Page Zoom - Too Slow (10 Seconds)



  • @mib2berlin Yes it does depend on the page.

    Also remember click at a point in the slider (rather than moving the slider) does not expose this problem (although page complexity is still technically a factor here also).



  • @hot_denim Also remember clicking at a point in the slider (rather than moving the slider) does not expose this problem (although page complexity is still technically a factor here also). You need to 'slide' the slider (and not slide very fast) on a complex page. See the video that I posted a link to previously.



  • @hot_denim Also remember clicking at a point in the slider (rather than moving the slider) does not expose this problem (although page complexity is still technically a factor here also). You need to 'slide' the slider (and not slide very fast) on a complex page. See the video that I posted a link to previously.


  • Moderator

    @hot_denim - Yes. It just doesn't happen here. Not in any of the five tests I ran (Mint and Win 10 on one machine, Win 10 on another, Lubuntu and Win 7 on a third) I have 4 more machines (all Win 10) I can test it on.



  • My hardware is not fast. It's already over 3 years old, and single-core, with on-board graphics. The E-bay page stutters a bit each time is drag the slider, say from 120 and stop at 150% it takes half a second or so to redraw the newly enlarged page.


    Specs: AMD A10-6800K, 8 Gb on Win 7 64-bit • 1.6.689.40 Stable



  • @Ayespy What are the CPU models of your machines. Need to take that in to account to see why you do not see the problem. Also you are the moderator, I am new here, are you one of the developers also ??

    Also remember clicking at a point in the slider (rather than moving the slider) does not expose this problem (although page complexity is still technically a factor here also). You need to 'slide' the slider (and not slide very fast) on a complex page, and the aim is to see the effect from start to end zoom (500% say), and not judge the updates seen inbetween as being the results. See the video that I posted a link to previously.

    Example page:
    http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/Computer-Processors-CPUs/164/bn_661696/i.html?_fsrp=1



  • @Pesala OK. But the problem was looking at it on a larger scale, e.g. from 100% to 500% (not small changes)


  • Moderator

    Ok, just tested it on a fourth machine. Intel dual core 1.46 GHz, 32-bit Win 10 installed, 2 GB of DDR2 RAM @ 266 MHz, Intel Mobil 965 graphics. (second slowest crappiest machine I have) - fraction of a second delay on zoom by any method.


  • Moderator

    5th machine - Win 10 (32-bit on 64-bit capable) laptop running Intel dual core 1.66 GHz processor, 3BG of 366 MHz RAM, Intel Mobile 965 graphics. No delays by any method. Oh. yeah. This is a laptop I put an SSD in.

    @hot_denim - I am a mod, a "Soprano," (internal tester) and NOT a developer.

    For what it's worth, the processor on this latest box is an Intel Mobile Core2 Duo, T5450. The prior test I mentioned was on a T2310. I normally don't name/number CPUs in these posts, because most people won't look up the release date and capabilities of a CPU, so the number means nothing to them.



  • @Ayespy Side question:

    I see your running Windows 10 on all your machines, even the older ones, ones that Windows 7 would be the most ideal. How does Windows 10 compare to what Windows 7 did on these older Core2 1.66Ghz and less machines (in terms of speed, efficiency, response , etc). Would you recommend Windows 10 over Window 7 for these machines ?


  • Moderator

    Next machine. Windows 10 X64 on an AMD Athlon 7550 (dual core, 2.5 GHz), 4GB of DDR2 PC6400 (400 MHz) RAM, NVidia GEForce 6150 nForce 430 onboard graphics (supposedly not Win10 compatible, but I know how to cheat), with 256 MB of dedicated memory.

    No zoom delay by any method.


  • Moderator

    @hot_denim - Win 10 runs better on every machine where I have been able to install it, than did Win7. It boots and shuts down faster. It runs faster, is more responsive, and more economical on resource use.

    Only my 13-year-old XP box was unable to install Win10, so it has Win7 and Lubuntu dualboot.

    Two of these machines came loaded with Vista. Win7 bettered that obviously, and Win10 bettered that even more.



  • @Ayespy mmmmm. When I tested both Windows 7 and Windows 10 in a virtual machine (on a Windows 7 host), Windows 7 was usable, almost normal, Windows 10 was sluggish take about 1-2 seconds for a reaction from a mouse click, which suggests that Windows 10 is more complex and thus require more power to do the same.


  • Moderator

    @hot_denim - when Win10 first cam out with the experimental insider editions only, I tried it on my throwaway Sony laptop (the core2 duo 1.46 GHz with 2 GB RAM above). That machine came new with Vista, and when it looked like it was no longer any good, I bought it a new battery and put Win7 Ultimate on it. It came back to life. Later, the Win7 install became ungodly buggy, would not allow me to update or install anything, and I was considering brain wiping it and installing 7 from scratch, when Win10 experimental builds became available. I signed up as an insider and put 10 on that thing, and it was decidedly better than 7 had ever been. I lived thru the growing pains of 10, including bricking that laptop once, having it refuse to obey the power switch (could not be turned off without removing the battery), etc. I reported all the problems up the ladder to MS. It become smooth as silk eventually, and then the first official 10 came out, and the rest is history.


  • Moderator

    @hot_denim - Don't know what to tell you. I suppose a VM is not dispositive.

    Win10 ran better and used less resources than 7 or 8 on everything I ever put it it on. And that's a pretty fair number of machines.



  • @Ayespy Even when the Minimum memory requirements are 1GB as 512MB compared to Windows 7 (2 times as much), and the same for the processor, ?


  • Moderator

    @hot_denim - "Mimimum" requirements are the same now for both Windows 10 and Windows 7 SP1. 1GB RAM, 1GHz processor.



  • @Ayespy OK


  • Moderator

    @hot_denim - I only know what they are now. I never tracked them. I do know that by the time your Win7 has been updated to SP1, it takes up over twice the space it did when it was installed.

    But I do know for sure that if a machine can run 7 and the processor has a somewhat modern instruction set (like MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, EM64T), it will run better under Windows 10.



  • @Ayespy I tried the problem on a HP Mini Netbook (1GB, Intel Atom 1.66Ghz Processor. Intel G45 Graphics).Not a fast machine. This hardware is different in all way from my original machine.

    But the problem is still there with this machine also.

    By the way, i need to point out, can you try your testing again with the slowest machine of yours, but this time, on the ebay page change the Items Per Page selection to 200 instead of 50 (the url I have does can not account for that). Any difference ?

    Any chance you can record 'how' you do your test and post a link to the video (on a slow machine), (like I did) ?


 

Looks like your connection to Vivaldi Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.