Build 600+ and CPU usage - page 3
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I can confirm that mt4 builds 600+ are (with the same amount of charts, indicators, etc open as b509) that the memory usage can be as much as triple.
Especially when running multiple EAs; with b509 the terminal might be 60-100MB, but build 610 is like 160-200MB after only 3-4 charts with EAs, and the max bars in chart is 'only' 2000 bars.
I can confirm that mt4 builds 600+ are (with the same amount of charts, indicators, etc open as b509) that the memory usage can be as much as triple.
Especially when running multiple EAs; with b509 the terminal might be 60-100MB, but build 610 is like 160-200MB after only 3-4 charts with EAs, and the max bars in chart is 'only' 2000 bars.
Mine at ~26MB, 13 charts with settings like my previous post.
Max bars in chart is 5000 each. MT4 Build 625
I use CleanMem though, which is might help in memory management. :)
I guess so but my laptop stays on
You have laptop or desktop PC?
Yesterday I noticed that memory usage becomes less after several hours. I have a VMWare vps with Windows2008 (64bit) running on 1 cpu and 1024MB of memory. I run 8 terminals with about 120charts and 8 EAs.
The terminals are indeed more cpu active but on average it seems to stay below 20%. When I start my terminals they use about 50MB to 100MB per terminal. After a day they use about half the amount they started with. I wonder why...
Mine at ~26MB, 13 charts with settings like my previous post.
Max bars in chart is 5000 each. MT4 Build 625
I use CleanMem though, which is might help in memory management. :)
Yesterday I noticed that memory usage becomes less after several hours. I have a VMWare vps with Windows2008 (64bit) running on 1 cpu and 1024MB of memory. I run 8 terminals with about 120charts and 8 EAs.
The terminals are indeed more cpu active but on average it seems to stay below 20%. When I start my terminals they use about 50MB to 100MB per terminal. After a day they use about half the amount they started with. I wonder why...
I upgraded to mt4 b625 and also reduced the max bars in chart to 1500. I have one terminal that has 8 EAs, 4 charts per symbol. It is using about 50MB. And there is a bug in the EA dll that is causing blank popup alerts every tick. I set the market watch to "hide all" symbols that I am not currently using.
A different broker with only 6 charts on mt4 b625 is using 40MB.
Actually, mt4 b509 with the same amount of charts and less EAs running is actually using up more memory. About 70MB
I'll continue to watch the situation until the end of the week, although I'm sure I will restart some of the terminals in between. Seems like MetaQuotes finally did something right. Let's hope it stays that way.
You have laptop or desktop PC?
I have both but my CPU usage issue refers to my Laptop, I haven't tried on my Desktop.
Remember, cpu usage would always be different. A 1.8GHz and 2.4GHz cpu usage will not the same, no matter how you try to make it the same.
Especially if the cpu have more than 1 core.
Remember, cpu usage would always be different. A 1.8GHz and 2.4GHz cpu usage will not the same, no matter how you try to make it the same.
Especially if the cpu have more than 1 core.
Perhaps you think 7% CPU usage for MT4 is OK for a i7 2640M (2 cores, 4 threads) when MT4 is running with no charts open ? I don't . . .
Well, ok then. Yeah, it sounds silly.
OK, some information from my system. I restarted it and applied all Windows Updates and restarted again . . .
so I guess this actually agrees with most other Users here . . . but the reality is that it is still using approx. 7% CPU as shown by Sysinternals Process Explorer
I thought I would have a look at Task Manager . . . interestingly it shows MT4 (updated to build 628) using 0% CPU
Measuring CPU Consumption
Older versions of Windows were able to track only an approximation of actual CPU usage. At a clock-generated interrupt that on most systems has a period of 15.6 milliseconds (ms), Windows identifies the thread currently executing on each CPU. If the thread is executing in kernel mode, its kernel-mode time is incremented by 15.6 ms; otherwise, its user-mode time is incremented by that amount. The thread might have been executing for only a few CPU cycles when the interrupt fired, but the thread is charged for the entire 15.6-ms interval. Meanwhile, hundreds of other threads might have executed during that interval, but only the thread currently running at the clock tick gets charged. Windows Task Manager uses these approximations to report CPU usage even on newer versions of Windows that have more accurate metrics available. Task Manager further reduces its accuracy by rounding to the nearest integer percentage, so processes with executing threads that consume less than 1 percent of CPU time are indistinguishable from processes that do not execute at all. Finally, Task Manager does not account for CPU time spent servicing interrupts or deferred procedure calls (DPCs), incorrectly including that time with the System Idle Process.
Procexp represents CPU usage more accurately than does Task Manager. First, Procexp shows per-process CPU utilization percentages rounded to a resolution of two decimal places by default instead of to an integer. Second, Procexp tracks the time spent servicing interrupts and DPCs and displays them separately from the Idle process. Finally, Procexp uses additional system metrics so that processes consuming small amounts of CPU can be identified and, when possible, provide a more accurate account of actual CPU consumption. Different metrics are available on Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Windows 7 and their corresponding server versions. Procexp takes advantage of whatever is available to report the most accurate measures possible.