CS3 + Win 7 64 + Quad Core = Rendering nightmare

I really need some help here.
I installed Win 7 Ultimate 64 with 8 GB ram and a Q6600 quad core processor. I have a WD Caviar black 7200 RPM HD with 32 meg buffer as my OS drive and two WD 7200 160 GB HDs in RAID 0 as a video drive. Im also using a EVGA GTX275 Nvidia card with 868MB RAM and the latest driver.
I have some serious concerns about Premiere Pro CS3s abiltity to render in Win7.
Here is the video I am attempting to render. I am making a Star Wars type intro with rolling text. I have two rolling text titles (each on their own layer) over a starfield video (on its own layer) that is being held on the INPOINT (the star field is). One rolling title starts where the other ends in order to give the effect of one long rolling title off to the far distance.
When I render this....and while watching my CPU Usage gadget, all four cores peg at 100%. Thats good. However, the render takes forever..and crawls. Sometimes it ticks off one frame per second. To make a segment that runs about 1min 30secs, its takes a good 8-10 mins to render. All the while, the four cores show 100%.
What is the problem? Ive tried to defrag. I tried to turn off Aero. Ive run it AS ADMINISTRATOR. Ive run CS3 in XP SP2 mode etc. Nothing. There is no way it can be this slow to render that. Overall, I think I see slow renders in other areas too. And the previews themselves, are choppy.
Tell me there is a fix or a patch or something. This is ridiculous.

Thanks for the input. I ran it again.
TeachDJs PC,   Personal or Computer ID
MSI, Computer Manufacturer
MS-7350,   Computer Model
103.2, secs Total Benchmark Time
6.2, secs AVI Encoding Time
62, secs MPEG Elapsed Time
35, secs Rendering Time
Intel,    CPU Manufacturer
QX6850,    CPU Model
3.00,    GHz CPU speed
1,    Number of CPU chips
4,    Total Number of Cores
8,    GB RAM
4.2.1,    APP Version PPBM4 DV
Win 7 64,    OSVersion
SATA,    OS Disk Interface
640,    GB OS Disk Capacity
7200,    OS Disk Speed
SATA,    Project Disk Interface
160x2 R0,    GB Project Disk Capacity
7200,    Project Disk Speed
SATA,    Preview Disk Interface
160x2 R0,    GB Preview Disk Capacity
7200,    Preview Disk Speed
Project Disk,    Output Disk Interface
Project Disk,    GB Output Disk Capacity
Project Disk,    Output Disk Speed
1xEvga Nvidia GTZ 275 896 MB RAM,
Neither of my disks are at or above 70% fill capacity. I am not using compression or indexing on either drive. They are turned off.

Similar Messages

Installing CS3 on a Quad core with Raid 5

I recently bought a new computer and tried installing CS3 Master collection on it and I'm having some problems.
The new computer has an AMD quad core processor, 4GB of ram, 3 hard drives set up in a RAID 5, and a high end Nvidia graphics card. I'm using Windows XP Pro 32bit for an OS. I've already updated all drivers for everything and there are no hardware conflicts.
When I start Photoshop, it stops responding as soon as the Photoshop window opens. It doesn't even bring up the activation screen. When I try Illustrator, In Design or anything else, I don't even get the window to open. If I leave it for 5 minutes or so, it eventually gives me an error stating I have a license and activation issue. Since I can't even get an activation screen to input a license key, I can't even try to fix it. I've already tried uninstalling and reinstalling twice on this computer.
Does anyone have any suggestions for what is causing CS3 to not work correctly and/or how to fix it?
Thanks for any help.
~N

Hi Nathan,
I do have exactly the same problem on dual Xeon with RAID 5. The culprit is RAID 5, but I did not found any solution yet. Did you?
I had an identical issue when previously installed CS2 on the same machine (i.e. with RAID 5) but only with Acrobat, and with some updates from Adobe the problem was solved.
If you find any solution for the problem, please let me know ([email protected]). Thanks! Dani

New Quad-Core Computer with Vista64, 8gb ram ; Should I install CS3 or CS4?

