Support Board
Support Board
Search Board
Control Panel
View My Posts / Threads
Direct MessagesDate/Time: Sat, 04 May 2024 17:28:15 +0000
CPU: More Cores or Stronger Cores
View Count: 7677
| [2018-10-27 00:58:11] |
| drywater0 - Posts: 85 |
|
Long time user about to upgrade trading computer running Windows 10. Use IB data feed and have 25 individual windows open in SC spread across 4 * 4K monitors. Will SC performance benefit more by using a CPU with more cores, or a more powerful CPU with less cores? The choice is: (1) i7-8700K with 6 cores where single core benchmark is 5900 running 3.7 up to 4.7 GHz OR (2) i9-7940X with 14 cores where single core benchmark is 5200 running 3.1 up to 4.3 GHZ Computer will include faster m.2 NVMe SSD and 32GB RAM in both cases. Your guidance is much appreciated. Thanks! |
| [2018-10-27 05:18:28] |
| |
|
In our opinion you are far better off with this: (2) i9-7940X with 14 cores where single core benchmark is 5200 running 3.1 up to 4.3 GHZ 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 |
| [2018-10-27 14:27:53] |
| RonW - Posts: 103 |
|
Question for the OP drywater0: I am also in the middle of looking at upgrading my trading computer which is 6 years old. Would you recommend any of the vendors out there that do custom builds? (Or do you build your own?) Thanks! |
| [2018-10-27 21:27:42] |
| drywater0 - Posts: 85 |
|
Reply to RonW: Haha - you and I take the prize for the oldest trading kit as my machines are 7 and 8 years old respectively:-) I've been considering upgrading for a while, and have narrowed it down to these two vendors: (1) EZ Trading Computers https://eztradingcomputers.net/ (2) Falcon Trading Systems http://falcontradingsystems.com/ My decision is based on a few factors: (a) price (b) performance (c) selection of systems (d) ability to make upgrades to any given system (e) knowledge and helpfulness (f) warranty With regards to warranty, please note that some vendors have different warranty policies for laptops vs. desktops so this could be a deciding factor. Hope this helps get you started down the right path! |
| [2018-10-29 12:19:39] |
| Marmany - Posts: 303 |
|
Some years back I purchased a machine from Falcon which they overclocked to the point that when it was only a couple of years old capacitors on the graphics cards started blowing apart. My current machine is from https://www.scan.co.uk/ Running Sierra with over 100 charts using only 7% CPU and 21% of 16 GB ram. |
| [2018-10-29 15:13:38] |
| drywater0 - Posts: 85 |
|
Thanks for sharing your experiences, 40winks & Marmany. Anyone else that has recently purchased new equipment or has a strong opinion, please add to this thread for the benefit of the community. Appreciate it! 1) There doesn't seem to be much in the way of online reviews for either EZ or Falcon, which makes this process somewhat challenging. In fact, I think much of what is supposed to be "independent" reads more along the lines of "sponsored" reviews / marketing. Based on the link to the ClayTrading article, the "scam" element refers to their products being overpriced relative to DIY or off the shelf solutions. I don't have the technical skill to do my own build and I haven't been able to find anything from the traditional manufacturers (Dell, Sony, Lenovo, etc.) with the specifications that I would like. 2) Falcon does indeed promote their skill in overclocking machines so I can see why that might have happened. Personally, I would rather pay a little more for a higher end machine rather than achieve the performance with overclocking and risk malfunction. Even with the 3 - 5 year warranties, it can be a painful experience to have your main machine out of service. |
| [2018-10-29 15:30:13] |
| user8888 - Posts: 159 |
|
I would go for a dual processor machine, instead of one cpu with 14 cores, two with 8 or so.
|
| [2018-10-29 15:48:16] |
| Xfanman1 - Posts: 320 |
|
I had a long reply written but the last message just killed it. Basically, I've built my own machines since it was possible to do so. With modern CPU's buy Near the top but don't pay the premium for the absolute newest, fastest. You'll notice NO difference and save yourself a lot of money. Last years best CPU/GPU is this years bargain and squeezing an extra couple of FPS out of FarCry is how they evaluate the latest GPU's and that's not what we (traders) do. I'd also question why you need 4-4k monitors to display 25 windows but you know your needs better than I. If you already use 4k monitors and know the extra pixel densisty is beneficial for you then go for it. If you currently use 1080P monitors and "think" that you'll be better off with 4k but at the same screen size then I say think again. I personally would consider using a single 43" 4k Monitor or TV(with the correct Chroma settings) and ditch a second GPU if 43" at 4k gives you enough room for your Charts/Windows. That's the direction I'll be going and I'll get rid of 3 standard 1080P monitors and my main 2k Monitor. You can display a LOT of information on a 4k screen if it's appropriately sized. As an example, many people have the false belief that a 4k 15in laptop is better than a 1080P 15in screen. The reality is that to be able to actually read text on a 15 inch screen (or 21" or 24" or 27") at 4k you have to down rez it by 200-300% so the benefit of 4k is GONE except when viewing photo's and maybe videos. For stock charts there is little to NO value using 4k at screen sizes less than around 32 inch. I use 2k screens at 28 inches and even at that PPI the text can get a little small. Anyway, I'd look at any of the mainstream manufactures and avoid the boutique "trading system" shops. The only issue you MAY have with HP, Dell, Lenova or some other vendors is adding a second GPU if you really do need 4 or more 4k monitors. You or a technically minded friend or family member can easily add another Graphics Card to your system and achieve what you want to do, probably for much less than a "Custom" machine. Good luck with your purchase! --= Scott Date Time Of Last Edit: 2018-10-29 16:04:46
|
| [2018-10-29 19:48:24] |
| User379468 - Posts: 508 |
|
In our opinion you are far better off with this:(2) i9-7940X with 14 cores where single core benchmark is 5200 running 3.1 up to 4.3 GHZ
Extremely surprised with this answer from Engineering that Sierra Charts now has it's heaviest processing loads multi-threaded to the point to efficiently take advantage of 14 slower cores vs 6 faster cores? How many instances would this require to be the case? I personally would consider using a single 43" 4k Monitor or TV(with the correct Chroma settings). You can display a LOT of information on a 4k screen if it's appropriately sized
Going this route as well. What are the correct Chroma settings, any thoughts on going bigger from 43 up to to 55 (vision not the best), any specific model suggestions? Date Time Of Last Edit: 2018-10-29 21:48:42
|
| [2018-10-29 22:42:24] |
| drywater0 - Posts: 85 |
|
Reply to Xfanman / Scott, Thanks so much for the detailed response. Historically I have followed your "near the top" principle with regard to CPU but thought that "this time might be different". In the interest of keeping the request as brief as possible for SC support, I didn't provide all the details of what I plan to run on this new computer. In addition to the described SC setup, I will also be running several desktops in TradeStation and IB TWS for my data feed. During lulls in the market, I spend time analyzing mortgages so also have a number of other programs running (2 * Excel, 2 * web-browsers, documents in Adobe Reader & Word, OneNote, Outlook) at the same time. Historically I have split this workload between my desktop and laptop but it constrains me to using a specific group of screens for a given task. With the advent of desktops within Windows 10, I would like to run everything on a single box and be able to switch desktops views as market conditions and other workload demand. Sometimes I need all the charts placed prominently in front of me while other times they can be safely moved to a monitor that is more above eye level. While I realize that using a single box for all my tasks presents a business risk, I do backup to NAS on a weekly basis. I'm also planning to run a second copy of TradeStation on my laptop as a contingency in the event of a need to trade through a hardware failure with the new desktop. I had a typo and misunderstanding with 4 * 4K. I'm actually running 6 * 30" displays that are 2560 * 1600, which is more than 1080P but less than 4K resolution. I really like your idea of just using a couple 42" displays as it keeps things simple. Unfortunately, I have too much invested in my six monitors to consider a swap at this moment. Having read more details of what I plan to do, would you agree I'm better off with 14 cores (i9-7940x) that are individually 12% slower than the 6 faster cores (i7-8700K)? Appreciate your thoughts. |
| [2018-10-30 00:18:21] |
| U_winks - Posts: 190 |
|
Hi User 379468, ...What are the correct Chroma settings, ...
The required Chroma setting is 4:4:4. Here's the link for more info: https://www.gamesradar.com/how-to-use-a-4k-tv-with-a-pc-and-use-a-pc-monitor-as-a-4k-tv/ Thanks very much for the detailed info, Xfanman.. I'm also keen to know if you've any specific suggestions as well. |
| [2018-10-30 00:19:26] |
| Xfanman1 - Posts: 320 |
|
In response to post #10, you need a TV that can display in Chroma 4:4:4, otherwise text will not be rendered optimally for use as a PC Monitor. As for size, 43 inches is the sweet spot from a PPI or DPI standpoint. Of course you can go larger but as I’m sure you know, the pixel density just goes down to achieve the larger screen size, you don’t get any additional information displayed. Also, going to a 50 or 55” screen might involve more head scanning back and forth to take in the information you need. If you were to mount your large monitor/tv further away than you would view a smaller PC monitor than a larger TV would probably be ideal. If you intend to use it at PC Monitor distances, 24-36 inches, then I’d look seriously at a 43”. The link below will give you some great information about using a TV as a PC monitor and rates them for suitability. https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/best/by-usage/pc-monitor — Scott Date Time Of Last Edit: 2018-10-30 00:27:52
|
| [2018-10-30 00:37:25] |
| Xfanman1 - Posts: 320 |
|
In response to post #11 It sounds like you do keep your system busy. Apart from the incoming data streams and chart displays however, having the extra programs open but not actively simultaneously crunching/calculating data is not really utilizing processing power. Memory yes, cpu cycles no. That said, the “Real” question is how well SC is utilizing multiple cores. The user above asked the SC team this same question. I certainly don’t know the answer so I’d have to defer to their expertise and recommendation. For MY personal use given your same requirements I’d have NO problem using the I7, but I’m a notorious “value” proposition buyer and everyone’s needs are different. :^) — Scott Date Time Of Last Edit: 2018-10-30 14:27:47
|
| [2018-10-30 16:24:47] |
| |
|
Having read more details of what I plan to do, would you agree I'm better off with 14 cores (i9-7940x) that are individually 12% slower than the 6 faster cores (i7-8700K)? Appreciate your thoughts. Performance You will also want to use M.2 drives as well. use 2k screens at 28 inches and even at that PPI the text can get a little small. You can adjust the text size in Sierra Chart:Graphics Settings: Fonts and Text Appearance 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: 2018-10-30 16:25:12
|
| [2018-12-21 18:21:17] |
| JayShea - Posts: 92 |
|
I bought from EZ Computers and I'd give the system a C or D+. Eddie Z is a person but that's not his name. Customer service was spotty. I wouldn't buy from them again. JD |
| [2018-12-21 23:45:39] |
| drywater0 - Posts: 85 |
|
Hi Jay, Thanks for being so candid about your experience with EZ Trading Computers. Would you mind if I Direct Messaged you for more details? Or perhaps, you can comment further in terms of the system you purchased and if this was a recent transaction? Was the actual equipment good quality but the service lacking? Or were you unsatisfied with the actual hardware? Many thanks in advance. |
| [2018-12-22 00:57:18] |
| RonW - Posts: 103 |
|
I just bought my computer from AVA Direct and I recommend them. I priced the same setup at probably 8 different vendors (but not EZ trading). Most vendors seem to price their computers about 40% to 60% above the cost of buying the parts from Amazon or Newegg. (Of course the vendor’s margin is higher because they buy the parts wholesale.) In return for the markup they assemble and test the computer, wrap the individual parts’ warranties with one of their own, and provide phone tech support. AVA Direct and ecollegepc seem to price their computers more like 10-15% above the sum of the parts. I went with AVA Direct because they happened to have my processor in stock. Kyle was knowledgeable and helpful, and they delivered a great product on time. One note... from a price perspective, none of the custom pc guys seem to be competitive with Amazon (for example) on monitors. |
| [2018-12-23 12:26:37] |
| RonW - Posts: 103 |
|
Well those complaints are from 8 and 10 years ago... Anyway, I will reiterate, I am very satisfied with the price, quality and service from AVA Direct. Perhaps I just got lucky. That doesn’t usually happen, though. |
| [2020-06-28 11:40:05] |
| Gianmarco - Posts: 10 |
|
I reopen that thread. Is Sierrachat supporting the amd threadrippers... Or is an intel the better choice for fast chart updating and many windows? |
| [2020-06-29 21:01:08] |
| User275592 - Posts: 97 |
|
Hi, You do not need a threadripper from AMD, except you are doing very unusual things with sierrachart If you have many windows and chart, look for exemple at the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 af + 16 GB ram + ssd this cpu is 6 core 12 Threads |
| [2020-08-14 13:15:44] |
| User690267 - Posts: 13 |
|
Am going to be running a Xeon 10 core (20 thread) with 25 MB cache that is low powered at 2.0ghz. I am looking for most cores per all the advice on the board from Sierra Staff. (PC will be only running SC with 15-20 charts 2 symbols). Is the low clock speed an issue at 10 physical cores ? Date Time Of Last Edit: 2020-08-14 13:29:47
|
| [2020-08-15 15:05:18] |
| rlotz1 - Posts: 11 |
|
Drywater, Slighty off topic,but I use IB data with SC and have been looking at Tradestation. What are your thoughts,experiences with them versus IB or others? You can direct message me or rbob8 AT cox DOT net. Thanks,Rick |
| [2020-09-13 23:22:46] |
| JayShea - Posts: 92 |
|
An update for my post about EZ Trading and the trading computer I bought from them. The C drive recently gave up. Over 6years old. I added a couple of SS drives. The guy that did it for me said the original components in the unit were all high quality. Thought it only fair to make that point. JD |
To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: