If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
What hardware to best speed up processing large Word file?
My genealogy program will create a very large file for Word that I
have been saving as a PDF for distribution at the family reunion each year. The file is currently over 3000 pages. If I try to do any editing in Word, it takes forever. Is there any way to change hardware or add something to make this work reasonalby fast? I currently have Word in my C Drive which is a Samsung 500 GB SSD. I plan on replacing it with a Samsung 1 TB nvme. The genealogy program runs on the C drive also, but the data is on a HDD. When I add the nvme, should I put the data on the nvme, or would it be better to put it on the repurposed 500 GB SSD, or does it make any difference? TIA for any suggestions. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
What hardware to best speed up processing large Word file?
Charlie Hoffpauir wrote:
My genealogy program will create a very large file for Word that I have been saving as a PDF for distribution at the family reunion each year. The file is currently over 3000 pages. If I try to do any editing in Word, it takes forever. Is there any way to change hardware or add something to make this work reasonalby fast? I currently have Word in my C Drive which is a Samsung 500 GB SSD. I plan on replacing it with a Samsung 1 TB nvme. The genealogy program runs on the C drive also, but the data is on a HDD. When I add the nvme, should I put the data on the nvme, or would it be better to put it on the repurposed 500 GB SSD, or does it make any difference? TIA for any suggestions. Not sure why you need to export the data from your genealolgy program to Word (.doc, .docx) format to edit it. Seems you need better geneaology software with more robust editing options for commenting on each node (person). When documents get huge, yep, Word will get slow. The premise is that if you are going to use a word processor for a huge project, you break it up into smaller sections, and use a master document to link them together. When I first starting working in a QA group in a mid-size company, their Testing Plan was all of 28 pages. It was up to the expertise of the tester to know how to test the software, and very little got documented about what feature(s) to test, prerequisites, setup, dependencies on other test, the test procedure (that noobs could understand, and without any gotcha conditions after a test was performed but with such conditions setup or explained beforehand), and the expected results, comments, and linkage to a matrix showing which components of the software got tested by which tests. When documentation got passed to me (because I was already expounding on the test docs), it inflated into a 4000-page document. Some components were huge, so they got broken into smaller components to be manageable by whomever was the supervisor for that section. Master document mode was the only way to handle the compendium of all the test docs that aggregated into a huge overall test plan. https://www.dummies.com/software/mic...ument-feature/ https://www.officetooltips.com/word_...ment_view.html However, if your current genealogy software just dumps everything into one huge .doc[x] file then that's what you are stuck with. Why not use genealogy software that builds a tree diagram along with notes about each node (person)? Use software that exports in GEDCOM format which is usable in many other genealogy software, so you don't restrict what software that others may choose. You can see several listed and compared at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...alogy_software Adding or substituting faster hardware does not obviate the underlying cause for the slowdown in document handling. Faster now just means the document(s) will become slow later as you keep enlarging one huge document file. NVMe SSDs are faster than SATA SSDs, but they can only help some regarding slow processes. The genealogy program will load faster on the C: drive that becomes an NVMe drive, but your huge doc file is still back on the slow HDD. Since you don't mention upping the CPU, a program that loads faster (but runs the same in system RAM), editing the huge doc file on the HDD will not get sped up by going with a faster SSD drive. Presumably you'll keep the SATA SSD drive to where you can store some data files, like the huge doc file. If you start putting lots of doc files on the NVMe drive that get edited a lot or incur huge write volume, make sure to up the overprovisioning of the NVMe SSD to prolong its lifespan. SSDs are self-destructive drives hence the need for overprovisioning (remapping space) and wear-leveling to move the writes around to reduce oxide stress on the same junction which eventually kills the junction. Even if you use the old SATA SSD for some doc files, if you edit them a lot or generate a lot of write traffic on the drive, you should up its overprovisioning. Lots of info on the Internet about how and why to overprovision SSDs, and the software that came with the SSD should have an overprovisioning option. You don't mention what OS you are using. Are you sure the SATA SSD, and later the NVMe SSD, are aligned? Not important for HDDs, but boosts performance for SSDs. https://www.google.com/search?q=ssd%20alignment The CPU can be a limiting factor, but mobos have a max speed they'll support. Without knowing the motherboard brand and model, and knowing if you're willing to spend a lot more to get incremental performance boost from the CPU, no one can tell if your setup can make use of a faster CPU. Memory constraints may be another limiting factor; i.e., not enough memory to load the complete document into system memory, so paging (swapping to the much slower drive, even for SSD or NVMe compared to system RAM) is needed to create a sliding view of the document. More memory means less or no paging. Also, you might be using 32-bit Windows with 32-bit MS Office instead of 64-bit Windows with 64-bit MS Office. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
What hardware to best speed up processing large Word file?
Charlie Hoffpauir wrote:
My genealogy program will create a very large file for Word that I have been saving as a PDF for distribution at the family reunion each year. The file is currently over 3000 pages. If I try to do any editing in Word, it takes forever. Is there any way to change hardware or add something to make this work reasonalby fast? I currently have Word in my C Drive which is a Samsung 500 GB SSD. I plan on replacing it with a Samsung 1 TB nvme. The genealogy program runs on the C drive also, but the data is on a HDD. When I add the nvme, should I put the data on the nvme, or would it be better to put it on the repurposed 500 GB SSD, or does it make any difference? TIA for any suggestions. Decades ago, we noticed Word was compute-bound. A faster processor might speed it up. (Speed = CLK * IPC, and each generation of processor adds about 10% to 20% IPC or so. The clock CLK being a bit stagnant.) IPC is Instructions Per Clock, the number of instructions that can be "retired" in a single clock cycle, about 4 instructions per clock or so at the moment. That's a measure of the "burst rate" inside the CPU. The 5950X is 4.9GHz, but the 5800X at 4.7GHz is a better deal from a price perspective. The Zen3 processors were more or less a paper launch, and they're hard to find. Just as two batches of video cards (AMD had a batch, NVidia had a batch) are also unobtanium. The CPU World site puts a table at the bottom, with devices for the same socket listed, so you can compare them. https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Zen/A...9%205950X.html https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Zen/A...7%205800X.html Numerically on clock rate, you could select an Intel one, but the IPC might be slightly less. (Cheaper, still good for Word) https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_...i7-10700K.html (Playing the same game as AMD and bumping the clock a hair...) https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Core_...i9-10900K.html But this is Word we're talking about, and 3000 pages *is* a lot of pages. Even my preferred editor would be slow and unruly at that size. Part of the delay can be working out pagination. It would be worse, if it was 3000 pages and every page had a picture of a family member in it :-) Back in the day, when some of the enthusiast sites wanted to bench a processor, they would use a Word scrolling test as their benchmark :-) That's how you know how pathetic Word is, when they're using it as a benchmark like that. Back then, a good video card did help, because there were some really bad video cards back then (unaccelerated). ******* With modern large machines, once the file is read from end to end (at the very first thing), now the file is cached in RAM and there is no reason to touch the disk again until it is time to do a save. Scrolling the document, should consult the System Read Cache in memory. As you scroll, the program will stop every once in a while and update the screen. If the program was clever, it could give a good deal of the rendering work to the video card. Modern OSes do some of their font rendering on the video card, rather than the CPU drawing each letter. But I don't follow Word enough, to be able to tell you how the latest version does things. The thing is, video cards have 2D acceleration (BitBLT) and 3D acceleration (as used in gaming). Nobody really benchmarks BitBLT any more, and it's quite possible there is no advancement at all in 2D. And it's just possible that a few things Word does, would be 2D functions. As a result of that, it would be disingenuous to promise that a new video card would do a damn thing. It might not. This might suggest no difference between a monster video card and a cheaper one (they could have the same 2D speed). The Intel processors above have a graphics chip inside them, so initially you don't even need to plug in a video card. (AMD has chips like that too, with a GPU inside, but they probably don't clock at 4.9GHz. AMD CPUs that have a GPU inside are called "APU", not that this is a big deal.) But a processor is going to help a bit. Just don't expect hardware to wring 10X the speed out of anything. Those kinds of improvements stopped years ago. But if your machine is frightfully bad, well, a new CPU is not going to hurt. And with a new CPU comes new motherboard and new RAM. The RAM speed now is up to 3200 or 3600. Currently the market is a bit skewed by availability issues. And so we can't just arbitrarily select the thing we really want, and expect to be able to buy it. And some of the problem is old-fashioned scalping. On the video card front, the rumor is, some "Bitcoin people" bought $175,000,000 worth of video cards, and it is preventing game players from buying the newest video cards. Since CPUs aren't nearly as attractive, I don't think anyone did that to the CPU products. Now, let's compare our CPUs. This site would list your existing CPU, so you can compare to the new ones, and get some idea of the level of improvement. I picked the single threaded bench, because for ordinary applications it is the best indicator of relative performance. The Intel runs a higher clock, but the IPC is lower, and so the bench value is a bit lower. It wasn't that long ago, that previous generations of AMD had lower IPC. That's why AMD is on my chart this year :-) And for a laugh, when I don't know an OPs processor, I put my own pathetic one for comparison. That's the E8400 I'm typing on. Part of the speed decline on mine, is slow RAM. https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html Bench AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 3400/4900 MHz 16C/32T 3,518 $799.99 NotAvail AMD Ryzen 7 5800X 3800/4700 MHz 8C/16T 3,515 $449.99 NotAvail === Intel i9-10900K 3700/5200 MHz 10C/20T 3,173 $529.89 Maybe Intel i7-10700K 3800/5100 MHz 8C/16T 3,086 $319.99 Maybe E8400 3000 MHz 2C/2T 1,242 cheep (Used) So that shows, if I wanted a straight line improvement in performance, a 5800X would be pretty close to 3X improvement on what I've got. If you browse computers at the computer store, you won't get the fastest ones there. You'll probably have to do some Internet browsing if you want something decent. The core count on the processors is mostly irrelevant for Word. For Excel, Excel has some parallelism in execution, and might use two cores (2C worth) when recalculating a spreadsheet. And it's applications like 7ZIP file compression that really like cores. If we were spending all day compressing files, then the eight hundred dollar processor would be a bit better. If you play games, the multiple cores (C) helps. THe (T) part measures Hyperthreading, which helps 7ZIP a bit. But it's the C number that bears most of the weight when doing 7ZIP (or RAR) compression. For your Word purposes, the following table is almost completely irrelevant. But is included to explain where the stupid pricing comes from. You can see my little processor is dwarfed by these monsters, on 7ZIP. https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html (Multi-thread bench) (where cores count) Bench AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 3400/4900 MHz 16C/32T 46,243 $799.99 NotAvail AMD Ryzen 7 5800X 3800/4700 MHz 8C/16T 28,761 $449.99 NotAvail === Intel i9-10900K 3700/5200 MHz 10C/20T 24,110 $529.89 Maybe Intel i7-10700K 3800/5100 MHz 8C/16T 19,630 $319.99 Maybe E8400 3000 MHz 2C/2T 1,155 cheep (Used) Poor at 7ZIP Paul |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
What hardware to best speed up processing large Word file?
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 02:21:07 -0500, Paul
wrote: Charlie Hoffpauir wrote: My genealogy program will create a very large file for Word that I have been saving as a PDF for distribution at the family reunion each year. The file is currently over 3000 pages. If I try to do any editing in Word, it takes forever. Is there any way to change hardware or add something to make this work reasonalby fast? I currently have Word in my C Drive which is a Samsung 500 GB SSD. I plan on replacing it with a Samsung 1 TB nvme. The genealogy program runs on the C drive also, but the data is on a HDD. When I add the nvme, should I put the data on the nvme, or would it be better to put it on the repurposed 500 GB SSD, or does it make any difference? TIA for any suggestions. Thanks for the suggestions from both Paul and Vangard.... but I've hit on a bit of a problem since I posted. I got the Samsung 1TB drive, but failed to get it working. Installed, my computer recognizes it. Sees it on ports 4 & 5. After cloning it shows up in both Win 10 Computer Management and in Hard disk Sentinel. but if I remove the 500 GB SSD I cloned from, I can't get the BIOS to find the 1 TB as a boot device. BTW the computer is a homebuilt Gigabyte MB (GS-Z97X-UD3H-BK), processor is an Intel I-5, don't remember exact model, and there's 16 GB of RAM.OS is Win 10, latest updates. I tried cloning from the 500 GB to the 1 TB drive, and once cloned, the computer fails to recoginize it as a boot device. I've had no problem at all cloning the 500 GB drive.... done it several times without problem using HDClone. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
What hardware to best speed up processing large Word file?
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 20:05:57 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:
Charlie Hoffpauir wrote: My genealogy program will create a very large file for Word that I have been saving as a PDF for distribution at the family reunion each year. The file is currently over 3000 pages. If I try to do any editing in Word, it takes forever. Is there any way to change hardware or add something to make this work reasonalby fast? I currently have Word in my C Drive which is a Samsung 500 GB SSD. I plan on replacing it with a Samsung 1 TB nvme. The genealogy program runs on the C drive also, but the data is on a HDD. When I add the nvme, should I put the data on the nvme, or would it be better to put it on the repurposed 500 GB SSD, or does it make any difference? TIA for any suggestions. Not sure why you need to export the data from your genealolgy program to Word (.doc, .docx) format to edit it. Seems you need better geneaology software with more robust editing options for commenting on each node (person). Actually, I don't export to a word file because it goes so slow, however, I'd "like" to be able to do that because I'd like to tweak the file to include things that the genealogy program doesn't have. The genealogy program is RM 7, and the file is a "Book" consisting of primarily an output from the program of a narative descendant report, with an index, TOC, etc. I'd like to add a Word document of a timeline that I have, but the program doesn't allow that. I've successfully used the export to a Word file for a smaller "Book" consisting of only the first 4 generations of the same descendant report. Then edited the file in Word by adding the timeline as another chapter of the book, and re-indexing in Word to amke everything work together. Makes for a nice book only 200 or so pages. When documents get huge, yep, Word will get slow. The premise is that if you are going to use a word processor for a huge project, you break it up into smaller sections, and use a master document to link them together. When I first starting working in a QA group in a mid-size company, their Testing Plan was all of 28 pages. It was up to the expertise of the tester to know how to test the software, and very little got documented about what feature(s) to test, prerequisites, setup, dependencies on other test, the test procedure (that noobs could understand, and without any gotcha conditions after a test was performed but with such conditions setup or explained beforehand), and the expected results, comments, and linkage to a matrix showing which components of the software got tested by which tests. When documentation got passed to me (because I was already expounding on the test docs), it inflated into a 4000-page document. Some components were huge, so they got broken into smaller components to be manageable by whomever was the supervisor for that section. Master document mode was the only way to handle the compendium of all the test docs that aggregated into a huge overall test plan. https://www.dummies.com/software/mic...ument-feature/ https://www.officetooltips.com/word_...ment_view.html I'll look into that, but since I need for the index to be an index of hte entire book, I don't think breaking it into separate components would work, especially since most of the book is the very large descendant report. However, if your current genealogy software just dumps everything into one huge .doc[x] file then that's what you are stuck with. Why not use genealogy software that builds a tree diagram along with notes about each node (person)? Use software that exports in GEDCOM format which is usable in many other genealogy software, so you don't restrict what software that others may choose. You can see several listed and compared at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...alogy_software Well I've tried all the present genealogy programs, and now defunct onles like Roots and TMG, and none seem to offer anything better than what I have. cause for the slowdown in document handling. Faster now just means the document(s) will become slow later as you keep enlarging one huge document file. NVMe SSDs are faster than SATA SSDs, but they can only help some regarding slow processes. The genealogy program will load faster on the C: drive that becomes an NVMe drive, but your huge doc file is still back on the slow HDD. Since you don't mention upping the CPU, a program that loads faster (but runs the same in system RAM), editing the huge doc file on the HDD will not get sped up by going with a faster SSD drive. Presumably you'll keep the SATA SSD drive to where you can store some data files, like the huge doc file. If you start putting lots of doc files on the NVMe drive that get edited a lot or incur huge write volume, make sure to up the overprovisioning of the NVMe SSD to prolong its lifespan. SSDs are self-destructive drives hence the need for overprovisioning (remapping space) and wear-leveling to move the writes around to reduce oxide stress on the same junction which eventually kills the junction. Even if you use the old SATA SSD for some doc files, if you edit them a lot or generate a lot of write traffic on the drive, you should up its overprovisioning. Lots of info on the Internet about how and why to overprovision SSDs, and the software that came with the SSD should have an overprovisioning option. You don't mention what OS you are using. Are you sure the SATA SSD, and later the NVMe SSD, are aligned? Not important for HDDs, but boosts performance for SSDs. Yes, it's Win 10 latest update, and SSDs are aligned. https://www.google.com/search?q=ssd%20alignment The CPU can be a limiting factor, but mobos have a max speed they'll support. Without knowing the motherboard brand and model, and knowing if you're willing to spend a lot more to get incremental performance boost from the CPU, no one can tell if your setup can make use of a faster CPU. I though maybe going to a faster CPU. I have an Intel I5. As I mentioned in another post, I don't recall exactly what model. My MB will go up to an I7 I think. Memory constraints may be another limiting factor; i.e., not enough memory to load the complete document into system memory, so paging (swapping to the much slower drive, even for SSD or NVMe compared to system RAM) is needed to create a sliding view of the document. More memory means less or no paging. Also, you might be using 32-bit Windows with 32-bit MS Office instead of 64-bit Windows with 64-bit MS Office. I could easily add another 2 sticks of RAM to go to 32 GB if that would help. I think Word is the 64-bit version. I have Office 365, is there a way to check to make sure? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
What hardware to best speed up processing large Word file?
Charlie Hoffpauir wrote:
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 02:21:07 -0500, Paul wrote: Charlie Hoffpauir wrote: My genealogy program will create a very large file for Word that I have been saving as a PDF for distribution at the family reunion each year. The file is currently over 3000 pages. If I try to do any editing in Word, it takes forever. Is there any way to change hardware or add something to make this work reasonalby fast? I currently have Word in my C Drive which is a Samsung 500 GB SSD. I plan on replacing it with a Samsung 1 TB nvme. The genealogy program runs on the C drive also, but the data is on a HDD. When I add the nvme, should I put the data on the nvme, or would it be better to put it on the repurposed 500 GB SSD, or does it make any difference? TIA for any suggestions. Thanks for the suggestions from both Paul and Vangard.... but I've hit on a bit of a problem since I posted. I got the Samsung 1TB drive, but failed to get it working. Installed, my computer recognizes it. Sees it on ports 4 & 5. After cloning it shows up in both Win 10 Computer Management and in Hard disk Sentinel. but if I remove the 500 GB SSD I cloned from, I can't get the BIOS to find the 1 TB as a boot device. BTW the computer is a homebuilt Gigabyte MB (GS-Z97X-UD3H-BK), processor is an Intel I-5, don't remember exact model, and there's 16 GB of RAM.OS is Win 10, latest updates. I tried cloning from the 500 GB to the 1 TB drive, and once cloned, the computer fails to recoginize it as a boot device. I've had no problem at all cloning the 500 GB drive.... done it several times without problem using HDClone. What is the model number of the Samsung drive ? What is the model number of the original drive ? I assume these are SATA. But maybe you've got your NVMe already ? What you can do, is with the Samsung connected, boot a Macrium Rescue CD and use the "Boot Repair" option in the optional menu. You want *only* the drive that won't boot, connected during this exercise. That assures that when Macrium scans the SATA drive, it only "glues together" the boot materials from inside that drive, and does not glue every blasted drive in the computer into some BCD file. --- DVD drive --- Macrium Rescue CD --- SATA HDD ---- Samsung 1TB -----------------/ Other ports empty Sometimes what happens during cloning, is the boot materials aren't completely copied. The Rescue CD can fix that. But of course, it's not a SATA drive, this new thing, so now we move on. ******* I have the PDF manual on disk here. It says: "Use of licensed AMI UEFI BIOS" Since the original drive booted, the BIOS should already have the correct settings for doing a good job. CSM Support Enables or disables UEFI CSM (Compatibility Support Module) to support a legacy PC boot process. Always Enables UEFI CSM. (Default) === boots MSDOS era media Never Disables UEFI CSM and supports UEFI BIOS boot process only. Boot Mode Selection Allows you to select which type of operating system to boot. UEFI and Legacy Allows booting from operating systems that support legacy option ROM or UEFI option ROM. (Default) === Legacy Only Allows booting from operating systems that only support legacy Option ROM. UEFI Only Allows booting from operating systems that only support UEFI Option ROM. Storage Boot Option Control (May need adjustment, not sure...) (M.2 PCIe may need UEFI first) M.2 PCIE SSD RAID Mode Enables or disables Intel Rapid Storage Technology Sometimes, if you're booting from NVMe materials, there's some storage ROM of some sort that has to be enabled. Other PCI Device ROM Priority Allows you to select whether to enable the UEFI or Legacy option ROM for the PCI device controller other than the LAN, storage device, and graphics controllers. Legacy OpROM Enables legacy option ROM only. UEFI OpROM Enables UEFI option ROM only. (Default) === This item is configurable only when CSM Support is set to Always. You can see someone had your problem here, and this failure pattern is a familiar one. https://forums.tomshardware.com/thre...3h-bk.3416549/ My board is Asus, and some of the terminology is slightly different. And that's why searching the PDF manual isn't digging up any hits. "check in the bios the SATA Controller is set to AHCI Mode " Which should have been the case anyway. There's some detail like that, that NVMe only work with certain modes, and only then when the BIOS is mature enough to not have bugs. "The BIOS update was indeed the issue. I had read through the update descriptions but didn't see where they mentioned fixing a boot from an M.2 drive. Could have missed it. I have to give them credit - the update process is SO much easier than the last time I did that a decade or two ago. Wow... The SATA controller was already set to AHCI." Another breadcrumb. This is most likely to be the problem. "Z97X Gaming5 Rev 1.0 bios F7 here. Issues like described with hc310 6TB disk. The solution for me was to enable Intel Rapid Start Technology and then it gave option under it to choose the controller to be used. I choose the other one that was available - "PCIE AHCI/NVME Controller" and system boots just fine. My disk with system is plextor ssd and HGST is the main storage." RAID and AHCI typically share the same driver file package. The RAID (RST) seems to recognize the PCIe interface to the NVMe device. And perhaps it needs to be turned on so the NVMe can be seen at boot, via the RAID ROM. And the option ROMs have to be turned on, for this to work. You can't get to the RAID window, unless the RAID ROM is turned on first, save, then enter the BIOS and press the magic key combo to get the RAID screen up. Now you know why most NVMe owners are bald from the hair loss. HTH, Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
What hardware to best speed up processing large Word file?
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 12:08:40 -0500, Paul
wrote: Charlie Hoffpauir wrote: On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 02:21:07 -0500, Paul wrote: Charlie Hoffpauir wrote: My genealogy program will create a very large file for Word that I have been saving as a PDF for distribution at the family reunion each year. The file is currently over 3000 pages. If I try to do any editing in Word, it takes forever. Is there any way to change hardware or add something to make this work reasonalby fast? I currently have Word in my C Drive which is a Samsung 500 GB SSD. I plan on replacing it with a Samsung 1 TB nvme. The genealogy program runs on the C drive also, but the data is on a HDD. When I add the nvme, should I put the data on the nvme, or would it be better to put it on the repurposed 500 GB SSD, or does it make any difference? TIA for any suggestions. Thanks for the suggestions from both Paul and Vangard.... but I've hit on a bit of a problem since I posted. I got the Samsung 1TB drive, but failed to get it working. Installed, my computer recognizes it. Sees it on ports 4 & 5. After cloning it shows up in both Win 10 Computer Management and in Hard disk Sentinel. but if I remove the 500 GB SSD I cloned from, I can't get the BIOS to find the 1 TB as a boot device. BTW the computer is a homebuilt Gigabyte MB (GS-Z97X-UD3H-BK), processor is an Intel I-5, don't remember exact model, and there's 16 GB of RAM.OS is Win 10, latest updates. I tried cloning from the 500 GB to the 1 TB drive, and once cloned, the computer fails to recoginize it as a boot device. I've had no problem at all cloning the 500 GB drive.... done it several times without problem using HDClone. What is the model number of the Samsung drive ? 970 EVO Model M2-V7E1T0 What is the model number of the original drive ? 860 EVo Model MZ-76E500 I assume these are SATA. But maybe you've got your NVMe already ? Yes, I cloned to 500GB to the 1TB, then found it wouldn't boot, and couldn't locate it in BIOS to set it as boot drive. What you can do, is with the Samsung connected, boot a Macrium Rescue CD and use the "Boot Repair" option in the optional menu. You want *only* the drive that won't boot, connected during this exercise. That assures that when Macrium scans the SATA drive, it only "glues together" the boot materials from inside that drive, and does not glue every blasted drive in the computer into some BCD file. --- DVD drive --- Macrium Rescue CD --- SATA HDD ---- Samsung 1TB -----------------/ Other ports empty Sometimes what happens during cloning, is the boot materials aren't completely copied. The Rescue CD can fix that. I'll ry that , but first I have a "new" system image created by Windows Backup, and System Repair disk. (Both cerated using the Win 7 installed on the 500 GB Samsung SSD). I'll try doing a Repair to the 1T Samsung NVMe drive using these. But of course, it's not a SATA drive, this new thing, so now we move on. ******* I have the PDF manual on disk here. It says: "Use of licensed AMI UEFI BIOS" Since the original drive booted, the BIOS should already have the correct settings for doing a good job. CSM Support Enables or disables UEFI CSM (Compatibility Support Module) to support a legacy PC boot process. Always Enables UEFI CSM. (Default) === boots MSDOS era media Never Disables UEFI CSM and supports UEFI BIOS boot process only. Boot Mode Selection Allows you to select which type of operating system to boot. UEFI and Legacy Allows booting from operating systems that support legacy option ROM or UEFI option ROM. (Default) === Legacy Only Allows booting from operating systems that only support legacy Option ROM. UEFI Only Allows booting from operating systems that only support UEFI Option ROM. Storage Boot Option Control (May need adjustment, not sure...) (M.2 PCIe may need UEFI first) M.2 PCIE SSD RAID Mode Enables or disables Intel Rapid Storage Technology Sometimes, if you're booting from NVMe materials, there's some storage ROM of some sort that has to be enabled. Other PCI Device ROM Priority Allows you to select whether to enable the UEFI or Legacy option ROM for the PCI device controller other than the LAN, storage device, and graphics controllers. Legacy OpROM Enables legacy option ROM only. UEFI OpROM Enables UEFI option ROM only. (Default) === This item is configurable only when CSM Support is set to Always. You can see someone had your problem here, and this failure pattern is a familiar one. https://forums.tomshardware.com/thre...3h-bk.3416549/ My board is Asus, and some of the terminology is slightly different. And that's why searching the PDF manual isn't digging up any hits. "check in the bios the SATA Controller is set to AHCI Mode " Which should have been the case anyway. There's some detail like that, that NVMe only work with certain modes, and only then when the BIOS is mature enough to not have bugs. "The BIOS update was indeed the issue. I had read through the update descriptions but didn't see where they mentioned fixing a boot from an M.2 drive. Could have missed it. I have to give them credit - the update process is SO much easier than the last time I did that a decade or two ago. Wow... The SATA controller was already set to AHCI." Another breadcrumb. This is most likely to be the problem. "Z97X Gaming5 Rev 1.0 bios F7 here. Issues like described with hc310 6TB disk. The solution for me was to enable Intel Rapid Start Technology and then it gave option under it to choose the controller to be used. I choose the other one that was available - "PCIE AHCI/NVME Controller" and system boots just fine. My disk with system is plextor ssd and HGST is the main storage." RAID and AHCI typically share the same driver file package. The RAID (RST) seems to recognize the PCIe interface to the NVMe device. And perhaps it needs to be turned on so the NVMe can be seen at boot, via the RAID ROM. And the option ROMs have to be turned on, for this to work. You can't get to the RAID window, unless the RAID ROM is turned on first, save, then enter the BIOS and press the magic key combo to get the RAID screen up. Now you know why most NVMe owners are bald from the hair loss. HTH, Paul Well, if I'd known there we so many issues I probably wouldn't have tried to go with the NVMe drive. I noticed someone mentioned Intel Rapid Start and then PCIE AHCI/NVME controller. I think I've seen an option to use Intel Rapid start, so I'll check my BIOS and see if I can find an option for ACHI/NVME. Thanks for all the suggestions. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
What hardware to best speed up processing large Word file?
