PDF-XChange Review Update

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Updated for 2.5.199

Retested Loading multiple documents with a different file set — PDF Books instead of Unicode 6 character sets, and that makes PDF-XChange look good again, but doesn't really solve what seems to be a problem with those particular files.

I attach the file set from the earlier test.

[Jamie - Tracker Supp]

Hi Bhikkhu,

Thanks for the files, this has been passed to our development team for review, support ticket RT#1287. We will email you when it has been actioned and post here.

Regards,
Jamie

[Paul - PDF-XChange]

Hi Bhikkhu,

Vasyl has taken a look at this and said it will be addressed in V3. At this point I can't say if this will be the initial V3 release or a subsequent one.

thanks for you patience.

[Giraffe]

Using .199: Selected all 40, "Open With", 2s to Open Viewer, 19s more for all files to open - I don't consider that to be slow on a 4-year-old PC!

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Here, its taking 1 min 38 seconds to open 40 Unicode Character sets totalling 3.30 Mbytes, compared to just 9 seconds with the much larger test set of 40 PDF files totalling 72.1 Mbytes. There is clearly something special about those particular documents. My PC is nearly five years old.

[Giraffe]

What I do find is a variation. Some files, with a lot of formatting and graphics, are fully open in a couple of seconds; others, some of them simple, take 5s+ after the blank page first appears.

I had one t'other day that was half a sheet of text. The viewer opened in 2 - 3s (how long does yours take from a 'cold' start?) then another 5s for the text to appear. I wish that I'd looked at its properties but I was reading a lot about terrestrial TV reception and didn't think to do so.

[Arnold]

I unzipped this file into a folder. 40 files totaling 3.30 meg. If I highlight and drag them onto PDFX-Viewer all 40 are open in around 11 seconds. I tried it a few times. My laptop is a Dell Latitude, AMD Athlon 64 X2, 1.90 GHz with 2 gig of RAM, Windows XP sp3. This is a big difference, and I don't think this laptop is fast. Did I do this right?

[Stefan - PDF-XChange]

Ran the same test as you guys,

The Viewer launched and running, and then dragging and dropping the 40 files in it. Took 3 and a half seconds here - but this is quite a fast and modern machine, so it seems like it's hardware related as well.

Paul's comment shows that Vasyl has identified some problems, but still may I ask you Bhikkhu - what was the memory usage at your end when you did those tests - do you think that any page file swapping could have occurred at the time?

Best,
Stefan

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Memory use is not an issue. It starts at about 24 Mbtyes and ends at about 80 Mbytes. There is no disk activity at all. CPU is running at 97%

I have tried it without Opera running or any other major programs, and it is still just as bad. With the Windows Task Manager in view its even slower — taking nearly 3 minutes.

[Jamie - Tracker Supp]

Hi Bhikkhu Pesala,

With the Windows Task Manager in view its even slower — taking nearly 3 minutes

Opening windows Task Manager should not make such a huge performance hit on any program and could point to larger challenges. I would recommend scanning with Malwarebytes and Hitman Pro, to be sure there isn't some malware running. I would also try disabling my security software to be sure it isn't slowing things up. Have you tried booting to safemode and seeing if you have similar issues? Give those suggestions a try and get back.

Regards,
Jamie.

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

If there was some malware running then the other big file set would have even greater problems, but it opens in a few seconds. You have had the slow file set, and others have tested them, but with less dramatic results.

[Jamie - Tracker Supp]

Hi Bhikkhu Pesala,

Well judging by our results and by others on this thread, as well as your computer stats.

AMD64 3500 1024 Mbytes

I am going to have to concur with Stephan on his hardware diagnosis. Why don't you try a series of tests on some modern hardware for comparison?

Regards,
Jamie.

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Why don't you try a series of tests on some modern hardware for comparison?

I cannot use hardware that I don't have. Old hardware is really useful for showing up bugs in software. Clearly, there is a huge difference in the time taken to load these two file sets. If you don't want to find the reason for that, what more can I say? You cannot expect that your software will only ever be used on the latest and greatest technology.

Most likely it is to do with the unusual Unicode fonts. The third file "Unicode, Misc Symbols and Arrows.pdf" loads noticeably slower than the first two: "Unicode, Gothic.pdf" and "Unicode, Old Italic.pdf"

I intentionally sorted the folder by file size to load the 40 smallest PDF files as earlier tests with a mix of large and small files were so slow.

I am running a full Malwarebytes scan now, but I am sure that there is some other cause for this persistent problem. I have opened hundreds of different PDF files, and only these cause this problem.

Foxit Reader loaded the same file set in 16 seconds while the Malwarebytes scan is running in the background.

[Jamie - Tracker Supp]

Hi Bhikkhu Pesala,

I am sorry you are having challenges with the viewer and your hardware but I am unsure what I can do for you other than what's already been offered. We have tried to re-create your challenge here but have been unsuccessful. We also don't have a single core processor to test with which may be what is offering such different results. If we do find something we think may help you we will be sure to let you know. Thanks for you continued support and patience.

Regards,
Jamie.

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

I just updated my review for build 2.5.210 and mentioned PDF-XChange Editor build 310. Its not complete enough to review yet, but I ran my speed tests again on it, including the latest versions of Adobe Reader 11 and Foxit Reader.

PDF-XChanger Editor is three times faster than the viewer at loading multiple files, and also faster at Finding Text in a single large file, but significantly slower at searching a folder of 338 PDF files. Still faster than Adobe Reader, but way slower than PDF-XChange Viewer.

PDF-XChange 2.5.210 found 2899 entries in 86 documents in 2:43
PDF-XChange Editor 301 found 2859 entries in 81 documents in 9:31
Foxit Reader 6.0.2.0413 found 2839 entries in 81 documents in 2:55
Adobe Reader 11.0.3 found 2931 entries in 86 documents in 12:45

I look forward to a more complete version to review properly. The Editor already has some nice features, and the interface is attractive. The plugin loads slowly in my browser (Opera) the first time it is used (15 seconds), but is OK for the next file. Sumatra is much faster out of the starting blocks, but it doesn't have many features.

[Will - Tracker Supp]

Hi Bhikkhu,

Thanks for the update - we definitely appreciate all the effort that you went to!

I'll forward this for the Dev. Team to see too.

Cheers,
Will

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

I ran the speed tests again for the new PDF-XChange Editor build 305 on my new Windows 7 PC, which is a lot faster than my old system.

Find Text is still much faster than Adobe Reader, and opening 50 documents in PDF-XChange Editor is about twice as fast as in the Viewer.

I haven't installed Foxit Reader on this system.

I have hardly looked at the Editor as it was previously incomplete, but now it seems ready for a more comprehensive review, if and when I have time.

[Will - Tracker Supp]

Hi Bhikkhu,

That's great! As usual, we're most thankful for any reviews that you're willing to take the time to do - much appreciated!