Slower than XnView Classic when browsing folder

[_NN_]

The program is noticeably slower than older XnView especially when I open a folder with many files.
Is it going to be improved ?
Thanks.

[helmut]

The program is noticeably slower than older XnView especially when I open a folder with many files.
Is it going to be improved ?
Thanks.

When browsing a folder for the first time, all images are read, thumbnails are calculated, cached, and displayed. When browsing a specific for a second time it will be much faster because chached thumbnails are available and are displayed.

How many files are in your folder? Is it still slow when browsing that folder for a second time? Do you use standard settings of XnView MP?

[_NN_]

I see.
Next time when I opened it was really faster, but I still feel some lags.
Maybe it is caching issue and lags will disappear.
I give it a try.
Thanks.

[helmut]

I see.
Next time when I opened it was really faster, but I still feel some lags.
Maybe it is caching issue and lags will disappear.
I give it a try.
Thanks.

Thank you for your response. Let us know here in case these lags don't dissappear.

[helmut]

Out of curiosity I just did some performance testing:

Test: Browsing a folder with 500 image JPEG files (each with 2272x1704pixels, ~700kb, embedded thumbnail) with XnView Classic and XnView MP.

Hardware: Old Windows Computer with AMD Athlon 2.4GHz and harddisk (no SSD)

• XnView Classic 2.39:
13 seconds when browsing folder for the first time.
< 0,5 seconds when browsing folder for the second, third, ... time. Note: Thumbnails appear all at once.

• XnView MP 0.84:
9 seconds when browsing folder for the first time.
< 0,5 seconds when browsing folder for the second, third, ... time. Note: XnView MP first shows JPEG file icons and then replaces it immediately with the actual thumbnails from resulting in a refresh that start at top left to bottom right. This happens very quickly (<0,5s) and you have to look thoroughly to see what's going on. Progress bar is displayed and disappears after about 1,5 seconds.

Summary:

• XnView MP loads image files a bit faster (9 seconds vs. 13 seconds)
• No noticable time difference when selecting the folder and displaying about 40 thumbnails for a second time.
• There is some difference in the screen update, though (see above notes). Due to the way the thumbnails are presented, XnView MP does look a bit slower, but in fact it is not.

Related topic:
- XnView - Tips about scalability

[m.Th.]

On a "normal" PC today: It doesn't matter.

My specs:
- i5-3550 @ 3.30 GHz
- 32GB RAM
- SSD
- AMD/ATI Radeon 6770

Folder: 747 RAW files (.CR2) @ 20.2 MPixels = 19.08 GB on storage

Thumbs are generated in:
XnWiew Classic: 45 secs (Thumb quality: JPEG - High quality)
XnWiew MP: 40 secs (Thumb quality: WebP - High quality)

So MP is 'faster'.

During the thumbs building, anywhere where I go with the scroll bar the thumbs are generated on the fly and shown with a lag under 0,5 sec. Classic slightly but noticeably slower than MP. That's why I said it doesn't matter because anything I want to see (generated or not) is displayed with a max lag of under 0,5 sec for the entire screen (!).

Display of any screen if the thumbs are already generated is done without any noticeable lag.

Hints:
- Buy a SSD.
- Use WebP as a thumb format.
- Use a decent CPU
- Use a decent VGA