Winsig.exe CPU Usage 60 %

[Bügeleisen]

Hi,
if i receive data for a new symbol chart, winsig.exe CPU usage increases above 60 % for some seconds and the quote liste froze. I know some other customer with the same problem.
If you use other datafeed(realtick, tenfore, tradestation) there isn`t the same problem.
PC: Intel 3.2 GHZ inside, 1 GB Ram, Win2000
10 monitors. Matrox-dualhead&quadhead-Cards.

FWIW, eSignal is a single threaded application. The cpu you have is "hyperthreaded" which really means that when you see winsig.exe CPU usage increases above 60 % for some seconds, that thread is completely overloaded.

In the Windows Task Manager, while this was happening, you should have a second CPU window which I believe would have shown the second CPU as lightly loaded.

What I am trying to say is that for the hyperthreaded CPU's, if you are running upwards of 50%, you are, in effect, running the PC as fast as it will go on that thread.

Just thought I would mention the above info on hyperthreading, eSignal, and CPU usage, as it is not straightforward.

You do have quite a fast PC, but running 10 monitors, that has to be a significant load as well. All in all, it seems as if you are at the ragged edge of your PC's capacity. Just my perspective, hopefully, this will help you resolve your issue.

[Bügeleisen]

Thanks for the answer.

Esignal charts are only on 2 of the 10 monitors. But winsig.exe uses most CPU resource. E.G. Esignal is my datafeed for TS 2000i. A lot of quotes for the global sever. But no problem for winsig.exe and server.exe or ts.exe. of Tradestation. Under 10 % usage together(TS takes 5 monitors)
What about dualboard with 2 CPU? Would that improve performance? Most software can`t use dualmainboard.

Regarding going to a dualboard with 2 cpu, it all depends on what is causing your system to slow down. If you were to assume that it was the eSignal winsig.exe, as I believe you implied, the new configuration would not help much at all, since eSignal is a single threaded application. If you believe the video cards feeding the 10 monitors could be a significant contributor, the new configuration may help, however, take a look at the picture below.

I would suggest that you try and better quantify what is causing the problem. To do this you will have to perform some tests. For example, remove all of the eSignal efs's in your charts, remove all but one video card, etc.

Your Motherboard could be a problem as well, the data throughput of your system is very high. There can be areas on the motherboard that restrict that throughput and slow everything else down. For example, below is a general layout of a motherboard which shows the data pathways. This Motherboard design is not the latest, as it is a year or two old (may be similar or older to what you have). Your CPU is on top of the diagram and connects to the Northbridge Chip / Bus. The Southbridge chip is below the Northbridge. Look at the interconnections and more importantly look at the data transfer rates between them. You can only imagine where you could run into data pathways getting restricted, resulting in your machine running at the restricted speed.



here is the link to the article http://www6.tomshardware.com/motherb.../i875p-01.html

Usually, the best bet for speed is to buy the fastest processor, lots of fast memory, a proven motherboard, fast hard drives and even faster video cards. Your system is very complex, with tons of throughput. To speed it up, you are going to have to do some homework. From just a system design perspective, here are some things to look at:

1) if your matrox video cards are all PCI bus cards, they would be high on my list.

2) I would then look at more memory and faster memory.

3) Ensure that the motherboard is adequate. Newer motherboards have the PCI express bus, a significant improvement in throughput as compared with the older PCI bus.

However, I would test your system first to see if you can better identify if there is a smoking gun which could be causing your performance problems.

I hope this is of some help.

[gspiker]

Steve makes some great points. I would add this:

The Intel memory architecture has been roughly the same for a VERY long time (Since 386 days)...it was an ok design then (not good, but ok). By todays standards it is horrible. AMD Opteron and new Athalon's have a much better memory and I/O architecture.

Intel is moving to a better architecture...but they just aren't there yet.

Some of the test results posted here seems to prove out that AMD is better at running eSignal.

Re: What is the limiting factor. Tuning can be an iterative effort (in fact usually is). So if you discover that I/O across the PCI bus is whats killing you now and you get rid of that with an upgrade you might find out that the increase isn't as significant as you would have expected as you just moved the "weakest link" to a new area...like memory or CPU. So if your tuning is "hardware upgrade" then you should buy the best system you can afford.

Just my .02.

Garth

[Bob A.]

Hi Steve/Garth,

Seems like I'm back pushing the Power User limits again! On my P4/3.0 HT with 800 FSB, 400DDR, dual SATA drives and 2 GB memory, I'm getting redlined in fast ES markets. With just eSignal running, on the Task Manager only one of the meters redlines which I think underscores that fact that eSignal is not set up for multithreading ( I guess that's too much to hope for!). So, am I right to conclude in this case that my best choice is to upgrade to (say) a 3.4 Ghz board?

However, I'm also running two other applications that both use Data Manager. When they're running too, both meters show similar loads (and redline at the same time). Does this indicate that Hyperthreading is effectively exploiting the full potential of the CPU? If that's true, then, for example, would a Dual 3.4 Xeon motherboard and appropriate memory give me a worthwhile improvement ? TIA.

Regards,
Bob

[atlas]

Steve, I don't understand how you can say, "esignal is single-threaded". In Task Manager, winros, has two threads, winsig has 6 threads. So, right offf the bat, the datafeed and charting are split into different threads. Also, when you open a popped-out window, you get a new thread. This would seem to suggest, adding multiple cpu's would alleviate the slowness.

atlas,

Do you have multiple instances of eSignal running?

[atlas]

No, why, what do you see in TM?

One of each, please post a screen print and perhaps we can have someone from eSignal comment. Also, do you have another application running that isusing another winsig?

[atlas]

Originally posted by stevehare2003
Also, do you have another application running that isusing another winsig?

No. Here is my tm:

[atlas]

:

There are a number of Posts regarding eSignal being a single threaded application... I performed a search and I believe this thread has a good explanation of the context I was referring to:

http://forum.esignalcentral.com/show...=&postid=59096

The specific post is a down further in the thread and is from Dion

eSignal itself is single threaded wrt to data processing

As you pointed out, new threads are opened with different windows, however the actual data processing takes place on only one thread which prohibits the sharing of that task between cpu's

[atlas]

Originally posted by stevehare2003
however the actual data processing takes place on only one thread which prohibits the sharing of that task between cpu's

Right, I am coming a little late to this discussion. However, I have been thinking about this, and have concluded that the CPU usage is primarily an issue of Esignal trying to calculate what the charts will look like with the new data. For instance, in a random advanced chart, if I "grab" the chart, and scroll it back forth with the mouse, CPU starts climbing rapidly. I suppose a good test, would be to use an application that does not have any charting, and solely runs off the Datamanager, and see if the CPU still spikes. One test I ran, was to check CPU during a fast market, with all charts minimized. IT still spiked, but I believe it is winsig keeping the charts "in sync" with the incoming data. Also, check out the relative usage (winsig vs. winros) in CPU time on the TM pic.

[gspiker]

Typically "windows" management and graphics display can burn a lot of CPU. Some of this depends on your gfx card and the type of graphics you are doing. But it wouldn't surprise me to find out that this function takes a lot of CPU in eSignal.

Those of us who remember some of the early early releases of X windows will tell you that dealing with clipping and other issues made the windows system almost unusable if you can too many overlapping windows (but tiled windows did ok).

G