SPSSX Discussion

SPSS 17 on Quad-core

Classic

List

Threaded

15 messages Options

Melissa Ives

SPSS 17 on Quad-core

I am about to get a new work computer and the recommendation is for a quad core processor (below)

Base Unit:

Dell Precision T5400 Mini Tower, Quad Core Xeon Proc E5405, 2.00GHz, 2X6MB L2 Cache1333MHz (223-4710)

Processor:

2nd Processor, Quad Core Xeon Proc E5405, 2.00GHz, 2X6MB L2 Cache,1333MHz, Dell Precision T5400 (311-8024)

Memory:

2GB, DDR2 ECC SDRAM Memory 667MHz, 2X1GB, Dell Precision T5400 (311-7684)

I searched the archives and only information I see is that some version of SPSS ran slower on a dual core processor than on a single core processor.

Do any of you have good experience with SPSS 17 (or SPSS 14) on a quad core similar to the proposed machine?

Thanks !!

Melissa

________________________________
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
This transmittal and any attachments may contain PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL information and is intended only for the use of the
addressee. If you are not the designated recipient, or an employee
or agent authorized to deliver such transmittals to the designated
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
copying or publication of this transmittal is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this transmittal in error, please notify us
immediately by replying to the sender and delete this copy from your
system. You may also call us at (309) 827-6026 for assistance.

====================To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD

wsu_wright

Re: SPSS 17 on Quad-core

Melissa,

I have a near identical machine, T5400 running dual xeon 2.3Ghz (E5410
processors). First, you really need to strongly consider increasing the
RAM from 2GB to at least 4 GB. True, in a 32-bit OS you'll only have
3.25 usable RAM, but, you will live to regret the 2GB restriction, this
will be more of a speed issue than the dual xeon's.

I have found no noticeable (in real human terms rather than nanoseconds)
difference in speed when using SPSS on either a T5400 dual xeon or a
T3400 single duo core quad processor.

David.

On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 6:31 AM , Melissa Ives wrote:

> I am about to get a new work computer and the recommendation is for a
> quad core processor (below)
>
> Base Unit:
>
>
> Dell Precision T5400 Mini Tower, Quad Core Xeon Proc E5405, 2.00GHz,
> 2X6MB L2 Cache1333MHz (223-4710)
>
>
> Processor:
>
>
> 2nd Processor, Quad Core Xeon Proc E5405, 2.00GHz, 2X6MB L2
> Cache,1333MHz, Dell Precision T5400 (311-8024)
>
>
> Memory:
>
>
> 2GB, DDR2 ECC SDRAM Memory 667MHz, 2X1GB, Dell Precision T5400
> (311-7684)
>
>
>
> I searched the archives and only information I see is that some
> version of SPSS ran slower on a dual core processor than on a single
> core processor.
>
> Do any of you have good experience with SPSS 17 (or SPSS 14) on a quad
> core similar to the proposed machine?
>
> Thanks !!
>
> Melissa
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
> This transmittal and any attachments may contain PRIVILEGED AND
> CONFIDENTIAL information and is intended only for the use of the
> addressee. If you are not the designated recipient, or an employee
> or agent authorized to deliver such transmittals to the designated
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> copying or publication of this transmittal is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this transmittal in error, please notify us
> immediately by replying to the sender and delete this copy from your
> system. You may also call us at (309) 827-6026 for assistance.
>
> ====================To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a
> message to
> [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except
> the
> command. To leave the list, send the command
> SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
> For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
> INFO REFCARD

E. Bernardo

5-point compliance scale

Hi all,

(I apologize for cross-posting)

A survey instrument that is used to measure the level of compliance of some X requirements used a 5-point scale as follows:

5 = Fully Complied
4 = Somewhat complied
3 = Neither complied nor not complied
2 = Somewhat not complied
1 = Not complied

I am not confident of the "qualitative equivalent" for each point; thus, I solicited ideas elsewhere just to improve it. One suggestion of a friend is shown below:

5 = Fully Complied
4 = Partially complied
3 = Neither complied nor not complied
2 = Partially not complied
1 = Fully Not complied

I would approaciate your suggestion to further improve... Please retain the 5-point scale; modify only the "qualitative equivalent".

