All mobile devices have limited storage options. Therefore, it is imperative for a tester to test an app under low memory conditions. To simulate these conditions, a tester has to fill device memory using dummy files. This is very tedious and time consuming process.
Is there any app or any proper steps to overcome this situation..!!
If you're using emulator to perform test execution have variety of options to control memory availability (both RAM, internal storage and SD card) Just limit the size of the memory type you need to the application size + 5% and you'll get "low memory" environment
There are also other ways already present at Stack Overflow on how to simulate memory shortage. See links below:
How can I force memory pressure for Android debugging?
How do you simulate low memory in the Android emulator?
You can specify the VM Heap parameter when creating the AVD. However, for a real device it doesn't look like you can change the parameters.
It is mentioned on MSDN page,is the requirement strict?My system has 3 GB of RAM and I am not thinking about upgrading my system's ram anytime soon.
Also can I ignore Visual Studio,Windows phone 8 sdk on the whole if I pick up marmalade sdk as the primary development tool?
As someone who has to estimate system requirements with some regularity, I take minimum system requirements with a grain of salt. The minimum requirements have some padding, because nobody really knows where the edge really is, and as estimators we have to play it safe.
Usually, you can get stuff to run even if you don't meet the minimums.
Note that this doesn't mean that it will run well.
Not sure about Marmalade. You should consider separating these two questions into separate postings.
For successfully developing windows phone application minimum hardware requirement is necessary.
Currently I am using the DTWGestureRecognizer open source tool for Kinect SDK v1.5. I have recorded a few gestures and use them to navigate through Windows 7. I also have implemented voice control for simple things such as opening PowerPoint, Chrome, etc.
My main issue is that the application uses quite a bit of my CPU power which causes it to become slow. During gestures and voice commands, the CPU usage sometimes spikes to 80-90%, which causes the application to be unresponsive for a few seconds. I am running it on a 64 bit Windows 7 machine with an i5 processor and 8 GB of RAM. I was wondering if anyone with any experience using this tool or Kinect in general has made it more efficient and less performance hogging.
Right now I removed sections which display the RGB video and the Depth video but even doing that did not make a big impact. Any help is appreciated, thanks!
Some of the factors I can think of are
Reduce the resolution.
Reduce the frames being recorded/processed by the application using polling model i.e. OpenNextFrame(int millisecondsWait) method of DepthStream, ColorStream & SkeletonStream
instead of event model.
Tracking mode is Default instead of Seated(sensor.SkeletonStream.TrackingMode =
SkeletonTrackingMode.Default) as seated consumes more resources.
Use sensor.MapDepthFrameToColorFrame instead of calling sensor.MapDepthToColorImagePoint method in a loop.
Last and most imp. is the algorithm used in the open source tool.
I am developing an application, and need to estimate how much resources (RAM and ROM) it will need to run on a device. I have been looking online, but couldn't find any good tip on how to do this.
The system in question is an industrial system. The application itself will need to have a .NET Compact framework, and following components besides Windows CE Core: SYSGEN_HTTPD (Web Server), SYSGEN_ATL (Active Template Libraries), SYSGEN_SOAPTK_SERVER (SOAP Server), SYSGEN_MSXML_HTTP (XML/HTTP), SYSGEN_CPP_EH_AND_RTTI (Exception Handling and Runtime Type Information).
Tx
There really is not way to estimate this, becasue application behavior and code can have wildly different requirements. Something that does image manipulation is going to likely require more RAM than a simple HMI, but even two graphical apps that do the same thing could be vastly different based on how image algorithms and buffer sizes are set up.
The only way to greally get an idea is to actually run the application and see what the footprint looks like. I would guess that you're going to want a BOM that includes at least 64MB or RAM and 32MB of flash at a bare minimum. Depending on the app, I'd probably ask for 128MB of RAM. Flash would greatly depend on what the app needs to do.
Since you are specifying core OS components and since I assume you can estimate your own application's resources, I assume you ask for an estimation of the OS as a whole.
The simplest way to have an approximation is to build an emulator image (CE6 has an arm one) and it should give you a sense. The difference with the final image will be with the size of the drivers for the actual platform you will use.
We have some users which are using lower-CPU powered machines and they're encountering slow response times using our web application. Is there any way for me to do testing so that I can simulate lower CPU rates?
For example, I have 2.3 Ghz computing power, can I lower it to 1.6 Ghz or lower so that I may be able to test it?
BTW, our customers are using Windows. I have to simulate low computing power on Internet Explorer as browser.
Most new CPUs multiplier can easily be lowered (Intel: Speedstep, AMD: PowerNow!). This is used to save power. With RMclock you can manually adjust your multiplier and thus lower your frequency and make your pc slower. I use this tool myself so I can tell you that it works.
http://cpu.rightmark.org/products/rmclock.shtml
The virtual machine Bochs(pronounced boxes) allows you to set a instructions per second directive. It's probably the slowest emulator out there as it is though...
Create some virtual machines.
You can use VirtualPC or VirtualBox both are free.
I would recommend to start something on the background which eats up all your processor cycles.
A program which finds primenumbers or something similar.
Another slight option in addition to those above is to boot windows in a lower resource config. Go to the start menu,, select run and type MSCONFIG. You can go to the boot tab, click on advanced options and limit the memory and number of of processsors. It's not as robust as the above, but it does give you another option.