Hello Friends,
I have been reading the forum trying to gain foresight before I spend very limited cash for hardware and software.
On Black Friday eve, I spent the night waiting at Best Buy to get the door-buster-deal on an HP desktop with AMD 9500 quad-core, 8gb ddr2 800MHz ram, Windows Vista 64 Home Premium, 760gb hard drive (7200rpm, ESATA 3.0gb transfer), second internal capture drive 500gb(7200rpm ESATA 3.0gb transfer), 1 TB external storage. This machine is only for my photography and video editing. I do wedding photography.
I have photoshop CS3 full version, so I can upgrade to CS4 Creative Suite for $1,100.00. I can also buy a full version copy of CS3 Creative Suite for $500.00 new in the box with all manuals.
With all the complaints about CS4, would I be better off buying CS3? Is CS4 worth $600 more? Have all the bugs been worked out of CS3?
I can upgrade 3 months after they release CS 5 for the $600 and skip some of the heart ache?
Please tell me what you think?
Jeffrey

Any option (CS3, CS4 or waiting for CS5 in 16-18 months) are all logical options for various reasons.
For you though, you might get the best mileage out of CS4, as there are certain advantages when running on Vista 64 (versus CS3, for which very little was done to take advantage of the extra features of Vista 64). In particular, Photoshop will run a 64-bit app on Vista 64. Premiere Pro also has some additional functionality on Vista 64.
CS5 should probably bring more full-fledged 64-bit apps, and better features in general (or at least one would hope). but it's not likely to be released or announced even until Q1 2010.

My Quad-Core can't handle CS3

I can't seem to run simultaneous Adobe programs - I typically have InDesign and/or Photoshop and Illustrator open simultaneously. I used to be able to multitask on my previous work PC (it was old and lagging but it let me use multiple programs). Work have recently upgraded me to a Quad-Core (specs at the end of post) and I am having troubles like never before.
Some examples off the top of my head include:
- The other day after a reboot, I went to start a new document in Photoshop and some of the fields/drop down menu was missing. InDesign was open at this stage
- Went to open a psd file from File>Open Recent and when I clicked on my psd file and hit open, Photoshop crashed without any error messages
- Tried opening Illustrator and the yellow starter window popped up and then nothing happened, the program didn't fully launch. So I went to my task manager and it didn't appear in there either. So I clicked it again and this happened 2-3 more times
- Tried to 'Edit original' in InDesign (right click on image) which would typically launch in Photoshop - it didn't launch
The only way I have resolved these issues are by rebooting my PC which is a royal pain.
My new PC's specs are:
- Dual Quad-Core 3GHZ processor (This was recommended by Adobe)
- 4GB RAM
- 768MB video card
- Windows XP w/Service Pack 3 (I saw a thread which said SP3 doesn't create any issues for CS3)
Does anyone have an idea of why this is happening? Any help would be most appreciated...
Tara.

I have a system with similar specs, but Vista 32-bit SP1 without any of the problems you are seeing.
How big is your paging file? I would try to force a paging file size of between 9 and 12 gigabytes as opposed to letting XP "automatically" handle that. (BTW, you do know that although you may have 4 GB or real memory on your system, only 3 gigabytes of that will really be available due to your video card, BIOS, and memory-mapped I/O requirements!)
If that doesn't work, what happens if you "roll back" SP3?
- Dov

2011 MacBook Pro, 64 bit i7 quad core, upgraded to Lion OSx, Bootcamp installed with Windows 7, wanting to install Windows 8 (don't ask), tried downloading/installing bootcamp 5.0.5033, error message something similar to bootcamp doesn't support this Win

2011 MacBook Pro, 64 bit i7 quad core, upgraded to Lion OSx, Bootcamp installed with Windows 7, wanting to install Windows 8 (don't ask), tried downloading/installing bootcamp 5.0.5033 (both on the mac/windows partitions (actually using a parallel to run Windows)), error message something similar to bootcamp doesn't support this Windows
So the question is am I doing something wrong? Should I just try and install windows 8 through my windows 7 partition and see if I can use the bootcamp 5.05033. Or do I solely have to use the bootcamp to install Windows 8? I'm not too familiar with bootcamp and how it runs.