Thank you.
Eins

---------------------------------
HOTMAIL, GMAIL, ….ACCOUNTS?
Invite your friends from Hotmail, Gmail to Yahoo! Messenger today!

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD

Marcus Vinícius Soares

Re: SPSS 17 on Quad-core

In reply to this post by wsu_wright

Melissa,

Also don't forget about your video card. It must be a good one, non on-board, since new SPSS versions (and other programs) are mainly "full graphics" interface. It is a important detail when rolling down the output or data screen.

Marcus Brito

--- Em ter, 30/12/08, David Wright <[hidden email]> escreveu:
De: David Wright <[hidden email]>
Assunto: Re: [SPSSX-L] SPSS 17 on Quad-core
Para: [hidden email]
Data: Terça-feira, 30 de Dezembro de 2008, 10:36

Melissa,

I have a near identical machine, T5400 running dual xeon 2.3Ghz (E5410
processors). First, you really need to strongly consider increasing the
RAM from 2GB to at least 4 GB. True, in a 32-bit OS you'll only have
3.25 usable RAM, but, you will live to regret the 2GB restriction, this
will be more of a speed issue than the dual xeon's.

I have found no noticeable (in real human terms rather than nanoseconds)
difference in speed when using SPSS on either a T5400 dual xeon or a
T3400 single duo core quad processor.

David.

On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 6:31 AM , Melissa Ives wrote:

Melissa Ives

Re: 5-point compliance scale

In reply to this post by E. Bernardo

How do you define the difference between 2 and 4?

Melissa

-----Original Message-----
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Eins Bernardo
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:54 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [SPSSX-L] 5-point compliance scale

Hi all,

(I apologize for cross-posting)

A survey instrument that is used to measure the level of compliance of some X requirements used a 5-point scale as follows:

5 = Fully Complied
4 = Somewhat complied
3 = Neither complied nor not complied
2 = Somewhat not complied
1 = Not complied

I am not confident of the "qualitative equivalent" for each point; thus, I solicited ideas elsewhere just to improve it. One suggestion of a friend is shown below:

5 = Fully Complied
4 = Partially complied
3 = Neither complied nor not complied
2 = Partially not complied
1 = Fully Not complied

I would approaciate your suggestion to further improve... Please retain the 5-point scale; modify only the "qualitative equivalent".

Thank you.
Eins

---------------------------------
HOTMAIL, GMAIL, ....ACCOUNTS?
Invite your friends from Hotmail, Gmail to Yahoo! Messenger today!

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the command. To leave the list, send the command SIGNOFF SPSSX-L For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command INFO REFCARD

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
This transmittal and any attachments may contain PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL information and is intended only for the use of the
addressee. If you are not the designated recipient, or an employee
or agent authorized to deliver such transmittals to the designated
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
copying or publication of this transmittal is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this transmittal in error, please notify us
immediately by replying to the sender and delete this copy from your
system. You may also call us at (309) 827-6026 for assistance.

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD

John Fiedler

Re: 5-point compliance scale

5 Completely complied
4 Almost completely complied
3 Partially complied
2 Slightly complied
1 Not complied

... or use nujmbers
100% complied
About 75% complied
About 50% complied
...etc

... or use ranges
90-100 complied
... etc.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Melissa Ives" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: 5-point compliance scale

