 Track this topic | Pages sur ce sujet: < [1 2 3] > | | Utilisateur | Auteur du fil: Grzegorz Gryc Ridiculous Studio 2009 performance for not so huge Excel files... |
|---|
Grzegorz Gryc 
Pologne
Local time: 09:02
 Membre (2005)
français vers polonais
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL | | Local vs LAN project processing speed (1) | Sep 7 |
Williamson wrote:
Trados 2009 studio Beta version, marketed as a normal release. A patch is in the making. |
|
Me too, I think Trados 2009 Studio is only a good beta.
The SP1 will be probably a RC version 
For the local hard drive vs gigabit LAN, I selected only the the tools for which the read/write times were the most important.
Sorry, no time but if even a tool like OmegaT goes from 15 s to, lets say, 12 s, I don't think it makes a real difference in the translator's experience
Trados 2007 Suite (TagEditor)
Opening: 9 min 45 s
Saving: 15 s locally vs 2 min 10 s over the LAN
As you see, the Trados over the LAN performance is ridiculous.
Preview generation:I assume the preview time is the same (the preview is generated locally), so you have 16 min to open, save and preview the file locally vs 18 min over the LAN.
As you see, the Trados 2007 LAN performance is really bad and during some write intensive operations the hell may freeze.
MemoQ 3.6
Opening: 16 min 30 s with preview generation, 15 min without preview vs 21 min 45 s with preview over the LAN (for a moment, we can interpolate this result using 0,9 ratio, so the opening without preview should be something like 19 min 30 s over the LAN, the interpolation may be somehow inexact)
Saving: while opening
Preview generation: while opening (internal viewer), instant preview during the translation if selected.
The local/LAN processing ratio seems correct, so no major I/O handling errors.
The import algorithm need an optimization.
Résumé
So, although MemoQ is slower than Trados 2007 in a pure read/write scenario, the real time preview generation takes only 10% more and it's damn worth of it...
Overall, I would say it's a draw.
BTW.
A "local" Trados 2009 test will follow shortly.
Cheers
GG
  | | | | Grzegorz Gryc
Pologne
Local time: 09:02
Membre (2005)
français vers polonais
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL | | On equal grounds... | Sep 7 |
Gergely Vandor wrote:
Jabberwock wrote:
This is quite interesting... Could you test MemoQ without the preview? |
|
Very good point. It would be interesting to see how MemoQ performs on equal grounds. |
|
I saw the problem, so why I added the preview category.
In fact, in this way, I should add the pretlanslation (because of Across) etc. etc.
But it's only a basic, home made test using the default settings, without optimization...
| None of the other tools provide real time preview. |
|
As SDL says, "ïnnovation delivered"
Cheers
GG
| | | | Grzegorz Gryc
Pologne
Local time: 09:02
Membre (2005)
français vers polonais
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL | | Grzegorz Gryc
Pologne
Local time: 09:02
Membre (2005)
français vers polonais
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL |
Grzegorz Gryc wrote:
Williamson wrote:
Trados 2009 studio Beta version, marketed as a normal release. A patch is in the making. |
|
Me too, I think Trados 2009 Studio is only a good beta.
The SP1 will be probably a RC version |
|
See below...
Trados 2009 Studio
Opening: 24 min 15 s locally vs 24 min over the LAN
Saving: 10 s locally vs 50 s over the LAN
Preview generation: 23 min locally (yes, 23 minutes!)
no internal viewer available, crashed while exporting to the external viewer while the project was not saved.
So, approx. 50% slower than MemoQ in a pure open/save scenario.
If you add the preview generation, almost 4 fimes slower than in Trados 2007, it's simply catastrophic.
Although the local HDD/network ratio is correct for reading, the general I/O performance is frankly bad.
It's the slowest tool in the review, far behind the competitors and even behind Trados 2007 Suite (TagEditor).
Sad but true.
