2019.08.1316:19:02.912 Core 03 pass 2 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:33.0502019.08.1316:19:02.943 Core 01 pass 0 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:33.1272019.08.1316:19:03.032 Core 02 pass 5 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:33.1662019.08.1316:19:03.238 Core 06 pass 4 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:33.3722019.08.1316:19:03.565 Core 04 pass 3 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:33.7032019.08.1316:19:03.784 Core 11 pass 1 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:33.947
Twelve agents,Tree_Brut_TestPL:
2019.08.1316:24:28.900 Core 12 pass 11 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:43.1682019.08.1316:24:29.595 Core 05 pass 10 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:43.8982019.08.1316:24:29.897 Core 03 pass 2 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:44.6752019.08.1316:24:30.425 Core 10 pass 8 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:44.8062019.08.1316:24:30.488 Core 02 pass 1 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:45.2642019.08.1316:24:30.635 Core 09 pass 5 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:45.4052019.08.1316:24:30.720 Core 08 pass 7 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:45.1222019.08.1316:24:30.721 Core 06 pass 4 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:45.4972019.08.1316:24:31.081 Core 07 pass 9 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:45.4222019.08.1316:24:31.882 Core 01 pass 0 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:46.6602019.08.1316:24:31.992 Core 11 pass 6 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:46.7692019.08.1316:24:32.075 Core 04 pass 3 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:46.8522019.08.1316:24:32.075 Tester optimization finished, total passes 122019.08.1316:24:32.086 Statistics optimization done in1 minutes 47 seconds
2019.08.1316:24:32.086 Statistics shortest pass 0:01:43.168, longest pass 0:01:46.852, average pass 0:01:45.294
Six agents,Tree_Brut_TestPL_F:
2019.08.1316:27:35.754 Core 01 pass 0 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:16.1982019.08.1316:27:35.969 Core 06 pass 5 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:16.4232019.08.1316:27:36.112 Core 04 pass 3 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:16.5772019.08.1316:27:36.246 Core 03 pass 2 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:16.7642019.08.1316:27:36.374 Core 02 pass 1 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:16.9052019.08.1316:27:37.184 Core 05 pass 4 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:17.6642019.08.1316:27:37.184 Tester optimization finished, total passes 62019.08.1316:27:37.194 Statistics optimization done in1 minutes 19 seconds
2019.08.1316:27:37.194 Statistics shortest pass 0:01:16.198, longest pass 0:01:17.664, average pass 0:01:16.755
Twelve agents,Tree_Brut_TestPL_F:
2019.08.1316:36:28.083 Core 11 pass 7 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:18.2792019.08.1316:36:28.473 Core 05 pass 5 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:18.6722019.08.1316:36:28.525 Core 01 pass 0 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:18.7242019.08.1316:36:29.260 Core 04 pass 2 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:19.4592019.08.1316:36:30.106 Core 10 pass 10 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:20.3052019.08.1316:36:30.865 Core 08 pass 6 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:21.0642019.08.1316:36:31.414 Core 06 pass 8 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:21.6132019.08.1316:36:31.556 Core 12 pass 11 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:21.7542019.08.1316:36:31.894 Core 03 pass 4 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:22.0942019.08.1316:36:33.473 Core 02 pass 1 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:23.6732019.08.1316:36:35.412 Core 09 pass 9 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:25.6122019.08.1316:36:35.493 Core 07 pass 3 returned result 1001000.00in0:03:25.6932019.08.1316:36:35.493 Tester optimization finished, total passes 122019.08.1316:36:35.503 Statistics optimization done in3 minutes 26 seconds
2019.08.1316:36:35.503 Statistics shortest pass 0:03:18.279, longest pass 0:03:25.693, average pass 0:03:21.411
Six agents,Tree_Brut_TestPL_F_Fast:
2019.08.1316:39:28.522 Core 02 pass 1 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:16.7552019.08.1316:39:28.549 Core 03 pass 2 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:16.7812019.08.1316:39:29.010 Core 06 pass 5 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:17.2472019.08.1316:39:29.085 Core 01 pass 0 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:17.3752019.08.1316:39:29.607 Core 04 pass 3 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:17.8212019.08.1316:39:29.716 Core 05 pass 4 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:17.9962019.08.1316:39:29.716 Tester optimization finished, total passes 62019.08.1316:39:29.726 Statistics optimization done in0 minutes 18 seconds
2019.08.1316:39:29.726 Statistics shortest pass 0:00:16.755, longest pass 0:00:17.996, average pass 0:00:17.329
Twelve agents, Tree_Brut_TestPL_F_Fast:
2019.08.1316:41:11.638 Core 04 pass 3 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:29.3822019.08.1316:41:11.827 Core 06 pass 5 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:29.5732019.08.1316:41:12.313 Core 02 pass 1 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:30.0602019.08.1316:41:12.826 Core 07 pass 9 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:30.0302019.08.1316:41:12.907 Core 08 pass 6 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:30.1152019.08.1316:41:13.695 Core 01 pass 0 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:31.4422019.08.1316:41:13.927 Core 05 pass 4 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:31.6732019.08.1316:41:13.964 Core 09 pass 7 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:31.2192019.08.1316:41:15.006 Core 03 pass 2 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:32.7522019.08.1316:41:15.381 Core 10 pass 10 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:32.5582019.08.1316:41:16.244 Core 11 pass 8 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:33.4202019.08.1316:41:16.365 Core 12 pass 11 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:33.5362019.08.1316:41:16.365 Tester optimization finished, total passes 122019.08.1316:41:16.376 Statistics optimization done in0 minutes 34 seconds
2019.08.1316:41:16.376 Statistics shortest pass 0:00:29.382, longest pass 0:00:33.536, average pass 0:00:31.313
Turning off hypertrading.
Six agents, Tree_Brut_TestPL:
2019.08.1316:46:06.369 Core 5 pass 2 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:37.2482019.08.1316:46:06.958 Core 1 pass 0 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:37.8612019.08.1316:46:07.391 Core 6 pass 1 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:38.2822019.08.1316:46:07.722 Core 4 pass 4 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:38.6112019.08.1316:46:08.158 Core 3 pass 3 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:39.0452019.08.1316:46:08.305 Core 2 pass 5 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:39.1642019.08.1316:46:08.305 Tester optimization finished, total passes 62019.08.1316:46:08.316 Statistics optimization done in0 minutes 40 seconds
2019.08.1316:46:08.316 Statistics shortest pass 0:00:37.248, longest pass 0:00:39.164, average pass 0:00:38.368
Six agents, Tree_Brut_TestPL_F:
2019.08.1316:53:21.112 Core 6 pass 3 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:10.7892019.08.1316:53:21.517 Core 1 pass 1 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:11.2402019.08.1316:53:21.660 Core 2 pass 0 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:11.5232019.08.1316:53:21.993 Core 4 pass 5 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:11.6482019.08.1316:53:22.054 Core 5 pass 4 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:11.7132019.08.1316:53:22.951 Core 3 pass 2 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:12.7102019.08.1316:53:22.951 Tester optimization finished, total passes 62019.08.1316:53:22.961 Statistics optimization done in1 minutes 13 seconds
2019.08.1316:53:22.961 Statistics shortest pass 0:01:10.789, longest pass 0:01:12.710, average pass 0:01:11.603
Six agents, Tree_Brut_TestPL_F_Fast:
2019.08.1316:54:51.756 Core 3 pass 0 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:14.6782019.08.1316:54:51.810 Core 4 pass 4 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:14.7272019.08.1316:54:51.842 Core 2 pass 3 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:14.7652019.08.1316:54:51.873 Core 5 pass 1 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:14.8812019.08.1316:54:51.939 Core 6 pass 5 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:14.8562019.08.1316:54:51.961 Core 1 pass 2 returned result 1001000.00in0:00:14.9152019.08.1316:54:51.961 Tester optimization finished, total passes 62019.08.1316:54:51.972 Statistics optimization done in0 minutes 15 seconds
2019.08.1316:54:51.972 Statistics shortest pass 0:00:14.678, longest pass 0:00:14.915, average pass 0:00:14.803
Thanks, but add Tree_Brut_TestPL_F and Tree_Brut_TestPL results for evaluation !
compiles of course long))) I only then saw the amount of code!
Tree_Brut_TestPL
4 agents 8 passes
Q 020:33:03.992 Core 3 pass 2 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:28.086
DF 020:33:06.162 Core 2 pass 0 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:30.305
DL 020:33:06.954 Core 1 pass 4 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:31.043
KE 020:33:06.998 Core 4 pass 6 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:31.025
EK 020:34:33.114 Core 3 pass 3 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:29.133
DP 020:34:36.197 Core 2 pass 1 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:30.045
GI 020:34:37.233 Core 4 pass 7 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:30.244
RO 020:34:37.410 Core 1 pass 5 returned result 1001000.00in0:01:30.465
KK 020:34:37.410 Tester optimization finished, total passes 8
GO 020:34:37.420 Statistics optimization done in3 minutes 02 seconds
PF 020:34:37.420 Statistics shortest pass 0:01:28.086, longest pass 0:01:31.043, average pass 0:01:30.043
CF 020:34:37.420 Statistics 8000 frames (3.14 Mb total, 412 bytes per frame) received
RE 020:34:37.421 Statistics local 8 tasks (100%), remote 0 tasks (0%), cloud 0 tasks (0%)
8 agents, 8 passes
EE 020:40:18.642 Core 1 pass 0 returned result 1001000.00in0:02:08.677
JJ 020:40:18.846 Core 8 pass 7 returned result 1001000.00in0:02:08.405
GP 020:40:19.243 Core 6 pass 5 returned result 1001000.00in0:02:08.930
DI 020:40:19.870 Core 2 pass 1 returned result 1001000.00in0:02:09.912
OO 020:40:20.049 Core 4 pass 3 returned result 1001000.00in0:02:10.090
MD 020:40:20.307 Core 3 pass 2 returned result 1001000.00in0:02:10.350
FM 020:40:21.323 Core 7 pass 6 returned result 1001000.00in0:02:10.983
PS 020:40:21.375 Core 5 pass 4 returned result 1001000.00in0:02:11.110
KG 020:40:21.375 Tester optimization finished, total passes 8
NS 020:40:21.386 Statistics optimization done in2 minutes 12 seconds
NJ 020:40:21.386 Statistics shortest pass 0:02:08.405, longest pass 0:02:11.110, average pass 0:02:09.807
RJ 020:40:21.386 Statistics 8000 frames (3.14 Mb total, 412 bytes per frame) received
DQ 020:40:21.386 Statistics local 8 tasks (100%), remote 0 tasks (0%), cloud 0 tasks (0%)
Tree_Brut_TestPL_F
4 agents 8 passes
EI 020:47:44.732 Core 1 pass 0 returned result 1000000.00in0:02:43.903
MN 020:47:46.827 Core 4 pass 6 returned result 1000000.00in0:02:45.985
DG 020:47:49.535 Core 2 pass 2 returned result 1000000.00in0:02:48.698
GM 020:47:52.933 Core 3 pass 4 returned result 1000000.00in0:02:52.631
LR 020:50:13.736 Core 1 pass 1 returned result 1000000.00in0:02:29.026
EH 020:50:19.324 Core 4 pass 7 returned result 1000000.00in0:02:32.515
PQ 020:50:25.653 Core 2 pass 3 returned result 1000000.00in0:02:36.136
CF 020:50:32.200 Core 3 pass 5 returned result 1000000.00in0:02:39.285
ES 020:50:32.200 Tester optimization finished, total passes 8
OG 020:50:32.211 Statistics optimization done in5 minutes 36 seconds
NN 020:50:32.211 Statistics shortest pass 0:02:29.026, longest pass 0:02:52.631, average pass 0:02:41.022
LO 020:50:32.211 Statistics 8000 frames (3.14 Mb total, 412 bytes per frame) received
JJ 020:50:32.211 Statistics local 8 tasks (100%), remote 0 tasks (0%), cloud 0 tasks (0%)
8 agents 8 passes
KG 020:56:41.505 Core 3 pass 2 returned result 1000000.00in0:03:42.298
JL 020:56:42.220 Core 2 pass 1 returned result 1000000.00in0:03:43.017
IE 020:56:42.573 Core 1 pass 0 returned result 1000000.00in0:03:43.367
DK 020:56:43.809 Core 4 pass 3 returned result 1000000.00in0:03:44.609
DP 020:56:44.715 Core 7 pass 6 returned result 1000000.00in0:03:44.424
GF 020:56:45.115 Core 5 pass 4 returned result 1000000.00in0:03:44.974
IO 020:56:45.763 Core 6 pass 5 returned result 1000000.00in0:03:45.587
KD 020:56:46.010 Core 8 pass 7 returned result 1000000.00in0:03:45.727
GE 020:56:46.010 Tester optimization finished, total passes 8
IQ 020:56:46.020 Statistics optimization done in3 minutes 48 seconds
JH 020:56:46.020 Statistics shortest pass 0:03:42.298, longest pass 0:03:45.727, average pass 0:03:44.250
OM 020:56:46.020 Statistics 8000 frames (3.14 Mb total, 412 bytes per frame) received
FL 020:56:46.021 Statistics local 8 tasks (100%), remote 0 tasks (0%), cloud 0 tasks (0%)
4 and 8 agents 27-32% speed difference. I think the problem is in the memory cache, FX is notorious for its cache bottleneck. I can't overclock it unfortunately to check it, my stone has absolutely no memory and northbridge overclocking.
but if you compare f and f-fast versions, the difference is colossal! here they are the wonders of 6.79 times optimization! Or with which version should f-fast be compared?
4 and 8 agents have a speed difference of 27-32 per cent. I think the problem is in memory cache, FX is famous for its cache bottleneck. I can't overclock unfortunately to check it, my stone has absolutely no memory and northbridge overclocking.
I write it off to 4 FPU cores.
Maxim Romanov: but if you compare f and f-fast versions, the difference is colossal! here they are wonders of 6.79 optimization! Or with which version should you compare f-fast?
I agree, it's phenomenal. You compare the versions correctly. Interestingly, the gap from the i7-8700 has shrunk in percentage terms for the older processors.
Most likely, yes. There are a lot of fine tuning parameters in BIOS, but I didn't get into them, I just set the Performance profile.
Then perhaps when hypertrading is switched off the booster will activate faster or at a higher frequency. It would be good to fix the frequency for objective tests.
I added the results of E5-2470 processor - 2 units, though the memory there is DDR3-800, which probably slightly underestimates the potential, but I don't think that significantly - 5% to 10%.
I decided to look at the prices of used components to assess the feasibility of the assembly - the prices are taken from Avito and Aliexpress.
Calculation was done as follows - assembly cost (column "Total") was divided by the number of passes per hour. Filtering is performed for the last but one column since the Expert Advisor is the heaviest one and not all of them, unfortunately, gave the data for the last EA.
It seems that i7-8700 is a really good option for optimization, even taking into account the used market price.
Memory for AMD processors on socket AM3 and AM3+ was taken as special, only for AMD (I use it myself) - frequency 1600.
DDR4 memory frequency 2600 - higher frequency is not commensurable with performance gain and, judging by tests of other sources.
For a little powerful processors can save on the cooler - 500 rubles.
Power supply took 500 watts - this is really enough, if not fake or already dead, but if possible better to get a new, but not top-end, but the price of bu is laid on a very solid option.
The graphics card in all variants is integrated into the processor or mother, except Ryzen, but the plug in 250-300 rubles decided not to take into account as an exception.
