New Notebook WITH SSD much slower than 8 old notebook with hard disk?


Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
A couple of months ago I bought a new notebook (Acer Swift 3 SF315-52G-83WQ).

I had now time to compare the performance with my 7 year old Samsung notebook.
Much to my surprise the new notebook is approximately 25% SLOWER (!) than the old notebook.

This although there are huge a differencen between them:
- CPU: new Intel CPU (=Intel Core i7 8550U CPU) is 5 generations younger than old (=Intel Core i7 3630QM)
both CPU have 4 COre and 8 Threads
- Memory: new 16GB vs. old only 8GB
- Space: new SSD vs. old only hard disk.
- WinOS: new Windows 10 vs old Windows 7


For comparison I used NOT one of the many benchmark tools but a real life task:
Re-encoding a video into the same video but with lower bitrate.

I used the well known, wide spread, free encoding tool "XMedia Recode" which is based (=a gui) for ffmpeg.
Of cause on both notebook I used the same encoding configuration and input video.
Encoding time is on the new notebook ~ 2 hours vs. on the old 1h 35min


I am baffled. Shouldn't the new notebook be (much) faster than the old?
I can think of two reasons: Maybe
- some BIOS settings throttle the SSD (or memory) access
or
- some Win 10 settings prevent full speed


Resource Monitor on the new notebook shows that the average CPU load an all 4 Core/8 Threads is 95%.
So there are no CPU limitations.


Does someone have a recommendation for speedup the new notebook?
 
Ad

Advertisements

Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
2,833
Reaction score
559
I have only one question, what sizes are the two drives involved? A main issue some time back when helping a client with large data files was having sufficient space on the drive to hold both the work and the temporary storage while working. Also involved was the Virtual Memory [paging file/swapfile] having sufficient size to handle the swapping out of RAM but 16GB should be sufficient with Windows-managed paging if it's also the same with the 8GB.
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2015
Messages
85
Reaction score
13
Well I totally agree. Windows 10 has never been faster than 7 on any hardware that I’ve tried.
2 quick questions, are running the same security software and have you gotten rid of all the bloatware that comes with Acer or clean installed Windows10?
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2021
Messages
120
Reaction score
22
The Windows Resource Monitor ) on both Win7 and WIn 10) will show you what processes are consuming which resources. If you type the command resmon into the Run command box the Resource Monitor will open on the overview tab - which is what you want for now. Expand all the major areas (CPU, Memory, Disk) so you can see the process lists. By default these are sorted on the most useful resource usage column so you should be able to see what processes are consuming resources on your Win 10 box that you don't see on your Win 7 box - then we can work out why.

A couple of important numbers to pay attention to:

1. On the header row of the Memory section you'll see the the Hard Faults/sec counter. If that is consistently non-zero for long periods of time let us know.

2. On the header row of the Disk section you'll see the % Highest Active Time, what is that?
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
5,972
Reaction score
1,231
I have only one question, what sizes are the two drives involved? A main issue some time back when helping a client with large data files was having sufficient space on the drive to hold both the work and the temporary storage while working. Also involved was the Virtual Memory [paging file/swapfile] having sufficient size to handle the swapping out of RAM but 16GB should be sufficient with Windows-managed paging if it's also the same with the 8GB.
Yep. Had the same experience, under different circumstances. A friend was running a gigabyte hd. Not a game player, just the daiily grind with office..etc.
I loaned him a 128 ssd and reinstalled, as well as able, an exact copy of his setup. The speed difference was very noticeable. I suspect, among other interfering points, that one culprit may have been the indexing. I have this turned off on my own computers . Since, he has purchased a small SSD for his purposes and is a satisfied user.
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
5,972
Reaction score
1,231
Well I totally agree. Windows 10 has never been faster than 7 on any hardware that I’ve tried.
2 quick questions, are running the same security software and have you gotten rid of all the bloatware that comes with Acer or clean installed Windows10?
I am unbiased, but you might care to look at this comparison:
or
another of many:

fwiw. I cannot say the same for windows 5/10/11. There is such a small improvement in performance with the latter two, it is not, at this stage, really worth the effort - unless you only wish to move on(?) There is certainly no improvement in visuals or otherwise. - Just different!
 
Last edited:
Ad

Advertisements

Joined
Apr 26, 2016
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
A couple of months ago I bought a new notebook (Acer Swift 3 SF315-52G-83WQ).

I had now time to compare the performance with my 7 year old Samsung notebook.
Much to my surprise the new notebook is approximately 25% SLOWER (!) than the old notebook.

This although there are huge a differencen between them:
- CPU: new Intel CPU (=Intel Core i7 8550U CPU) is 5 generations younger than old (=Intel Core i7 3630QM)
both CPU have 4 COre and 8 Threads
- Memory: new 16GB vs. old only 8GB
- Space: new SSD vs. old only hard disk.
- WinOS: new Windows 10 vs old Windows 7

I think I still have the same notebook, only that mine is a core i7 3635QM (basically the same)
it was a samsung Ativ Book 8, 16.6 inch with intel core i7 3635QM 2,4GHz, 8Gig of Ram, 1TB harddisk and AMD Radeon 2GB GDDR5
It was one of the greatest notebooks they ever made!!!
Aluminum case, fell down and had a bump in the aluminum, but it never broke.
I changed the 1TB HD to a 1TB ssd and went to windows 10 clean install. Had a hard time finding all the drivers. (the hardest was the one for the backlight of the keyboard... but finally found one that worked. Of course you have to remove all the windows bloatware like one drive and cortana. the best is to turn everything off except updates and antivirus with OOshutup10. It boots in less than 10 seconds and is much much faster than the newest HP I got from the office.

