1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Log File Clean-Up

Discussion in 'ATITool' started by Vigilante, Aug 23, 2004.

  1. Vigilante New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Messages:
    16 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    W1zzard, the log file is really getting cluttered with rather useless messages only stating how long Scan for Artifacts has been running. Pages and pages of this kind of useless message build-up.

    An example:
    2004-08-23 11:46:25 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:25 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:25 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:25 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:25 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:25 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:26 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:26 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:26 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:26 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:26 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:26 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:26 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:26 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00
    2004-08-23 11:46:26 Scan for Artifacts running for: 0:00:00

    I don't know whether you want this kind of report in this forum or the beta one, W1z.
     
  2. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    14,969 (3.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,785
    thanks .. seems to be a bug ..
     
  3. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    14,969 (3.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,785
    hmmm doesnt happen here .. did you try the latest 0.0.22 beta?
     
  4. Vigilante New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Messages:
    16 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Yes, the .22 beta is where that's from.

    And that was just a short amount - I had just done a quick 15 min without artifact test with the .22 , and it ran several pages of that type of entry consecutively before the test finally ended.
     
  5. Vigilante New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Messages:
    16 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    W1zzard - I was testing out the new screesaver on/off feature and had the screensaver selected on at the time. I know you like to run it with the SS off, could that somehow make a difference in the logs?
     
  6. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    14,969 (3.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,785
    shouldnt make a difference .. drop me a message on instant messenger so we can work this out
     
  7. bobo New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    31 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    I'm having this same problem, is there a quick solution to this? if there is could you please let me know it? thanks
     
  8. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    14,969 (3.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,785
    i cant reproduce this .. you just hit scan for artifacts?
     
  9. bobo New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    31 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    no when I scan for max core & mem.
    but i'd assume it would do the same thing when scanning for artifacts.
    i'll try it out and post it here if it does or not.
     
  10. bobo New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    31 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    but what did you mean? you cant reproduce this?
     
  11. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    14,969 (3.92/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,785
    i do not get the error when trying
     
  12. bobo New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    31 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    hmm... i dunno then.... were you able to help the last guy with this problem?
     
  13. bobo New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    31 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    BTW it does the same thing when i just push "scan for artifacts"
     
  14. Vigilante New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Messages:
    16 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Could it be due to the type of card or Catalyst version being used? I'm using a Sapphire 9800 Pro with the 4.9 beta. How about you bobo, W1z?
     
  15. Vigilante New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Messages:
    16 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    BTW, I thought it might be because of Service Pack 2 - I was getting some other problems with it installed and I noticed the log file problem shortly after installing SP2 as well. So I system restored to before installation and that made no difference with the log file problem. I don't know if that's of use or not, but I figure the more info you have the better.
     
  16. bobo New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    31 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    I don't think its the catalyst driver.

    ATI radeon 9800 Pro 128M - Catalyst v4.8
    512MB RAM
    P4 3.0Ghz OCed

    and I run a windows 2k SP4
     
  17. bobo New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    31 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    and one quick question to someone who knows about OCing, im pretty new to it so i dont know whats good and whats not.

    my core clocked out at 411.75
    mem: 378.00 -- is this a good reading for my 9800 Pro?
    and i just installed an arctic cooling vga silencer replacing my stock and that boosted both core and memory about 10-11 each. NIIIIIIICE
     
  18. Vigilante New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Messages:
    16 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Those are pretty typical results for a 9800 Pro, probably a little lower than most reported results for the core and a little higher for the memory.
     
  19. bobo New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    31 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    oh ok, thanks. well im pretty new here so i really appreciate you helping me out on this stuff.
    one more thing though, when i check for the max memory, should i have the core at default or should i have it OCed to like 5 below its max or w/e?
     
  20. Vigilante New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Messages:
    16 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    You can try it both ways and see how your results are.

    Generally, you'd just test with the core speed at default, but due to your individual card cooling, case temps and air flow around the card, you might get differing results if you test the mem with your core OCed.
     
  21. bobo New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    31 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    i see what your sayin. thanks.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page