xcontrol: performance question (again)

[lavalava]

lol, that's not a lot but just barely enough to run vista.  The base stuffs already consumed 40% of my memory right off the bat, so the leaves me with only 60% overhead to play around with other applications like LV.  Throw LV in there and it drops me down 45% of free overhead.  And I can't get more rams for my x38 chipset either because they max out at 8GB.

[Intaris]

---

lavalava wrote:

Here ya go, take a look at my changes to your codes.  I got all 3 of them to running at about the same resource based on what I told you in the last post (all 0% CPU consumption, before was 6% for xcontrol case).  Keep in mind, I'm running Vista x64, Intel Quadcore 45nm, that's 4 processors running at 3.65Ghz ea, & 8GB RAM.  Even if you have a slower system, you should still see a whole lot better performance than before.

---

If it wasn't for Vista, I'd be jealous right now!

Shane.

[lavalava]

hah, I hate Vista too but I only use it because of windows media center.  Otherwise, I would have sticked to XP x64 and that is what we use at work.  I work with a bunch of guys who hate changes.

[FraggerFox]

try optimizing Vista by googling for its tips and tricks. It worked for me 🙂

[soranito]

hi lavalava,

finally I found the time to look at the posts.  I checked out your solution and was a bit surprised, that it really had quite less cpu load. Then I tried the solution  I posted first again and it was as fast as yours. Hmmm, I don't have to understand everything.

But still, both XControls are about 10 times more cpu-consuming then the queue/subvi-approach.

I guess I have to accept, that xcontrols are slow and IMHO not thought through completely (yet).

soranito