if you're using parallels and full bootcamp then you're making it 100% more troublesome for youself then it needs to be
bootcamp is running windows directly on the hardware this give full memory and cpu and 3d video game power
running windows in parallels is running a virtual machine where one can't run powerful games and the like but one can have it in a window and change fast between osx and windows
parallels as the only virutal machine (as far as I know) support not have the operating system as a file on the osx harddisk but can access a bootcamp parition as virtual machine but without the benefits bootcamps provides
it's a service parallels provide for those who want both to play games in normal bootcamp and sometimes use windows in a virutal machine
just install it like a normal virtual machine and you need not worry about bootcamp drivers and the likes
plus it would mean that the windows part would be a part of the timemachine bacup of osx
which it is not when it's in bootcamp

Can't install Premier Elements 10 on Win 7 32 bit, quad core 2.40ghz, install package not compatible with my processor type

Hello All, I am trying to install Premier Elements 10 on a Windows 7 Pro box 32bit running an Intel Q6600 Core 2 Quad Core @ 2.40ghz, 2gb ram, I get the following error " This installation package is not supported by this processor type, Contact your product vendor."," What's wrong?

Interesting, I guess I need to call the Alienware folks and find out why they installed a substandard processor in such an expensive gaming box. I do have several other processors I can swap it out with, do you have a recommendation on a good processor that will get the job done? Learning is never a waste of time, but giving up is. Thanks for your insight,

HT1270 Will a Mid 2011 15" 17 core macbook pro run on 2 8GB 1666mhz memory? Told quad core MB Pro runs on 16GB at 1066 or 1666???

I have a what is said mid 2011 macbook pro quad core i7 with 4GB at 1333 Mhz, and read this is upgradeable to 8GB but also it will accept and run great on 2X8GB-16GB at either 1066 or 1666MHz-Can anyone shed light? I'm hoping fpor fastest I can get-I use as interface for recording and for photo work now and then. I usually put a 7200rpm HDD in but this came w/a 750GB/5400 and I wonder if the FSB/RAM speed and upgrading the RAM max will make up?
I'm thinking rather than always use ext 7200rpm hdd top record buy 2nd hdd at 7200 and use external open enclosure I can pop in and out use only for recording-I am starting back to school and have MS2011 Ofc but want to add Win 7 no virtual hdd's please, second question-can I add this w/o wiping all clean to reformat? Is this required to add partition for Win 7 or are these newer models designed to simply ADD-ON such MS software?
DO I EVEN NEED WIN 7 OR IS THIS A LUXURY? I would think my WORD, EXCEL, POWERPOINT is all I'll need for college classes requiring MS/Windows-am I correrct? I can eliminate problem #2.
MAINLY I WANT TP UPGRADE RAM-I FOUND CORSAIR MADE FOR THIS MODEL, 2X8GBAT 1666MHZ, AND A WEB PAGE THAT SAID THEY HAD A FLAWLESS UPGRADE AND IT RA EVEN FASTER AND SMOOTHER-This is the best Mac I've owned and I've had 100, including 27" iMac I sold-too much for my needs-I'm a prtable person-HELP!!! I get YES answers from my IT professional and others tell me only *GB at 1333, so WHICH? Thanks, madthomii.

Hey,
Perhaps this is relevant ..........
(1) I have a very late 17" macbook Pro. (It is actually the somewhat rare 2.5 quad model.) One of the very last ones made.
(2) It comes with 1333 ram
(3) I swapped in 1600 ram
(4) IT IS ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN, THAT, THE MACHINE RUNS MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH FASTER when you have 1600 speed ram.
(Indeed, it runs 1600 / 1333 = 1.20x faster on all memory operations - it's just that simple and obvious.)
I did many tests back-and-fore swapping the slow and fast ram, and it is very, very obvious, the speed difference. Most operations on computers are just memory bound - everything from startup to rendering and the like is quicker - obviously and clearly quicker - with faster ram.
(5) I have had utterly no problems running the faster ram. It reports and runs the ram utterly normally, no problem.
(6) These machines cost thousands, and ram cost a few dollars - there seems very little reason you wouldn't do this.
(7) I do have one of the very last 17" mbp. (It was "old new stock" - I bought it unused in March 2013.) So, it's possible that OLDER 17" mbp will not run 1600 speed RAM. But, I mean it costs like $100 to try, on a fantastic machine worth $1000s, so it's a huge win at low cost if it works.
I hope this helps future readers!!! Cheers