Lowering the CPU clock doesn't always give expected results.
Newer CPUs feature architecture improvements which make them more efficient on an equvialent clock basis than older chips. Incidentally, because of this virtual machines are a bad way of testing performance for "older" tech as well.
Your best bet is to simply buy a couple of older machines. Using similar RAM (types and amounts), processor, motherboard chipsets, hard drives, and video cards. All of which feed into the total performance of the machine itself.
I bring the other components up because changing just one of them can have an impact on even browser performance. A prime example is memory. If your clients are constrained to something like 512MB of RAM, the machines could be performing a lot of hard drive access for VM swaps, even for just running the browser. In this situation downgrading the clock speed on your processor while still retaining your 2GB (assuming) of RAM would still not perform anywhere near the same even if everything else was equal.
Isak Savo'sanswer works, but can be a bit finicky, as the modern tpl is going to try and limit cpu load as much as possible. When I tested it out, It was hard (though possible with some testing) to consistently get the types of cpu usages I wanted.
Then I remembered, http://www.cpukiller.com/, which does this already. Highly recommended. As an aside, I found this util from playing old 90s games on modern machines, back when frame rate was pegged to cpu clock time, making playing them on modern computers way too fast. Great utility.
Another big difference between high-performance and low-performance CPUs is the number of cores available. This can realistically differ by a factor of 4, way more than the difference in clock frequency you're likely to encounter.
You can solve this by setting the thread affinity. Even IE6 will use 13 threads just to show google.com. That means it will benefit from a multi-core CPU. But if you set the thread affinity to one core only, all 13 IE threads will have to share that one core.
I understand that this question is pretty old, but here are some receipts I personally use (not only for Web development):
BES. I'm getting some weird results while using it.
Go to Control Panel\All Control Panel Items\Power Options\Edit Plan Settings\Change Advanced Power Settings, then go to the "Processor" section and set it's maximum state to 5% (or something else). It works only if your processor supports dynamic multiplier change and ACPI driver is installed correctly.
Run Task Manager and set processor affinity to a single core (or whatever number of cores you want) for your browser's (or any other's) process. Not a best practice for browsers, because JavaScript implementations are usually single-threaded, but, as far as I see, modern browsers actually DO use multiple cores.
There are a few different methods to accomplish this.
If you're using VirtualBox, go into the Settings for the VM you want to slow the CPU speed for. Go to System > Processor, then set the Execution Cap. The percentage controls how slow it will go: lower values are slower relative to the regular speed. In practice, I've noticed the results to be choppy, although it does technically work.
It is also possible to set the CPU speed for the whole system. In the Windows 10 Settings app, go to System > Power & Sleep. Then click Additional Power Settings on the right hand side. Go to Change Plan Settings for the currently selected plan, then click Change Advanced Power Plan Settings. Scroll down to Processor Power Management and set the Maximum Processor State. Again, this is a percentage. Although this does work, I find that in practice, it doesn't have a big impact even when the percentage is set very low.
If you're dealing with a videogame that uses DirectX or OpenGL and doesn't have a framerate cap, another common method is to force Vsync on in your graphics driver settings. This will usually slow the rendering to about 60 FPS which may be enough to play at a reasonable rate. However, it will only work for applications using 3D hardware rendering specifically.
Finally: if you'd rather not use a VM, and don't want to change a system global setting, but would rather simulate an old CPU for one specific process only, then I have my own program to do that called Old CPU Simulator.
The main brain of the operation is a command line tool written in C++, but there is also a GUI wrapper written in C#. The GUI requires .NET Framework 4.0. The default settings should be fine in most cases - just select the CPU you'd like to simulate under Target Rate, then hit New and browse for the program you'd like to run.
https://github.com/tomysshadow/OldCPUSimulator (click the Releases tab on the right for binaries.)
The concept is to suspend and resume the process at a precise rate, and because it happens so quickly the process will appear to just be running slowly. For example, by suspending a process for 3 milliseconds, then resuming it for 1 millisecond, it will appear to be running at 25% speed. By controlling the ratio of time suspended vs. time resumed, it is possible to simulate different speeds. This is completely API agnostic (it doesn't hook DirectX, OpenGL, etc. it'll work with a command line program if you want.)
Old CPU Simulator does not ask for a percentage, but rather, the clock speed to simulate (which it calls the Target Rate.) It then automatically determines, based on your CPU's real clock speed, the percentage to use. Although clock speed is not the only factor that has improved computer performance over time (there are also SSDs, faster GPUs, more RAM, multithreaded performance, etc.) it's a good enough approximation to get fairly consistent results across machines given the same Target Rate. It also supports other options that may help with consistency, such as setting the process affinity to one.
It implements three different methods of suspending and resuming a process and will use the best available: NtSuspendProcess, NtQuerySystemInformation, or Toolhelp Snapshots. It also uses timeBeginPeriod and timeEndPeriod to achieve high precision timing without busy looping. Note that this is not an emulator; the binary still runs natively. If you like, you can view the source to see how it's implemented - it's not a large project. On my machine, Old CPU Simulator uses less than 1% CPU and less than 1 MB of memory, so the program itself is quite efficient (unlike running intensive programs to intentionally slow the CPU.)