Paul wrote:
THe (T) part measures Hyperthreading, which helps 7ZIP a bit. But it's the C number that bears most of the weight when doing 7ZIP (or RAR) compression. Do all of the newer CPUs offer Hyperthreading (or something equivalent)? I'm not exactly sure what it is, but I presume it enables multiple threads to run faster on a single core. For example, do the new AMD CPUs have hyperthreading (or something equivalent)? Cheers, Bill |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
What hardware to best speed up processing large Word file?
Bill wrote:
Paul wrote: THe (T) part measures Hyperthreading, which helps 7ZIP a bit. But it's the C number that bears most of the weight when doing 7ZIP (or RAR) compression. Do all of the newer CPUs offer Hyperthreading (or something equivalent)? I'm not exactly sure what it is, but I presume it enables multiple threads to run faster on a single core. For example, do the new AMD CPUs have hyperthreading (or something equivalent)? Cheers, Bill Register Bank Register Bank | | select between them | out of order execution engine What HyperThreading does, is if the CPU core is "stalled" on a memory access (a wait of 100 cycles say), the core can switch to the other bank, where the other bank is not stalled, and execution of a thread there can take place. Now, if that register bank happens to need a memory access, it stalls, and the engine flips back to the other side (where the required memory access if finished). For the price of a suitably large register bank, you can extract anywhere from -5% to +30% more performance. On a multi-threaded application. AMD calls this SMT. You'd have to look somewhere, to see whether this is exactly the same mechanism as Intel uses. A Russian site added some color on the topic. They found that the Pentium with this feature, had a "recirculator loop", and some information sits in a queue while this sort of switching is going on. And apparently the first HT had a bug, where the recirculator could sorta hang for a millisecond. And nobody noticed. Later HT implementations were better than the first one. But then the later ones never got any color commentary like that. ******* There are certain usage patterns, that cause thrashing or competition between the two sides and rob the CPU of performance (-5%). In some cases, users elect on their 16C 32T processor, to turn off the 32T and just run with the 16C. If you have a 64C 128T processor (they exist), if you switch on the 128T, Windows treats this as "two processor groups" and weird stuff happens. Again, the better part of valor might be to turn off the 128T portion so the scheduler in Windows behaves itself. Windows 10 Workstation does better scheduling than Windows 10 Pro (you might find that mentioned on the enthusiast sites I saw that in). So not all the Windows SKUs are equal. Paul |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
What hardware to best speed up processing large Word file?
Paul wrote:
Bill wrote: Paul wrote: Â*THe (T) part measures Hyperthreading, which helps 7ZIP a bit. But it's the C number that bears most of the weight when doing 7ZIP (or RAR) compression. Do all of the newer CPUs offer Hyperthreading (or something equivalent)? I'm not exactly sure what it is, but I presume it enables multiple threads to run faster on a single core.Â* For example, do the new AMD CPUs have hyperthreading (or something equivalent)? Cheers, Bill Â*Â* Register BankÂ*Â*Â*Â*Â* Register Bank Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* |Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* | Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* select between them Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* | Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* out of order Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* execution engine snip Thank you! It occurred to me that I could look at some benchmarks to see which CPUs are doing a good job with this. IIRC, last time I bought a CPU, hyperthreading may have been a feature on the Intel "I-7"s which wasn't on "I-5"s or "I-3"s. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Processing speed question! | Annie | Dell Computers | 15 | October 6th 06 10:03 AM |
Convert DVD to CD? (large .cab file) | Sunny | Cdr | 8 | January 9th 06 01:01 AM |
Burning a large AVI file to VCD | The Seabat | Cdr | 5 | November 1st 05 09:05 PM |
Nero & a Large File.. | smh | Cdr | 3 | October 22nd 05 04:24 AM |
Large file UDF problem | ayosha | Cdr | 7 | August 11th 03 08:36 AM |