Playback of HD bmp sequences too slow on quad core i7

I have a fairly fast quad-core i7 Win 7 64bit machine with 12GB RAM and primarily use Premiere as an editor for our animated series. We render 1280x720 30 fps bmp sequences (not interlaced just progressive), which I then import along with the .WAV audio files. We need to line up sound FX and other editing considerations, but playback on the machine is way too jerky to properly time things.
I assumed this might be improved with PP 5.5 (I have been using PP 2.0 for ever, since it met my needs) but the trial does not reveal that to be the case. I can, of course, render out to uncompressed AVI sequences to then retime things and that's what I've been doing in PP 2.0, but if that's what I have to do there is little advantage in me upgrading to 5.5.
Is this just the way it is? I would have thought my machine specs to be adequate to this task, but perhaps not and I'll just have to live with the older program. Or is there something I should enable to make it work better (I've tried everything I can think of in the program but nothing seems to improve it -- quite frankly, the playback is just as slow as it is on my much older dual-core XP box, also running Premiere 2.0)

Thanks for the responses, guys.
The disc drives are all SATA AV drives with as high a throughput as is reasonably possible. I had not turned off indexing but I tried that on one drive and it didn't seem to help any (I really couldn't tell any differences).
Yes, of course I have an AV program running, as does anyone nowadays, but with 99.9% of the CPU cycles available I doubt whether it's slowing things down. When looking at all the cores in Process Explorer, for example, they are nearly as flatline as anything could be. But if you're suggesting I need to dump any AV as well as, say, even a browser window open to work in Premiere, I'd say it isn't worth it.
That leaves rendering the timeline which, of course, I can do even in 2.0. I assume the work files involved are at least smaller than rendering out the uncompressed AVIs so that is one advantage, although obviously render times are a PITA compared to timeline playback. But if that's state of the art nowadays (that is, if most *reasonable* modern systems aren't capable of handing this kind of playback) then so be it. There's not a real compelling reason for me to upgrade now, then, but that's okay as well.
And, again, I do appreciate the attempt to help (I just wish my system could do this. Sigh).

Quad Core Versus Dual Core on a Mac

I am going to upgrade to one of the new 27 inch iMacs. I use CS4 Premium Design Suite, PS, IL, ID and a little bit of DW. Does anyone have a comment or thought on any real benefit to a Quad Core processor? Do any of these apps support the multi threading that makes use of quad core technology? The little bit of research I have found on the internet suggests that there is not any significant performance improvement with the current software such as CS3 and CS4. The exceptions seem (and only seem) to be with some CAD applications and high end video editing.
Any input or factual data would be greatly appreciated.
Floyd

Mark, I know what paid for my G5 Tower compared to what I can get from the new iMacs is incredible.
I do ad layouts in Illustrator, sometimes very large layouts 6 feet by 4 feet for menu boards. I use Photoshop extensively for pre layout work and for my own photography. I do a bit of video work but nothing major. I use either iMovie or Final Cut Express, again mostly simple stuff, not to much rendering.
I'm probably going to put 8 gig of ram, running Snow Leopard, For what I am comparing, the Quad machine is about $300 more the the Duo Core. The Quad processor speed is 2.66 ghz, the Duo Core processor is 3.06 ghz. so this is where it gets all muddy. Duo has faster processor but if the software I use does not have the "treading" capability to make use of the 4 cores than it seems that the duo is a better choice. Am I making proper sense out o this. It used to be so much easier to compare the options.. And no one seems to want to post a list of programs that truly benefit from Quad Core.
By the way I could care less about gaming benefits.

