task priority for the terminal shell allows to regain control. It is not clear why MQ does not want to give low priority to local agents (those on the PC, not on the network) by default.
Things can happen... Can you use any of the tests in the table above to see how your PC performs? Plus we have the same graphics cards.
If you look at performance per GHz, Phenom II is clearly faster than FX series - for MT5 in Expert Advisor - it turned out to be 11.26% faster.
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and strategy testing
I need Benchmark MT5 - easy for developers, useful for users
Aleksey Vyazmikin, 2018.06.16 21:11
And here's what happens if you divide the scores by the number of cores and CPU frequency, i.e. bring everything to the performance per 1 core with 1 Mhz.
By the way, post the scores inCINEBENCH R15 with different CPU frequencies at one time, just to get an idea of what the difference could be.
Phenom had a terrific series until the company realised they released something too early...
The 4-core Phenom from 6-7 years ago was putting everyone on both blades in terms of overall performance. Some of the hardware (either the motherboard or the stone) is dead. And I can't find an adequate replacement - there just isn't one.
Any alternative is better either in computing (when it's necessary to chase numbers and matrices) or in virtualization (yes, I have a lot of virtuals at once) or - what a pity - in 3-dimensional dynamic shooters :-)
If you live in a big city, it's quite possible to buy used hardware and find out what's wrong - nowadays good mothers for Phenom II cost 1000-1500 rubles (without FX support).
The processor is 3600MHz, the memory is 1866MHz
If you have a chance, reset the frequency - see how it affects PR. I don't think it has much of an effect...
As for phenom - it really can't be all that bad there, I really was comparing 960T with fixed frequency of 3500 raised and core unlocked, but even in this case 1 agent is slower, which is confirmed by optimization in general as well.
If you look at performance per gigahertz, the Phenom II is clearly faster than the FX series - for the MT5 in EA, it turned out to be 11.26% faster.
By the way, post the scores inCINEBENCH R15 with different CPU frequencies at the same time, to get a good idea of what the difference could be.
I won't be able to discount the frequencies anytime soon, I wasn't planning on rebooting the computer.
Yes the topic exists - as you can - I also have my cars busy...
Here's more added for stats
The FX-8350 draws attention - it's faster here than the original computer - internet is the same, memory is the same 1600, but I know this mother's CPU is actually mdelenier by 30%!!! Some weird measurements on this PR....
I won't be able to reset the frequencies in the nearest future, I don't plan to reboot the computer.
And don't.
Control Panel / Hardware and Sound / Power Options / High performance / Change plan settings / Change advanced power settings / Processor power management / Maximum power state
Decrease 100% by 1% by pressing Apply until system frequency drops. It is important to monitor under load, because the frequency is floating. Frequencies can be viewed by different monitoring software. I have OCCT. You can also load it - it's a stress tester.