Support Board
Date/Time: Sat, 18 Jan 2025 19:22:13 +0000
[User Discussion] - What's new in x64 Sierra?
View Count: 1908
| [2018-02-24 15:02:27] |
| User630719 - Posts: 11 |
|
Hi, I am wondering what is the real benefit of the new 64bit version of Sierra? When is there going to be a multicore support? Thank you for your answer. |
| [2018-02-24 16:41:48] |
| jenda3 - Posts: 21 |
|
Hi, I have simmilary question. I did some performance BackTest with mine AOS in sierra chart and there isn't diffrence between sierra x86 and new x64. I did this test from 2017-01-24 to 2018-01-28 in 2 pricechange chart. And both tests take same time. I expected, that x64 will be faster than x86. What is better in x64?
|
| [2018-02-24 18:09:17] |
| Xfanman1 - Posts: 320 |
|
64bit will allow the software to access more available memory than 32bit software (limited to 4gigs on 32bit versions of Windows) when run on 64bit operating systems. It does not necessarily mean it will run faster. If you weren’t running into memory access issues with Sierra Chart in the 32bit version than the 64bit version isn’t going to be a noticeable performance improvement for you. If you were running a demanding load requiring access to more than 4 gigs of memory than I would think this will be a huge potential improvement. I understand there are security benefits to 64bit also but I’m not a programmmer and I don’t know much about that aspect of it. Scott |
| [2018-02-25 07:20:53] |
| User630719 - Posts: 11 |
|
Well I ran really difficult and demanding backtests filled with the bunch of custom studies and the system never took more than 1.5 GB so this make no sense.
|
| [2018-02-25 08:33:41] |
| jenda3 - Posts: 21 |
|
I have the same experience as User630719
|
| [2018-02-25 13:52:39] |
| Zdislav - Posts: 73 |
|
My experience is that when I started the same chartbook with backtest set up in it in both versions simultaneously, the x64 version ended while x86 version was at nearly 80%. So it was a little bit faster. Both versions took the same system resources from processor and memory usage. I set up just a quick backtesting environment from native SC functions and two of mine linear regresion channels. I used Trading system based on alert conditions and set the period of last 30 days on a minute chart. I will do more rigorous testing on my new comp when it arrives. It is a pitty that SC can use only one core for calculations. New 6-core processors working at higher frequencies are very promissing but sadly the limit is set in the software. I can understand some problems related with splitting calculation processes of continuous time lines but there exists some reasonable solution to this for sure (from efficiency prospective). Imho, the main competitor of SC in the field of retail trading is NT. When proper multicore support is added it will be very serious advantage even compared to many other platforms. |
| [2018-02-25 20:24:35] |
| |
|
I can understand some problems related with splitting calculation processes of continuous time lines but there exists some reasonable solution to this for sure (from efficiency prospective). There is no reasonable solution. This is pure fantasy.It is already complicated enough to put study calculations on another thread. Perhaps one day that might occur, but it is not anything that would come in the next 2-3 years. You just need to run multiple instances of Sierra Chart to distribute processing load. Sierra Chart does use multiple threads already though: Performance Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2018-02-25 20:27:18
|
To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: