on Jun 16, 2003<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML><HEAD><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR><STYLE></STYLE></HEAD><BODY bgColor=#ffffff><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>HelloVic,</FONT></SPAN></DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003> <FONT face=Arialcolor=#0000ff size=2>I did some of the original speed testing on the 8753D and8753ES, so I have some of the information you need. It can actually befound in the user and programming manuals.</FONT></SPAN></DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ffsize=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I havean 8720D manual, should be the same as the 8753 for the most part. For2-port calibration on, reading 1 data array, 201 points, narrow band, IFBW=3700,the data read time is 1.54 seconds. (remember, this is for a forward and reversesweep, applying 2 port cal, and reading out 1 parameter). If you arereading out only 1 parameter with 1-port cal, I would expect it to be muchfaster (2-3x) so your time of .5 sec is reasonable.</FONT></SPAN></DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ffsize=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>The8753ES (or 8720E or ES) manual shows for the same set-up, the total time is0.151 secs (vs 1.54 above). So, we see that the ES is much faster (muchfaster CP and DSP in the ES). Probably more in line with the 8714ES. Inthis case, GP-IB is typically not the bottle neck, but rather the instrumentmeasurement time can be.</FONT></SPAN></DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ffsize=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Datatransfer time only is also included in the specs section, with form 2 (32 bit,recommended...that's about what the analyzer uses internally)</FONT></SPAN></DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ffsize=2>8753D=85 msec, 8753ES= 15 msec. You can add to that the sweeptime:</FONT></SPAN></DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ffsize=2>8753D=200 msec, 8753ES=77msec. Then there might be some otheroverhead as well (markers on, time domain, it's slower for wide bandmeasurements...).</FONT></SPAN></DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ffsize=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Togive you an idea of LAN vs GP-IB, the new PNA network analyzer familysupports both, with the details that 1601 points over GP-IB is 43 msec, and overLAN is 2 msec.</FONT></SPAN></DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>(201points, the times are 7 ms and 1 msec, but the resolution is 1 msec, so I'm notsure if that's a valid time).</FONT></SPAN></DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ffsize=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Asalways, it's all in the manuals...if you can find it.</FONT></SPAN></DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ffsize=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV><DIV><SPAN class=725302117-17062003><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ffsize=2>Joel</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> vicr@hq.lindsayelec.com [mailto:vicr@hq.lindsayelec.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, June 16, 2003 10:40 AM<BR><B>To:</B> VEE vrf<BR><B>Subject:</B> [vrf] GPIB slowdown<BR><BR></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial>Thank-you to all that responded to my first e-mail. I tried all the tips given without any real success.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial>Turns out my old NI GPIB card was installed such that the IRQ feature was not being used. I disabled one of comm ports and re-installed the card. The free IRQ was found and used.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial>Using the 8753D I can now transfer 201 complex data points in a little under half a second (instead of 12 or 13 seconds). I use OPC? to synchronize the transfer with the sweep. Hartmut's code, using the status register, yielded similar performance.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial>I can work with this, but am a little disappointed. An 8714ES with a LAN connection will transfer data much quicker than this.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial>What is a reasonable performance expectation for an old GPIB card?</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial>Best Regards,</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial>Vic Race</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial>Lindsay Electronics<BR>50 Mary St. W.<BR>Lindsay, ON, K9V 4S7<BR>Voice: 705-324-2196 Ext. 241<BR>Fax: 705-324-5474<BR><A href="http://www.lindsayelec.com">www.lindsayelec.com</A><BR></FONT></DIV>---<BR>You are currently subscribed to vrf as: joel_dunsmore@agilent.com<BR>To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".<BR>To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".<BR>To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". <BR>If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". </BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
The simple answer is no. If you need to impress someone with your coding
skills and speed, use a text editor to look at the .vee file. On that
basis, VEE is a real performance improvement tool compared to any text-based
language. After all specification, design, coding, debugging, testing, and
documentation, programming is about one line per hour for text-based
languages. VEE is about one object per hour. You still need to do all the
steps, but the coding itself is just faster. Look at the .vee file for a
ten-object function and consider how "productive" you are.
If you are after a measure of individual productivity, you need to compare
time to produce the "code" to implement a specific function. Try a time
comparison, make a VEE function of ten to twenty objects. Then translate it
to C or C++. My experience is that an hour of VEE is about the same as four
hours of C for just the coding.
Robert Reavis
Warm Springs Computer Works
Fremont, CA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fields JR, JW Jim (7302) @ IS" <jim.fields@L-3com.com>
To: "VEE vrf" <vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com>
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 2:30 PM
Subject: [vrf] Source Line Counter
> Is there a source line counter for VEE or some other tool which allows
> comparison/analysis of code sets?
> Thanks,
> Jim Fields
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: robert@wscw.com
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
"vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".