Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ZRocker]

On my PII 450 PC w/256 meg of memory, MC 9.1 is slow.  The  new pane stuff takes atleast 10 seconds to build and finally display with my 5000 imported tracks (all local to the PC).  Nothing else is consuming CPU time except MC 9.1.

On top of that, while MC is 'thinking', it does NOT display the busy cursor (like any descent Window's UI should)...so, MC looks like it is 'locked up'.

Others...please chime in now.

[jleerigby]

If performance is an issue for you it's time to treat yourself me thinks.

[ZRocker]

JLee,

You're missing the point....with MC 9.0, MJ 8.0, MJ 7.0 and MJ 6.0 performance was not an issue (with the same PC).   I imagine when MC 9.1 is released and performance is still an issue, I"ll just reinstall MC 9.0 and live with it (and say goodbye to using future MC upgrades).

[jleerigby]

JLee,

You're missing the point....with MC 9.0, MJ 8.0, MJ 7.0 and MJ 6.0 performance was not an issue (with the same PC).   I imagine when MC 9.1 is released and performance is still an issue, I"ll just reinstall MC 9.0 and live with it (and say goodbye to using future MC upgrades).

Hopefully Matt will optimise things a little.  However, if you don't want MC to stand still, i.e. you and the rest of us are looking for more and more features, then you can't expect your PC processing power to stand still - you have to move on as the application does.  Maybe now is the time.

[sraymond]

However, if you don't want MC to stand still, i.e. you and the rest of us are looking for more and more features, then you can't expect your PC processing power to stand still - you have to move on as the application does.  Maybe now is the time.

Well said...  there is really little reason to not upgrade these days.  As many have pointed out, you can find cheap no-name upgrades for less than $100.  I just bought a P4 2.4 (800 MHz FSB) and Intel 875 motherboard for just over $300.  I'd imagine Celeron 2.0s are going for something like $100 these days.  Worst case, you'd have to upgrade the memory as well...  but overall, I can't see an upgrade costing much more than $150.

It's great to MC use the processsing power available...   keep the features coming.

But that's not to say that an eventual optimization isn't a good thing...

Scott-

[Matt]

Z, can you give us a few benchmarks:

• Does it matter what the view scheme is? (simple vs complex)  Are certain fields slowing it down?
  
• Are you using a view filter?
  
• Is it slow in a view that doesn't have panes?
  
• Are you using thumbnails or album grouping?
  
• Are file properties visible?
  
• Do you have a mouse plugged in? (haha)
  
  Thanks for helping.

[ZRocker]

Matt,

Doesn't matter what I select in Media Library....anything that has to display my whole library in the list take 10+ seconds to display.  I've hidden the panes and the display time is the same (slow)....I just click on Media Library, Audio, etc. & wait 10+ seconds for the list to display.  Using Panes and drilling down, MC gets faster when the list gets smaller (expected)...but, still slow (like 3 seconds for 250 tracks)....still, 10+ seconds to get the initial list (so I can drill down).

No view fillter.  No groupings.  No file properties displayed.

I just tried with the 3 calculated fields removed (columns...that I use) and the display time was still slow (over 10 seconds...no difference).

[ZRocker]

I fixed it!!

It was the sorting using a calcuated field I created called 'Album (year)'.  I simply changed the sorting to use Album instead (and hid the Album column after I setup the sorting) and the speed went down to about 2 seconds now.

[Matt]

Good find.

Calculated fields are bound to be slower than stored fields.  We may be able to optimize them a bit though.

Thanks Z.