PDA

View Full Version : HEM causing slow/freezing tables on FTP



shuman
07-17-2009, 07:48 PM
Hello. This is my first post. I have read as many threads as possible regarding this issue, but I am still having problems. It's been very frustrating.

I usually play up to 16 tables at $1/2 NLH full ring (9max) on Full Tilt. I'm wondering whether the problems I'm having have to do with HEM (I have version 1.09 beta 18a) or that my computer is too old for the new FTP updates. (When I close HEM, the slowness/freezing goes away now.) I've noticed that I get the LEAST slowness/freezing right after I manually vacuum my database. However, after the slowness begins it does NOT go away, and I can't play more than 9-10 tables. Even then, I occasionally time out on some hands. I also used to use Poker Tracker v2 before FTP's updates, so I don't know if HEM could be causing the problems.

Here is an example from today. After manually vacuuming my database, I was able to play 6-12 tables with little slowness with HEM auto importing. (I also had Internet Explorer open with 2 tabs.) However, after about 2 hours, there was a lot of slowness playing just one table (I played a total of 900 hands in 3 hours).

I am not a computer expert, so I will give you as much info that I think would be helpful. Sorry, but I don't know how to take a snapshot of the info.

My computer specs are:
Intel Pentium 4 CPU 3.00 GHz 3.01 GHz, 512 MB of RAM

hardrive:
Used space: 33.1 GB
Free space: 1.28 GB
Capacity: 34.4 GB

I also hit CTRL+ALT+DLT toward the end of my session while playing just one table with HEM auto importing. The Windows Task Manager screen on the Performance tab showed the following:

CPU usage: ~8%
PF usage: 967 MB (~3/4 bars full)

Totals
Handles: ~18428
Threads: 479
Processes: 49

Physical Memory (K)
Total: 522476
Available: ranged from 29,000-70,000
System Cache: ranged from 25,000-34,000

Commit Charge (K)
Total: ~1042948
Limit: 1277092
Peak: 1050560

Kernel Memory (K)
Total: ~38,200
Paged: ~24,600
Nonpaged: ~13,600

Processes: 49
Commit Charge: 1016 M/1247 M

My HEM database has a total of 1,285,504 hands stored in it, 117,196 of which are mine.

If you think the problem is the age of my computer, do you think taking it somewhere like Best Buy and having them clean up the hard drive would help? Or, would it be better to either upgrade to a faster processor, more RAM, and more hard drive space OR get a brand new computer?

Any advice would be very much appreciated.

Thank you.

fozzy71
07-17-2009, 08:37 PM
Your computer is getting a bit outdated. The new FTP software makes better PC's than yours lag, even before they turn on HM.

Here are some performance improvements you can try - http://208.109.95.123/forum/showthread.php?p=62613&posted=1#post62613

Personally I would suggest you get a new PC if you can manage it. A new 5 or $600 PC would be far ahead of your current PC in terms of overall performance.

shuman
08-27-2009, 05:20 PM
Your computer is getting a bit outdated. The new FTP software makes better PC's than yours lag, even before they turn on HM.

Here are some performance improvements you can try - http://208.109.95.123/forum/showthre...ed=1#post62613

Personally I would suggest you get a new PC if you can manage it. A new 5 or $600 PC would be far ahead of your current PC in terms of overall performance.


Hello. Because of the lagging/freezing issues of my PC, I have been using my other computer, a Dell latitude laptop, (which has all the same specs as my PC listed above except the GHz are less=2.20 GHz, 1.18 GHz) for the past several weeks when playing on Full Tilt, but I am still having problems with HEM running in that my computer will freeze after about 2 hours when I try and open a new table. I then have to remove the power cord and battery pack and reboot.

So, I think I finally need to get a new computer so I don't have to worry about the freezing. I was thinking of building a PC on Dell.com. Could you please recommend what types of things I should look for in a new computer in order to get optimum performance when I play, but not too much stuff that isn't worth the extra money (ie: processor, RAM, video card, etc.)? Also, I would want the computer to be able to use 2 monitors at the same time, so what components would I need for that in the computer?

Also, I was wondering if the freezing could be a result of my internet connection or service. I wouldn't want to get a new computer and then have the same problems because of my internet. I currently use an ethernet cable, and my laptop has a 3Com 3C920 Integrated Fast Ethernet Controller and is connected at 100 Mbps. Would a wireless card and wireless router be slower or faster? Also, two other family members each use their computers in other rooms in the house via wireless cards and a wireless Linksys router. Would the internet run slower for me when they are using their computers?

Thank you.

Patvs
08-27-2009, 11:35 PM
My computer specs are:
Intel Pentium 4 CPU 3.00 GHz 3.01 GHz, 512 MB of RAM

hardrive:
Used space: 33.1 GB
Free space: 1.28 GB
Capacity: 34.4 GB

After manually vacuuming my database, I was able to play 6-12 tables with little slowness with HEM auto importing. (I also had Internet Explorer open with 2 tabs.) However, after about 2 hours, there was a lot of slowness playing just one table.


You have sooo many problems. I would say your Intel P4 3.0 Ghz is not one of them. It's still fast enough. This problem above is caused bij the PostgreSQL database which uses more memory, the longer a session lasts. Only rebooting (or just closing HEM and stopping the HUD + IMPORT) will fix it. A short term solution (lasting only about 15 minutes) would be to close Internet Explorer. A better solution is to just add more memory to your system. (at least 2-3 GB) (another temporarily solution is to defrag your harddisk with Defraggler and try to keep at least 5+ GB free)

Your current system wants to use about 1 GB. It only has 512 MB available, so Windows creates a "pagefile": a virtual memory file on your harddisk. It uses an extra 512 MB of your harddisk to function as memory.
But actual RAM memory is really fast (with speeds of 3 GB/s), your harddisk is really slow with speeds of <50 MB/s. So the minute your computer needs to use the virtual memory (after playing for an hour or so) the system grinds to a halt.