Allow the use of cookies to log in to the MQL5.com website.
Please enable the necessary setting in your browser, otherwise you will not be able to log in.
You are signed in. Two-factor authentication has been disabled. Set it up again and scan a new QR code, or continue with two-factor authentication disabled.
So, once again recompiled all three EAs.
Intel Core i7-8700, 3.2GHz, 16Gb RAM, 6 cores.
Hyperthreading enabled.
Six agents,Tree_Brut_TestPL:
Twelve agents,Tree_Brut_TestPL:
Six agents,Tree_Brut_TestPL_F:
Twelve agents,Tree_Brut_TestPL_F:
Six agents,Tree_Brut_TestPL_F_Fast:
Twelve agents, Tree_Brut_TestPL_F_Fast:
Turning off hypertrading.
Six agents, Tree_Brut_TestPL:
Six agents, Tree_Brut_TestPL_F:
Six agents, Tree_Brut_TestPL_F_Fast:
Thanks, but add Tree_Brut_TestPL_F and Tree_Brut_TestPL results for evaluation !
compiles of course long))) I only then saw the amount of code!
Tree_Brut_TestPL
4 agents 8 passes
8 agents, 8 passes
Tree_Brut_TestPL_F
4 agents 8 passes
8 agents 8 passes
4 and 8 agents 27-32% speed difference. I think the problem is in the memory cache, FX is notorious for its cache bottleneck. I can't overclock it unfortunately to check it, my stone has absolutely no memory and northbridge overclocking.
So, once again recompiled all three EAs.
Figures have dropped a bit - took them to the table for now. Does the computer enable auto-boosting during optimization?
4 and 8 agents have a speed difference of 27-32 per cent. I think the problem is in memory cache, FX is famous for its cache bottleneck. I can't overclock unfortunately to check it, my stone has absolutely no memory and northbridge overclocking.
I write it off to 4 FPU cores.
but if you compare f and f-fast versions, the difference is colossal! here they are wonders of 6.79 optimization! Or with which version should you compare f-fast?
I agree, it's phenomenal. You compare the versions correctly. Interestingly, the gap from the i7-8700 has shrunk in percentage terms for the older processors.
Current data - no test result in blue.
The E5-2670 2pc is now clearly ahead of the i7-8700, which makes sense.
The figures have dropped slightly - took them into a table for now. Does the computer enable automatic boosting during optimisation?
Most likely, yes. There are a lot of fine-tuning parameters in the BIOS, but I didn't go into them, just set the Performance profile.
Most likely, yes. There are a lot of fine tuning parameters in BIOS, but I didn't get into them, I just set the Performance profile.
Then perhaps when hypertrading is switched off the booster will activate faster or at a higher frequency. It would be good to fix the frequency for objective tests.
I added the results of E5-2470 processor - 2 units, though the memory there is DDR3-800, which probably slightly underestimates the potential, but I don't think that significantly - 5% to 10%.
I decided to look at the prices of used components to assess the feasibility of the assembly - the prices are taken from Avito and Aliexpress.
Calculation was done as follows - assembly cost (column "Total") was divided by the number of passes per hour. Filtering is performed for the last but one column since the Expert Advisor is the heaviest one and not all of them, unfortunately, gave the data for the last EA.
It seems that i7-8700 is a really good option for optimization, even taking into account the used market price.
Memory for AMD processors on socket AM3 and AM3+ was taken as special, only for AMD (I use it myself) - frequency 1600.
DDR4 memory frequency 2600 - higher frequency is not commensurable with performance gain and, judging by tests of other sources.
For a little powerful processors can save on the cooler - 500 rubles.
Power supply took 500 watts - this is really enough, if not fake or already dead, but if possible better to get a new, but not top-end, but the price of bu is laid on a very solid option.
The graphics card in all variants is integrated into the processor or mother, except Ryzen, but the plug in 250-300 rubles decided not to take into account as an exception.
Looks like the topic is rotting, I'll drop the file I used to count and draw the tables in excel.