The Corsair User Forums  

Go Back   The Corsair User Forums > Corsair Product Discussion > Corsair Link

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 252 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #136  
Old 05-12-2015, 01:54 AM
Nadar Nadar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 49
POST ID # = 778701
Nadar Reputation: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by _pseudonym View Post
And yes, they unfortunately do want to collect all sorts of information from you, but I'm sure you can find a way to tell them what they want to hear.
I just lie as I always do when someone tries to force information from me that's none of their business, I just dislike being put through that. A onetime email address is probably also the smart thing here, as this seems like a company that will spam you forever.

That aside, I'm still confused about their terms of evaluation/trial and the different versions. It seems to me like the only free option is a limited version called "evaluation" for the eclipse version "special" for the classic IDE.

Just to warn anyone that want to go down this path, I tried to install the "classic IDE" version, and it failed to install on a 64 bit system. Hopefully the Eclipse version will work on modern OS'es.
Reply With Quote


  #137  
Old 05-12-2015, 10:59 AM
omegatotal omegatotal is offline
Hand Me Down OverClocker
omegatotal's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 42
POST ID # = 778746
omegatotal Reputation: 10
Default

Email catch all's are nice, I can give out any email address on my domain and know exactly who is selling my info.

Then when I start getting spam, use some scripting/mail rules to 'return to sender' and also forward a copy to the support email at the original page, with a few choice words in the subject line. :-P

I really wish corsair would open source the spec on the USB protocol for all devices, but I also understand protecting your IP from getting copied for/by counterfeiters.. :-/
Reply With Quote


  #138  
Old 05-13-2015, 10:27 AM
StealthGaming StealthGaming is offline
Registered User
StealthGaming's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 371
POST ID # = 778962
StealthGaming Reputation: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by omegatotal View Post
Email catch all's are nice, I can give out any email address on my domain and know exactly who is selling my info.

Then when I start getting spam, use some scripting/mail rules to 'return to sender' and also forward a copy to the support email at the original page, with a few choice words in the subject line. :-P

I really wish corsair would open source the spec on the USB protocol for all devices, but I also understand protecting your IP from getting copied for/by counterfeiters.. :-/

Corsair isn't going to release the Link software USB protocol no matter how much the select few continue to raise Cain.

I'm not trying to insult anyone, but it's readily apparent some don't have a sense of business. Has anyone ever heard of a Non-Disclosure Agreement, Intellectual Property Rights and or Patent Rights?

Corsair doesn't own the Intellectual Property Rights for the LINK software, it's leased from CoolIT. A violation of their Legal agreement would cause Repercussion in the Hundreds of Thousands if not Millions with Attorney's have a field day.

Any Corsair Employee can weigh on this if it's not correct or if the LINK software is owned outright by Corsair, please correct me if i'm wrong?
Reply With Quote


  #139  
Old 05-13-2015, 11:31 AM
StealthGaming StealthGaming is offline
Registered User
StealthGaming's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 371
POST ID # = 778970
StealthGaming Reputation: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by red-ray View Post
As is often the case you are half right and failed to research this before you posted. The H100iGTX comes from http://asetek.com/customers/do-it-yo...h100i-gtx.aspx.

An interesting question is given it does not come from CoolIT how did they manage to get CL to support it?

As you do not know the exact terms of the NDA you are just speculating. For all you know Corsair may be able to release such information provided an appropriate NDA is setup.

If you would have bothered to read my post Unofficial Hydro Series Installation Guide, it clearly states the H80i GT and H100i GTX are Asetek made pumps.

Red-ray you don't even know the difference between a Core Parking issue and a Memory Leak issue.
Reply With Quote


  #140  
Old 05-13-2015, 11:32 AM
Nadar Nadar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 49
POST ID # = 778971
Nadar Reputation: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthGaming View Post
Corsair isn't going to release the Link software USB protocol no matter how much the select few continue to raise Cain.

I'm not trying to insult anyone, but it's readily apparent some don't have a sense of business. Has anyone ever heard of a Non-Disclosure Agreement, Intellectual Property Rights and or Patent Rights?