Macsafe 85w still not enough when running Heavy program on Macbook pro 2011 Quad Core

Is there any official announcement from apple on how macsafe 85w works & design flow or diagram..??
We know the magsafe 85w is not enough to run macbook pro quad core i7 and their family.. But there must be some reason why apple only allow maximum 85w only.. rite
I run this multiple test on my Macbook Pro early 2011, 17" 2.2 Quad core i7, 8G ram, to proving that the 85W is not enough.
-Im running this test on both OSX & win 7
-the battery capacity is 20% when i running this test
-the power adapter "macsafe" is plugin when i run this test
1) macsafe 85w turn to green to stop charging when rendering HD movie in Final Cut pro 7 in OSX ( but then it will turn to orange to charged again after you cancel the render)
2) macsafe 85w turn to green to stop charging when playing high graphic game such "Razor F1 2010" in Win 7 ( but then it will turn to orange to charged again after you quit the game)
3) macsafe 85w turn to green to stop charging when editing AVCHD on Sony vegas Pro 10 in Win 7 (it will turn to orange to charged again after you quit the program)
4) when the baterry reach 100%. then I run all of 3 heavy program above.. the baterry will drain slowly until 93% then it turn to orange to charging again.
(this will happen only when you run heavy program) 85w macsafe itself also not enough to run these program.. still need little battery support..
As i know this will happen to all macbook pro since before Quad core model. You must run heavy program, then you can determin this systoms..
Lastly, I really hope that all of this symtoms are the "macsafe work design", & not the macsafe fault... & really hope this symtoms will not damage the battery because regullaly charge on & off.
Maybe This is why new macbook pro design,, you cannot take out the battery... It still need the battery support also, while plugin..
Thanks &
Sorry broken english..

"Maybe This is why new macbook pro design,, you cannot take out the battery... It still need the battery support also, while plugin.."
Yes — but only when you're working the machine very hard. Most of the time, 85W is ample.
"But,, we need the official announce by apple regarding this issue"
No you don't. That's how it works. What good would an announcement from Apple do you?

Performance Question:Two 2.8GHz Quad-Core VS Two 3.0GHz Quad-Core?

I am in the market for a Mac Pro and I want to know if there is a huge performance difference between the dual 2.8 quad-cores and the dual 3.0 quad-cores. I do video editing, web sites and graphic design, as well as gaming. Is 200 more mhz really worth $800? Please let me know what is a better investment?

Hello,
Your question is one seen often here.
I would agree that the difference in time-to-completion for projects such as video editing is important. But one has to think in terms of seconds saved - per project. In other words, if one saves "10 seconds" per project using the higher speed processors, does that represent a significant savings at the end of a year's worth of projects? That of course depends on how many "extra" projects get completed (and paid for). Most individual Mac users agree that it's not that significant a difference when it comes to profits gained vs extra cost of the machine.
Granting: If one is talking about a company with 500 people running high end rendering projects, the cumulative difference is significant because there'll be that many more "extra projects" completed over a given period. It's just obvious: increasing productivity on that scale is significant.
Video gaming is in an entirely different category: "personal preference." I think it's fine if a gamer finds the "mightier" machine provides a better experience. But it won't help you "win" a single video game. As one who was active in the Muscle Car Era of the 1960s, I think that was much like what we're seeing with video gamers today. If having a 450 hp muscle car was itself a status symbol, it still only meant that, sometimes, a street drag race could be won by "a bumper length" over a 400 hp car. No one can say they have the "right" to decide how you spend your money - it's up to you if the prestige is worth it to you.
Basically, given the above, I have to agree with Rick (and many others) on this question.

Quad core versus 8 core for final cut studio

Hi,
I have previously used adobe premiere cs3 for video editing and am now switching to final cut studio.
My question is: is it worth spending the 600 pounds extra to purchase an 8-core with 2.26 ghz processors as opposed to the 2.66 quad?
Apologies for the repetition...I know there have been similar questions already, and I have read the previous threads on this topic and also the barefoot reviews.
So far my understanding is:
1. It is not worth upgrading to the 2.93 quad as there is hardly any difference in performance
2. The 2.26 ghz 8-core is faster than the 2.66 quad for rendering, etc but slower for some other applications including photo editing.
3. Officially, there is no way of upgrading the processor of either once bought, although some "DIY upgrades" have been described.
But how does this translate into practice? I would like to hear from someone who uses final cut studio on a quad core - are you happy with the performance? And those with an 8-core - was it worth the extra money? I am planning to upgrade to the ATI HD graphics card, but still not sure on which computer model I should choose.
Thanks for your help