> How do you define the difference between 2 and 4?
>
> Melissa
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
> Eins Bernardo
> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:54 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [SPSSX-L] 5-point compliance scale
>
> Hi all,
>
> (I apologize for cross-posting)
>
> A survey instrument that is used to measure the level of compliance of
> some X requirements used a 5-point scale as follows:
>
> 5 = Fully Complied
> 4 = Somewhat complied
> 3 = Neither complied nor not complied
> 2 = Somewhat not complied
> 1 = Not complied
>
> I am not confident of the "qualitative equivalent" for each point; thus,
> I solicited ideas elsewhere just to improve it. One suggestion of a
> friend is shown below:
>
> 5 = Fully Complied
> 4 = Partially complied
> 3 = Neither complied nor not complied
> 2 = Partially not complied
> 1 = Fully Not complied
>
> I would approaciate your suggestion to further improve... Please retain
> the 5-point scale; modify only the "qualitative equivalent".
>
> Thank you.
> Eins
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> HOTMAIL, GMAIL, ....ACCOUNTS?
> Invite your friends from Hotmail, Gmail to Yahoo! Messenger today!
>
> =====================
> To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
> [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
> command. To leave the list, send the command SIGNOFF SPSSX-L For a list of
> commands to manage subscriptions, send the command INFO REFCARD
>
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
> This transmittal and any attachments may contain PRIVILEGED AND
> CONFIDENTIAL information and is intended only for the use of the
> addressee. If you are not the designated recipient, or an employee
> or agent authorized to deliver such transmittals to the designated
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> copying or publication of this transmittal is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this transmittal in error, please notify us
> immediately by replying to the sender and delete this copy from your
> system. You may also call us at (309) 827-6026 for assistance.
>
> =====================
> To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
> [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
> command. To leave the list, send the command
> SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
> For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
> INFO REFCARD
>
>

Melissa Ives

Re: 5-point compliance scale

I would use the % complied for 2 and 4 at least. Otherwise it seems like the difference between partly cloudy and partly sunny. If you use percentage ranges then arguably you could calculate a percent complied using the mid-point of the range.
Using your example from below....
5 Completely complied (>80%)
4 Almost completely complied (61-80%)
3 Partially complied (41-60%)
2 Slightly complied (20-40%)
1 Not complied (<20%)

Just a thought...
Melissa

-----Original Message-----
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of John Fiedler
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 9:57 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [SPSSX-L] 5-point compliance scale

5 Completely complied
4 Almost completely complied
3 Partially complied
2 Slightly complied
1 Not complied

... or use nujmbers
100% complied
About 75% complied
About 50% complied
...etc

... or use ranges
90-100 complied
... etc.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Melissa Ives" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: 5-point compliance scale

> How do you define the difference between 2 and 4?
>
> Melissa
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf
> Of Eins Bernardo
> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 7:54 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [SPSSX-L] 5-point compliance scale
>
> Hi all,
>
> (I apologize for cross-posting)
>
> A survey instrument that is used to measure the level of compliance
> of some X requirements used a 5-point scale as follows:
>
> 5 = Fully Complied
> 4 = Somewhat complied
> 3 = Neither complied nor not complied
> 2 = Somewhat not complied
> 1 = Not complied
>
> I am not confident of the "qualitative equivalent" for each point;
> thus, I solicited ideas elsewhere just to improve it. One suggestion
> of a friend is shown below:
>
> 5 = Fully Complied
> 4 = Partially complied
> 3 = Neither complied nor not complied
> 2 = Partially not complied
> 1 = Fully Not complied
>
> I would approaciate your suggestion to further improve... Please
> retain the 5-point scale; modify only the "qualitative equivalent".
>
> Thank you.
> Eins
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> HOTMAIL, GMAIL, ....ACCOUNTS?
> Invite your friends from Hotmail, Gmail to Yahoo! Messenger today!
>
> =====================
> To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
> [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except
> the command. To leave the list, send the command SIGNOFF SPSSX-L For a
> list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command INFO
> REFCARD
>
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION This transmittal and any
> attachments may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL information and is
> intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the
> designated recipient, or an employee or agent authorized to deliver
> such transmittals to the designated recipient, you are hereby notified
> that any dissemination, copying or publication of this transmittal is
> strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmittal in error,
> please notify us immediately by replying to the sender and delete this
> copy from your system. You may also call us at (309) 827-6026 for
> assistance.
>
> =====================
> To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
> [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except
> the command. To leave the list, send the command SIGNOFF SPSSX-L For a
> list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command INFO
> REFCARD
>
>

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the command. To leave the list, send the command SIGNOFF SPSSX-L For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command INFO REFCARD

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
This transmittal and any attachments may contain PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL information and is intended only for the use of the
addressee. If you are not the designated recipient, or an employee
or agent authorized to deliver such transmittals to the designated
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
copying or publication of this transmittal is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this transmittal in error, please notify us
immediately by replying to the sender and delete this copy from your
system. You may also call us at (309) 827-6026 for assistance.

