Tweet
Dear All, for some strange reasons, in our lab, we find CLC's latest version 6 runs slower than v5 for the same parameter of Reference based mapping. Version 6 in general claims to be much much faster than Version5...Anyone else facing similar issues?? any solution..shed some lights on it..
-
-
What kind to difference are we talking about here? Minutes/hours?
Benchmarking software versions is something only the vendors probably care about, mainly for marketing purposes.
If you are convinced that this is an issue restricted to CLC version 6 (and not 5.x) then you may want to check in with CLC tech support. -
The differences are by hours, infact twice the difference (~6 hours in 5.1 version and ~11 hours in Version 6) !
Both the computer use the same kind of structure and configuration, infact the slower mapping is in a system which is more powerful than the other computer.
Right now I am trying to download the legacy version (Version 5.1) in the same computer and would do a comparison between the versions within the same system.Last edited by Bioanalyst; 02-26-2013, 07:44 AM.Comment
-
For us it was the exact opposite: mapping in v5 took forever (much longer than in v4), but v6 was fast again (and still is). weirdComment
-
Same problem here, did you find solution?
We have the same issue. CLC gwb version 5.5 was fast. We recently upgraded to version 6 and it was ok, but then after upgrading to version 6.0.3, it has become very slow. It freezes the whole computer, and takes almost 20 minutes to upload a file that only took 2 mins with version 5.Originally posted by Bioanalyst View Post
Did you get a solution to the problem? I checked their website and there is a new version v6.0.4 for upgrade, have you tried this new upgrade?
Any info will be helpful, Thanks!Comment
-
With a clear problem like this your first stop of inquiry should be CLC tech support. Is this a Mac or a PC? Are we talking about the same exact data set (in terms of size at least).Originally posted by NGS_New_User View PostComment
-
Thanks for the suggestion. I have just sent them an email, hopefully will get a response from them soon. It is a PC. Yes, the same exact data setOriginally posted by GenoMax View PostComment
-
Proteins are often described as the workhorses of the cell, and identifying their sequences is key to understanding their role in biological processes and disease. Currently, the most common technique used to determine protein sequences is mass spectrometry. While still a valuable tool, mass spectrometry faces several limitations and requires a highly experienced scientist familiar with the equipment to operate it. Additionally, other proteomic methods, like affinity assays, are constrained...04-04-2024, 04:25 PM -
Despite advancements in sequencing platforms and related sample preparation technologies, certain sample types continue to present significant challenges that can compromise sequencing results. Pedro Echave, Senior Manager of the Global Business Segment at Revvity, explained that the success of a sequencing experiment ultimately depends on the amount and integrity of the nucleic acid template (RNA or DNA) obtained from a sample. “The better the quality of the nucleic acid isolated...03-22-2024, 06:39 AM
Comment