The hatter wrote:
you probably have read anything I could say or said already. have you asked in the final cut forum? have you considered the $2400 2008 2.8GHz 8-core?
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/mac_pro
Oh that they were still readily available in the UK - I just missed out on one a couple of weeks ago - as soon as I hit Buy it had gone!
They've got an 8 core 2008 3.2 GHz for £2500 but I'm not convinced it's worth £1,000 more at this stage.
AC

Crazy to install CS2 on Quad Core 64 bit Windows 7 notebook?

I've been a video producer/director/editor since 1970 and have witnessed most all the progress and insanity of the "corporate wars" to dominate video production and later, video editing. I no longer see any reason to differentiate between still photography, video production, editing, web authoring, print production, graphics, CGI, CAD etc...ad nauseum. My dream has long been to have one very powerful laptop that could do most everything that a creative person desired on location anywhere in the world.
My new notebook is an ASUS Quad Core G71GX with 6 GB RAM - an Nvidia Geoforce GTX 260M - and 2 - 500 GB, 7200 rpm hard drives - Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit OS. These days I shoot most video using a Canon SX1 IS at 1080 30p and the files are playing back beautifully on the 1920x1400 display at full frame rate. So for me that covers the basics. I will be upgrading from Windows 7 Home Premium to Ultimate shortly. Does anyone have issues/questions about the platform?
As to the software . . . I have been using Adobe stuff for 20 years or so.but did not get into their video editing products until Premiere 6.5. Than I jumped in with both feet and became a beta tester for the CS2 video collection. I still have my complimentary Premiere Pro 2.0 and it still works on my older XP Pro notebooks.
But now we are here in 2010 and all the major PC platforms are running 64 bit Operating Systems and I just figure that I should hold out for a true 64 bit Master Collection [which many people call CS5]. In the meantime I decided to install my CS2 Creative Suite and Premiere Pro 2.0 just so I could have the benefit of these programs while I am waiting for the 64 bit to release.
I purchased my CS2 back in 2005 as a download and last night made the attempt to install it onto the ASUS. As expected the serial number did not work so I called Adobe Installation support and got started after they prompted me for the "challenge" code. When I entered it the installation began nicely UNTIL the first folder [CS_2.0_UE_Ret_D1] finished loading and UP POPPED a window saying "Please insert CD #2" with only an OK button. Well, I didn't have any CDs because the suite was delivered as a download way back when and there seems to be no way to get to Disk 2 folder.
I finally decided to Quit the install when up pops a window that says [paraphrasing]. Your Photoshop program on Disc 1 has been verified and so try again to install. I said OK and up pops a window with all the various programs and the option to select Install. I selected each one [except GoLive because I now have Dreamweaver CS4] and proceeded. I sort of kluged my way through the transition from D1 to D2 to D3 to D4 folders and by all indications had a successfully installed, registered and activated CS2 suite on the ASUS notebook. Restarted the machine.
Opened Photoshop and up comes an error message "Your Adobe Photoshop user name, organization or serial number is missing or invalid. The application cannot continue and must now exit" "OK", which I pressed and Photoshop closed. Checked the other CS2 programs and none of them would open.
I would appreciate any pointers on how to get CS2 Creative Suite to install properly since Adobe Tech Support says such installation help is out of date and recommended this forum.
BTW: I run Videography Lab and am the "seminal author of videography". OCT 1972 American Cinematographer. I have a different take on the meaning of videography than most folks. After 38 years of research and contemplation I believe "Videography means 'I know to write' or conversely 'writing my knowing'" The platform that I've been talking about is the technology tool that enables such communication in "the Age of Videography" [Miller Freeman Publishing - 1996].
Call me crazy and than help me get this sorted out
Bob Kiger - [url removed by host]
PS: Does anyone beside me expect a sudden and dramatic shootout between Final Cut Studio & Adobe Creative Suite soon?

