How fast can you Quickpar?

C

cbass98

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
146
So one of my reasons for building a new PC was to increase the time it takes me to Quickpar files. And after building my new rig, I'm highly disappointed at the little to no gain in speed. The amount of time it takes me to Quickpar a 4GB file is the same as in the new and old rig. Is it because of the limitation of the Quickpar program or did I miss something?

old rig - AMD X2 4800+, 2GB RAM, 150GB Raptor

new rig - 2 x Opteron 2218 (basically 4 cores), 4GB RAM, 2x140GB 15K SAS in RAID 0

I figured my new rig would cut the quickpar'ing time by at least 50%. For instance, I just recovered a 4GB Discovery .TS movie. Had to use 130 out of 140 blocks (very messed up archive) and Quickpar took almost 30 minutes, which I'm guessing would have been the same on the old rig. Is anyone else seeing this too or am I delusional?
 
Well...
Does the program even support multiple cores? Have you profiled it at all to see where the bottleneck lies?
 
At best, a program can only improve about 50% when going from single thread to multi-thread. If the program isn't designed to take advantage of a multi-core system (its not multi-threaded), then you will see virtually no performance increase when using it unless the CPU clock speed is faster.
 
IIRC, Quickpar is SMP aware in the newer versions, but what's your HDD subsystem like? It does a lot of data-reading/writing by its very nature (Computing the Reed-Solomon matrix is fast as hell even on my P4, but my IDE drives lag the actual repair process to hell).

Then again, on that same rig, thigns would actually download faster than they could be yEnc-decoded or uuEnc-decoded. ;)
 
My HDD system is 2 x 140GB 15k SAS (Serial attached SCSI) in RAID 0. That's why I even moved to SCSI....because I knew all the reading and writing really slows down an IDE or SATA drive.

I just wonder if Quickpar is really SMP aware. I'll have to try an apples to apples test on all my machines (C2D T7200 laptop) to see if I'm just being paranoid. Thanks for the responses guys.
 
cbass98 said:
My HDD system is 2 x 140GB 15k SAS (Serial attached SCSI) in RAID 0. That's why I even moved to SCSI....because I knew all the reading and writing really slows down an IDE or SATA drive.

I just wonder if Quickpar is really SMP aware. I'll have to try an apples to apples test on all my machines (C2D T7200 laptop) to see if I'm just being paranoid. Thanks for the responses guys.
Click to expand...

...well, it's clear that your HDD's are clearly not bottlenecking a thing. :eek: Still, 30 minutes? For reference, it took around 55 minutes for me on my old P4 2.8E, 40GB SATA drive to Quickpar/repair a 8GB DVDISO.
 
I've tried it on (4x)15k.5s in RAID 0 with my C2Q at 3.2 and its STILL slow, lol. I really just think the software isn't fully optimized for modern hardware. There hasn't been an update to it for years.
 
It's slow regardless of what computer you're on. I wouldn't bother upgrading if that's your only motive.
 
Yeah. Try downloading an uncompressed Bluray or HD-DVD only to find that one of the splits is missing. It takes FOREVER to rebuild it, lol.
 
Hmm which ISP do you use? If you make a habit of DLing huge 10-20 gig HD movies they will shut you off eventually. I would know... I used to obtain HD transport stream copies (of movies I already owned of course) which were 10-20+ gigs and comcast threated to switch me off saying I was using more bandwidth than 99% of the population. Apparently if you go over 200 gigs in a month they will threaten to terminate your account.

I noticed no difference in quick par either when I upgraded memory and switched to Sata either BTW.
 
I use Optimum Online with the Boost service. 30mb down, 5mb up. Last month I downloaded approximately 300GB. My ISP caps uploaders, not downloaders.
 
Ah, comcast really sucks in that case.

I had the boost service for a bit then it suddenly went away and I'm back to 768 KB/s. I was getting 2.6mb/s+ in newsleecher for a couple of weeks.
 
God, that is horrible. :( Capping downloads should be equivalent to crimes against humanity.
(I love newsleecher too)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top