Hello,

I just installed Inkscape on Win7 Ultimate. After just drawing a few lines or circles, it is getting veeeeery sloooow. (I mean takes e.g. 10 seconds for the PC to move an object).
I have 4G of RAM, half is used, processor is running on 50%, no HDD activity.
What can I improve this?
Am i doing (installed) something wrong?

Thanks for the help!

br,
Laszlo

Well, Inkscape is known to have performance issues, which can challenge a computer with fewer resources (RAM). There is one particular issue where simply moving the mouse across the canvas can cause excessive CPU use, as seen in Window's Task Manager. The last I read about it, was with version 0.46, and I don't know if it's been fixed or even improved. Maybe so, maybe not In any case, even though you can see the CPU use fluctuate, you don't notice any slowdown.

You clearly have plenty of RAM though, and should not have any noticeable slowing with the type of drawing you describe. I also use Windows 7, although mine is Home Premium, with 4 gb RAM. Compared to my XP machine with 1.25 gb, I haven't had ANY slowing to the degree I do on the XP system. Although certainly with huge numbers of nodes, heavy use of filters, blurs and/or gradients, Inkscape can slow to a crawl on even the fastest machines around.

But I don't know what to suggest. I guess you could try uninstall/reinstall -- it certainly can't hurt to try it, lol.

With Filters and such it will slow you down. Make sure you don't ZOOM in to high, as this will slow you down as well. If you need to Zoom in for editing, change your >View >Display Mode to <No Filters> or <Outline>.

Got the same problem. Try disabling "visual designs" AND "desktop composition":
1. Right click the programs shortcut/exe
2. select Properties
3. select Compatibility tab
With this workaround inkscape works within my win7 as fast as within my openSusi.

Won't disabling those things interfere with Inkscape's performance, as well? I can see where Compatibility Mode might work. But I don't think slow running on Windows 7 is a very widespread problem in the first place. In fact the original member never replied back, and I've haven't seen or heard of any other reports. It just seems like "desktop composition" might be something Inkscape requires??

Thanks for your objections. They are reasonable.

> Won't disabling those things interfere with Inkscape's performance, as well?
Maybe, I won't consider this as a general solution to improve inkscapes performance

>don't think slow running on Windows 7 is a very widespread problem in the first place
You're probably right, so I will give here some "intel" on my system:
Windows 7 Pro 64bit running on a Thinkpad x301 with 4Gb RAM, SSD-Hard-Drive, Intel Core 2 Duo U9400 with 1.4 Ghz and "Mobile Intel(R) 4 Series Express Chipset Family"-Graphics.

Previous OS was a OpenSuse 12.1 with no performance-issues while using inkscape (haven't use complex filters or similar, primary used it for some network-diagrams).

> It just seems like "desktop composition" might be something Inkscape requires??
I can't answer this question, so maybe you're right. BUT:
- standard-installation of inkscape 0.48 with no extra configuration AND performance for simply drawing a line was horribly poor on my system (empty picture and no filters or blurry stuff used
- turning off the aero-features (hardware accelerated window-decoration with fancy transparancy and window-previews) was the !! workaround !! for better inkscape-performance in my case on my system. Normally I won't consider nor recommend disabling hardware-acceleration for the desktop (don't whats happening by turning off this features).

Can't say, if this maybe a problem in:
- gtk-libs (does inkscape use them?) interfering with hardware-accelerated window decoration
- poor driver for Intel-chipset-family
- poor Intel-chip
- weird case with windows 7 pro 64bit
- my system-configuration (most is pretty standard)

This is a short-way solution which is working well enough for me (other forums pointed out the option in using WinXP + inkscape within a virtual machine - a "wee" bit over-sized in my opinion).

The described problem won't change my opinion on inkscape - simply an awesome tool with no alternative on the market. Can't work without it. Keep up the good work.

Hhhm, interesting. Well if nothing else, perhaps the additional info you provided will help someone else provide some helpful comments.

I think Inkscape might actually use gtk-libs, but that's way over my head. I have recently learned that a lib is a library, but I have no idea what "library" means to a computer program....I might guess some kind of database, maybe). And gtk just sounds really familiar. (I read almost every message posted, whether I understand it or not. I learn a lot, but a lot's still over my head.)