Cheers
GG
[Edited at 2009-09-07 10:04 GMT]
| | | | Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL
Royaume-Uni
Local time: 08:02
Membre (2004)
anglais vers italien
| | as posted in another thread some time ago... | Sep 7 |
by myself...
| | | | VitoSmolej
Allemagne
Local time: 09:02
 Membre (2004)
anglais vers slovène
+ ...
| | 40 minutes?! you got to be kidding .... | Sep 7 |
Jabberwock wrote:
... Freelancers can live with forty minutes of delays per day, even if it means the caffeine intake rises significantly. |
|
... I am afraid, it is not just the rise in the coffee consumption, it's the increase in the domestic violence as well.
Re SP1, I keep fingers crossed, it will come AFTER Microsoft releases #7. Otherwise, we will be tortured again some other ingenious way. As the Great inquisitor supposedly exclaimed:"The b*d dared to die?! And I've had so many ideas what else to ask him under torture".
[Edited at 2009-09-07 12:38 GMT]
| | | | alex73me
Bélarus
|
Grzegorz Gryc wrote:
OmegaT 1.8.1_6
Opening: 15 s
Although it's not comparable 1:1 because the xls file was converted first to ods (Open Office format).
|
|
Could you check it on the latest OmegaT (2.0.4) ? It supports Microsoft Open XML Files, BTW.
WBR, Alex.
| | | | Grzegorz Gryc
Pologne
Local time: 09:02
Membre (2005)
français vers polonais
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL | | Binary formats vs XML... OmegaT 2.0.4... | Sep 10 |
alex73me wrote:
Grzegorz Gryc wrote:
OmegaT 1.8.1_6
Opening: 15 s
Although it's not comparable 1:1 because the xls file was converted first to ods (Open Office format).
|
|
Could you check it on the latest OmegaT (2.0.4)? |
|
Marc Prior asked me to send him the file ad he did the test himself on a very similar old machine.
He had 10 s for ODS and 5 s for XSLX.
Of course, his machine may be a little bit faster than mine
The saving/export is almost instantaneous.
| It supports Microsoft Open XML Files, BTW. |
|
Yes, but the test was made with a binary XLS file.
I insist it can't be comparred 1:1 to the XML based filters.
Generally, the most CAT tools performance is better for XML based files as no external program is invoked in order to import the file (a tool like Trados must run Excel in the background and exchange data with Excel).
Cheers
GG
| | | | Grzegorz Gryc
Pologne
Local time: 09:02
Membre (2005)
français vers polonais
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL | | Trados snail revisited | Nov 7 |
Grzegorz Gryc wrote:
Test file:
300 kB xls file, 1000 rows, 18 columns (no empty cells, plain text, no formatting at all).
Test machine:
Pentium IV 2,6 GHz, 3 GB RAM, file stored over the LAN (Gigabit Ethernet)
Trados 2009 Studio
Opening: 24 min 15 s. |
|
Trados 2009 Studio SP1
Opening: 20 min 25 s.
Somehow better but still at the end of the universe...
Cheers
GG
[Edited at 2009-11-07 19:52 GMT]
| | | | Eleftherios Kritikakis
États-Unis
Local time: 02:02
Membre (2003)
grec vers anglais
+ ...
|
Back then: The internet appears (Revolution)
Now: Web pages introduce smily faces (Not a revolution)
----------------------------------
Back then: Word processing (Revolution)
Now: MS Word 2007 has different menu bars (Not a revolution)
----------------------------------
Bach then: Translation toos appear and find matches and terms (Revolution)
In the middle: Translation tools evolve and they can open lots of files and give good control over some parameters (Progress)
Now: Translation tools introduce lots of options that can't be filtered out during installation, clutter the computer, cost a lot in
a) Work time
b) Opportunity cost (the time and effort you' re wasting while you' re not seeking other options)
and in general, work under the assumption that a translator has become a first-rate geek without any other life than waiting all day what the agencies will indirectly or directly force him/her to buy in order to translate files, and most of them would not even require upgrading to anything more than 2007 tools (at the most).
----------------------------------------------
PS1. Tools such as the Autosuggest, in the hands of a tired translator in a hurry, are a disaster.
PS2. These speed tests are very informative, keep them going.
PS3. Anyone of you know about "Across"? I haven't tried it but friends tell me that "you can't save a copy on your drive, it's all over the internet" and that's a little strange and not a good idea. What if I want to make changes?
PS4. "Sarcasm" was a word noted in the other thread about remarks on studio 09. Well, the last time I checked, sarcasm had a value of "0" in the stock market and other markets, and in some cases even a negative value.
If some of us raise doubts about new tools, it doesn't mean that we are "against progress". Quite the contrary. Personally I was operating virtual offices since 1997... I'm always new to fresh ideas, with this condition: they have to simplify and to make me more productive in my actual job, which is to translate (not to "click on many options"). Modern software is sometimes simplified and fast (I love that), sometimes it gives you easy access and understanding of the options (I love that too), and sometimes it leaves you scratching your head and delaying your actual work.
Let me also clarify this:
- 80% of my total projects require that I deliver a bilingual file.
- 50% of my total projects would not even require a TM, but I have to use it because they fall under the first category "require a bilingual file".
- I could also say that from the 20% of my projects that do not require a bilingual file, half of them could be done on Word without any other tools.
------------------------------------------------------------------
My major concern is that with the cut-off sentences in SDLX and Wordfast etc. I start to lose control of the document as a Writer. The TM is being used by the agencies to re-create documents that make no sense.
That is why I like Workbench for many texts (free flow text), I like SDLX/Wordfast for other texts (tech-med), I like just MS Word for other texts, and so on.
I like them all, each for a specific use, and most of the times I'm able to convince the PMs to let me use the tool that I consider appropriate for the job (Greek legal texts in Wordfast or SDLX are a Greek tragedy, but they' re wonderful in Workbench or just plain Word).
I bought and tried Studio 2009. Then I said "ok, they removed tools that the agencies still want me to use and deliver bilingual files, and they added WHAT?" Autosuggest is horrible in Greek (still requires manual intervention - too many declesions and syntax particularities - for which many Greek translators found the solution by introducing stupid syntax), and I'm still trying to figure out WHAT exactly is the "improvement" for me. So far, nothing.
So I removed it and re-installed Trados 2007, Wordfast, and all other tools that my clients want me to use.
If my clients want me to use 2009, I will install it again (and the clients will be eventually forced to pay more money because all translators will face delays). In the meantime though, I've already seen one (1) very large agency shifting from SDL to Wordfast... although Wordfast is not my favorite option, it seems that this little tool is simplifying their work and it cuts down on employee and translator time.
If you push people too far they will react... and SDL is pushing too far, in an unregulated and problematic market, without controlling any "legislation" or even "standards".
I'm still saying that if Apple or Microsoft ever get into this market of CAT and other such tools and they introduce their own "Friendy Translation Suites with Great Customer Support", all the others will become history.
| | | | Claudio Porcellana
Italie
Local time: 09:02
Membre (2004)
anglais vers italien
| | great answer Eleftherios ! | Nov 8 |
I completely agree with your analysis
Claudio
P.S. the only difference between us, is that I've not bought Studio 
[Modificato alle 2009-11-08 10:51 GMT]
| | | | Laurent KRAULAND
France
Local time: 09:02
Membre (2007)
allemand vers français
+ ...
| | So much for making a CAT tool "mandatory"... | Nov 8 |
Eleftherios Kritikakis wrote:
If my clients want me to use 2009, I will install it again (and the clients will be eventually forced to pay more money because all translators will face delays). In the meantime though, I've already seen one (1) very large agency shifting from SDL to Wordfast... although Wordfast is not my favorite option, it seems that this little tool is simplifying their work and it cuts down on employee and translator time.
|
|
and while SDL Trados was "mandatory" until Studio was released, Wordfast is now their "preferred CAT tool" - a big LOL here, or has this agency realized that linguistic competence is more important than using this or that CAT? It would really be a paradigm shift on their side .
[Edited at 2009-11-08 12:11 GMT]
| | | | Bjørnar Magnussen
Norvège
Local time: 09:02
Membre (2002)
anglais vers norvégien
+ ...
