Why do Windows timing functions have poor resolution and accuracy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dissident Dan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Functions Windows
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Windows timing functions exhibit poor resolution and accuracy, typically achieving only 5-8 milliseconds at best. Users have reported issues with non-monotonic jitter, which further complicates time measurement. For high-resolution and accurate timers on Windows XP, alternative methods are necessary, as the built-in clock crystals are inadequate compared to standard wristwatches. The discussion highlights the need for improved timing solutions in Windows environments.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Windows XP operating system
  • Familiarity with timing functions in programming
  • Knowledge of clock crystal technology
  • Basic concepts of non-monotonic behavior in computing
NEXT STEPS
  • Research high-resolution timer APIs in Windows, such as QueryPerformanceCounter
  • Explore third-party libraries for accurate timing in Windows XP
  • Learn about the limitations of clock crystals and alternatives for precise timekeeping
  • Investigate techniques to mitigate non-monotonic jitter in time measurements
USEFUL FOR

Software developers, system programmers, and anyone involved in performance optimization on Windows XP who require precise timing solutions.

Dissident Dan
Messages
244
Reaction score
1
One would think that counting time would be one of the simplest functions that a computer could do, given that computers generally operate based on fixed frequencies, which I believe are generated by crystals.

However, the windows time functions that I know are horrible. Firstly, they have horrible resolution, being able to get them down to about 5-8ms at best. Also, there are sometimes non-monotonicly increasing jitters.

Does anyone know of any simple ways to have high-resolution, accurate timers in Windows XP?
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/kw217/useful/win32time.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dissident Dan said:
One would think that counting time would be one of the simplest functions that a computer could do, given that computers generally operate based on fixed frequencies, which I believe are generated by crystals.

The clock crystals in a computer aren't actually that good for producing accurate times. A $5 department store watch will keep better time than your computer will.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 123 ·
5
Replies
123
Views
21K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K