Kalabaza Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 To disable the performance counters I use this app, maybe is the sameone that Jeronimo's talking about...Exctrlst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeronimo Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 Yes Kalabaze that was the tool I have used in the past, thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pallavsuri Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 kalabaza and jeronimo does this have any impact on ram or performance in general? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalabaza Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 When you have the performance counters active, speaking in a operating way, there are little programs (maybe they are threats of the service "System idle process" or "Taskmanager") that are obtaining all the time information and making logs with that information that's relative to the present state of a computer.If you have never used the administrative tools, then you're not going to miss the information that this counters make, in other words, you haven't missed any important funtion on your system. It would be working as it used to be. (with some errors in the event log).It's up to you if you want to disable this counters, but if you don't used them with having them running all the time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeronimo Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 With almost all counters disabled (PerfOS, PerfProc and WmiApRpl are enabled again automatically) I am willing to believe that latency decreases from 92 to 87. However I need to check further: I also noticed System process takes up 10% right after boot (userinit has stopped) and this goes on until about 32 seconds of CPU time have been used with quite some consistent HD activity. This I had not noticed before and I need to check if this is related to the performane counters as this might not be a good sign (need to check and enable them again to see if it is related). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeronimo Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 Ok, now I'm loving it. I read how to use this program exactly today. First thing I tried was disabling storage controllers. iSCSI did not make any difference, but disabling my Jmicron JMB36X controller (on Asus P5B "vanilla") cut down latency to 70us (from 92). Might not be that much, but considering most drivers don't matter altering the setting (Creative Audigy disabled made no difference for example), I consider this quite a big gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pallavsuri Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 @nuhithis is what dpclat does and can be useful inhttp://www.thesycon.de/eng/latency_check.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuhi Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 So it is only for the hardware polling after all. This can't help us with the removals, as far as I can see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pallavsuri Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 (edited) yeah seems mostly to deal with device driver latencies. with vista latencies will be high due to non whql drivers existing currently.probably try and reduce ram foot print in other ways..!waiting for the next big idea !! Edited March 23, 2007 by pallavsuri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeronimo Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Well nuhi, you did the best you could: allow removal off drivers. If no drivers are available for my device(s), then those unkown devices can not cause any additional latency Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z0iid Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Read the articles below. You will have a better understanding of the Vista Kernel and why the latency is going to be higher.http://www.microsoft.com/technet/technetma...el/default.aspxhttp://www.microsoft.com/technet/technetma...el/default.aspxhttp://www.microsoft.com/technet/technetma...el/default.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pallavsuri Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 (edited) @nuhii happened to disable most device drivers in vista e.g. display, network, sound and still the latency was hovering at average of 1000 us with a max of 20000 us (peaks when aero/network/sound drivers are enabled or disabled. These peaks do not show in DPCLAT in XP while changing resolutions/colordepth/enabling or disabling drivers.)Also getting rid of the peaks and troughs of DPCLAT in vista while enabling/disabling aero/other drivers could lead to a more stable vista besides increasing performance.This leads me to believe getting an XP like under 100 us latency score in DPCLAT program could still be a good idea. There is more to the latency than device drivers and hardware.This is the direction which could be explored more. Edited March 29, 2007 by pallavsuri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeronimo Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 On a side note, I did not get DPC Latency Checker working with Vista x64 HP vLite'd by 0.95. This might be because not all hardware is recognized as I need to install my audio drivers, but I do find it strange (it should not make a difference for what it is intended to do). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdogg Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 (edited) trying to get this to get some really large latency. I found a way to tax the program. I think it is finding bad .dll's and drivers and such.As vista gets .dlls removed, some may make this change.Using everest ultimate edition build 3.50.760. I could cause the latency to hit 14614 us. This was done by going to tools and everest cpuid.I could not reproduce this with a newer version, nor any other program I tried.But I guess it goes to show, that vista updates, along with new drivers, and more cleanup, will result in lower numbers.\This was done in windows xp, I don't want to use vista until I get 4GB of ram and a dx 10 video card. Since it still doesn't support 7800 gt's in sli. Edited March 30, 2007 by gdogg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pallavsuri Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 (edited) yeah its still love and hate with vista!xp was love all the way!lolz Edited March 30, 2007 by pallavsuri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now