Support Board
Date/Time: Tue, 06 May 2025 20:16:23 +0000
Not Possible to Achieve Same Performance with SC Timers on Certain Machines
View Count: 192
| [2024-12-04 17:49:34] |
| n8trading - Posts: 44 |
|
Just wanted to offer my experience on this. On my machine, it is not possible, not even close, to achieving the same level of performance in SC using SC Timers vs Windows Timers. There is no doubt that there is some inefficiency going on, at least on certain machines, with the SC Timers. With Windows Timers on my machine, I can use a 10ms global Chart Update Interval and I can clearly see that my charts are updating very quickly which is important for my style of trading, and the UI is very smooth and responsive. Whereas with SC Timers, I have to increase the Chart Update Interval quite a lot (200ms+) to get somewhat smooth UI responsiveness (but it is still choppy), but then I also clearly get much slower updates in my charts. Even at 1000ms+, the UI is still intermittently choppy. So even if you could increase the Chart Update Interval enough to get somewhat smooth UI responsiveness, for me I am getting much slower chart updates which has a negative trading implication. With that being said, I am certain that there are good technical reasons to want to use the SC Timers over Windows Timers. But at this point in practice, the SC Timers are causing some sort of inefficiency on certain machines. And because of potential trading implications, automatically updating the Chart Update Interval is not an appropriate solution in my opinion. My suggestion would be to have an option in SC to use Windows or SC Timers (as SC engineering considered previously), and the default option should likely be Windows Timers at this point in time, until more is learned about why some machines don't like the SC Timers. I'm not a programmer so I'm not sure why the SC Timers would be inefficient, but I suspect that some CPU instruction is getting bogged down when processing the SC Timer events that doesn't cause high CPU usage but still results in poor performance in the app. I've tested between 2706 (Windows Timers) and the latest prereleases (SC Timers). You guys are doing great work and I say all of the above with the utmost respect. This is just one of those tricky situations in software where it's difficult to figure out why some machines don't like it. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2024-12-04 17:52:26
|
| [2024-12-04 18:46:51] |
| Sawtooth - Posts: 4212 |
|
I am experiencing the same effects, and I agree with all you have said.
Date Time Of Last Edit: 2024-12-04 18:47:42
|
To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: