Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Tasuki

Companies That Build Trading Computers?

Recommended Posts

I'm in the decision making process as well and so far my thinking is as long as it's a dedicated computer (as mentioned earlier) and has 3 gb RAM, decent pentium processor, and a graphics/video card to handle multiple monitors that should be enough for me - why the need for $4,000+ units...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm in the decision making process as well and so far my thinking is as long as it's a dedicated computer (as mentioned earlier) and has 3 gb RAM, decent pentium processor, and a graphics/video card to handle multiple monitors that should be enough for me - why the need for $4,000+ units...?

 

 

Answer is quite simple---the quality of the components. Cheap graphics cards are just not worth the headache. Get quality. Same for hard drives. I'd recommend getting what's known as "server-grade" hard drives. They last longer, are more reliable, etc. Same shtick applies to power supplies and mother boards. Get quality. Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a lot of great advice on how to trick out your next computer for trading and I want to thank you all for your input.

I was wondering if anyone has any advice as to which computer company like HP, Dell, etc makes the most reliable computer?

Having the fastest computer to meet your trading needs is great ,but if it is always breaking down all only last a year or two, doesn't sound so great anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use several Dell PC and they last a long time for me,

my current main trading PC is a Dell(3 years old)... Most that use the same platform as I do Also like and use Dell.

 

Note: I'm not implying that Dell is the best PC.

 

Regards..

Edited by sep34

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think all computers "reliability" is more or less equal. Many of the same parts you're going to find on a dell can be found on any other machine and likewise. Only so many manufactures make motherboards, hard drives, etc.

 

I say find some online builder like http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/ and just buy a gaming rig that fits your price range.

 

It comes built, you can customize features and most of them come with more than enough CPU power, HD, and Memory out of the box.

 

What i've found in terms of reliability relates directly to what your trade computer is used for. If you're trading on it AND surfing the internet with it then your probability of it crashing due to malware, viruses, trojans, etc. SKYROCKETS. This isn't the "Computers Reliability" at fault, its what you're using it for .

 

Likewise if you're using your trading computer for gaming... the likelihood of something going wrong from a graphics card driver update, or a patch on a game, or the added stress on the components for the high heat during prolonged gaming again skyrockets.

 

What I decided to do was this:

 

Buy 1 PC FOR ONLY TRADING. Ie the ONLY software on it is my Tradestation platform and my brokerage platform. NOTHING ELSE. This avoids registry errors, the temptation to use it to browse online, etc.

 

Use a separate computer for browsing the internet and playing games. If it goes to shit at least it doesn't affect you're P/L. You cn avoid 90% of your reliability problems if you use your head and restrict the usage of the computer to what it was purchased to be used for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the fast reply back, greatly appreciated. I agree with you about have a seperate computer for trading. I am going to check out your link cyberpowerpc.

Since all the computers are pretty equal in reliablity, I was wondering if you can tell me what your recommendations would be for a desktop setup to meet my needs which is mainly to have a computer that would be able to handle intensive live charting and live news feeds example cnbc all at the same time on 2 seperate monitors with out freezing up or cpu running at 100% plus having a crisp video and chart images.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were me I would go for the newer Intel i7 systems as its the "latest & greatest" out right now. You pay a hundred bucks or so premium over the older Core Duo 2's but your technology won't be out of date by the time you purchase it...

 

http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/system/Intel_Core_i7_Configurator/detail

 

Their base one for 799.99 looks just dandy as it is configured stock. You already are going to have 3GB Memory and a decent video card for that price and a very nice CPU. Upgrade what you want to stay within your budget...

 

If you were going to spend an extra 100-150 bucks off the default configuration I would upgrade the memory to one with a faster frontside bus (the 1600mhz is a 29.00 upgrade), I would upgrade the CPU heatsink to any of the other options (see what you like on the comparison, they are all about the same price) for 50.00. Keep things even cooler! And then upgrade the Video card to either a 9600GT 512mb or the 9500GT 1GB for 20-40 bucks depending on what you want. Contrary to popular belife, charting platforms are not graphic intensive. Charting requires good memory, a fast frontside bus, a solid hard drive, and a fast cpu.

 

So for between 800-900.00 depending on how you outfit it you'll have a solid piece of equipment to work with that won't give you any problems running any of your trading stuff.

 

Lets put it this way. I use a computer that is less than half as powerful (2GB mem, 7200RPM HD, Duo 2 Processor, and an ATI X1600 256mb memory card) as the base configuration of that i7 at 799.00 and i've run tradestation with over 100 charts open at one time with live data, two broker platforms up without so much as a glitch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor
Tresor,

What charting package do you know that will run on a Mac? Seriously, I didn't think there were any.

Tasuki

 

Any charting software can run on MAC PRO provided you install Vista or XP OS on it.

 

I do not have MAC PRO but a friend of mine does. I saw it in action. It works quietly (it has 8 or 12 fans built in its case) and is vey very fast. He runs simultaneously two opeating systems and switches between applications designed for each.

 

Before I saw this I didn't even realize this would be possible at all.

 

Regards

Edited by Tresor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are being blinded by technology and slick bs.

 

If an app is designed to run in windows it will run better in Windows without something shimming the hardware. The link is marketing stuff ... and we all know the difference between a used car salesman and a computer salesman, right?

 

The difference is that the used car salesman actually knows when he's lying to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any charting software can run on MAC PRO provided you install Vista or XP OS on it.

 

I do not have MAC PRO but a friend of mine does. I saw it in action. It works quietly (it has 8 or 12 fans built in its case) and is vey very fast. He runs simultaneously two opeating systems and switches between applications designed for each.

 

Before I saw this I didn't even realize this would be possible at all.

 

Regards

 

Funny, I just mentioned in another thread, I run a mac pro with dual monitors. windows on one screen (for ninja) and osx on the other, works great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor
Funny, I just mentioned in another thread, I run a mac pro with dual monitors. windows on one screen (for ninja) and osx on the other, works great.

 

Hi,

 

My friends also runs ninja (4 monitors) on MAC PRO. He says that Windows never hangs or crashes on MAC PRO while it hangs and crashes quite often on machines desiged specifically for Windows.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK.

 

This is tech ignorance at a very special level. Now we have a claim that a mac is more reliable running shimmed windows than machines without extra software between the user and the hardware ??? Get a grip.

 

 

If your mate has hangs on another machine then he either has a flawed installation or he has faulty hardware. I have 4 windows machines. I run XP on most of them but also Windows 7 and Vista.

 

Guess what? No hangs. Never. Guess why? They are not faulty and the software was properly installed.

 

So, my small numbers trump your small numbers. But lets get real. The real issue is simple: when you run Windows in a Mac environment it is shimmed in their in one form or another. That means there is extra software between the user and the hardware. This will inevitably have two effects:

- for the same hardware it will in some way be slower.

- more software is involved so it will be less reliable.

 

And that ignores any premium price one might chose to pay for an Apple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor

Kiwi

 

put evidence where your mouth is. prove windows is slowler on MACs than on PCs.

Edited by Tresor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor

All tests and benchmarks I read so far showed that XP and Vista are faster on Apple machines (boot camp) than on PCs.

 

When you claimed than Windows cannot be natively run on MACs I did not say a word of your ignorance, as I myself am ignorant on many issues. But now show hard facts evidence (not your ''expert'' words) to prove my ignorance.

 

Regards

Edited by Tresor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All tests and benchmarks I read so far showed that XP and Vista are faster on Apple machines (boot camp) than on PCs.

 

When you claimed than Windows cannot be natively run on MACs I did not say a word of your ignorance, as I myself am ignorant on many issues. But now show hard facts evidence (not your ''expert'' words) to prove my ignorance.

 

Regards

 

You are talking about two different things now. Bootcamp is something different than what your friend does. You clearly stated "He runs simultaneously two opeating systems and switches between applications designed for each." With bootcamp this is not possible. With bootcamp, you have to either boot the mac up under OS X or Windows. You cannot have both at the same time. Since under bootcamp, Windows has full control and access over the hardware, the performance will be faster than when you run it under something like Parallels or VMWare Fusion. Both provide a virtual machine that have an extra layer between the applications and the hardware, so by definition this would be slower. If you don't understand that then there really is no point talking with you about these things.

 

I don't know how you can claim that Mac runs Windows natively faster than PC's. If you have two machines with the exact same specs, how can one be faster than the other? If the Mac these benchmarks was ran on has more powerful hardware, then of course it will be faster. This is like saying if you have two cars and one is green and the other red with bigger engine, that red cars are faster than green ones.

 

This is what Kiwi has been trying to tell you, but you don't understand that there is a difference between bootcamp and what your friend is doing. You assume both are the same and is basing your arguement on this wrong assumption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sevensa is technically correct that virtualization (eg parallel, vmware, virtualbox) will always be slower than native (eg bootcamp), but with improvements, it may not matter for most applications.

 

http://www.macworld.com/article/137374/vmwarefusion201.html

 

http://www.ednasia.com/article-22701-virtualizationsliconandsoftwaresalvationortechnologicaltowerofbabel-Asia.html

0901pg29_f3.jpg

 

0901pg24_t1.jpg

Edited by thrunner
added graphics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sevensa is technically correct that virtualization (eg parallel, vmware, virtualbox) will always be slower than native (eg bootcamp), but with improvements, it may not matter for most applications.

 

That is true and I am running vmware myself to have easy portability and is happy with it. I was not disputing that it is a viable option, which in my opinion it is. I was disputing the statements by someone who doesn't understand the difference between virtualization and running it natively, that Mac somehow is faster even though it is an apples to oranges comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that I never said that Windows can not be run natively on Mac hardware. That would join some of the other ignorant statements.

 

My statements relate to the foolishness of suggestions that various shimming softwares are either faster or run more reliably than native operation. No tests are required and any tests you have (you haven't quoted them) will be comparing pears with peaches (ie, the hardware will not be the same).

 

1. Most trading software is designed to run under Windows.

2. Running windows natively on given hardware will always be faster and more reliably than some form of software shim - there are less instructions to run so both will be true by the very nature of software.

 

Note that 2 requires that the hardware be the same (not faulty) and that the people setting up the software don't make mistakes in the setup. Such mistakes form the basis of many benchmarking disputes in the XP/Vista/7/Linux world. I didn't realize they'd crept into macworld as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor
You are talking about two different things now. Bootcamp is something different than what your friend does. You clearly stated "He runs simultaneously two opeating systems and switches between applications designed for each." With bootcamp this is not possible.

 

 

Hello sevensa,

 

Rest assurred I knew I was talking about two different things. That's why I put boot camp in brackets to explain to Kiwi that under these conditions tests were run to prove that Vista is quicker on MACs than on PCs.

 

Take high end Apple and a few high end PCs. Vista on Apple will be faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Agreed since some of the new traders usually lose money in start and some loses more while chasing their lost money and eventually ends up blaming to their brokers part.
    • The crypto market are also in phase of maturing like the forex and other trading assets so we can do much more accurate analysis than before since early days it was purely a luck if the investments in crypto bears results because most of the coins or tokens never come to fruition. Some early birds were also able to make profits on these tokens or coins. e,g., like turtle coin starts with 1 satoshi and go up to 7 sathoshis, quite good rewards. another token lmgx now hovering at 10 started from 1, 
    • How's about other crypto exchanges? Are all they banned in your country or only Binance?
    • Be careful who you blame.   I can tell you one thing for sure.   Effective traders don’t blame others when things start to go wrong.   You can hang onto your tendency to play the victim, or the martyr… but if you want to achieve in trading, you have to be prepared to take responsibility.   People assign reasons to outcomes, whether based on internal or external factors.   When traders face losses, it's common for them to blame bad luck, poor advice, or other external factors, rather than reflecting on their own personal attributes like arrogance, fear, or greed.   This is a challenging lesson to grasp in your trading journey, but one that holds immense value.   This is called attribution theory. Taking responsibility for your actions is the key to improving your trading skills. Pause and ask yourself - What role did I play in my financial decisions?   After all, you were the one who listened to that source, and decided to act on that trade based on the rumour. Attributing results solely to external circumstances is what is known as having an ‘external locus of control’.   It's a concept coined by psychologist Julian Rotter in 1954. A trader with an external locus of control might say, "I made a profit because the markets are currently favourable."   Instead, strive to develop an "internal locus of control" and take ownership of your actions.   Assume that all trading results are within your realm of responsibility and actively seek ways to improve your own behaviour.   This is the fastest route to enhancing your trading abilities. A trader with an internal locus of control might proudly state, "My equity curve is rising because I am a disciplined trader who faithfully follows my trading plan." Author: Louise Bedford Source: https://www.tradinggame.com.au/
    • SELF IMPROVEMENT.   The whole self-help industry began when Dale Carnegie published How to Win Friends and Influence People in 1936. Then came other classics like Think And Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill, Awaken the Giant Within by Tony Robbins toward the end of the century.   Today, teaching people how to improve themselves is a business. A pure ruthless business where some people sell utter bullshit.   There are broke Instagrammers and YouTubers with literally no solid background teaching men how to be attractive to women, how to begin a start-up, how to become successful — most of these guys speaking nothing more than hollow motivational words and cliche stuff. They waste your time. Some of these people who present themselves as hugely successful also give talks and write books.   There are so many books on financial advice, self-improvement, love, etc and some people actually try to read them. They are a waste of time, mostly.   When you start reading a dozen books on finance you realize that they all say the same stuff.   You are not going to live forever in the learning phase. Don't procrastinate by reading bull-shit or the same good knowledge in 10 books. What we ought to do is choose wisely.   Yes. A good book can change your life, given you do what it asks you to do.   All the books I have named up to now are worthy of reading. Tim Ferriss, Simon Sinek, Robert Greene — these guys are worthy of reading. These guys teach what others don't. Their books are unique and actually, come from relevant and successful people.   When Richard Branson writes a book about entrepreneurship, go read it. Every line in that book is said by one of the greatest entrepreneurs of our time.   When a Chinese millionaire( he claims to be) Youtuber who releases a video titled “Why reading books keeps you broke” and a year later another one “My recommendation of books for grand success” you should be wise to tell him to jump from Victoria Falls.   These self-improvement gurus sell you delusions.   They say they have those little tricks that only they know that if you use, everything in your life will be perfect. Those little tricks. We are just “making of a to-do-list before sleeping” away from becoming the next Bill Gates.   There are no little tricks.   There is no success-mantra.   Self-improvement is a trap for 99% of the people. You can't do that unless you are very, very strong.   If you are looking for easy ways, you will only keep wasting your time forgetting that your time on this planet is limited, as alive humans that is.   Also, I feel that people who claim to read like a book a day or promote it are idiots. You retain nothing. When you do read a good book, you read slow, sometimes a whole paragraph, again and again, dwelling on it, trying to internalize its knowledge. You try to understand. You think. It takes time.   It's better to read a good book 10 times than 1000 stupid ones.   So be choosy. Read from the guys who actually know something, not some wannabe ‘influencers’.   Edit: Think And Grow Rich was written as a result of a project assigned to Napoleon Hill by Andrew Carnegie(the 2nd richest man in recent history). He was asked to study the most successful people on the planet and document which characteristics made them great. He did extensive work in studying hundreds of the most successful people of that time. The result was that little book.   Nowadays some people just study Instagram algorithms and think of themselves as a Dale Carnegie or Anthony Robbins. By Nupur Nishant, Quora Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/    
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.