But still you cant compare a windows 10 machine to a windows 7. its like comparing apples and pears.
Example: The fastest booting computer i have is my very old ibm thinkpad with windows 3.11 booting directly into wordperfect.
my 85 year old mother was using it as a typewriter. Yes it is fast, but you cant compare it to a modern machine.

But I agree: the Samsung Book 8 (mine is from 2013) is faster than most of the very new modern notebooks. The main reason is they were using components that were really fitting together. other example: the rams are in a metal cage that is held with 4 screws. Todays laptops have the rams just in a plastic box.

Sorry if i am too long.. but i just love those older Samsung laptops in aluminum cases. They are meant to work for a long time. Not like the new plastic stuff.
Just put a ssd into your samsung, do a clean install with windows 10 and you will see, it will be faster than the new ones.

Luc
 
Joined
Jul 29, 2015
Messages
98
Reaction score
9
Make sure it is fully updated so you're not looking for updates in the background when you boot up. Check to see if a new version is downloaded but not installed. Check task manager to see what's using the power. If anything is maxed out, let it sit a while to see if it calms down.
 
Ad

Advertisements

Joined
Nov 19, 2015
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
...
For comparison I used NOT one of the many benchmark tools but a real life task:
Re-encoding a video into the same video but with lower bitrate.
...
Hi tobwen.

I do not want to offend you, but You should think about CPU as about computing device, which makes computations.

Your task - video encoding - is "the one", on which We can see, that people are conviced to think, that something new should or must be better than something old. In computations it does not matter, if You compute on personal calculator from times of Your studies, or on supercomputer. Input + algorithm = output. And now comes the funny part. All this about input, algorithm and output computed in some "time factor" or fraction, is the real output. You can encode video on Your calculator, but We both know, how log it will take. And now look at this simple cpu comparison:


You can see, that the old cpu is exactly so much faster (GHz) than the new one. And, that, broken down into simplest details (zeroes and ones + the algorithm of video encoding) tells You, that the same mathematical operation is calculated about 20% faster on old cpu than on the new one - because "the clock" of the older cpu is ticking +20% higher - and when You look that it has the same count of cores (threads) = both cpus can handle same amount of computations in "one tick" (simplified meaning) - also it does not matter, that the new one is 5 years newer. It can handle less computations in same TIME FRAME as the old one.

The same method will be true, even if the cpu would be "one core - one thread" - You cannot have some advantage in essential computations without some special "features" (will be mentioned later) - when simplified to the max - You cannot move same amount of zeroes and ones to other "combinations" (= encoding algorithm) where "the moves" are in real done by cpu clock tick (gate flip at elementar part of cpu - transistor) faster, when You don't have "faster clock".

Now some "hidden tweaks and magics" - also the special features of CPU - please - run simple software on both of Yours cpus - "HW Info x64". On the first summary screen - in left upper part - You will see "cpu features".



1641968663663.png

https://www.hwinfo.com/download/ - use same portable version on both computers.

Here You can see, what Your cpu is able to have of advantages. Some of them helps by "video processing", some helps by other simplified tasks. But, it exclusively (mostly) depends of the software, if these will be used in the algorithm. Also, when You run the video processing software, which can handle the input with the help of some of these "features" of the cpu, You can achieve better results, but when not, You have simple raw computing devices and here comes the clock to the play. Sure, even on the "special features" can We look as on "simple separate algorithms" - and when used on both cpus - there is no more advantage - here is the same applied like on the "essential computation" - also here are the zeroes and ones moved "in same way"...

Also higher clock = better results.

No magic, no hidden secrets, only simple computation...

Also when Your software - ffmpeg - can use multiple threads (I think it can), You can achieve even better results, when You use as much as fast cpu, as You can efford, with so much cores/threads as possible - or grid cpu platform - You will be surprised even more how fast You are able to en/de-code Your vids. Be aware of so called cpu affinity - use as much cores as possible ;-)

At the last, it is worth to mention, that "yes", also the speed of disk, memory, bus and other crucial parts of the computer has to tell something to the duration of the encoding process... But in this perfect simplest sample of daily usage where it does not matter in any direction what size of ram, disk, other, etc. and other speeds You have - compared to the "brute computing power" of the cpu.

Sure, this is (not) very siplified explanation of the whole "encoding madness" - You can dream very well much more about this process, but for Your simple case the answer is - NOT.

You can overclock (if possible, but very dangerous on U "mobile" cpus due overheat an NO option to mount water cooling in most cases), You can speed it up by legal "turbo" mode - if it is able to process so, You should always run "on charger" - because other way You are switched to low power consumption mode when on battery... You can do something more, sure, but You CANNOT overcome the simple problem in this case -> video encoding computation is RAW computation - it depends purely on CLOCK SPEED of cpu.

Hope I helped You (and others too) to understand, what is crucial for You in this case of video processing.

p.s. Be aware of XEON fever or other "high computing" cpus - sometimes they cannot handle video encoding so as You expect - there is always some forum or thread available on net where You can study, if the choosen cpu will be more effective at this task - here You can be surprised of the "lack of advanced cpu features" - it is possible that 5Ghz Xeon with some huge amount of cores cannot handle the input as You expect...

Some simple search and You are good to go:


And Yes, I love the Ryzen latest :) We have some of them here and it is fun to leave them encode multiple stages of ffmpeg in "no time" :-D
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top