Corsair doesn't own the Intellectual Property Rights for the LINK software, it's leased from CoolIT. A violation of their Legal agreement would cause Repercussion in the Hundreds of Thousands if not Millions with Attorney's have a field day.

Any Corsair Employee can weigh on this if it's not correct or if the LINK software is owned outright by Corsair, please correct me if i'm wrong?
I'm sorry, but I think it's you who don't understand. Corsair sells us hardware that depends on "free" software to use. The software isn't really free, but you pay for it when you pay for the hardware. This software doesn't work properly, and hasn't done so in years. They show no interest or capability to solve the issues (it's hard to tell which it is). We who bought the hardware are stuck with a product we can't use, so we ask for a desciption of how to communicate with the hardware we have bought to compensate for the fact that the broken software renders the hardware useless.

I struggle to see how that has anything to do with not having a sense of business. To me, as a customer, it's of no interest whatsoever how Corsair made the software, it's a part of a product I bought and it doesn't work. What deals and agreements they would have made is completely irrelevant for me, I only have an agreement with Corsair (by purchasing products from them).

If Corsair lacked the knowledge to produce the software themselves, they should hire someone to make it for them. It's obvious to me that such an agreement would give Corsair all IP rights to the software, anything else would be a grave error on Corsairs part. On top of this, we're not asking for the source code for the CL software, but simply how to communicate with the hardware. To have signed a deal that makes that a secret, would seem to me to be extremely short sighted. When you combine this with the fact that the software hasn't been fixed within anything resembling a reasonable time frame, I see only two possible solutions: Corsair renegotiates the deal and secure the necessary rights, or they recall all the products. To me it's that simple.

Last edited by Nadar; 05-13-2015 at 11:40 AM.
Reply With Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
  #141  
Old 05-14-2015, 10:47 AM
StealthGaming StealthGaming is offline
Registered User
StealthGaming's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 371
POST ID # = 779148
StealthGaming Reputation: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by red-ray View Post
Your post should have stated that and also included the links. Given that CL reports both CoolIT and Asetek hardware it is clear that the NDA situation is not as simple as you seem to think. I feel such statements as the ones you made are pointless unless the are made by Corsair employees.

You totally failed to address

As regards your incorrect statement as to my knowledge then yet again you need to do your research before posting. I assume you did not include a link to justify this as there is no post that I made to link to, then again many of your posts fail to have appropriate links.

Here is the link as requested:

http://forum.corsair.com/v3/showthread.php?t=135179

Red-ray quoted " That is what I expected would be happening and eventually the system will be low on memory and things will be sluggish. All you can do is wait for Corsair to fix their code and in the meantime exit and restart CL one in a while ".

Care to explain to the Forums how the Corsair LINK is related to the stuttering?

The issue was related to " Core Parking ", so it appears you were incorrect once again.
Reply With Quote


  #142  
Old 05-14-2015, 12:33 PM
Nadar Nadar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 49
POST ID # = 779161
Nadar Reputation: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthGaming View Post
Here is the link as requested:

http://forum.corsair.com/v3/showthread.php?t=135179

Red-ray quoted " That is what I expected would be happening and eventually the system will be low on memory and things will be sluggish. All you can do is wait for Corsair to fix their code and in the meantime exit and restart CL one in a while ".

Care to explain to the Forums how the Corsair LINK is related to the stuttering?

The issue was related to " Core Parking ", so it appears you were incorrect once again.
I have over 600 hours of play time in BF4 and have heard the "core parking" claim many times. I've yet to spot any difference whatsoever, and considers this more of an urban myth than a real issue. It's to me very unrealistic that Windows would, even if it could, park cores while they were in use.

That aside, CL's high CPU and RAM usage could easily create lag conditions on a not too powerful computer. That CL has memory leaks is simply a fact, I've established that a long time ago. Just let it run, and it eventually will crash. I think the longest I've had it run in one go is somewhere around 48 hours. Another thing is that such a small program, with so few tasks should only use a very few CPU cycles once in a while to check on things if it were made correcly. It shouldn't be able to reach 1% on all but the very weakest CPU's imo.

What strikes me is that, as far as I could read, nowhere in the linked thread did it say that disabling core parking solved the problem. Still yet, you concluded that this was the problem, despide CL using resources like a mad bat out of hell.

This discussion is so off topic to this thread that it constitutes spam. Is there are point to your argument except that we are stupid for wanting the USB protocol spesification?
Reply With Quote


  #143  
Old 05-14-2015, 12:51 PM
StealthGaming StealthGaming is offline
Registered User
StealthGaming's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 371
POST ID # = 779162
StealthGaming Reputation: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadar View Post
I have over 600 hours of play time in BF4 and have heard the "core parking" claim many times. I've yet to spot any difference whatsoever, and considers this more of an urban myth than a real issue. It's to me very unrealistic that Windows would, even if it could, park cores while they were in use.

That aside, CL's high CPU and RAM usage could easily create lag conditions on a not too powerful computer. That CL has memory leaks is simply a fact, I've established that a long time ago. Just let it run, and it eventually will crash. I think the longest I've had it run in one go is somewhere around 48 hours. Another thing is that such a small program, with so few tasks should only use a very few CPU cycles once in a while to check on things if it were made correcly. It shouldn't be able to reach 1% on all but the very weakest CPU's imo.

You are incorrect for assuming urban myth and Core Parking has no affect in games. Obviously you are not aware of the core parking feature built into Windows which can be traced back to Windows 7.

With 600 hours in Battlefield i would expect someone to know the difference between stuttering and lag. Everyone knows the Net Code is screwed up in battlefield however it has nothing to due with the game stuttering.
Reply With Quote


  #144  
Old 05-14-2015, 01:16 PM
Nadar Nadar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 49
POST ID # = 779166
Nadar Reputation: 12
Default

This is going even further off topic...

Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthGaming View Post
You are incorrect for assuming urban myth and Core Parking has no affect in games. Obviously you are not aware of the core parking feature built into Windows which can be traced back to Windows 7.

With 600 hours in Battlefield i would expect someone to know the difference between stuttering and lag. Everyone knows the Net Code is screwed up in battlefield however it has nothing to due with the game stuttering.
You can't simply state that I'm incorrect, you can state that you think I'm incorrect. There's no absolute proof available here. I'm aware of the core parking feature, and I explained why I think it's very unlikely to cause issues.

There are so many names for different kind of lag, I consider "lag" to be the umbrella concept for them all. It seems to me that you think lag only applies to network induced lag, but that's certainly not the way it's been used traditionally.

"The netcode" argument is another one of those urban myths as I see it. The behaviour is by design, it's all due to client hit detection and lag compensation - the result of which gives what many that doesn't understand how it works and only see the symptoms call "bad netcode". Any btw, 600 hours is just BF4. In Battlefield in total I have several thousand hours.
Reply With Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
  #145  
Old 05-14-2015, 01:49 PM
StealthGaming StealthGaming is offline
Registered User
StealthGaming's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 371
POST ID # = 779172
StealthGaming Reputation: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadar View Post
This is going even further off topic...


You can't simply state that I'm incorrect, you can state that you think I'm incorrect. There's no absolute proof available here. I'm aware of the core parking feature, and I explained why I think it's very unlikely to cause issues.

"The netcode" argument is another one of those urban myths as I see it. The behaviour is by design, it's all due to client hit detection and lag compensation - the result of which gives what many that doesn't understand how it works and only see the symptoms call "bad netcode". Any btw, 600 hours is just BF4. In Battlefield in total I have several thousand hours.

Its a known fact that Core parking creates in game stuttering on Intel Core i7 processors with H/T dating back to Sandy Bridge, additionally it also affects AMD FX processors. Most games only take advantage of 2 logical Cores no matter how many Cores the processor has. The stuttering arise when Windows continues to enable and disable Cores every few seconds while trying to offset the Load demand.

I would recommend to pull up a YouTube video showing stuttering, it's has nothing to due with the lag issue.

Your assumption that Net Coding is urban myth is laughable, DICE seriously drop the ball on this. Look no further than the introduction of Network Smoothing Factor>

As far as the claim that Corsair LINK is creating a stuttering in game is just factually incorrect. How can a machine be under powered when CPU demand is 50% and Memory is using 3.5-4.0 GB of 8.0 GB under full system load and gaming?

Last edited by StealthGaming; 05-14-2015 at 02:04 PM.
Reply With Quote


  #146  
Old 05-14-2015, 03:06 PM
Technobeard's Avatar
Technobeard Technobeard is offline
Bearded Corsair Employee
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,304
POST ID # = 779188
Technobeard Reputation: 68
Default

To all: You may want to provide evidence (in the form of URLs) to back up your hypotheses.
__________________
“Humor is reason gone mad.” - Groucho Marx
"I suggest a full frontal assault with automated laser monkeys, scalpel mines and acid." - Psychotic potato dwarf
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, especially simian ones. They are not all that subtle." - Terry Pratchett

Last edited by Technobeard; 05-15-2015 at 02:07 PM.
Reply With Quote


  #147  
Old 05-14-2015, 05:57 PM
wytnyt's Avatar
wytnyt wytnyt is offline
`~~`
wytnyt's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Roanoke, Virginia
Posts: 8,107
POST ID # = 779207
wytnyt wytnyt Reputation: 159
Send a message via ICQ to wytnyt Send a message via AIM to wytnyt Send a message via Yahoo to wytnyt Send a message via Skype™ to wytnyt
Default

Perhaps just agreeing to disagree would be the best medicine.
Many times theres more than one right opinion and yes If someone like me can atd,then anyone can do it...
__________________
My 4930k Air 540 Custom Loop Build Pics
http://s39.photobucket.com/user/wytn...?sort=3&page=1
Reply With Quote


  #148  
Old 05-15-2015, 01:09 PM
Nadar Nadar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 49
POST ID # = 779341
Nadar Reputation: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Technobeard View Post
To all: You may want to provide links to proof to back up your hypotheses.
It's hard to prove a negative.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthGaming View Post
Its a known fact that Core parking creates in game stuttering on Intel Core i7 processors with H/T dating back to Sandy Bridge, additionally it also affects AMD FX processors. Most games only take advantage of 2 logical Cores no matter how many Cores the processor has. The stuttering arise when Windows continues to enable and disable Cores every few seconds while trying to offset the Load demand.
I'll try to explain once more: While core parking is a real issue, especially with the AMD Bulldozer architecture, many in the gaming community seems to think this is the sole cause of the type of lag called stuttering. This is what I consider the "myth" part. The fact is that the stuttering can be cause by a whole ray of different things related to the game machine resources. Lag can be divided into two main "branches", one originating from high network or server latency and one originating from insufficient computer resources (e.g CPU, GPU, RAM, motherboard bus transfer rate). While core parking CAN cause such issues on some platforms, it's unlikely to be the cause except from on the AMD Bulldozer architecture where Windows' CPU scheduler has a bug. This bug can be fixed by installing hotfix kb2646060. Core parking is otherwise unlikely to cause issues because it by design only parks cores when the CPU is under light load conditions, which is not typical of a gaming situation. You can read more about it here.

When it comes to your assuption about the games using only two cores, you're wrong (that is, it's over simplified). The games, or any software, does not "use" cores. The software simply asks Windows for CPU time, and the Windows CPU scheduler assigns CPU time from whatever core it sees fit. The problem is that each thread runs in it's own memory scope which can't easily be switched between cores. To use multiple cores effectivly the software therefore has to be written in such a way that the CPU load is effectively distributed over several threads. From the programmers perspective it's easier just to let everything, or atleast, all the heavy computing, happen in one thread, since you don't have to deal with semaphores and shared memory. So, to say that a badly written software just uses one core can be true, but when it comes to how multiple threads use multiple cores that's entirely up to Windows.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthGaming View Post
I would recommend to pull up a YouTube video showing stuttering, it's has nothing to due with the lag issue.
As pointed out before, stuttering is just one "type" of lag.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthGaming View Post
Your assumption that Net Coding is urban myth is laughable, DICE seriously drop the ball on this. Look no further than the introduction of Network Smoothing Factor>
I'm not saying that the symptoms attributed to "bad net code" is a myth, the myth is that it's somehow caused by Dice's inability to write a bug free "net code". As stated above, the issues are BY DESIGN in the sense that when you combine client side hit detection with predicion algorithms and the factors in latency (both client, network and server), you WILL see such issues. There's nothing Dice can do to "fix" that other than to redesign the whole system, all they can do is try to fine-tune the experience (as is what they do by introducing e.g the smoothing factor or increase server tick rates). Increasing server tick rates reduces server latency, so it will lessen the symptoms some, depending on how big part of the total latency comes from the server. Adjusting the "network smoothing" is simply a way to adjust how much prediction the client will do -the setting has been there the whole time, Dice just exposed it to the users to let them tweak it themselves. This whole mess started back in BF2 when they started the whole "prediction" mess. The funny thing for those of us remembering before that, the whining about the net code was just as bad before they did that, but the symptoms were different. Back then you had to lead the shots more, to compensate for latency, and high pingers would suffer badly. It also meant that snipers wouldn't always get a kill even though they had the enemy in the crosshairs, simply because what they say was somewhat outdated information. To remedy this, client hit detection and prediction was introduced, leading to all kinds of strange behaviour since the client both predicts where something is about to move AND deciding if it's a hit, meaning that you can be killed for being somewhere you never has been.

In short, I agree that Dice got it wrong, I just disagree that the problem is "badly written net code". The problem is listening to whining snipers that don't always get their kills and then ruining the game for everyone else. It's "by design".

Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthGaming View Post
As far as the claim that Corsair LINK is creating a stuttering in game is just factually incorrect. How can a machine be under powered when CPU demand is 50% and Memory is using 3.5-4.0 GB of 8.0 GB under full system load and gaming?
As explained above, it's a bit more complicated that that. Badly written software, like CL, often doesn't respect the CPU scheduler and hands back it's CPU shares when they are not needed (but spends them looping for example). That leads to the scheduler thinking the software needs more CPU shares, and diverts more resources to this software - which it ofcourse again just wastes on some waiting loop. This will lead to one or more cores (depending on threading, my guess is that CL is not threaded) reaching 100% utilization which is really just wasted doing nothing. This means any threads unlucky enough to live on the same core, will be severely starved for resources. Because of semaphores, other threads in the same application will often end up waiting for the threads starved for CPU to release their locks, and everything slows down a lot. Simply looking at total CPU utilization is too simple, for that number to give meaning you have to assume that all software respects the scheduler and only uses the shares it needs. Therefore it's very possible for CL to severly slow down a computer even though there seems to be available CPU resources. I see the same happening on my computers running CL all the time, the whole system becomes slow and closing (not minimizing) CL is what resolves the issue.
Reply With Quote


2 members found this post helpful.
  #149  
Old 05-16-2015, 11:40 AM
StealthGaming StealthGaming is offline
Registered User
StealthGaming's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 371
POST ID # = 779488
StealthGaming Reputation: 20
Default

Your opinion is a vast over-complication of known facts.

Moving this debate to the Game section where a poll will be started, everyone is encouraged to participate.
Reply With Quote


  #150  
Old 05-16-2015, 02:29 PM
Nadar Nadar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 49
POST ID # = 779504
Nadar Reputation: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StealthGaming View Post
Your opinion is a vast over-complication of known facts.

Moving this debate to the Game section where a poll will be started, everyone is encouraged to participate.
I'm not interested in discussing this, never have been, I just tried to explain why badly written software, like CL, can and very likely will have a performance impact even on relatively powerful computers. The netcode discussion was completely irrelevant here, and I admit that I should have refrained from commenting on that.
Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.