Hi,

I tried the suggestions above but none of those worked. It's hard to say what this problem is.
I have 3 computers:

* one desktop running windows 7 professional (64 bit) with i7 processor and 6 Gb RAM
* a laptop running windows 7 home premium (64 bit) with an i7 2nd generation processor and 4Gb RAM
* and another laptop running Fedora (linux) 32 bit with 1Gb RAM

The windows 7 desktop is fine, the Fedora laptop is slight slow but that's only got 1 Gb RAM. The windows 7 laptop inkscape (with the best specification) runs VERY slow.
I've deleted my inkscape user preferences, and installed the latest version 0.48.2 on there but it makes no difference. Playing around with compability mode makes no difference. In any case, I can see it runs fine on my Windows 7 desktop.

Is it possible to run inkscape in a debug mode to collect some more information??

Thanks for any help.
Edward

I don't know about a debug mode. But if you're interested in tracking this down, you could start at Launchpad, Inkscape's bug tracker https://launchpad.net/inkscape. Or maybe even check on the mailing list for possible existing discussions among developers http://inkscape.org/mailing_lists.php?lang=en.

hey everyone... i'm using windows 7 32-bit on a 2.5ghz dual core and 2gb ram...
inkscape was lagging badly until i tried running in compatibility mode for xp sp3.......
it's made performance significantly better even after adding filters and effects and zooming.....
still lags a bit but it doesn't hang anymore.
haven't disabled anything else.... hope this works for you guys...

Welcome to InkscapeForum!

Wow, that's interesting! I wonder, did you test different compatibility modes, and found XP xp3 to be the fastest? Or did you just try XP sp3, find improvement, and stop there?

I'd like to test. But I'd like to test side by side. Would it be possible to run Inkscape in a compatibility mode, and at the same time, have another instance opened without compatibility? For example, if I opened Inkscape in the usual way, then changed compatibilty mode for Inkscape, would it prompt me to close Inkscape first? Otherwise, I'd have to find a stopwatch.....I wonder if my cell phone has a stopwatch....ah-ha! Yes it does

I'll find a nice large file that would be good to test on, copy it, then I'll test the same commands on one with my usual Win7, 64-bit, and on the other in compatibility mode. Actually I can't do it at this moment, but later tonight I probably can. I'll post my results

thanks brynn
didn't test any other modes just like you said. found xp sp3 better and left it at that
have run two instances at once but both small and haven't experimented with compatibility...
started playing with inkscape only a couple of days ago so if you have any other advice about how
to run it i'd really appreciate it

Ah, well since you're so new to Inkscape, I wonder if you tested the same commands in both modes. It's possible that something else was causing to appear slow or hang. If you run into that again, let us know, and we can work through the issues. It's possible that it actually does run better in Win7 mode, but that you didn't understand what was happening.

I haven't had a chance to test it yet.

worked partially for me:
go to inkscape preferences, go to Filters, set number of threads to whatever your processor can handle. I set it to 8, restart.
then clearly better performance while doing anything on a canvas with objects that have filters.


to compare: before, after 10 minutes of non responsive behaviour, even just for selecting stuff, i just quit process...
on canvas: nothing large - 800x300 pixels filled with a gradient, 2 objects 200x100 pixels that have a filter). However overall performance still is sluggish, like opening menu's.

in both cases (# of threads was by default on 1, now on 8) all is fine on no filters/outline view, extreme zoom slows things down as ususal, but when working with filters, this is the best i found until now.

I tried:

-compability mode for winxp sp3 - no improvement (from shortcut, from .exe)
-on compability tab, disable visual themes - no improvement
-switch off fancy desktop, went back to win7 basic - no improvement
-run dedicated on nvidia gtx-675m - did not even seem to work, no improvement. hard to check whether it was actually using the nvdida, i doubt it, even after setting it up in nvdia config.

-basic system: bto laptop, win7 pro 64-bit, 8 gb 1600 Mhz, i7-2670QM 2.2 Ghz, 128 corsair ssd, just to indidcate it can hardly be in the general specs, could still be something specific though. hope it helps.

i did actually try out the same commands and definitely better after the compatibility mode.... without running any other programs
i was talking about advanced preferences and settings in inkscape for better peformance

Welcome to the forum, Juno Rebel

That's interesting info as well!
I've never thought of adjusting Inks Prefs > Filters > Threads, because I don't really understand what "threads" means. I have looked it up at TechWeb, but I'm still not really clear. It sounds like adding more threads, in this case, means that it will allow several separate processes to work on displaying the filter. Presumably meaning that it gets displayed faster..... Is that a proper, though general, exlplanation?

Displaying filters has long been a problem for Inkscape. It seems that if the answer was so simple as changing the number of threads, I would have heard about it a long time ago. I'm hoping someone can explain this a little more in context for me?

Note that I have no problem waiting for 0.49, but if the answer really is so simple, I'll be all over it. Is there some maximum number of threads that can be set safely?

Thanks

brynn wrote:I've never thought of adjusting Inks Prefs > Filters > Threads, because I don't really understand what "threads" means. I have looked it up at TechWeb, but I'm still not really clear. It sounds like adding more threads, in this case, means that it will allow several separate processes to work on displaying the filter. Presumably meaning that it gets displayed faster..... Is that a proper, though general, exlplanation?

A computer program is a sequence of operations that are executed by the processor. A traditionnal processor can only handle one program at a time. You have the feeling that you can execute several programs at the same time because the operating system as a scheduling mechanism that makes that one program executes its operations, then after a short time it switches to another program that can run (while the first one is paused), then a third can run, and so on. As this switch accurs several million times in a second, you can not see it happening.

Now, modern CPUs have several cores. Dual core CPU are common, 4 core CPU are common too, high-end CPU can have 6 cores, and you can even have more (this one has 12 core for example). Intel has developped a technology they call HyperThreading that enables the core of their CPUs to handle two programs at a time. I don't have the details about the technology, the only things I know is that (1) it somewhat doubles the number of programs your computer can run without doubling the number of cores and (2) it's not as efficient as having 2 times more core (because of CPU cache memory that is to be used by two programs instead of one, and such things).

So, for example, my CPU has 4 cores at 2.5Ghz and hyperthreading. So it can handle 8 programs at the same time, for a total of 20 000 000 000 operations by second (approximately, and in the best case. In practice, it's more complicated because for example some operations take multiple CPU cycles while some other only take one. But that's not the problem here, this is just an example).

The problem is that Inkscape is only one program. So when I use it, it can only do 2 500 000 000 operations by second.

Here come the threads: threads are sometimes called "light processes" (not sure about the correct word, in french we say «processus légers»), that are a way to split one program into several parts, each of them being able to be handled by one core (two of them for each core with HyperThreading). So, in Inkscape's preferences, I can set "Number of threads" to 8, then Inkscape is split into 8 parts that are handled in parallel by the CPU, so I have access to 100% of its calculation power.

Using the full power of multi-core CPUs is somewhat a challenge because splitting a program into several parts is not trivial at all. There are numerous things to think about, and it's not always possible at all. It's great that Inkscape developpers managed it. If you want to google some keywords you can search "parallel programming" or "dead lock" but I have to warn you that it might be a pretty boring reading…

So your question was about the number of threads that you must specifyu in the options. You can set 2 times the number of cores your CPU has. If you set less than that you won't take advantage of all the power of your CPU. You shouldn't have problems if you set more than that, but don't go too high either, it's useless to set 500 threads if your CPU can handle 4. With very big values you should end up in a situation where your computer loses time managing to much useless threads. In conclusion, a safe value can be 8.

Now the problem with 32 bits vs 64 bits : the main advantages of 64 bits over 32 bits are:

• With 32 bits you can have 2^32 bits of RAM = 4Gb ; with 64 bits you can have 2^64 bits of RAM = ~2000Tb (no mother board that I know can handle so much but it's the limit of the technology)
• The CPU can easily handle bigger numbers or more precise decimal numbers (but at a point that it's only interesting for scientific calculations)

So, if you are looking for performance, 64 bits will give you no added value. The only thing it can help you with is having more than 4Gb of RAM.

Well, no, there's something very important about having a 64 bits system: you can say "32 bits is so 20th century".

Thank for the welcome, Brynn!

Your assumption is pretty much correct, and Mathieu147 explained and answered your questions, i think.

Two additions: you should not have to worry about setting the number of threads too high, inkscape resets it to the max if you go too high (i set 16, just to try, restart inkscape, went back to look and it was at 8 again, the max for my quadcore)

Second, i think this only helps if your filters are blurs, although i do not know how inkscape treads filters in this respect. According to the prefs, it shoud help rendering blurs.
Interesting though is that i have no performance issues on handling regular blurs, that is: the blurs you create from within layers or object Fill/stroke options. it starts only when using Filters-->Blurs-->make a choice (haven't had the time for proper testing, deadlines in the way

Omgoodness, I have learned 2 awesome new things in one day about Inkscape, and this is one! I'll be anxious to learn how much better performance I can get for filters, by changing the threads, which hopefully I can do later today.

I just have one question about your info, Mathieu147. Well, it's more about my computer, but based on the info you provided. My computer is a laptop running Win7, 64-bit. I have understood since I bought it that 64-bit means that it has 2 cores (which I understand generally to be 2 hard drives). But in my system info, there's a "Q" which makes me think there might be 4 of something. The name of the processor is Intel Core i7, but that doesn't necessarily reveal anything to me. Like I don't think there's 7 of something. (It's probably like a 7th generation of this type of processor, I think.) Anyway, you mentioned that computers can have 1, 2, 4, or even more cores, which makes me wonder why there aren't, you know 96-bit or 128-bit operating systems. I think the answer that is somewhere in the info you provided, so I will study it more carefully.

But anyway, my question regarding Inkscape....well, actually you and JR have also answered that too. I was pondering whether to try 2 threads or 4 in Inks Prefs. But it sounds like I can put 8, and after a restart, Inkscape will tell me the highest value I can have (something less that 8 probably).

JR, regarding the info you provided about this probably working better for blur type of filters -- those are the main culprits, in both my opinion and my experience. I know that filters generally provide raster content for Inkscape. But the basic blur is the most commonly used, in my experience, especially the one in the F/S dialog. I suspect that you may have more trouble with the blurs in the Filters menu, because they have the blur value preset, and usually to some extreme value (that's necessary to create the desired effect). Plus they might have a few filter primitives with blurs. But it sounds like you know much more about it than I do.

I'm also interested to learn that the way the new renderer works is by using the 2nd or other cores.....well I thought someone said it, but now I can't find it. It might have been said in another topic. But anyway, that's fascinating as well. Does that mean that people with 32 bit systems won't see much improvement in speed of rendering? Or can you have a 32 bit system with more than 1 core. Hhhmmm.....well I have a lot of new stuff to study now. The difference between 32 and 64 bits was explained to me (when I bought this computer) as having either 1 drive or 2. But now we're talking about processors, not hard drives. Perhaps I misunderstood "drive" to mean hard drive, when it actually means processor??

Anyway, thanks to both Mathieu147 and Juno Rebel, for taking the time to explain things that are WAY off the general topic of Inkscape. I really, really appreciate it. Plus hopefully I'll be able to help others with filter delay issues

brynn wrote:I just have one question about your info, Mathieu147. Well, it's more about my computer, but based on the info you provided. My computer is a laptop running Win7, 64-bit. I have understood since I bought it that 64-bit means that it has 2 cores (which I understand generally to be 2 hard drives). But in my system info, there's a "Q" which makes me think there might be 4 of something. The name of the processor is Intel Core i7, but that doesn't necessarily reveal anything to me. Like I don't think there's 7 of something. (It's probably like a 7th generation of this type of processor, I think.) Anyway, you mentioned that computers can have 1, 2, 4, or even more cores, which makes me wonder why there aren't, you know 96-bit or 128-bit operating systems. I think the answer that is somewhere in the info you provided, so I will study it more carefully.

32 or 64 bits has absolutely nothing to do with hard drives. It's only CPU related. It has nothing to do with the number of CPU cores either. You can have a 32 bits multiple-core CPU or a single-core 64 bits CPU.

In a program, every operation is coded in binary, using a defined number of bits. So 32 bits programs have their instructions coded using 32 bits, while 64 bits programs have instructions coded on 64 bits. A 64 bits CPU can run 32 bits programs, but a 32 bits CPU can not execute a 64 bits program because all the instructions are 2 times too long, so it can not read them entirely.

In a CPU, a core is a computation unit. Having a CPU with two cores or two CPU with only one is pretty much the same.

The 7 in Core i7 doesn't mean your CPU has 7 cores just like a BMW 320 doesn't have a 320-cylinder engine. I don't really know what it means, it's just like a model number or something. There are Core i5 and Core i3, too. There are some Core i7 that have 2 cores, some have 4 and some have 6. If you Right-click on «My computer» and go to «Properties», you should see how much you have. Or give us the exact model number and we'll find out. Every Core i7 has HyperTreading.

It's, at the moment, useless to have a more-than-64-bits operating system, because we are very far away from the max-2000Tb-of-RAM limit, and that's the only main advantage of 64 bits systems.

brynn wrote:But anyway, my question regarding Inkscape....well, actually you and JR have also answered that too. I was pondering whether to try 2 threads or 4 in Inks Prefs. But it sounds like I can put 8, and after a restart, Inkscape will tell me the highest value I can have (something less that 8 probably).

JR, regarding the info you provided about this probably working better for blur type of filters -- those are the main culprits, in both my opinion and my experience. I know that filters generally provide raster content for Inkscape. But the basic blur is the most commonly used, in my experience, especially the one in the F/S dialog. I suspect that you may have more trouble with the blurs in the Filters menu, because they have the blur value preset, and usually to some extreme value (that's necessary to create the desired effect). Plus they might have a few filter primitives with blurs. But it sounds like you know much more about it than I do.

As I said earlier, splitting a calculation process between several threads is not trivial. Maybe the simple blur (the one you can use with the F/S dialog) can be computed this way, but the blur in the filter dialog is more complex. I suppose that the "F/S blur" is a special case that is easy, and the "filters blur" is a general case that can not be computed easily. In fact, I don't know at all, I'm just thinking…

brynn wrote:I'm also interested to learn that the way the new renderer works is by using the 2nd or other cores.....well I thought someone said it, but now I can't find it. It might have been said in another topic.

Maybe that was me?

brynn wrote:But anyway, that's fascinating as well. Does that mean that people with 32 bit systems won't see much improvement in speed of rendering? Or can you have a 32 bit system with more than 1 core. Hhhmmm.....well I have a lot of new stuff to study now. The difference between 32 and 64 bits was explained to me (when I bought this computer) as having either 1 drive or 2. But now we're talking about processors, not hard drives. Perhaps I misunderstood "drive" to mean hard drive, when it actually means processor??

32 bits users will see the same improvements that the 64 bits users. And the seller who mistakenly told you about 64 bits having something to do with hard drives certainly didn't understand anything

You can buy a computer preinstalled with a 32 bits version of Windows, or a 64 bits version, but the CPU will always be 64 bits-capable. Intel and AMD stopped making 32 bits CPU a long while ago.

brynn wrote:Anyway, thanks to both Mathieu147 and Juno Rebel, for taking the time to explain things that are WAY off the general topic of Inkscape. I really, really appreciate it. Plus hopefully I'll be able to help others with filter delay issues

Brynn, many, many times i have used your posts/info to help me along without you even being aware! When i saw this thread, i was looking for a solution myself, and happened to find something that worked for me. You really know much more about inkscape than i will ever forget - how goes the saying..? Anyway, glad i could return the favour a little.

I just hope it helps you along too. Mind you: working with filters is still slow with this setting, so i am still switching between views a lot. It also helps to use the right order, well if it's right i dont know, but it helps to first zoom to the level you want, then activate filterview so it needs to render it just that once.

Have a nice day! And oh yeah, before i forget: 32 bits is sooo previous millenium

Thanks again guys

(When I bought this computer, I think the salesperson did not know exactly how to answer my questions. So I'm not surprised that I didn't get the proper info. I didn't really think I had 2 hard drives, but I had 2 of something important, where each had 32 bits. It all makes so much more sense now, lol!)

brynn wrote:I had 2 of something important, where each had 32 bits.

Well, that's not the case either, you have 2 (or 4, or 6) cores that are each 64 bits. Your CPU can read longer instructions, so the inscructions can read larger numbers, more precise decimal numbers, or bigger RAM addresses (that's why you can have more RAM on a 64 bits system).

Well, clearly the salesperson either didn't know the answers to my questions (and made them up), or didn't want to take the time to explain the answers. I guess I have some research to do....

Anyway, thanks again

Update FYI - I changed threads to 8, then restarted Inkscape. Inks Prefs still showed 8 threads. Not sure if "requires restart" meant restart Inkscape or restart computer, I also restarted the computer. It still shows 8.

I'm pretty sure I don't have 4 cores. The system info reads: "Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU, Q 720 @ 1.60 GHz, 1.60 GHz" (I added the commas for clarity but they don't actually appear.) It's the Q in that Q 720 that made me wonder if something was "quad". If it IS a quad core, then wow, that salesperson really had no idea what he was talking about, lol. And I have way more computer than I thought I had, too.

Anyway, it does make a noticable difference for me, and I couldn't be happier I wouldn't call it a huge difference, but noticable, significant, and very helpful. At times when I had to wait maybe 3 to 5 seconds for a significant zoom (approx 10 x) now takes only about 2 to 3 seconds. That could be seen as almost doubling performance, if you were looking only at that object, in that file, at this point in it's development.

Thanks again for everyone's comments