Faster computer and CVIndex?

[LoneWoLF]

Does having a faster computer like an i5 or i7 process the indices much faster on CVData/CVIndex? If so how long would it take to generate full indices on a top notch comp? Or is the program just on a set speed regardless of your computers hardware?

[Norm]

Speed of the processor certainly makes a difference. How long it takes depends on the count and the number of indices selected. You should not select all indices as most are ridiculous. For example, there are no indices for plays like A6 vs. ten. The level of count also matters a great deal. There can be a very large difference in the time it takes.

[Three]

LW uses a level 3 count.

[Norm]

That slows it considerably.

[LoneWoLF]

I was looking at making a custom count and using full indices with beat to death feature. Im aware the level below beat to death is just as accurate, but i like having the 'perfect' answer at all times.

[Three]

I am not sure how norm generates indices. There are a few ways you could go about it. How fast the results converge shows the strength of the index. Some indices are best ignored for some counts. They tend to take a long long time to converge. At least using simulation as the method of calculating indices. It is about frequency of the decision and the correlation of your count to the hand matchup's EoR's. A poorly correlated play may have an index that is never worth much. Low frequency matchups take a long time to get enough data for things to converge. If it is both low frequency and poorly correlated it will take forever to get results that aren't worth anything anyway.

[Bodarc]

Does having a faster computer like an i5 or i7 process the indices much faster on CVData/CVIndex?

The number of cores your computer has available makes a big difference also. I have an 8 core computer that is much faster than my 4 core one.

[Norm]

CVData uses multiple cores. CVIndex doesn't.

Actually it's funny that so much emphasis is put on multiple cores as only a tiny fraction of applications use them.

[Bodarc]

Actually, I wasn't really looking for it. It just so happened my Asus 8 quad & faster processor with 1 terabyte hard drive was cheaper than an HP with about 1/2 that capability and after all, they are all made in the US aren't they?

[iCountNTrack]

CVData uses multiple cores. CVIndex doesn't.

Actually it's funny that so much emphasis is put on multiple cores as only a tiny fraction of applications use them.

LOL yeah, Intel just released the i7-6950X with 10 physical cores and 20 threads @$1700

[Gronbog]

Actually it's funny that so much emphasis is put on multiple cores as only a tiny fraction of applications use them.

Multiple cores are great when running several cpu-intensive programs simultaneously. Also great when building a large software application, where the development environment supports simultaneous compiles.

[Norm]

Great for sims. Four cores runs up to seven times as fast, and the web is still responsive.

[Bodarc]

Great for sims. Four cores runs up to seven times as fast, and the web is still responsive.

Last Christmas, I bought my wife a new computer. She needed one!

Anyway, at that time I started the same sim at the same time on the new faster processor/8 quad and my slower processor/4 quad. The new one was finished when the older computer (2 years) was only about 1/3 finished as best I can remember. Something made a huge difference.