Enable L3 cache on Dual 800mhz G4 processor

can anyone help?
i cannot enable the L3 cache on this processor.
im am not sure if it is even working or present
CPUD shows no option to enable it
it does not show in the system profile
Reggie SE show me an error (1018) when i try to enable the L3 cache.
i have tried to use the .kext written by Till Wimmer but i get an error on reboot saying the .kext file was not properly installed.
i am not so sure about using terminal
any help much appreciated

hi thanks for the replies,
As far as i am aware the specs show that the Dual 800mhz processor does have an L3 cache, and yes it is from a QS, modded into my DA.
the L3enabler is mounted when i am installing the .kext file.
i am a little unsure with Terminal, i am not sure that i am inputting the commands correctly, i am basically cut+paste the instructions with L3enabler
please correct me if i am doing the totally wrong thing!
step by step instructions would be great, spoon feeding if you like, whilst i cn get my head around the installation of hardware, my knowledge of programming code is VERY limited
(Cracking code for my ZX spectrum in the 80s was easy but i missed out on unix lessons!)

Similar Messages

Enabling result cache

Hi,
I am trying to enable result cache feature at Oracle 11g R2 server. I am following the below steps but everytime the cache status is coming DISABLED. Please help me to correct it
1. I am setting the RESULT_CACHE_MAX_SIZE and RESULT_CACHE_MODE as below. Memory_Target is 1232M, so I chose to allocate 200M for result cache.
ALTER SYSTEM SET RESULT_CACHE_MODE=FORCE
System altered.
ALTER SYSTEM SET RESULT_CACHE_MAX_SIZE=200M
System altered.2. I am restarting the database
SHUTDOWN IMMEDIATE
STARTUP
3. I am querying the result cache status
SELECT DBMS_RESULT_CACHE.STATUS FROM DUAL
STATUS
DISABLEDI have configured other database servers for cache and its working fine. But i am not able to sort out what is going wrong in above scripts. Please help me if i am missing out some step.
Thanks

select * from v$version;you need "Enterprise Edition" http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B28359_01/license.111/b28287/editions.htm
for EE check this:
http://psoug.org/reference/dbms_result_cache.html
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/articles/datawarehouse/vallath-resultcache-rac-284280.html
http://www.oracle-developer.net/display.php?id=503

Leopard Server on Dual 800MHz G4?

Sorry if this is a repost, I tried searching around for a while and couldn't find an answer to this...
I'm looking to install OS X Server on an old dual 800MHz G4 tower. I was just wondering if the install would allow it, because the clock speeds are below the minimum requirement, even though it's got 2 of them.
Thanks in advance,
J

No, Leopard's CPU speed restriction applies to a single processor. Your computer does not meet the requirement. You could look for a CPU upgrade for your model (check sonnettech.com) but you should know that Apple does not support CPU upgrades. Now that doesn't mean Leopard won't run on an upgraded machine, it means that if you have any problems with Leopard on an upgraded machine, Apple provides no support and does not guarantee that Leopard will work on an upgraded machine. However, the vendors selling the upgrades can confirm compatibility (at least with Leopard Client. I don't know if they test the Server version.)
You will need to weigh the differences between the cost of upgrading the computer versus buying a new or newer model with a faster processor.

Dual 800MHz in 733MHz QuickSilver - heatsink

Hello everyone!
I just had a PowerMac G4 QuickSilver 2001 (the original model) with a 733MHz single CPU from a good friend.
I want to upgrade the CPU and I already know that the CPU from the Dual 800MHz Quicksilver will fit and work in my computer, but my question is about the heatsink.
The Dual 800MHz CPU I saw on eBay doesn't come with an heatsink, so: can I use my heatsink from the single 733MHz with the Dual 800MHz or will it overheat? I could put a second 60mm fan attached to the heatsink to improve the airflow, will it be enough cooling?
Thanks!

As BD says, the 344W should be sufficient. It was standard on the 2001 Quicksilver with the dual 800MHz CPU.
I would worry more about the heat created. When I fit a dual processor to a Quicksilver, I fit an Evercool EC6025H12CA fan in place of the standard CPU fan. Cools things down nicely. It's a three wire fan, so you fold the third (blue, I think) wire out of the way. As I recall, you pull the blue wire out of the little white plug (folding it back out of the way) and move the black wire from its initial position to the space left when you pulled the blue wire. This lets you slide the little three wire plug onto the two posts of the motherboard where the original low speed fan went. The new fan will run at full speed (like the original) instead of being a variable speed job, but I haven't had one fail yet. Stare at it for a few minutes to get it all properly arranged in your mind, and it should go smoothly.
If you can't find a proper heatsink, you can try looking for a dual 1GHz CPU (and heatsink) from the 2002 Quicksilver. Interchanges easily.
I sort of prefer a Radeon 9800 or a GeForce 6800GT to the 9600, but anything should be faster than the GeForce2.
Best of luck! ... jws