Hi Michael--
Upon continued research we found your statement "CS 2 isn't compatible with Windows 7 32-bit no less 64-bit." not quite true. We grant you that, in it's raw state, Windows 7 will not install, activate, register etc. CS2 programs. That's been the Adobe position for quite a while.
Now that we have Windows 7 in hand and can play we found that if you have Windows 7 Professional or Ultimate edition you can acquire for $89.95 and download/install in an hour or so "Windows Virtual PC" and "Windows XP Mode".[Note: This feature is not available on Home editions].
We purchased the platform and once it is installed we had a "Windows XP platform" on our Windows 7 machine. From that point forward the installation of CS2 and many other of our old favorite programs was a snap. We've opened and worked with Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign etc. with no problems.
And, by the way, Premiere Pro 2.0 intalled easily on Windows 7. We're testing it now with some sub-1080p projects.
As to the long nagging problem of Adobe Installer not recognizing the downloaded CS2 CAB files during installation, we worked around by just saying OK when the installer asked for the next disc and immediately clicked on the desired disc in a seperate exlorer window which contained all the download files.
So that's the workaround for us. Now we wait to see who wins the race to enchant users with 64 bit editing and imaging suites.
Thanks for all your help.
Bob Kiger - Videography Lab

I am running Photoshop CC 2014 on Windows 8.1 with an AMD quad core processor and AMD E1-2100 APU with AMD Radeon HD 8210 Graphics Card. I have installed the latest driver version 13.152.0.0. When I activate puppet warp, the mesh appears over the image an

I am running Photoshop CC 2014 on Windows 8.1 with an AMD quad core processor and AMD E1-2100 APU with AMD Radeon HD 8210 Graphics Card. I have installed the latest driver version 13.152.0.0. When I activate puppet warp, the mesh appears over the image and I can place the first pin. However, when I go to add the second pin, Photoshop crashes. I have tried with on a new, blank file, with just a few lines on it, but, as soon as I place the first pin, the image disappears, and then, as soon as I click anywhere else in the image, Photoshop crashes. I have followed all the online advice about settings under the Preferences/Performance interface, but nothing fixes the problem. Can anyone please help?

BOILERPLATE TEXT:
If you give complete and detailed information about your setup and the issue at hand, such as your platform (Mac or Win), exact versions of your OS, of Photoshop and of Bridge, machine specs, such as total installed RAM, scratch file HDs, video card specs, what troubleshooting steps you have taken so far, what error message(s) you receive, if having issues opening raw files also the exact camera make and model that generated them, etc., someone may be able to help you.
A screen shot could be very helpful too.
Please read this FAQ for advice on how to ask your questions correctly for quicker and better answers:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/419981?tstart=0
Thanks!

Quad core

Hi hope someone can help me out here?
My brother in law has just bought a new HP laptop 1337tx amd quad core cpu.
He asked my why his laptop was running slow when browsing and opening programs.
He runs win 7 64 bit now I told him maybe his cores are not turned on so I went to control panel system config and selected his cpu only showing 1 core running so I changed it to alllow the 4 cores to run. But when he restarted his laptop he was presented with the blue screen ? So we changed the cores bact to 1 restarted works fine so we tried again 1 at a time 2 cores then 3 and 4 everytime we changed the cores blue screen.
So a friend of his said just start the laptop back to default yeah sure that will work but he will still be using 1 core when he tries to change the cores same problem blue scrren.
Under the task manager it clear shows only 1 core being used so why can we not turn the 4 cores on ? I suspect that his cpu or motherboard is faulty
Any help please
Russell
This question was solved.
View Solution.

Hi Russell,
Try the following.
As you have done already, launch System Configuration, select the Boot tab and select Advanced Options - if there is a tick in the box next to 'Number of Processors:', click the box to remove it. Click Ok, then click Apply and Ok in the remaining window.
Restart the notebook - what happens?
Regards,
DP-K
****Click the White thumb to say thanks****
****Please mark Accept As Solution if it solves your problem****
****I don't work for HP****
Microsoft MVP - Windows Experience

CS3 + Win 7 64 + Quad Core = Rendering nightmare

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for