DBSTalk Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Why Can't Slow Receivers be Fixed?

60K views 445 replies 99 participants last post by  Stuart Sweet 
#1 ·
I know this subject has been discussed on other threads many times, but my search has not come up with an answer to my question. I have (2) R22-100s w/HD and an HR24-200. The R22-100s are extremely slow, especially when I first turn them on in the morning. I've done the RAM clearing, and they are still slow. It is obvious that DTV can and has corrected other flaws in the past. Why can't they seem to fix this glitch? I would appreciate any useful solutions to this problem. Also does anyone know if DTV is working on this problem? Thanks.
 
#352 ·
jes said:
I'm sure the HR20-23s have plenty of HP for efficient code... We're not running graphics intense video games or 3D design here. You want the HR2Xs to run fast, optimize the code... The task is still to control a DVR with built in Satellite receiver. ;) The best example of code efficiency is take an old sluggish Windoze XP computer, install Linux w/X windows and you've suddenly got a very usable machine :rolleyes: The latest NR (0x5c8) just emphasized the problem. Things that used to work OK, are now broken on (my) HR20s. The hardware didn't suddenly become short on processing power. :p
Your Post then Begs the Question, Why do all 5 of my HR24-500s all work Fast without any Problems whatsoever other than Slow Channel Changing which is caused by the HDMI Handshake and not Bad Inefficient Code???

What is the Difference in that and my 2 HR23-700s?

They have a Faster CPU Processor and MORE RAM and I have installed a Faster Hard Drive with a Larger Cache, so Go Figure it out for yourself!!!

Also, the longest Process in a Computer is the Paging Process where the CPU has to wait for chunks of data to be delivered so the CPU can process that data. It can only do so many other Multitasks as it waits for that data so a Larger Cache reduces the amount of paging that has to take place by Paging in Larger Chunks of Data to work with.

Also, they added MRV (WHDVR Service), Apps, DoublePlay, etc. so all of these Tasks are Slowing down the CPU as it is trying to do to many things with too little resources.
 
#353 ·
Richierich said:
They have a Faster CPU Processor and MORE RAM and I have installed a Faster Hard Drive with a Larger Cache, so Go Figure it out for yourself!!!
What would your explanation be for the new DirecTivo? It runs on HR22 hardware.

The point is that it's not merely one thing. While a faster processor and additional RAM indeed improve things, that is not the sole problem here. I believe you mentioned knowing someone at D* who said a solution was in the works. If that's true, then that same person could probably tell you that their plan of attack is not to install more RAM and a different CPU in older receivers. In the end, the hardware can't be "undersized" if not everyone is encountering the issues, and a separate company can use the platform without the same concerns.
 
#354 ·
allenn said:
True! The Linux OS running on the HR DVRs is very efficient, but it can only do so much with the existing processor, GPU, and memory. To maintain processing speed when functions are added, you can streamline the code to some degree; but ultimately a faster processor, gpu and more memory must be installed to handle the added functions and / or increased processing demand. 1080p resolution, 3D, HD-UI, SWiM, DECA and VOD were not available when the HR20 was introduced. D* now offers these programming options.
While I understand your point, you haven't had any reference to the dedicated chips the receivers have to handle this workload, so it isn't quite "apples to apples" to compare a PC running video games.
1080p is handled by the GPU.
3D isn't handled by the GPU in the H/HR20, so it isn't an option.
SWiM isn't loading the CPU, as it too is being handled by the tuners.
DECA is handled by a separate chip and is just part of the networking.
VOD, and any loading it might cause would only come into play when downloading.
The HD GUI hadn't bogged down my HR20 last fall, before it was retired.
The H/HR21-23 do have a slower bus speed to their memory, than the HR20.
This caused a slightly slower reaction/response from my HR21, than the HR20, but was minor, though there.
 
#355 ·
Richierich said:
Also, they added MRV (WHDVR Service), Apps, DoublePlay, etc. so all of these Tasks are Slowing down the CPU as it is trying to do to many things with too little resources.
Good point! :)

But then before they had any of those things, the HRs previous to the HR24 were already having speed and remote response issues, which begs the question 'if the equipment was seemingly underpowered then, why add more for it to do?'

The simple and obvious answer was that it was cheaper to do and gave them a marketing edge at our expense.

Meanwhile the competition didn't bring out MRV on old boxes, instead choosing to come up with a new system that is very quick and performs quite well from all reports. Sure, some issues with new gear as you would expect, none of them affecting the speed of operation or responding to the remote and with some limitations built in.

Which was the better path? We don't know yet, but I'm betting the new box approach is very much more in favor of the user than patching older equipment has turned out to be.

With D* HRs, a more full HD causes slowdowns from reports here. Yet with E* that doesn't seem to be an issue. With D* adding Double Play is not only a kludge, but it affected performance, yet E*'s Vip series has had dual live buffers all along.

Got to make you wonder...
 
#356 ·
dsw2112 said:
What would your explanation be for the new DirecTivo? It runs on HR22 hardware.

The point is that it's not merely one thing. While a faster processor and additional RAM indeed improve things, that is not the sole problem here. I believe you mentioned knowing someone at D* who said a solution was in the works. If that's true, then that same person could probably tell you that their plan of attack is not to install more RAM and a different CPU in older receivers. In the end, the hardware can't be "undersized" if not everyone is encountering the issues, and a separate company can use the platform without the same concerns.
What puzzles me is that all 5 of my HR24-500s are Fast and Reliable not just 1 or 2 or 3 but all of them while others Report that their HR24s are Sluggish while running the same Software on the same Platform.

The only difference is that I have installed 2 TB WD20EADS Drives in them which are Faster and have a Larger Cache.

So maybe that is helping my situation and could be an answer along with trying to rewrite the code in a more efficient manner.
 
#357 ·
lparsons21 said:
Good point! :)

But then before they had any of those things, the HRs previous to the HR24 were already having speed and remote response issues, which begs the question 'if the equipment was seemingly underpowered then, why add more for it to do?'
While some may have had problems back then, I'm not sure is was as widespread as you suggest.
 
#358 ·
Richierich said:
What puzzles me is that all 5 of my HR24-500s are Fast and Reliable not just 1 or 2 or 3 but all of them while others Report that their HR24s are Sluggish while running the same Software on the same Platform.
We all seem to have difference viewing habits which may come into play.
I too have been puzzled with a friend who has a HR24 and was needing to reboot it every two weeks as it would bog down and finally come to a point where it stopped responding. This is a completely stock setup, with very few recordings/series links, so almost all viewing was basically live TV, with no doubleplay being used, and maybe just some pausing of the live TV.
 
#359 ·
veryoldschool said:
While some may have had problems back then, I'm not sure is was as widespread as you suggest.
You may not be sure, but the polling done a few years back indicates that it certainly was an issue. And unfortunately the speed and remote response issues show up with all too much regularity.
 
#360 ·
lparsons21 said:
You may not be sure, but the polling done a few years back indicates that it certainly was an issue. And unfortunately the speed and remote response issues show up with all too much regularity.
You've got to love "the polls". :lol:
Those who have problems vote and those that don't have problems don't bother.
I'm not trying to deny some have problems.
It's just not known what the real percentages are.
Had I never had any problems, I wouldn't have come to this and other websites, which suggests there's a bias from the start for any poll here or on another website, as they wouldn't [by nature] include everyone not having problems equally.
 
#361 ·
veryoldschool said:
We all seem to have difference viewing habits which may come into play.
I too have been puzzled with a friend who has a HR24 and was needing to reboot it every two weeks as it would bog down and finally come to a point where it stopped responding. This is a completely stock setup, with very few recordings/series links, so almost all viewing was basically live TV, with no doubleplay being used, and maybe just some pausing of the live TV.
It's as if Memory is Not being Freed Up and a Reboot Frees up that Memory which is really not being used but tied up and Released.

My PC works the same way as it Slows Down and I Reboot it and it goes back to being Fast.

However, all 5 of mine don't even Bog Down or exhibit any problems whatsoever other than Slow when Changing Channels (I don't surf or watch much Live TV so I could care less about that) which is due to the HDMI Handshake.
 
#362 ·
Richierich said:
It's as if Memory is Not being Freed Up and a Reboot Frees up that Memory which is really not being used but tied up and Released.

My PC works the same way as it Slows Down and I Reboot it and it goes back to being Fast.

However, all 5 of mine don't even Bog Down or exhibit any problems whatsoever other than Slow when Changing Channels (I don't surf or watch much Live TV so I could care less about that) which is due to the HDMI Handshake.
You need a better PC!! :) My iMac hasn't been restarted at all except when I go on a trip or have applied an update requiring a restart.

As to your operation of HRs, well I'm glad your glad! I'm of a different opinion.
 
#364 ·
veryoldschool said:
You've got to love "the polls". :lol:
Those who have problems vote and those that don't have problems don't bother.
I'm not trying to deny some have problems.
It's just not known what the real percentages are.
Had I never had any problems, I wouldn't have come to this and other websites, which suggests there's a bias from the start for any poll here or on another website, as they wouldn't [by nature] include everyone not having problems equally.
It has been a very real problem for many of us for a long time. I have had consistent speed problems on my HR-20 and HR-21 since late 2008.
I was this close to tossing the HR-21 out the window. It was unusable. Since then, the HR-21 has actually become faster than my HR-20. There is no rhyme or reason and I have tried EVERY SINGLE tip posted to these forums.
I find it odd that people didn't start seeing problems until the HD GUI because I have had them for years.

I am very tempted to pull the trigger on the HR34/HR24, but I don't want to get screwed by D* again so I'm holding off until they get their act together. If they can't then I'm off to greener pastures. 3+ years is way too long.
 
#365 ·
Richierich said:
It's as if Memory is Not being Freed Up and a Reboot Frees up that Memory which is really not being used but tied up and Released.

My PC works the same way as it Slows Down and I Reboot it and it goes back to being Fast.

However, all 5 of mine don't even Bog Down or exhibit any problems whatsoever other than Slow when Changing Channels (I don't surf or watch much Live TV so I could care less about that) which is due to the HDMI Handshake.
lparsons21 said:
You need a better PC!! :) My iMac hasn't been restarted at all except when I go on a trip or have applied an update requiring a restart.

As to your operation of HRs, well I'm glad your glad! I'm of a different opinion.
That's just it! It's not the computer. Components don't just slow down. Inefficient and poorly written software will continue to consume resources until a reboot is required. The more RAM and faster processor will only help delay or mask the problem.
 
#366 ·
kosh56 said:
That's just it! It's not the computer. Components don't just slow down. Inefficient and poorly written software will continue to consume resources until a reboot is required. The more RAM and faster processor will only help delay or mask the problem.
But I don't have to ever Reboot my HR24-500s and they continue to run Fast without any Problems and I am running the same Software as those who are experiencing Slowness or Sluggishness, so it can't be the Code.

The only thing I have done different than others is the Replacement of my Hard Drive with one that is Faster and has a Larger Cache which reduces the Paging Process which is the Slowest Process of a PC.
 
#367 ·
Richierich said:
The only thing I have done different than others is the Replacement of my Hard Drive with one that is Faster and has a Larger Cache which reduces the Paging Process which is the Slowest Process of a PC.
IOW, if you add new hardware to them, they will perform properly. Pretty damning of the hard drive selection D* made when they put these things together, isn't it?

And that again points to the problem of expecting a software fix to actually fix a hardware deficiency very well too.

Couple those two with the history of software developement with D* and it paints a not so pretty picture.
 
#368 ·
My experience is that the DVR's are much slower than the non-dvr's. For example my HR24-200 is MUCH slower than an H24-200, and its maybe slightly slower if not the same as my H21-100.

I do think the HDGUI did improve things, especially scrolling the guide. There's still room for improvement. 59e or whatever the last NR was made things slower. In fact a buddy of mine has an HR24-500 and his box was MUCH slower than my HR24-200. I even did the NVRAM clear for him and changed the scrolling option. I have the 58c or 5c8 (forget exactly) but its the new NR that is slowly rolling out in the early morning hours. I think this version is a little better than the last - especially scrolling through the playlist. There are still some delays bringing up menus and exiting. I almost wonder if that would be masked if there was some sort of feedback. Like the screen fade in and out. The transition effect would be an indication that the button was accepted and you are "on your way" to that screen. Whatever takes 5 seconds to bring up the menu , list or guide could be prefetching or loading while that transition effect is taking place.

What is the CPU again in the HR24's? Is it this one?
http://www.nxp.com/documents/data_sheet/PNX15XX_PNX952X_SER_N.pdf
That is a really good in depth data sheet with pinouts, signal traces and everything. Worth a look if your into that sort of nitty gritty.
 
#370 ·
skyboysea said:
The next NR is already out and doesn't fix the problem. If possible, the remote response is even worse now and introduce some additional issues. After just two days it is too early to say if it does anything to fix the UI but on my HR20 clicking the list button and start viewing the first program in the list takes about 15 seconds.

Maybe "next NR" is the new "soon".
One can only wonder which HR20 you have....:nono2:

Rich
 
#372 ·
skyboysea said:
The next NR is already out and doesn't fix the problem.
Well, you have to wait more than 48 hours for the DVR to finish Sorting and Indexing the Guide Data for it to then respond as fast as it should going forward.

You can not expect the Speed to be the same as soon as you have the Software Downloaded then it will be 3 days after the Download when all of the Housekeeping Activities are finished.
 
#374 ·
lparsons21 said:
IOW, if you add new hardware to them, they will perform properly. Pretty damning of the hard drive selection D* made when they put these things together, isn't it?

And that again points to the problem of expecting a software fix to actually fix a hardware deficiency very well too.

Couple those two with the history of software developement with D* and it paints a not so pretty picture.
We've known for years that the HRs will run better with a large internal drive as opposed to the paltry stock drive.

Rich
 
#375 ·
cypherx said:
My experience is that the DVR's are much slower than the non-dvr's. For example my HR24-200 is MUCH slower than an H24-200, and its maybe slightly slower if not the same as my H21-100.

I do think the HDGUI did improve things, especially scrolling the guide. There's still room for improvement. 59e or whatever the last NR was made things slower. In fact a buddy of mine has an HR24-500 and his box was MUCH slower than my HR24-200. I even did the NVRAM clear for him and changed the scrolling option. I have the 58c or 5c8 (forget exactly) but its the new NR that is slowly rolling out in the early morning hours. I think this version is a little better than the last - especially scrolling through the playlist. There are still some delays bringing up menus and exiting. I almost wonder if that would be masked if there was some sort of feedback. Like the screen fade in and out. The transition effect would be an indication that the button was accepted and you are "on your way" to that screen. Whatever takes 5 seconds to bring up the menu , list or guide could be prefetching or loading while that transition effect is taking place.
Could you all take a moment and read this post by cypherx? Note how he gives the full model number of each of his HRs. Is that so hard? Believe me, it makes a difference which model you're using. Lumping them all together as "slow" is bordering on the ridiculous.

Rich
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top