MODÉRATEUR | | Off-topic: Autosuggest and declensions | Nov 8 |
Eleftherios Kritikakis wrote:
Autosuggest is horrible in Greek (still requires manual intervention - too many declesions and syntax particularities - for which many Greek translators found the solution by introducing stupid syntax), and I'm still trying to figure out WHAT exactly is the "improvement" for me. So far, nothing.
|
|
I don't know Greek, but I work professionally with some source languages (Russian and Polish) that have many declensions.
I get around this problem by only registering the stem of the word in multiterm.
Let's take the adjective "unfair" as an example: It is declined as"niesprawiedliwy/niesprawiedliwa/niesprawiedliwe/niesprawiedliwe" in Polish. I register the multiterm entry as "unfair" for English and "niesprawiedliw" for Polish.
If I (this is hypothetically since I only translate into Norwegian) were to translate a text from English to Polish using this MT glossary, I would press "n", get "niesprawiedliw" through autosuggest and then fill out with the appropriate ending. That means 3 keystrokes (n, tab, y) as opposed to 15 keystrokes if I were to type "niesprawiedliwy" from scratch...
I do agree that multiterm (and other similar solutions) seem to favour a certain type of languages. Btw, this is a very interesting discussion (applied comparative linguistics), so if you want to go further, let's open a new topic for it.
| | | | Jerzy Czopik
Allemagne
Local time: 09:02
 Membre (2003)
polonais vers allemand
+ ...
|
I do not know, how your AutoSuggest has been prepared and which TM was the source of that, but in particular for translations German to Polish my AS dictionary, created from a TM with some 1,000,000 segments, keeps suggesting me even declensed forms of polish words accordingly to the case they appear in the source.
AS is working perfectly well for GE to PL translation. The leverage in the other way (PL to GE) is not that impressing, but still leaves me with typing fewer words and using more suggestions, either from MT or from AS.
@Bjørnar: You called that "Applied comparative linguistics". Sounds verey nice and sophisticated. But in fact this is not only MultiTerm, which seems to prefer some languages, but simply the way a dictionary is made: singular nominative case. For German, English and so on not a big difference, if any. For Polish of course a difference. But i have not seen a single dictionary working differently, how should it in fact? Giving you so many entries as many casses we have? We could then end with some 14 entries in Polish... (7 cases, singular, plural and who knows what else - I'm not a linguist).
BTW, because I'm not a linguist possibly I go better in using CAT tools. Simply I do not look theoretically how it should work, but take how it works and make my practical use of that.
The "speed" of Studio seems to be an effect of the environment it uses. This is MS .NET and it is responsible for such and not different performance, so I was told.
[Edited at 2009-11-08 12:35 GMT]
| | | | Grzegorz Gryc
Pologne
Local time: 09:02
Membre (2005)
français vers polonais
+ ...
AUTEUR DU FIL | | These .Net related explications... LOL... | Nov 8 |
Jerzy Czopik wrote:
@Bjørnar: You called that "Applied comparative linguistics" [...] |
|
I'll address this question later (sorry, I'm after 6 hours of CAT classes...).
A damn good question.
| The "speed" of Studio seems to be an effect of the environment it uses. This is MS .NET and it is responsible for such and not different performance, so I was told. |
|
LOL.
No, it's just the SDL programmers' incompetence,
Almost all Windows centered tools do use .Net (DVX, MemoQ, Across, Alchemy Publisher etc.) but the benchmarks I did show T2009 is the slowest up to 10 times (compared to DVX) and up to 100 times for some other tools (compared to Wordfast Pro).
Probably the SDL guys import cells one by one using the slowest data exchange procedure.
BTW.
If they know .Net is so slow, why they use it?
They can use plain C or C++, Dephi or something else.
You was told in an evasive manner.
The high level languages are the easiest for the programmer but not necessarily the most effective.
Some time ago, the programmers near me used to say "the .Net programming is a bad programming".
Now, they're more cautious but the core parts of their work are still done in C++.
Cheers
GG
| | | | | Pages sur ce sujet: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator | Ridiculous Studio 2009 performance for not so huge Excel files... |