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD

Kornbrot, Diana

Re: 5-point compliance scale

In reply to this post by E. Bernardo

> 5 = Fully complied
> 4 = More than half complied
> 3 = Half complied
> 2 = Less than half complied
> 1 = Not complied at all
> best
>
> diana
>
> I am not confident of the "qualitative equivalent" for each point; thus, I
> solicited ideas elsewhere just to improve it. One suggestion of a friend is
> shown below:
>
> 5 = Fully Complied
> 4 = Partially complied
> 3 = Neither complied nor not complied
> 2 = Partially not complied
> 1 = Fully Not complied
>
> I would approaciate your suggestion to further improve... Please retain the
> 5-point scale; modify only the "qualitative equivalent".
>
> Thank you.
> Eins
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> HOTMAIL, GMAIL, .ACCOUNTS?
> Invite your friends from Hotmail, Gmail to Yahoo! Messenger today!
>
> =====================
> To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
> [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
> command. To leave the list, send the command
> SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
> For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
> INFO REFCARD

Professor Diana Kornbrot
School of Psychology
University of Hertfordshire
College Lane, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL10 9AB, UK

email: [hidden email]
web: http://web.mac.com/kornbrot/iweb/KornbrotHome.html
voice: +44 (0) 170 728 4626
fax: +44 (0) 170 728 5073
Home
19 Elmhurst Avenue
London N2 0LT, UK

voice: +44 (0) 208 883 3657
mobile: +44 (0) 796 890 2102
fax: +44 (0) 870 706 4997

====================To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD

Peck, Jon

Re: SPSS 17 on Quad-core

In reply to this post by wsu_wright

More RAM is always good, but a number of procedures in SPSS are multithreaded and will accumulate results faster when passing the data. The list can be found in the help for SHOW THREADS. This can be significant (npi) with large datasets. And with the frontend and backend running as separate processes, they can each execute on a different processor or core.

Another thing that can help is an extra disk drive. If you can put the SPSS temp directory on a different spindle from the data, i/o can be considerably faster.

Of course, most of these factors won't matter with small datasets.

HTH,
Jon Peck

-----Original Message-----
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of David Wright
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 5:36 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [SPSSX-L] SPSS 17 on Quad-core

Melissa,

I have a near identical machine, T5400 running dual xeon 2.3Ghz (E5410
processors). First, you really need to strongly consider increasing the
RAM from 2GB to at least 4 GB. True, in a 32-bit OS you'll only have
3.25 usable RAM, but, you will live to regret the 2GB restriction, this
will be more of a speed issue than the dual xeon's.

I have found no noticeable (in real human terms rather than nanoseconds)
difference in speed when using SPSS on either a T5400 dual xeon or a
T3400 single duo core quad processor.

David.

On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 6:31 AM , Melissa Ives wrote:

Gary Oliver

Re: SPSS 17 on Quad-core

In reply to this post by wsu_wright

David

Your reply regarding memory prompts me to ask the SPSS staff who monitor
this list:

Is it true that MS XP and Vista will use more than 3GB of RAM but not
report it if it is there? A technician made this claim to me before
Christmas.