What is the operating system available for Macbook Dual core Intel processor system

what is the operating system available for Macbook Dual core Intel processor system

Exactly what model? Do you really mean the old MacBook with the dual core processor or do you mean one using a Core 2 Duo processor?
The last OS X that runs on a dual core Mac would be:
Upgrading to Snow Leopard
You can purchase Snow Leopard through the Apple Store: Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard - Apple Store (U.S.). The price is $19.99 plus tax. You will be sent physical media by mail after placing your order.
After you install Snow Leopard you will have to download and install the Mac OS X 10.6.8 Update Combo v1.1 to update Snow Leopard to 10.6.8 and give you access to the App Store. Access to the App Store enables you to download Mountain Lion if your computer meets the requirements.
     Snow Leopard General Requirements
       1. Mac computer with an Intel processor
       2. 1GB of memory
       3. 5GB of available disk space
       4. DVD drive for installation
       5. Some features require a compatible Internet service provider;
           fees may apply.
       6. Some features require Apple’s iCloud services; fees and
           terms apply.

4GB memory on new MacBook Pro Retina 13 with 2.4GHz dual core i5 processor &128GB flash storage

Hello,
I'm completely new to the mac world but I'm fed up with pc's and all the insanity with processor problems, viruses, etc. I'm seriously looking at replacing my HP laptop with the new MacBook Pro Retina 13 with 2.4GHz dual core i5 processor, 4GB memory (RAM) & 128GB flash storage, OS X Mavericks (not sure which version). My concern is whether this will be reliably & consistantly fast & smooth both in desktop apps & internet use. I don't need it to do somersaults or anything too advanced. I would mostly be using Pages & spreadsheet apps & internet. It would double as my daughter's computer for cyber school so it's crucial that it runs quickly & efficiently. If she can't complete everything on time or log in to her online sessions because of a computer issue we'll be up a creek without a paddle since this particular cyber school's tech department is still working off of pc's running Windows XP. My father, thus far a pc user, thought I should consider moving up to 8GB memory but I was hoping that with flash storage being faster, I would be able to avoid the extra $100 for the upgrade to 8GB. My biggest fear is finding myself as frustrated & angry as I am now with all of my pc's, ready to take a sledge hammer to them because they take forever to boot, launch apps, internet or do just about anything (that is if they're even fuctioning at all- not joking). Does anyone have any advice or input? Thanks!!
P.s. On Apple's site I found a refurbished late 2013 model of the MacBook Pro Retina 13 with all of the same specs as listed above (4GB, not 8GB), running OS X (doesn't say which one) but for a bit less than a brand new one. Is this the same model as what they're currently selling new in their store or did they just upgrade everything to match what is being offered in the current "new" model? I realize this may be a dumb question but I can't seem to find anything online indicated that Apple has released a model newer than what was released late last year (October 2013, I believe), except that the model released then came with SSD storage instead of flash.

No computer is fault free but Apple MBPs have a good track record. In those cases where problems do arise, Apple has the best support in the industry.
A MBP with 4 GB RAM with the SSD storage should be adequate for your needs.
lsmoondancer01 wrote:
P.s. On Apple's site I found a refurbished late 2013 model of the MacBook Pro Retina 13 with all of the same specs as listed above (4GB, not 8GB), running OS X (doesn't say which one) but for a bit less than a brand new one. Is this the same model as what they're currently selling new in their store or did they just upgrade everything to match what is being offered in the current "new" model?
The latest MBP models came out in October 2013, so it will be the same, with the same warranty and telephone support. The difference will be that the price will be less and it will be delivered in a plain white box.
I have purchased three MBPs from the refurbished section. I have never been able to detect any cosmetic differences and will go that route again.
Ciao.