Though simply adding 2 GB of RAM doesn't solve your problem. PostgreSQL also is very I/O intensive (it wants to read/write a lot of small files from/to your harddisk when importing hands / using the HUD) So even if you have 8 GB or RAM, it is still constantly using your harddisk. I'm guessing your 40 GB harddisk (3 years old?) can only read/write with sequential speeds of 40 MB/s. New harddisks can reach 90 MB/s. (and Solid State Disks [SSD] 200+ MB/s) (this is a simplification of harddisk speeds :) )

So your cheapest solution would be: add 2 GB of RAM for $40, and replace the harddisk with a 500+ GB new Western Digital Caviar BLACK, or Samsung Spinpoint F1 / F3 series for $60. Total upgrade costs $100.
Or buy a whole new computer for $500. (that would give you the same setup just with a better CPU, and better videocard, etc.)
(And eventually you'd want a SSD for your operation system/SQL database, but they're still quite expensive, $250 for a Intel X25-M G2 Postville)

shuman
08-28-2009, 06:42 AM
Thanks a lot for the info Patvs. You sound dead on as to what's happening with my old computer(s).

So assuming a new computer would come with a harddisk that can reach a speed of 90 MB/s, would there be a noticeable difference in performance based on 2 GB of RAM versus 4, 6, or 8? Also, what about a Core 2 Duo Processor versus a Quad core?

I assume the videocard is for the monitor, so would I need to have 2 video cards installed in the new computer to be able to use 2 monitors at the same time?

Thank you.

Patvs
08-28-2009, 08:36 AM
You're really in LUCK. This is THE best time to buy a new computer :) for 2 main reasons. Usually there is some really cool hardware technology just around the corner and it is recommended to wait 2-3 months. (and after 3 months there is something else to wait for) Right now everybody is waiting for 3 things: SATA3.0 (a.k.a. SATA "6"Gb/s speeds for harddisks), PCI-Express 3.0 (for faster videocards) and USB 3.0. And all three of them are postponed for at least 6-12 months. No new interesting technology will be released in the next 6 months! Only Windows 7 (but you can already get a free upgrade for that now when you buy a new computer)

Videocard: For 2 monitors you'll just need 1 videocard which has 2 "outputs": usually a card that has 2x DVI outputs. And many cards have that. (even $50 cards) The general rule is if your card has 3 outputs (for example 1 VGA +1 DVI +1 HDMI output) you can use 2 out of 3.
Note: if you want a 30 inch screen with a 2560x1600 resolution it needs one DUAL-LINK DVI output port. (which can be found on most new $50+ cards) The current best buys are any card with a ATI Radeon 46xx+, 47xx+ or 48xx+ chipset.

There will only be a difference in 3, 4 or 6 GB, if your system actually wants to use all 6+ GB and you have less memory. Your current system uses 1 GB so you need 1+ (=2 GB). Your new system will easily use 2 GB (since you will run more programs or play more tables/longer sessions) so it's savest to just put at least 3 GB in it. There also is no real performance difference between DDR2 and DDR3 memory. And the different CAS latencies (the timings of the memory: 4-4-4-20 vs 8-8-8-24, etc.) only can account for a 5% performance difference.

CPU: Same thing here as for the memory. You will not notice any significant performance increase in your daily computer use / internetting / Holdem Manager + poker whether you have a fast $80 Core 2 Duo, the slowest ($120) Intel quadcore or the fastest $999 i7 eXtreme. (unless you play a CPU intensive game which is optimized using multiple cores)

The bottleneck of the system will always remain the harddisk. On 2+2 there are a dozen topics of people that have a fast quadcore, 4+ GB RAM, some even have 2x VelociRaptors in RAID0 and they still are experiencing lag playing 12+ tables using HoldemManager because they have such a large database. Those people need a SSD.

fozzy71
08-28-2009, 09:28 AM
.........Those people need multiple SSD's.

fyp ;)

For my new PC this fall, I am planning on getting SSD for my OS, SSD for my SQL, and a Caviar Black for my data, graphics, and backups. :D

shuman
08-31-2009, 06:42 AM
So Patvs, I looked on Dell.com at some of the different desktops, and I was wondering what you thought about a few things:

1) When building a computer, it doesn't say anything about the hard disk speed. So, if I call an operator and ask them if they can put a Solid State Disk in my new computer, do you think it would be worth the extra money right now? Or would I be better off waiting until the price comes down?

2) What's the difference between a SSD and a Caviar Black? Aren't they both hard disks? Fozzy's post confused me.

3) I've never used Microsoft Windows Vista, and I noticed on Dell.com that they offer 2 models of computers that you can build in which they will pre-install your version choice of Microsoft Windows XP and give you the Vista disk if you ever want to upgrade. Also, you get a free upgrade to Windows 7 when it's available. Just wondering if you think it would be worth a little extra money (I'm assuming) to get the Windows XP instead of just Vista? I've heard some people don't like Vista and/or have problems.

4) I currently play on Full Tilt. Do you know if I would NOT have the lagging/frezzing issues if I played on PokerStars? Maybe their software would be more compatible and less processor/RAM intenstive on my current computer.

Thank you.

Patvs
08-31-2009, 07:34 PM
1) When building a computer, it doesn't say anything about the hard disk speed. So, if I call an operator and ask them if they can put a Solid State Disk in my new computer, do you think it would be worth the extra money right now? Or would I be better off waiting until the price comes down?


The whole regular 7200 RPM harddisk vs SSD is a difficult balance between the need for SPACE (GB), SPEED and COSTS ($). The price for SSDs will drop with 50% every year. For the same $ amount this year, you'll get double the space of GB next year. But do you really NEED double the space in GB?

Or you can get double the SPEED next year. The current SSDs are limited to speeds up to 300 MB/s (due to the limitations of the SATA-2 ports). Likewise most external harddisks are limited by the speed of USB2.0. SATA-3 will be released in 12 months and will bring SSDs that are twice as fast as the current generation.

Fusion-iO ioDrives ALREADY use PCI-Express 2.0 ports and are 5x as fast as a SSD. (and 10x times more expensive than a SSD) In 24 months, there will be Fusion-iO drives that use PCI-E 3.0. (the smallest ioDrive costs $1500 now) If they would cost $350 in 24 months, we would probably have the SSD vs ioDrive discussion in two years. (conclusion: buy the fastest you can afford now... or you'll wait FOREVER)




2) What's the difference between a SSD and a Caviar Black? Aren't they both hard disks? Fozzy's post confused me.

Some of the latest 7200 RPM harddisks are really fast: they are the Western Digital Caviar Black, Samsung Spinpoint F1 and Samsung Spinpoint F3. All of them are ALMOST as fast as a VelociRaptor. (note: even the eco 5400 RPM Samsung Spinpoint F2 approaches this speed)

A SSD harddisk, is like a big USB memory stick. It has no moving parts. It uses less power, it creates less heat, and they're indestructible.
Speed-wise the Caviar Black is actually slightly faster with sequential WRITE speeds. A SSD is faster with sequential READ speeds. And a SSD is 10x faster with 4K read and write speeds. (reading/writing tiny 4kb size files)



3) I've never used Microsoft Windows Vista, and I noticed on Dell.com that they offer 2 models of computers that you can build in which they will pre-install your version choice of Microsoft Windows XP and give you the Vista disk if you ever want to upgrade. Also, you get a free upgrade to Windows 7 when it's available. Just wondering if you think it would be worth a little extra money (I'm assuming) to get the Windows XP instead of just Vista? I've heard some people don't like Vista and/or have problems.


VISTA sucks. XP is solid.... but just get the free upgrade to Windows 7. Win7 is really good.



4) I currently play on Full Tilt. Do you know if I would NOT have the lagging/frezzing issues if I played on PokerStars? Maybe their software would be more compatible and less processor/RAM intenstive on my current computer.



The new Full Tilt software (I play on FT) does use a lot of system resources (RAM). Which is funny because they claim their new software was completely re-written to accommodate slower computers.

I sent FT an email "praising them for their great new software" and I asked them "now that they have created software with no lag, which doesn't use ANY system resources, surely now I am allowed to have my table limit increased from 16 to playing 24 tables simultaneously." :)

They replied:


Unfortunately, we are unable to increase these limits further.



PokerStars can fix some problems for you since it won't crash on you or have connection problems. But the most lag/freezing is caused by the combination of using HEM + playing multiple tables + having a slow harddisk/not enough RAM + PostgreSQL. And I actually have faith in Full Tilt they will solve all of their problems in future software updates.

Edit: Anandtech wrote a final great article about SSDs here (http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3631)

shuman
08-31-2009, 10:08 PM
The new Full Tilt software (I play on FT) does use a lot of system resources (RAM). Which is funny because they claim their new software was completely re-written to accommodate slower computers.

I sent FT an email "praising them for their great new software" and I asked them "now that they have created software with no lag, which doesn't use ANY system resources, surely now I am allowed to have my table limit increased from 16 to playing 24 tables simultaneously."

They replied:

Quote:
Unfortunately, we are unable to increase these limits further.

Hilarious stuff Patvs! It's funny how when they upgraded their software I could barely play 1 table because my computer was so slow. Fantastic for older computers:)

I really appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions and give me such great info. I don't know much about computers, so a lot of the stuff you are telling me is new to me. It really helps me out a lot.


The whole regular 7200 RPM harddisk vs SSD is a difficult balance between the need for SPACE (GB), SPEED and COSTS ($). The price for SSDs will drop with 50% every year. For the same $ amount this year, you'll get double the space of GB next year. But do you really NEED double the space in GB?

Or you can get double the SPEED next year. The current SSDs are limited to speeds up to 300 MB/s (due to the limitations of the SATA-2 ports). Likewise most external harddisks are limited by the speed of USB2.0. SATA-3 will be released in 12 months and will bring SSDs that are twice as fast as the current generation.

Ok, so I was thinking that I would be better off getting a SSD now, but I'm not sure how many I would need (1,2?). I would rather have the speed than the extra space. I think I could always get an external hard drive if I needed extra space. I just don't want to deal with any lagging/freezing anymore. It's terrible.

So, like Fozzy said before:


For my new PC this fall, I am planning on getting SSD for my OS, SSD for my SQL, and a Caviar Black for my data, graphics, and backups.

Does that mean it's good to get 2 SSD's and 1 7200 RPM harddisk? It seems to me that 3 hard hard disks in one computer would be pretty expensive, and maybe for me, unnecessary. I just started playing pretty regularly a few months ago, and I've calculated that I could probably play at MOST anywhere from 1-2 million hands in year (5000-6000 hands per day) on Full Tilt if I played consistently all that time. So, i'm not sure how many or how much harddisk components I would need.

As for the video card recommendations you gave me in a previous post:


The current best buys are any card with a ATI Radeon 46xx+, 47xx+ or 48xx+ chipset.

Do you think anything below a ATI Radeon 46xx+ is not good enough? Some of the Dell options only allow an upgrade to a ATI Radeon 4350. I'm not sure how much of an impact that would make on performance if I went with the 43

With all these different components, maybe I should have my friend, a computer engineer, build me a desktop instead of going through Dell. I thought it would be less expensive through Dell, but when I price it out on the website it always comes out to at least $800/900. He built the last desktop I got like 5 years ago. Problem with Dell somtimes is that they won't allow you to upgrade certain components on certain computer models (ie: RAM, video card, hard disk, etc.)

If I haven't tired you out yet with all my questions, I would still really appreciate it if you could reply when you have time.

Thank a lot.

Patvs
09-01-2009, 05:20 AM
Ok, so I was thinking that I would be better off getting a SSD now, but I'm not sure how many I would need (1,2?).


Just buy one 80 GB Intel X25-M G2.
I bought 2x 30 GB OCZ Vertex in RAID0 myself, but it is still uncertain if Intel will ever have TRIM support for their RAID chipsets (my motherboard has a Intel ICH10r RAID chip)
Why You Absolutely Need an SSD (http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3631&p=20) (somewhere in the Anandtech article he recommends buying just one for this reason). He also concludes: "You should buy the largest drive you need/can afford. If you only have 30GB of data on your system, buy the 64GB Indilinx drive (Vertex). If you need 50GB? Opt for the 80GB Intel drive."



Do you think anything below a ATI Radeon 46xx+ is not good enough? Some of the Dell options only allow an upgrade to a ATI Radeon 4350. I'm not sure how much of an impact that would make on performance if I went with the 43

I believe the 46xx/47xx/48xx is the generation of the cards. And the last two numbers is the speed.
Take a look at this chart (http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-cards-charts-2009-high-quality/Sum-of-FPS-Benchmarks-1920x1200,1473.html).
So a 4770 is faster than a 4850, but a new 4830 is faster than the old 3850. The numbers really make no sense. :)



Another problem with DELL is their basic model is really nice and cheap, but they charge a lot for any upgrades. Just let your friend build you a PC.

shuman
09-05-2009, 02:35 AM
Hey Patvs,

I read both articles you linked me to by Anandtech, and it sounds like the Intel X25-M G2 is the way to go, just like you said. Thanks for the links.