Happy New Year/gary

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>On Behalf Of David Wright
>>Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 11:36 PM
>>To: [hidden email]
>>Subject: Re: SPSS 17 on Quad-core
>>
>>Melissa,
>>
>>I have a near identical machine, T5400 running dual xeon
>>2.3Ghz (E5410 processors). First, you really need to
>>strongly consider increasing the RAM from 2GB to at least 4
>>GB. True, in a 32-bit OS you'll only have
>>3.25 usable RAM, but, you will live to regret the 2GB
>>restriction, this will be more of a speed issue than the dual xeon's.
>>
>>I have found no noticeable (in real human terms rather than
>>nanoseconds) difference in speed when using SPSS on either a
>>T5400 dual xeon or a T3400 single duo core quad processor.
>>
>>David.
>>
>>
>>On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 6:31 AM , Melissa Ives wrote:
>>
>>> I am about to get a new work computer and the
>>recommendation is for a
>>> quad core processor (below)
>>>
>>> Base Unit:
>>>
>>>
>>> Dell Precision T5400 Mini Tower, Quad Core Xeon Proc E5405,
>>2.00GHz,
>>> 2X6MB L2 Cache1333MHz (223-4710)
>>>
>>>
>>> Processor:
>>>
>>>
>>> 2nd Processor, Quad Core Xeon Proc E5405, 2.00GHz, 2X6MB L2
>>> Cache,1333MHz, Dell Precision T5400 (311-8024)
>>>
>>>
>>> Memory:
>>>
>>>
>>> 2GB, DDR2 ECC SDRAM Memory 667MHz, 2X1GB, Dell Precision T5400
>>> (311-7684)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I searched the archives and only information I see is that some
>>> version of SPSS ran slower on a dual core processor than on
>>a single
>>> core processor.
>>>
>>> Do any of you have good experience with SPSS 17 (or SPSS
>>14) on a quad
>>> core similar to the proposed machine?
>>>
>>> Thanks !!
>>>
>>> Melissa
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION This transmittal and any
>>> attachments may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
>>information and is
>>> intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the
>>> designated recipient, or an employee or agent authorized to deliver
>>> such transmittals to the designated recipient, you are
>>hereby notified
>>> that any dissemination, copying or publication of this
>>transmittal is
>>> strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmittal
>>in error,
>>> please notify us immediately by replying to the sender and
>>delete this
>>> copy from your system. You may also call us at (309) 827-6026 for
>>> assistance.
>>>
>>> ====================To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a
>>> message to [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body
>>> text except the command. To leave the list, send the
>>command SIGNOFF
>>> SPSSX-L For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the
>>> command INFO REFCARD
>>
>>=====================
>>To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
>>[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text
>>except the command. To leave the list, send the command
>>SIGNOFF SPSSX-L For a list of commands to manage
>>subscriptions, send the command INFO REFCARD
>>

E. Bernardo

Re: 5-point compliance scale

In reply to this post by Melissa Ives

Hi John, Melissa, Diana, et al.

Thank you for your suggestions.

Regards,
Eins

Melissa Ives <[hidden email]> wrote:
I would use the % complied for 2 and 4 at least. Otherwise it seems like the difference between partly cloudy and partly sunny. If you use percentage ranges then arguably you could calculate a percent complied using the mid-point of the range.
Using your example from below....
5 Completely complied (>80%)
4 Almost completely complied (61-80%)
3 Partially complied (41-60%)
2 Slightly complied (20-40%)
1 Not complied (<20%)

Just a thought...
Melissa

-----Original Message-----
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of John Fiedler
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 9:57 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [SPSSX-L] 5-point compliance scale

5 Completely complied
4 Almost completely complied
3 Partially complied
2 Slightly complied
1 Not complied

.... or use nujmbers
100% complied
About 75% complied
About 50% complied
....etc

.... or use ranges
90-100 complied
.... etc.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Melissa Ives"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: 5-point compliance scale

ncanfield

Re: SPSS 17 on Quad-core

In reply to this post by Gary Oliver

At home I use Vista and at work I use XP Pro with SPSS. With XP Pro SP3 it only recognizes the 3gb of RAM, it's still there but not being used to it's fullest potential. On Vista 32bit pre-Service Pack 1 (SP1) only recognized 3gb of RAM. After installing Vista 32bit SP1, the computer should recognize 4gb of RAM and better manages the memory. Also, I use a 2gb flash drive for ready boost cache memory. I've noticed dramatic differences from 3gb to 4gb and also adding a flash drive with ready boost (Vista only). I would love a quad-core processor, but the prices were very high a few years ago, now they're more reasonable and would suggest at least a 2.4ghz quad-core or higher depending on your budget. In the office we use Dell Optiplex 755 desktops with dual core processors (2.13ghz, 2.66ghz, and 3.00ghz), 2gb or 4gb ram installed, and 256mb video card. These have been big improvements from the Dell Dimensions with single processors (2.4-2.8ghz), 512mb ram, and integrat!
ed video cards.