Can't Enable write cache on disk with event ID 34

One of our clients has a performance issue similar this one:
Performance issue on TS as VM - Resolution with screenshots
After monitoring it we found the problem is write cache. We improve the
... I
checked all other VMs, the Enable advanced performance is unchecked. Do you
... A: To improve the performance for the disk, here are some proactively action
plans:.
www.chicagotech.net/remoteissues/tsperformance1.htm
However, when we follow the resolution to Enable write cache, it doesn't take it with this event:
Event Type: Warning
Event Source: Disk
Event Category: None
Event ID: 34
Description:
The driver disabled the write cache on device \Device\Harddisk0\DR0.
How to fix it?
Bob Lin, MCSE & CNE Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Networking, Internet, Routing, VPN Troubleshooting on http://www.ChicagoTech.net How to Install and Configure Windows, VMware, Virtualization and Cisco on http://www.HowToNetworking.com

Hi,
By default, write caching is disabled on a disk that contains the Active Directory database (Ntds.dit). Also, write caching is disabled on a disk that contains the Active Directory log files. By doing this, you enhance the reliability of the Active
Directory files.
Thus if it is a DC, try to move the Active Directory database and the Active Directory log files off of a disk in which you need to enable write caching.
If you have any feedback on our support, please send to [email protected]

Full backup ( ~ 1 TB ) using external HD - speed USB vs. Firewire vs. eSATA - what are relative speeds - how to install eSATA on mid-2010 Mac Pro desktop ( dual hex-core processors)_

    Hi All,
     I'm trying to resume regular scheduled Full backup ( ~ 1 TB ) of drives using external HD (to allow off-site redundant backup storage) .
     What are relative speeds of USB vs. Firewire vs. eSATA ?
     I suspect eSATA connection may be considerably faster … how to install eSATA on mid-2010 Mac Pro desktop ( dual hex-core processors)?
      ( The quicker and easier backup protocol is, the more likely one is to use it to backup on a routine repetitive basis.)
Thanks

Jim Bogy wrote:
...I suspect eSATA connection may be considerably faster … how to install eSATA on mid-2010 Mac Pro desktop ( dual hex-core processors)?
      ( The quicker and easier backup protocol is, the more likely one is to use it to backup on a routine repetitive basis.)
Adding a USB 3.0+eSATA PCIe card, which The hatter mentions, is the best solution that I've found. See http://eshop.macsales.com/item/CalDigit/FASTA6GU3/. The card is not cheap, but the USB 3.0 works flawlessly (which can't be assumed; ask me how I know) and the eSATA connection allows booting from the connected drive. Grant Bennet-Alder's point about HD speed is important to consider; in addition, the size of the individual files being backed up and where on the backup disk they're going will affect overall transfer speed. For example, using the USB 3.0 connection on that CalDigit card going to a Toshiba 3TB external, the transfer rate for a big file (say a virtual machine file) from an internal SSD boot drive was about 145 MB/sec while a bunch of little files might drop to 30 MB/sec and both rates decrease as an inner partition on the external is used. All told, a nearly 700 GB backup took under 1.5 hours. Using a HD as the source added almost an extra hour, though a WD external was used for that. Using a WD green drive plugged into this http://eshop.macsales.com/item/NewerTech/FWU3ES2HDK/ with an eSATA connection took about 2.5 hours also, but that was bootable whereas the USB 3.0 connection is not.
Another point to consider is that USB 3.0 is ubiquitous on PC's now so there's lots of price competition for externals; not so much for eSATA externals.

PowerMac G5 Image across single, dual, and quad Processor Macs

Good Day,
Our organization is preparing to roll out Tiger. To streamline
this process we have decided to create images for each Mac family in
use. I know I need to find the newest possible model to create the
image but what is the rule for single, dual, and quad processor macs?
Can we use an image created on a quad processor PowerMac on the
dual/single processor PowerMacs?
Thanks

Macs of different models and vintages may take different restore disks. The disk image method of doing this kind of work may or may not work. Use the original disks when faced with different releases or different models. See this article:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=25784
So a dual-single processor transfer will not necessarily work.
In addition, there are license agreement considerations.
I would not do it unless you know you are in the clear on both accounts.

Thermal issues with PowerMac G5 Dual 2.0 Processor

I've been having issues with my fans running super loud for no apparent reason. I have been told that my thermal meter for one of my processors has gone bad and that I have to replace both my processors at a cost of over $800! I am simply wondering if there has been any other issues even similar to this one or if anyone can tell me if I really do have to have both processors replaced for this situation. Also, I am wondering if anyone knows how to run the processor diagnostic where I can view my computers feedback for myself.
I am a starving designer and desperate to fix my biggest tool. Please let me know of any possible suggestions or cheap fixxes. If there is no way around replacing both processors, please let me know of any good mac processor retailers! Thanx all!
-Aron
Powermac G5 Dual 2.0 Processor Mac OS X (10.4.5)

You can check the temps and fans with
http://www.bresink.de/osx/HardwareMonitor.html
or
http://www.kezer.net/thermographx.html
Who has told you what the problem is? Has the G5 been in the shop?
Is there a pattern to the loud fan noise?
Is there a red light on inside?
How warm is the room?
Is there a dust build-up inside the G5?
A simple thing, but is Energy Saver - Processor Performance set to 'Automatic'?

VISTA Support for Multiple Dual Quad Core Processors

Sorry if I missed this in my search.
Does Windows Vista Home Basic support dual quad core processors?
Windows Help & Support:
Under System, you can view the processor type and speed, as well as the number of processors installed, if your computer uses multiple processors.
Yet I see no mention of multiple processors there -- what am I missing?

Hi -g,
all Windows Home versions (XP and Vista) only support one physical prcossor with multiple Cores.
Windows Professional versions (XP Professional and Vista Business+Ultimate) support two physical processor with multiple Cores each.
Regards
Stefan

Enabling BIOS caching.

Sorry for the noob question, but I was curious about enabling the BIOS cache feature. Is there a noticable performance gain? Is it okay to do from a security standpoint?
I have my BIOS backed up on a floppy as I learned the hard way a long time ago, but maybe that's what makes me nervous about enabling the cache feature. So, who uses this and have you had any problems with it?? I would like to try it, but want to check the knowledge pool here before I do something I would regret.

I would kindly like to disagree,
The only thing about that is, sure if you can cache your system BIOS to memory it should be faster. But XP/2000 Don't rely on the system BIOS like old legacy OS's (Win3.1, 9x, OS/2) do and in fact rarely at all ever make a call to it. So while you may see a tiny AND I MEAN TINY shred of performance, overall you are slowing your machine because you're wasting memory on something that's hardly ever used.
The similar situation with VIDEO BIOS Cacheable. While this sounds like a great idea for improving total system performance, video memory is fast enough that it usually outperforms system memory. In addition as far as I'm aware (please correct me if I'm wrong) XP/2K GARTs handle video on their own independant of the actual video BIOS, as such the memory bandwidth would be better spent elsewhere than caching the Video BIOS.

What is the pupose of the Enable Document Cache option?

Hey All,
What is the Enable Document Cache option in the Reports Properties - General Settings? What are the benefits of this option? Documentation is lean on this one.
Thanks,
Ron

>I miss information of optimal setting for the cache. What is the ideal size and what is that setting depended on? Memory size? Raw file size?
The default size is 1GB, but it can be set much higher. When the number of previews held in the cache reaches the limit of the cache size older previews get dropped. This is the reason given for making the cache large. However, the problem with this approach is that the ACR cache preview is in addition to to the Lr preview created for the Library module. So, a larger cache will mean that even more disk space is used storing duplicate previews. If you're using a slower computer and are in the habit of quickly scanning through large number of files in the Develop module then a larger cache "might" help, otherwise anywhere between one and five GB should be more than adequate.

Kernal message: Could not enable ARP cache poisoning detection.

Looking at system files in Console, for another issue, I came across this kernal message, which occurs at start-up: "*Could not enable ARP cache poisoning detection. Your computer will not be protected*."
It's an intel Mac Mini running Leopard ( 10.5.8 ). I have Norton Antivirus for Mac 11 installed (I know, I know), which has ARP cache poisoning turned on in its "vulnerability protection" prefs. I've gotten no warnings of attacks from Norton, just this Kernal message at start-up. I've seen this issue on a couple of other threads with no answer or solution (except advice to Google it... duh!), already archived and accepting no new posts... so no help there.
Is this ARP cache poisoning detection part of the OS, and if so, why is it not being enabled? Is there a way to enable it? Could the kernal message be telling me that the Norton protection is bugged and not working, or would it be OS related. The mini is a wired connection (ethernet), and there's one other laptop (macbook 10.4.11) using the modem/router ( Actiontec GT 701-wg) via wireless airport. I haven't seen this message on the laptop in console or system logs, but haven't looked hard.
Someone, please respond with a knowledgeable answer, for me and for others who've asked here and on other forums with no helpful public answers given.

Doing a "erase and install" of Leopard, thus dumping Norton AV 11, and then installing Snow Leopard... I haven't seen this Kernal message come up again, yet. I'll assume it was some buggy Norton related thing that cropped up after an OS update, but who knows. I'll leave the question open for a bit, in case anyone else has had this issue and found a reason or solution, and wants to share.

Measuring "performance" improvement when enabling blob caching

Hi.
Is there a way to measure improvement/disimprovment when you enable blob caching in a Sharepoint 2013 farm for the user experience? Will it show when measuring page
download time?
Wish you a good day!
Simon

I would use Fiddler2 which will provide you with an overall time. One of the largest improvements for blobcaching is that it tells the client to cache the data so blobs aren't re-requested.
Trevor Seward
Follow or contact me at...
&nbsp&nbsp
This post is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect the opinion or view of Microsoft, its employees, or other MVPs.

Enable L3 cache on Dual 800mhz G4 processor

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for