I've been wondering if just one 80 GB Intel X25-M G2 will be enough as far as storage space though? I know I mentioned previously that I could just get an external hard drive if necessary. However, I've never actually purchased or used an external hard drive before, and I was wondering if it would actually be better if I also had a regular 7200 rpm hard disk installed along with the SSD if I can afford it now. What do you think?

It is possible to have a regular hard disk and a SSD built into the same PC right? I'm still not clear about this. I know Fozzy said for his new PC he was going to get a SSD for his OS, SSD for his SQL, and a Caviar Black for his data, graphics, and backups. So, he would have 3 hard disks in his PC? Do you happen to know much money a PC like Fozzy describes would cost to have built?

I need to get a new computer if I intend to continue playing on Full Tilt. Now my computer is freezing on individual tables with HEM running, sometimes immediately after I sit down and post the BB. Then I can't even stand up or close the table. I've had enough.

Thanks a lot.

shuman
09-05-2009, 02:43 AM
I forgot about the video cards--About the link you gave me with a chart...You said in a previous post that the current best buys are any card with a ATI Radeon 46xx+, 47xx+ or 48xx+ chipset.

So, for playing poker on Full Tilt, do you think one of these ATI Radeon's would sufficient compared to one of the Nvidia Geforce GTX's, which I assume are more expensive?

Thanks.

fozzy71
09-05-2009, 09:48 AM
/.........

It is possible to have a regular hard disk and a SSD built into the same PC right? I'm still not clear about this. I know Fozzy said for his new PC he was going to get a SSD for his OS, SSD for his SQL, and a Caviar Black for his data, graphics, and backups. So, he would have 3 hard disks in his PC? Do you happen to know much money a PC like Fozzy describes would cost to have built?........

My estimates for my dream machine were WAY over $1.5k USD.

I actually had to give in and order a pre-built machine from HP. I needed a new PC, that I could afford, asap.

My current PC is in bad shape, and keeps crashing so bad I have to use the power button to shut it down (multiple times per day). I ordered a top of the line HP machine. After W7 releases I will be adding a SSD to it. I am still undecided if it will be for my HD, or if I should consider using it for my OS instead. I will probably go the easy road and just put the SSD in as a slave for my SQL DB.


This cost me $1k as is:

* Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium with Service Pack 1 (64-bit)
* Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-920 processor (2.66GHz, 1MB L2 + 8MB shared L3 cache with QPI Technology)
* FREE UPGRADE! 9GB DDR3-1066MHz SDRAM [5 DIMMs] from 8GB
* 750GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive
* 1GB ATI Radeon HD 4650 [DVI, HDMI, VGA]
* LightScribe 16X max. DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti drive
* Integrated 10/100/1000 (Gigabit) Ethernet, No wireless LAN
* 15-in-1 memory card reader, 1 USB, 1394, audio
* No TV Tuner w/remote control
* Integrated 7.1 channel sound with front audio ports
* No speakers
* HP multimedia keyboard and HP optical mouse
* Microsoft(R) Works 9.0
* Norton Internet Security(TM) 2009 - 15 month
* HP Home & Home Office Store in-box envelope

Patvs
09-05-2009, 03:34 PM
I've been wondering if just one 80 GB Intel X25-M G2 will be enough as far as storage space though? I know I mentioned previously that I could just get an external hard drive if necessary. However, I've never actually purchased or used an external hard drive before, and I was wondering if it would actually be better if I also had a regular 7200 rpm hard disk installed along with the SSD if I can afford it now.


80 GB is enough for HEM + Windows + Office. It's not enough for games/movies/downloads/Japanese porn, etc. so I'd just add an extra 500-1000 GB WD Caviar Black. You can have 6-7 harddisks in your computer. Also a internal harddisk will be cheaper AND faster than all external harddisks.
I have 3 harddisks now (2x SSD and 1x 7200 RPM), I'll probably add another 1 TB 7200 RPM in 2 months.

If you would build it yourself (or by a friend) you could build a $800 AMD Phenom system which has EVERYTHING you need (excl. monitor) and the price would be closer to $1000 if it is a Intel i7 system.




I forgot about the video cards--About the link you gave me with a chart...You said in a previous post that the current best buys are any card with a ATI Radeon 46xx+, 47xx+ or 48xx+ chipset.

So, for playing poker on Full Tilt, do you think one of these ATI Radeon's would sufficient compared to one of the Nvidia Geforce GTX's, which I assume are more expensive?



Best Graphics Cards For The Money: August '09 (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-graphics-card,2387.html)

Check out this article. They actually recommend a lot of Nvidia cards. (or often a Radeon and Geforce tie)

shuman
09-08-2009, 04:01 AM
Fozzy and Patvs,

Thanks so much for your new computer info. Looks like you got a pretty good deal Fozzy-SUPER fast processor, tons of RAM, fast and large hard disk, solid video card-all for just $1k. I'll have to check out HP's website. I've only looked at Dell's website and thought about asking my friend (although, not a close friend) to build me a PC.

So, I went to Intel's website I see that the Intel Core i7-920 processor you got is SUPER fast. Do you also do a lot of online gaming/photo editing/multitasking etc.? Just wondering why you went with such a fast processor.

I don't do gaming, and the only thing I might do other than poker and email/web surfing is downloading things for school or maybe a few songs. I originally thought I just needed a good Core 2 Duo processor. Now I see that Intel has several models above the Duo even before you get to your i7-Quad, Extreme, i5. I'd like to get the fastest processor for the money for the tasks I'll be using the computer for. I don't want to pay extra for a processor that I don't need/won't be using all of it's power.

Any recommendations?

Also, so you will get a SSD later on and install it yourself? HP couldn't install a SSD for you now? Or, you just didn't want to pay extra for it right now? I don't have that knowledge/ability, so unless Dell or HP could install an SSD for me in a computer I build with on of them, I think maybe I would just go the route of my friend. At least I could have at the minimum one SSD, and if I think I can afford it, I'd also get a Caviar Black.

I think it might be less expensive for me to get a PC from Dell or HP, but if I can't get a SSD through one of them, I think I'd rather pay extra for my friend to build it. I guess maybe I could buy a Dell or HP and then ask my friend if he'd install a SSD, but I'm not sure if that would/could work as far as all the technical stuff and space inside the PC goes.

One final thing-I noticed you did NOT get the wireless LAN. So, you only use your PC with an Ethernet cord? Didn't think it's worth the extra money just in case you need the wireless?

Thanks a lot.

fozzy71
09-09-2009, 08:52 PM
Fozzy and Patvs,

Thanks so much for your new computer info. Looks like you got a pretty good deal Fozzy-SUPER fast processor, tons of RAM, fast and large hard disk, solid video card-all for just $1k. I'll have to check out HP's website. I've only looked at Dell's website and thought about asking my friend (although, not a close friend) to build me a PC.

So, I went to Intel's website I see that the Intel Core i7-920 processor you got is SUPER fast. Do you also do a lot of online gaming/photo editing/multitasking etc.? Just wondering why you went with such a fast processor.

I just wanted to get the bottom end of the newest intel series. The 920 is the first of the Ci7 chips, and the next steps up are very pricey. I do massive multi-tasking working for HM. And I do graphics work and web site development. It is very common for me to have 3 or 4 adobe applications open working on a site and graphics, along with my browser, media player, holdem manager, etc...



I don't do gaming, and the only thing I might do other than poker and email/web surfing is downloading things for school or maybe a few songs. I originally thought I just needed a good Core 2 Duo processor. Now I see that Intel has several models above the Duo even before you get to your i7-Quad, Extreme, i5. I'd like to get the fastest processor for the money for the tasks I'll be using the computer for. I don't want to pay extra for a processor that I don't need/won't be using all of it's power.

Any recommendations?

I really am quite clueless about hardware in general, and you would do better to ask someone like patvs.




Also, so you will get a SSD later on and install it yourself? HP couldn't install a SSD for you now? Or, you just didn't want to pay extra for it right now? I don't have that knowledge/ability, so unless Dell or HP could install an SSD for me in a computer I build with on of them, I think maybe I would just go the route of my friend. At least I could have at the minimum one SSD, and if I think I can afford it, I'd also get a Caviar Black.

They had RAID options and an option for a 320gb 10k rpm drive, and 640gb 7200rpm drive, but that was a +$200 upgrade. They did not have SSD options on their site. I was trying to keep my cost close to 1k for now. $1,090 after tax.



One final thing-I noticed you did NOT get the wireless LAN. So, you only use your PC with an Ethernet cord? Didn't think it's worth the extra money just in case you need the wireless?

Thanks a lot.

I probably should have in hindsight. We have a wireless router, that my brother uses for his iphone and laptop, but it is in my room currently, and I prefer the stability of wired.

Patvs
09-09-2009, 10:02 PM
So, I went to Intel's website I see that the Intel Core i7-920 processor you got is SUPER fast. Do you also do a lot of online gaming/photo editing/multitasking etc.? Just wondering why you went with such a fast processor.



The following Intel CPUs all have the same "clock speed":
Q6700 4x 2.66 Ghz (8 MB L2 cache)
Q8400 4x 2.66 Ghz (2x2MB L2 cache)
Q9400 4x 2.66 Ghz (2x3MB L2 cache)
Q9450 4x 2.66 Ghz (12 MB L2 cache)
i5 750 4x 2.66 Ghz
i7 920 4x 2.66 Ghz (8 MB L3 cache)


But performance wise they all perform very differently, based on the chip architecture, available L1/L2/L3 cache, energy efficiency: the i5 uses the least power, etc. The MAIN difference is the i7 hyper-threading. (My computer is running around 1200 threads now - you can see this in TASK MANAGER - Performance). The i7 has 4 cores.. and each core runs two threads! So I have 4 (physical), and 8 (logical) CPUs.

The new released Intel i5 only has 1 thread per core just as the Qxxxx series.
The 2010 release i9 will have 6 (physical) and 12 (logical) CPUs and the i9 will be compatible with my motherboard. (that's why the X58 chipset motherboards are so expensive)

Do I really need 8 CPUs? Eh... no... :-) I also just wanted the newest Intel series. (I had a AMD before this) And the option to upgrade to a i9 in a year. (And you can easily overclock the 4x 2.66 Ghz i7 920 to 4x 3.60 Ghz, but I'm not planning to.... though I did try it and it worked fine) (And I had the money -actual pokerwinnings- to spend a little bit extra) (And Adobe CS4 programmes have high system requirements)

Best CPUs For The Money: August '09 (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-cpu,2398.html) (article about the best CPUs for $50-$100/$200--->and $250)
In next month's guide I'm pretty sure the i5 will be the big winner, because it's cheaper than a i7 920 and just as fast.

If you have a somewhat tight budget, I'd SAVE money on the processor/motherboard (by picking a cheaper i5, or Qxxxx) and SPEND money on a SSD harddisk (read: Intel X25-M G2)
so you have "balanced" system. Anandtech wrote something funny about people that have a i7 and a "slow" harddisk:

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/thessdrelapse_083009193318/19853.png

"This is on a Core i7 system. To have the world’s fastest CPU and to have to wait half a minute for a couple of apps to launch is just wrong!"

"A SSD is an order of magnitude faster than a hard drive. It’s the difference between a hang glider and the space shuttle; both will fly, it’s just that one takes you to space. And I don’t care that you can buy a super fast or high flying hang glider (read: "VelociRaptor") either!"




Wireless LAN.


I have a wireless router. But it's 3 feet away from my computer so I just have it wired.

fozzy71
09-10-2009, 01:56 AM
........

The new released Intel i5 only has 1 thread per core just as the Qxxxx series.
The 2010 release i9 will have 6 (physical) and 12 (logical) CPUs and the i9 will be compatible with my motherboard. (that's why the X58 chipset motherboards are so expensive)

Do I really need 8 CPUs? Eh... no... :-) I also just wanted the newest Intel series. (I had a AMD before this) And the option to upgrade to a i9 in a year. (And you can easily overclock the 4x 2.66 Ghz i7 920 to 4x 3.60 Ghz, but I'm not planning to.... though I did try it and it worked fine) (And I had the money -actual pokerwinnings- to spend a little bit extra) (And Adobe CS4 programmes have high system requirements)

ditto



http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/thessdrelapse_083009193318/19853.png


OK. I think I will be buying 1 or 2 SSDs to upgrade my PC this winter. :D

Patvs
09-11-2009, 02:30 AM
The first i5 750 and new i7 870 benchmarks are pouring in.

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/3513/266t.jpg

I really found this graph interesting because it shows four different 4x 2.66 Ghz CPUs doing a CPU benchmark task. (the lower the time [in seconds] the better) This makes the i5 THE BEST (price/performance wise) CPU on the market.

fozzy71
09-11-2009, 11:23 AM
Oh so very glad I didnt get an AMD Phenom. :D

Patvs
09-11-2009, 12:36 PM
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/p55oc_090909183214/19976.png

shuman
09-12-2009, 09:59 PM
If you have a somewhat tight budget, I'd SAVE money on the processor/motherboard (by picking a cheaper i5, or Qxxxx) and SPEND money on a SSD harddisk (read: Intel X25-M G2)

Patvs,

Great info as always. I am definitely gojng to get at an Intel X25-M G2, the 80 or 160 GB, whichever I think will work better as far as storage space. I may also get a Caviar Black (or a similar fast harddisk) as well, in addition to the SSD, so after I can price everything together I will decide whether to get just the one SSD or an SSD and a regular harddisk.

If you don't mind, could you give me a little more advice on the processor? It sounds like the i5 is the fastest for the money, but is it worth it to get the i7? You said you also have an i7 (like Fozzy just bought a new HP computer with the i7 920). Which model number do you have, or which models do you recommend?

Like I said above, I won't be using my computer as intensively as you and Fozzy as far as multi-tasking, but I can afford (from poker winnings) and want to get the fastest processor that I can get the most use out of without wasting money on one that's too fast for the tasks I'll be doing.

Plus, I'd like my new computer to last as long as possible, so I want to go with a processor that will last a few years.

Thanks again.

Patvs
09-13-2009, 06:07 AM
Intel will release a X25-V in 6 weeks. (V = Value)
It will only be 40 GB. So it will be really cheap to put 2x 40 GB X25-V in RAID0.

OCZ will get rid of the Vertex TURBO series in two months, and instead will use overclocked memory for all Vertex drives. (so every NEW Vertex drive will basically become a Vertex TURBO)

I have the i7 920. (which used to be the only affordable i7) Now the i7 860 is faster and only costs $15 more. i7/i5 pros and cons:
PROS:
-i7 has hyperthreading (but very few programmes can actually utilize this, except for AVG antivirus)
-i5 750/i7 720 can easily be overclocked to 4x 3.5 Ghz thus making it faster than the 4x 2.93 Ghz i7 860 AND the expensive 4x 2.80 Ghz i7 860.
-i5 is really energy efficient.
-i5 has cheaper motherboards and the motherboards have a COMPLETELY new design with only one chip (the P55).
CONS:
-i7 the motherboards are more expensive and they have the "old" two chip design with the Intel Northbridge chipset and the Southbridge chipset. (and the Northbridge really SUCKS, because it overheats and you need a special heatsink (sometimes even an extra fan) just to cool the Northbridge).

So the i5 really is the big winner. (it especially crushes ALL QuadCore Qxxx models, being faster and cheaper)

fozzy71
09-13-2009, 12:29 PM
Intel will release a X25-V in 6 weeks. (V = Value)
It will only be 40 GB. So it will be really cheap to put 2x 40 GB X25-V in RAID0.
....

How dumb would it be, and how much work, to upgrade my new HP machine to a raid0 SSD for the OS and move my current 750gb drive with the OS to be a data drive? I would probably add another single SSD for my SQL DB if I can afford to do the upgrade after w7 comes out.

My PC comes with a free w7 upgrade. This probably wont be sufficient for a clean install on a new SSD raid will it? SO I will also have to buy w7 along with the SSDs and raid controller. :-\

shuman
09-15-2009, 07:46 PM
Intel will release a X25-V in 6 weeks. (V = Value)
It will only be 40 GB.

Patvs,

Do you know how much the new SSD X25-V 40 GB will cost? I think one of the links you gave me said the current X25-M G2 80 GB is $300 and the 160 GB is $500.

And the new SSD X25-V will be available for purchase to the general public in 6 weeks?

Also, when you say:

So it will be really cheap to put 2x 40 GB X25-V in RAID0.

What does "in RAID0 mean?" Can the current X25-M G2's be put in RAID0?

I don't know if I want to wait 6 weeks, unless the savings would be significant. I could always leave room to add one of the new X25-V's later on. My computer is so bad that I can't even play a normal poker session anymore without individual tables or my computer freezing, or without Full Tilt or HEM crashing.

Thanks.

shuman
09-15-2009, 07:54 PM
How dumb would it be, and how much work, to upgrade my new HP machine to a raid0 SSD for the OS and move my current 750gb drive with the OS to be a data drive? I would probably add another single SSD for my SQL DB if I can afford to do the upgrade after w7 comes out.

fozzy71,

It sounds like you want to have 2 SSD's: one for the OS and one for your SQL DB. Just wondering why you want one for your OS? Would this OS SSD be beneficial in general for all of your computing needs, or mostly for your poker-playing needs?

I wasn't sure if I should get one or two SSD's installed in my new computer. I definitely want at least one for my SQL DB, but do you know if also getting one for the OS would show noticeably better performance for me while using HEM and playing on Full Tilt?

Thanks.

fozzy71
09-15-2009, 10:14 PM
fozzy71,

It sounds like you want to have 2 SSD's: one for the OS and one for your SQL DB. Just wondering why you want one for your OS? Would this OS SSD be beneficial in general for all of your computing needs, or mostly for your poker-playing needs?

I wasn't sure if I should get one or two SSD's installed in my new computer. I definitely want at least one for my SQL DB, but do you know if also getting one for the OS would show noticeably better performance for me while using HEM and playing on Full Tilt?

Thanks.

My new HP will be here any day. I needed a new, stable PC asap for my work, and couldnt afford to build one how I wanted. I would like an SSD for my OS for things like loading Adobe photoshop, illustrator, dreamweaver, and bridge, all at once. It currently can take just photoshop 1 - 2 minutes to load because of the 3.6k fonts it has to read and sort.

Patvs
09-16-2009, 03:56 AM
How dumb would it be, and how much work, to upgrade my new HP machine to a raid0 SSD for the OS and move my current 750gb drive with the OS to be a data drive?

My PC comes with a free w7 upgrade. This probably wont be sufficient for a clean install on a new SSD raid will it? SO I will also have to buy w7 along with the SSDs and raid controller. :-\

I don't know if the free W7 update can do a clean install, or will only update Vista. (but you can always just install Vista and update to W7 on your SSD/SSDs)

Installing one or two SSDs in your HP machine could result in several problems:
-The main problem is installing them in your case. SSDs are 2.5 inch, regular harddisks are 3.5 inch. Most cases don't have any option to install 2.5 inch drives. So you might need an expensive ($20) 2.5-to-3.5 bracket or be very McGyver-like creative with some elastic bands.
-For RAID: you need two things. -1 access to the BIOS where you can actually change some settings (harddisk: IDE/AHCI --> to RAID) I don't know what motherboard the HP machine will have. Assuming it's a normal X58 chipset motherboard, you should be able to change the RAID settings.
-2 That is... IF.. the motherboard has a RAID chip? so you don't need a RAID controller. Of course hardware RAID would be better... but it's also a lot more expensive. And the results with the latest Intel ICH10R RAID chips are really good. So hopefully your motherboard will have that chip.
After enabling RAID in the BIOS. A special RAID option menu will appear while booting the computer, and you can setup the RAID configuration there. (partitions, number of drives, etc.)




Patvs,

Do you know how much the new SSD X25-V 40 GB will cost? I think one of the links you gave me said the current X25-M G2 80 GB is $300 and the 160 GB is $500.

And the new SSD X25-V will be available for purchase to the general public in 6 weeks?


The X25-V has a official release date of "4th Quarter of 2009" so 6 weeks is an optimistic date. It could be anytime from october- late december.
I'm guessing they'll give it the same price as the 30GB OCZ Vertex TURBO, so around $150-$160.




What does "in RAID0 mean?" Can the current X25-M G2's be put in RAID0?

I don't know if I want to wait 6 weeks, unless the savings would be significant. I could always leave room to add one of the new X25-V's later on. My computer is so bad that I can't even play a normal poker session anymore without individual tables or my computer freezing, or without Full Tilt or HEM crashing.



With RAID0 several drives think that they are "one" drive. And all information is written/read from multiple drives simultaneously. (RAID1 is two drives where one drive MIRRORS the other drive, which is the ultimate backup)
Every drive can be put in RAID0 is long as you have two identical drives.
The plus side to RAID0 is, the performance (read and write speeds) usually doubles. (things like "access time" don't improve)
So the 160 GB X25-M G2 is pretty useless, since you're buying that drive for SPEED. And 2x 80 GB X25-M is faster and doesn't cost a lot more.
The 40 GB X25-V makes EVERYTHING more complicated, because 2x X25-V will be almost twice as fast as one 80GB X25-M. (Of course you can also put 2x 80GB X25-M in RAID0 but that will cost you 2x $300.. for that amount of money why not put 4x X25-V in RAID0)

I'd just buy one 80GB X25-M G2. (for your OS and SQL database)

The X25-M G2 was sold out for at least 2 months after its official release. Assuming the same happens with the X25-V (and it will) they will be very difficult to get your hands on for the next two-three months.
When I bought my computer I had the same problem with the release of the 80GB X25-M G2. It would be released in two weeks, but it wasn't actually for sale anywhere after its release date. So I could buy a X25-M G1 (Generation 1), wait with my WHOLE system for the G2, build a system with a Caviar Black and upgrade to a G2 later, or -what I ended up doing- getting 2x 30GB OCZ Vertex in RAID0.

fozzy71
09-16-2009, 09:38 AM
Thx for the info. I think I wont mess with my HP much in that case. I may add a 2nd drive for my SQL DB at some point, but if I want a machine with RAID SSDs I think I will just plan on my first ever computer build for a winter project. ;) Then I will have my nice stable HP for my work duties that i can rely upon, and a hi-performance toy. :p

fozzy71
09-16-2009, 11:56 AM
I saw this a while back and almost shat myself.

Samsung SSD Awesomeness (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96dWOEa4Djs)



We took 24 256GB Samsung MLC SSD's and put them in RAID to make this awesome computer!

:eek:

shuman
10-02-2009, 08:55 PM
Fozzy and Patvs,

Hope all is well. When the new Windows 7 comes out, do you know if Holdem Manager will be compatible with it right away? I still haven't gotten my new computer, and I was wondering whether I should wait and a few weeks and just get it with Windows 7 or just get it now with Windows XP and upgrade later.

Thanks.

Patvs
10-02-2009, 09:35 PM
Fozzy and Patvs,

Hope all is well. When the new Windows 7 comes out, do you know if Holdem Manager will be compatible with it right away? I still haven't gotten my new computer, and I was wondering whether I should wait and a few weeks and just get it with Windows 7 or just get it now with Windows XP and upgrade later.

Thanks.


I've been using HEM + Windows 7 for months now, with no problems.
I started with a decent Windows 7 beta (build 7000), --> to Windows 7 Enterprise (build 7100), ---> to the final release Windows 7 Ultimate RTM (build 7600).

There is a chance some prebuild computer (DELL, etc.) prices will drop around october 22 to push Windows 7. But most offer VISTA now with a free Windows 7 upgrade anyway. It really makes no difference, if you're comfortable doing the upgrade. Will you be building your new computer, getting a prebuild DELL, will you install a SSD harddisk yourself, will you wait with the SSD, what's your update?

shuman
10-03-2009, 08:27 PM
Hey Patvs. All right. Sounds good with the Windows 7. Thanks again.

I've been procrastinating with getting the new computer. I don't know why, since my old one stinks when I play poker in that I once I open tables and the HUD appears I'm afraid to try and close the table or stand up from a seat once I sit down on account that the table might freeze. Sometimes the whole computer wil freeze or Full Tilt or HEM will crash too. Real pain. Probably costing me money in that I can't always play as many tables as I would like.

I'm pretty sure I'm going to have either a local computer shop or my friend build a computer for me with an i5 processor, one 80 GB X25-M G2 SSD (for the OS and my SQL), one fast regular hardisk (not sure what size to get yet), lots of RAM, a good video card, and see if they can leave space so that I could add one or two more SSD drives in the future (not sure if this is possible). I don't really know about all the other components that go into building a computer, so I would just defer to them on those parts--unless you have any other suggestions on other components.

I look at it as an investment, so I'm willing to spend the money now to get something that will perform well for a while.

Take care.

Patvs
11-04-2009, 07:55 PM
The X25-X (it will not be called "V") will be the new 40GB Intel SSD.
Its overall performance is disappointing:

X25-X series = 170 MB/s read / 35 MB/s write
X25-M G2 series = 170 MB/s read / 70 MB/s write
X25-E series = 250 MB/s read / 170 MB/s write

The good news is Intel finally released new firmware for the X25 with TRIM support. OCZ released two new firmwares: one with TRIM, and one special firmware for RAID with garbage collecting. (NO Intel/OCZ firmware with TRIM support for RAID as of now)

The 35 MB/s write speeds are really poor for the X25-X. It's a really stupid decision by Intel, they could have easily given it 70 MB/s write speeds. (The OCZ Vertex 30 GB has 220 MB/s read / 130 MB/s write)

---

So nothing has changed. The X25-M G2 is still the best SSD (80/160 GB) and the OCZ Vertex (2x 30 GB) is the best RAID alternative.

WillyT
12-15-2009, 05:26 PM
Hey guys,

Great thread. I learned a lot about what specs to get on my new laptop and will hopefully have a beast of a pokering machine come January.

I also have a question in line with the problems OP was having. My oldest laptop is freezing up when running both HEM (hud and autoimport) and FullTilt at the same time. The problem comes on suddenly though. It'll be running normally and then all of a sudden the spinny thing will be on the screen and nothing will respond.

I've tried all of the suggestions at the beginning of the thread about closing firefox/ie and also of regularly shutting down HEM to make sure I'm retaining enough physical memory. I really doubt that it's a problem of my specs though as the computer is fairly good. I don't recall the speed of the hard drive but it's an Acer just a little over a year old with 4GB ram and running vista and has core2duo processors. I don't notice any spice in the memory usage during the freezes.

Any insights on what to do to clear this up?

FWIW, the database isn't that big on this computer either. Only 200k hands.

Thanks.

edit: the freezes last less than a minute. usually something between 15 and 40 seconds then the computer seems to run normal again for quite some time before it happens again. the autoimport is importing every minute so it seems as though the two should not be related but these freezes don't happen when HEM is not running.

Patvs
12-15-2009, 06:38 PM
-Vista... do you have service pack 1 and 2 installed? (Check in Control Panel--> System)
-Is it a 64 bit version of Vista? (Check in Control Panel--> System)
-Do you use any antivirus/firewall program? Which ones?
-Just for fun.. benchmark the speed of your harddisk with CrystalDiskMark (http://release.crystaldew.info/CrystalDiskMarkSetup)
-In the Control Panel--> Power Options--> set it to HIGH PERFORMANCE
-Turn off indexing and turn off "compress this drive to save disk space" in your harddisk properties.
-Defrag the harddisk with Defraggler

WillyT
12-15-2009, 08:07 PM
-Vista... do you have service pack 1 and 2 installed? (Check in Control Panel--> System)
-Is it a 64 bit version of Vista? (Check in Control Panel--> System)
-Do you use any antivirus/firewall program? Which ones?
-Just for fun.. benchmark the speed of your harddisk with CrystalDiskMark (http://release.crystaldew.info/CrystalDiskMarkSetup)
-In the Control Panel--> Power Options--> set it to HIGH PERFORMANCE
-Turn off indexing and turn off "compress this drive to save disk space" in your harddisk properties.
-Defrag the harddisk with Defraggler
So here's what I get following your instructions:

Service pack 2 is installed.
It is a 32bit version of Vista.
McAffee antivirus and just the standard windows firewall.
I turned indexing off and 'compress this drive to save disk space' was already off.

I used your crystaldiskmark 2.2 and here are the results:

All: 5 100MB C:Hard Disk [NTFS]
Seq: 55.07 53.67
512k: 23.14 36.68
4k: 0.329 1.297
[read] [write] in MB/s

I don't know what to read into those results though.

I also ran defraggler.

What next?

Thanks!

Patvs
12-15-2009, 08:31 PM
-1 First of all... you may have 4 GB of RAM.
But the 32 bit version of Vista.. will only use 3 GB of that.
That's one of the limitations of a 32 bit OS.
So you should consider installing a 64 bit Windows 7 which WILL be able to use all 4 GB RAM.

-2 In McAfee there should be an option to name folders, it should not monitor. Add ProgramFiles/RVG Software and ProgramFiles/PostgreSQL to that list.




All: 5 100MB C:Hard Disk [NTFS]
Seq: 55.07 53.67
512k: 23.14 36.68
4k: 0.329 1.297
[read] [write] in MB/s


These are pretty normal (for a laptop).. and at the same time horrible results. A NEW 7200 RPM harddisk will get Seq 100/100, 512: 70/70, 4K 0.5/0.5. And a SSD can even get 25/25 for the 4K speeds.
Do you know if you have a 5400 RPM or 7200 RPM harddisk?

WillyT
12-16-2009, 09:26 PM
-1 First of all... you may have 4 GB of RAM.
But the 32 bit version of Vista.. will only use 3 GB of that.
That's one of the limitations of a 32 bit OS.
So you should consider installing a 64 bit Windows 7 which WILL be able to use all 4 GB RAM.

-2 In McAfee there should be an option to name folders, it should not monitor. Add ProgramFiles/RVG Software and ProgramFiles/PostgreSQL to that list.



These are pretty normal (for a laptop).. and at the same time horrible results. A NEW 7200 RPM harddisk will get Seq 100/100, 512: 70/70, 4K 0.5/0.5. And a SSD can even get 25/25 for the 4K speeds.
Do you know if you have a 5400 RPM or 7200 RPM harddisk?
I don't know the speed of the hard drive. It's my gf's old lap top and I've been using it to play a bit.

I also couldn't figure out how to get McAffee to ignore some the appropriate folders because the damn thing is in Swiss German. :-/

I haven't tried running HEM again while playing for fear of losing pots due to computer freeze.

Should I go to the micros and see if it's no longer locking up or are there other things I should monitor and try first?

(I'm'a test it out anyway. I'll report back with results.)

Thanks again for all the help.