-----Original Message-----
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Gary Oliver
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 6:22 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: SPSS 17 on Quad-core

David

Your reply regarding memory prompts me to ask the SPSS staff who monitor
this list:

Is it true that MS XP and Vista will use more than 3GB of RAM but not
report it if it is there? A technician made this claim to me before
Christmas.

Happy New Year/gary

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. It is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Additionally, we will take the appropriate action to avoid sending you an unintended e-mail in the future. Thank you for your cooperation.

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD

Juanito Talili

references for conjoint analysis

In reply to this post by E. Bernardo

Hi all,

Do you have articles or researches that used conjoint analysis. I want to know how to present the data (computer printouts) and how these data are analyzed.

Thanks.
Juanito

What are the top 10 Pinoy street foods?Yummy! Find out on Yahoo! Answers. http://ph.answers.yahoo.com/

====================To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD

Peck, Jon

Re: SPSS 17 on Quad-core

In reply to this post by Gary Oliver

This is quite a complicated question. Different Windows OS versions behave differently. See
http://kb.ultratech-llc.com/?File=/MaxRAM.TXT
for a table of maximums on Windows. There is also this funny thing call PAE that allows limits to be exceeded. PAE, however, requires an application to be coded specially to take advantage of it, and most applications, including SPSS, are not so coded. (PAE mainly benefits software like in-memory databases)

Out of whatever address space you have, though, the video adapter will probably take up .5GB or more, and other devices will consume some additional memory.

For Windows client versions of SPSS, more than 4GB of physical memory will probably do no good. Going from 2 to 3 GB might, but since memory these days tends to come in 2GB increments, a 3GB configuration might not be practical. I wouldn't go below 2GB for sure, though, if configuring a new machine.

One way to see whether more memory might be useful with your actual workload is to watch the Task Manager display as you are working with typical problems. In version 17, the processes to watch are
statistics.exe (frontend)
spssengine.exe (backend)
startpython.exe and startr.exe (programmability)
Of course, for SPSS Statistics Server users, there are other considerations.

If you are using the R plug-in, R, unlike SPSS, keeps all its data in memory. But this is virtual memory. R has its own mechanisms for setting the maximum it will use (see the memory.limit and memory.size functions). If it has to start paging heavily, though, performance will certainly suffer.

Look at the Memory columns in the Task Manager Processes display - memory, peak memory, page faults, and vm size. (You have to add these columns from the View menu)
Also watch the Performance tab, which will show the amount of surplus physical memory for the whole os. The OS will actually use some of this for i/o buffering and other performance tricks, but it's a clue.

The biggest memory chunk for SPSS is typically the statistics.exe process, but you can't really see what it is doing with memory, because it is a Java process, and Java is managing memory inside the process in a way that the Task Manager can't see. But high paging rates would still suggest that more memory would be beneficial.

In the end, what you need depends not only on what SPSS is doing but what all the other things running on your PC are doing. Right now on my system, the biggest memory users are Outlook, a software monitor, and Firefox, all ahead of SPSS.

HTH,
Jon Peck

-----Original Message-----
From: SPSSX(r) Discussion [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Gary Oliver
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2008 5:22 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [SPSSX-L] SPSS 17 on Quad-core

David

Your reply regarding memory prompts me to ask the SPSS staff who monitor
this list:

Is it true that MS XP and Vista will use more than 3GB of RAM but not
report it if it is there? A technician made this claim to me before
Christmas.

Happy New Year/gary

John Fiedler

Re: references for conjoint analysis

In reply to this post by Juanito Talili

Lots of examples and resources at www.sawtoothsoftware.com

JOHN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Juanito Talili" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 1:10 AM
Subject: references for conjoint analysis

Hi all,

Do you have articles or researches that used conjoint analysis. I want to
know how to present the data (computer printouts) and how these data are
analyzed.

Thanks.
Juanito

What are the top 10 Pinoy street foods?Yummy! Find out on Yahoo!
Answers. http://ph.answers.yahoo.com/

=======
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD