How good is ths CHIP!! Intel Quad Core i7 3630QM and it is in my Qosmio X870

Details:  Rel Date 30th September 2012 
(Thanks Toshiba for including it in my X870, recieved in Australia a few days before Xmas 2012)
Architecture / Microarchitecture
Microarchitecture
Ivy Bridge
Processor core 
Ivy Bridge
Core stepping 
E1 (QCF5, SR0UX)
CPUID
306A9 (QCF5)
Manufacturing process
0.022 micron
1.4 billion transistors
Die size
159.82mm2
Data width
64 bit
The number of cores
4
The number of threads
8
Floating Point Unit
Integrated
Level 1 cache size  ? 
4 x 32 KB instruction caches
4 x 32 KB data caches
Level 2 cache size  ? 
4 x 256 KB
Level 3 cache size
6 MB
Physical memory
32 GB
Multiprocessing
Not supported
Features
MMX instructions
SSE / Streaming SIMD Extensions
SSE2 / Streaming SIMD Extensions 2
SSE3 / Streaming SIMD Extensions 3
SSSE3 / Supplemental Streaming SIMD Extensions 3
SSE4 / SSE4.1 + SSE4.2 / Streaming SIMD Extensions 4 
AES / Advanced Encryption Standard instructions
AVX / Advanced Vector Extensions
F16C / 16-bit Floating-Point conversion instructions
EM64T / Extended Memory 64 technology / Intel 64 
NX / XD / Execute disable bit 
HT / Hyper-Threading technology 
TBT 2.0 / Turbo Boost technology 2.0 
VT-x / Virtualization technology

Games:  Space Engineers (FULL HD Res) Max, everything!  , GTAIV, Saints RowIV, MS FSX(Max), Sim City (New one and PLAY in 3D), Just Cause2 (Max & in 3D), ARMAIII, COD, so many games, never any crashes.
Windows 8 Pro Ultimate 64-Bit
RAM 32GB
Graphics GE Force GTX 670M (Current stable driver 350.42) with 3D Vision
Total HDD FREE 2TB, 3.5TB Used.......lol  
My Power Gaming Rig!
Scott

Similar Messages

  • Intel quad core i7 2.6 vs 2.7 GHz

    hello,
    I would like to buy a macbook pro, but now I doubt which intel quad core I should choose.
    Is there a noticeable difference between the 2.6 and 2.7 GHz?

    the only time you'll see a difference between the 2.6GHz and 2.7GHz if you're using benchmarking software which most are sythetic and not real world conditons (what we'll use it for).
    In paper, the difference of the 2.6GHz level 3 cache memory at 6MB and the 2.7GHz level 3 cache memory at 8MB looks good.  In reality, you will not see a difference or benefits going with the 2.7GHz. 
    suggestion - if you're buying a NON-Retina Macbook Pro get the 2.6GHz and use the money you save to buy either a 16GB of RAM or a SSD drive.
    good luck

  • Intel Quad Core QX6700 + Dreamweaver 8 + CuteFTP Pro Problem

    I know you guys probably can't help me with CuteFTP, but here
    goes with DW8 anyway:
    Ok, last week I upgraded from my single core CPU to the nice
    Intel Quad Core Extreme QX6700 Kentsfield. It wasn't until today
    that when I wanted to put up Dreamweaver 8 and my CuteFTP program
    for some website updating, I noticed that DW8 would not startup
    unless all but 1 core was disabled otherwise the system would hang
    and lockup. CuteFTP would not even load up reguareless if 1 or all
    4 cores were running.
    Previously, I was using WS FTP Pro 2006, but it is not
    compatable with IE7 which was the reason why I switched to CuteFTP.
    I don't care if the workload is distributed over the
    multicores as it is just website editing, nothing fancy. I would
    just like to know if there is a way to just get it to run with all
    4 cores active. So far, every Adobe program I have runs fine with 4
    cores, it is just DW8 and CuteFTP which are finiky. I purchased it
    when it was under Macromedia which could be a factor.
    If anyone could help me out, it would be great!
    PS: I know website design doesn't need 4 cores, lol! I am
    also a CGI graphics artist in advance production classes at my
    university, hence needing the 4 cores for rendering!

    Unfortunately, you'll probably have to wait for a CuteFTP
    update, too.
    If there's a support forum or contact for CuteFTP, ask them
    what to do.
    "NITRO1250" <[email protected]> wrote in
    message
    news:euukct$run$[email protected]..
    > Downloaded the 8.02 update and it fixed the problem.
    Does anyone know of a
    > way to fix Cute FTP?

  • Intel quad core i5 versus i7

    Intel quad core i5 versus i7.  A lot of the posts I see on this are old.  Am about to purchase a new iMac and this is the sticking point.  I do not do video or heavy duty gaming.  Sometimes work with photos.  Usually try to buy the upper end, but if the i7 is not worth it???  Just don't want to be sorry if I do not get it.
    Another question.  Is there any rumor of new processors for the iMac?  If so, I would wait a bit before purchasing
    Thanks

    Answering your questions helps here.
    1. Worth it? It's a cost thing for sure. Moving up to device longevity (future prospects) the 8-core is $2,000 more than 4-core, while the 6-core is just $500 more. K5-models are way more than display updates in D500 and D700. The processor are dumping the 1600's and moving to the 2500's. If you try and mix-match, you bottle-neck. With two generations on the sales rack. be careful!
    2. 2500's ARE the new processor. Follow these links to http://ark.intel.com and spec your Mac Pro stats vs. the processor stats. Apple store back room tech  advised me to line-up the dots. Processor and Memory are easy: 3.7GHz to 12GB, etc. Fit to Graphics involves droping from 4 options to 3 options... but only at first glance. D300 is definitely a 3.7-12 selection. Using it anywhere else is asking for trouble. Dual D700 is your crossfire PC W9100 spec. You can over-kill without worry, out of curiosity. D500 is a respectable Unix adaptation for 3.5-16 and for 3.0-32. The former is for gamers, fast vid only (sort-of-thing). The later is for multi-threading.
    Lining up the dots may sound like a game... but it's not for folks like me who like less friction and more compatibility.
    Read the Intel Unix stats.
    http://ark.intel.com/products/75779/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-1620-v2-10M-Cache-3_ 70-GHz
    http://ark.intel.com/products/75780/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-1650-v2-12M-Cache-3_ 50-GHz
    http://ark.intel.com/products/75279/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2690-v2-25M-Cache-3_ 00-GHz
    http://ark.intel.com/products/75283/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5-2697-v2-30M-Cache-2_ 70-GHz
    http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks

  • MSI P6N-SLI AND INTEL QUAD CORE Q8200 NOT SUPPORTED ? BIOS FLASH ?

    HI,I have MSI-P6N SLI (MS-7350) pc mainboard and my new processor Intel Quad Core Q8200 not running on this desk.
    It possible some bios update or something ??   :(
    thanks for answers

    Quote from: DaLoona on 02-September-10, 02:46:27
    According to this:
    http://global.msi.eu/index.php?func=prodcpu2&prod_no=1141&maincat_no=1&orderby=cpu_name%20ASC#menu
    "Yorkfield" 45nm quadcores are not going to work on this board, only "wolfdale" 45nm dualcores and even that depends on revision, like Jack mentioned.
    So your Q8200 is a no go unfortunatly.
    Only the older 65nm "Conroe" quads will work.
      and fastest intel processor (not 45nm quad core) ?

  • Intel Quad core  speed .vs I5 or I7 chip

    Can anyone tell me if there is any appreciable speed increase going from the Standard Intel Qaud core processor up to
    the i5 or i7 chip for use with Photoshop CS4?  I am trying to buy a new machine and can't tell whether the higher end chips will give me any speed advantage for the extra money.  I plan on having 8GB memory no matter what I buy  with high end graphics card on a Windows 7 machine.
    Thank you!

    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3704&p=8
    Decide for yourself but a system based on i5 750 isn't that much more expensive compared to one based on C2Q. Also note that the LGA-775 (the socket for Core 2 Quad and Duo) is basically dead, there won't be a lot more CPU's released for that socket.
    I also wouldn't bother with high end video cards unless you're planning on working with 3D a lot

  • Intel Quad Core for Premiere - is this a smart choice ?

    Hi everyone,
    I'm wondering if Intel's new Quad Core processor ( 2.4 Ghz ) will give a good boost to system performance over an older Intel 3.2 Ghz Ht chip.
    I have seen test results where a 1.6 ghz dual core Intel processor has lost in speed tests vs regular 3.2 ghz chips ( not dual core )
    So I'm puzzled,, will a Quad Core chip have any advantage when running Premiere ?
    I'm hoping there is a clear cut answer here, and I look forward to any responses.
    Thank you,
    Dave.

    Guys...
    Before you all go out and throw a party...
    My understanding is that with regards to CS3:
    1. 32bit XP normally supports up to 2gigs of ram. 4gigs if you modify a line in the bootstrap file. But 4gigs is divided into 3gigs for apps and 1gig for system stuff.
    2. 64bit XP is not supported.
    3. 64bit Vista is not supported yet.
    Here's the specs from Adobe:
    - Intel® Pentium® 4 (1.4GHz processor for DV; 3.4GHz processor for HDV), Intel Centrino®, Intel Xeon® (dual 2.8GHz processors for HD), or Intel Core Duo (or compatible) processor; SSE2-enabled processor required for AMD systems
    - Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional or Home Edition with Service Pack 2 or Windows Vista Home Premium, Business, Ultimate, or Enterprise (certified for 32-bit editions)
    - 1GB of RAM for DV; 2GB of RAM for HDV and HD; more RAM recommended when running multiple components
    Here's the memory specs for xp from Microsoft:
    Operating systems based on Microsoft Windows NT technologies have always provided applications with a flat 32-bit virtual address space that describes 4 gigabytes (GB) of virtual memory. The address space is usually split so that 2 GB of address space is directly accessible to the application and the other 2 GB is only accessible to the Windows executive software.
    The 32-bit versions of the Windows 2000 Advanced Server and Windows NT Server 4.0, Enterprise Edition, operating systems were the first versions of Windows to provide applications with a 3-GB flat virtual address space, with the kernel and executive components using only 1 GB. In response to customer requests, Microsoft has expanded the availability of this support to the 32-bit version of Windows XP Professional and all 32-bit versions of Windows Server 2003.
    Windows 2000 Memory Support. With Windows 2000 Professional and Server, the maximum amount of memory that can be supported is 4 GB (identical to Windows NT 4.0, as described later in this section). However, Windows 2000 Advanced Server supports 8 GB of physical RAM and Windows 2000 Datacenter Server supports 32 GB of physical RAM using the PAE feature of the IA-32 processor family, beginning with Intel Pentium Pro and later.
    Windows XP Professional and Windows Server 2003 Memory Support. The maximum amount of memory that can be supported on Windows XP Professional and Windows Server 2003 is also 4 GB. However, Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition supports 32 GB of physical RAM and Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition supports 64 GB of physical RAM using the PAE feature.
    The virtual address space of processes and applications is still limited to 2 GB unless the /3GB switch is used in the Boot.ini file. When the physical RAM in the system exceeds 16 GB and the /3GB switch is used, the operating system will ignore the additional RAM until the /3GB switch is removed. This is because of the increased size of the kernel required to support more Page Table Entries. The assumption is made that the administrator would rather not lose the /3GB functionality silently and automatically; therefore, this requires the administrator to explicitly change this setting.
    The /3GB switch allocates 3 GB of virtual address space to an application that uses IMAGE_FILE_LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE in the process header. This switch allows applications to address 1 GB of additional virtual address space above 2 GB.
    The virtual address space of processes and applications is still limited to 2 GB, unless the /3GB switch is used in the Boot.ini file. The following example shows how to add the /3GB parameter in the Boot.ini file to enable application memory tuning:
    However, knock yourselves out on getting the biggest baddest processors out there.
    regards,

  • Are all intels quad-core?

    I went to Best Buy to buy a laptop today and I went to buy a AMD quadcore because there were no Intels that I saw in my price range with more than one core. Well the associate there told me that all the Intels are quadcore, so I left without purchasing anything because I wanted to do my research on it before I pay this much money for something, but I cannot seem to find much on it online. So I was wondering can anyone confirm that all Intel processors are quadcore now? I did notice that all the laptops with Intel processors didn't have how many cores were in the name as the AMD did. He also told me, it would be best not to buy a computer with an AMD processor.

    i5 (certain models) and i7 do have quad. Even my i5 does and it's EOL (i5-2500K). No, it doesn't hyperthread. What is absolute is that of the three, only the i7s have quad and hyperthreading together.
    That being said, it is better to have a really beefy processor when doing video editing especially if you are doing any sort of 3D work. Most video editing software relies on the multicore processors way more than GPUs. Hence why you have video shops such as Pixar putting the beefiest processors in their machines. Like bobberuchi said about integrated graphics, skip that. It comes on most Intel chips these days, so you can't really get around it, but offloading whatever it can to the GPU will definitely save you some cycles here and there.
    My recommendation, grab the i7 with hyperthreading. The quad cores with a logical 8 will carry you much farther than the greatest of video cards. Most of my friends who are in the industry figured that out the hard way. However, doing any serious video editing work will probably choke out the laptop and hard drive space will be finite. You can always plug in an external hard drive, but it will be slower.

  • How can I operate  multi displays on my Imac 21.5 quad core 2.5 and have each display function independently?

    how can I operate  multi displays on my Imac 21.5 quad core 2.5 using Lion and have each display function independently?

    Below are some converters/adapters to look at.  If these look like they may work:
    USB 2.0 to HDMI Audio Video 1080P Adapter for Windows and Macbook
    Matrox DualHead2Go D2G-A2D-IF (or look here)
    These should allow you to run multiple displays in extended display mode.  Note that these use HDMI as an output so you would need some additional adapter to conver HDMI to whatever your displays require.  Of course these suggestions are all academic if such an adapter doesn't exist.
    Update:
    I just reread your last post and I am confused.  Is it only your TV that you are trying to run in extended display mode?  I thought you wanted more than two displays.  If only  the TV it should just work if you are not using mirrored displays.  Your Displays Arrangement tab should show both your main screen (one with the little whith menu bar) and the TV.  Set the proper resolution and refresh rate for the TV using it's Displays preference window.  That is all you need to basically do (ignoring overscan/underscan problems).
    Note, if you are using Lion then I have heard that when using full screen mode in Lion additional screens show nothing.

  • Refurb. 27'' 2.93GHz Intel Quad-Core i7  (July'10) vs new i5 or i7???

    I am looking for an iMac for use specifically for photoediting. I'm ignorant with computers for the most part.
    I'm looking at the 27'' refurbished because it is cheaper and I will upgrade the RAM myself to 8g. Here's the link.
    http://store.apple.com/ca/product/G0JP0LL/A?mco=MTA4MjcxODg#overview
    I think the screen is a little to big for me, but its almost the same price as the 21.5'' 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
    Do I need i7 or should I go i5? Do I go with a new iMac or the refurbished (it only has 1TB storage too...)
    Help.

    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3704&p=8
    Decide for yourself but a system based on i5 750 isn't that much more expensive compared to one based on C2Q. Also note that the LGA-775 (the socket for Core 2 Quad and Duo) is basically dead, there won't be a lot more CPU's released for that socket.
    I also wouldn't bother with high end video cards unless you're planning on working with 3D a lot

  • New NI CompactRIO calls the question, "¿Quien is mas macho, Intel quad-core Atom or 4-year-old i7?"

    Perhaps you remember the Saturday Night Live TV sketch from 1979 where Bill Murray played a game show host who asked the show’s titular question, “¿Quien es mas macho?”
    Today, Matt Spexarth, Principal Product Manager for Embedded Systems at National Instruments (NI), called the NI CompactRIO controller introduced this week at NI Week—the model cRIO-9039, which pairs a 1.91GHz, quad-core Intel Atom CPU with a Xilinx Kintex-7 325T FPGA—the highest-performance CompactRIO ever released. That includes the existing cRIO-9082 controller, which pairs a 1.33GHz, dual-core Intel i7 CPU and a Xilinx Spartan-6 LX150 FPGA. So both the processor and the FPGA have been upgraded in the new CompactRIO controller. The NI cRIO-9039 controller es mas macho.
    NI Model cRIO-9039 Controller in an 8-slot CompactRIO Chassis
    The new NI CompactRIO controller runs security-enhanced NI Linux Real-Time. It has an SDHC card slot for non-volatile storage and can directly operate a local, graphical UI (user interface) as a human-machine interface. Another key performance feature, noted Spexarth, is a bank of DDR3 SDRAM attached directly to the Kintex-7 FPGA to allow the FPGA to directly handle large data sets, to process large FFTs for example.
    As with the entire line of NI CompactRIO controllers, you program the cRIO-9039 controller using NI’s LabVIEW graphical development environment with its many add-on modules including LabVIEW FPGA. In addition, the new CompactRIO controller maintain compatibility with the many CompactRIO plug-in I/O hardware modules.
     

    Whygirl,
    it reads as though an internal disk upgrade (and possibly a battery replacement) would suffice for you, and those two together would be far less expensive than a new MacBook Pro. Yes, you could install either a HDD or a SSD in place of its current internal HDD. You could look at the Hitachi Travelstar 7K1000 as an example of a suitable 1 TB HDD; SSDs are more expensive per unit of storage than a HDD, but might be worth the extra cost if your apps are disk-bound. (I put a Samsung 840 PRO into my 13-inch Mid 2010 model, and it’s been working well.) Note that Chrome might be responsible for the extra heat (and the extra heat is responsible for the increased volume from the fans kicking in); Chrome isn’t optimized for use on 64-bit versions of OS X, like 10.8.5.

  • 2.0 GHz Intel Quad core i7 vs. 3.7 GHz Intel Duo Core i7 Processor: Why not make the Quad Core 3.7GHz?

    I don't really understand processors, but is the 2.0GHz Quad Core i7 really a better processor in terms of performance? If it has 4 cores why not give it greater processing speed like 2.7 or 3.0 GHz?
    I am asking because I am thinking about getting the high end Mac Mini, but I see that it's processor runs at 2.0GHz and the others in the line run at 2.5 and 2.7 respectively. Why is this?

    I'm really oversimplifying here, but...
    Let's just assume that each core runs at full speed all the time, the total performance of that processor would be the sum of the running totals of each core:
    Duo Core i7 = 2 (cores) * 2.7 GHZ = 5.4 Ghz total processor power
    Quad Core i5 = 4 (cores) * 2.0 GHZ = 8.0 Ghz
    Like I said, oversimplified.  But, you get the point.  Not to mention, most apps still aren't optimized, so at a given time they only use a single core anyway. In this case, it'd be more beneficial to have more cores, since they would (hypothetically) be able to run more simultaneous processes (four vs. two in your case).
    I gues the greater question is: what were you planning on using the mini for?  Most CPUs go underutilized anyway, so you may be better off getting a 2.0, and maxing out your RAM and maybe adding a SSD.  Those upgrades (the SSD especially) will result in a very noticeable increase in performance.

  • Will It Work on Leopard: iMac Late 2009 with Quad Core i7, 8GB and 4850 Mobility GPU

    Hi. I'm doing an experiment if the garbled screen (unreadable but the OS and files are not being corrupted at all) I'm experiencing since I upgraded to Lion (up to Yosemite) is a software bug (specifically when it's running it's 3D drivers) or a hardware bug (possibly the GPU is failing). I would rule it as a hardware, that the iMac's GPU is failing but when I used Ubuntu 14.04 Live CD which does not use any of the 3D drivers (it doesn't use OpenGL) for its 3D acceleration, it's perfect there which is why I feel it may be a software bug- no problems with 3D acceleration.
    If Leopard would work on the late 2009 iMac with i7 quad core, that'd be great.
    Thank you in advance.
    God bless, Rev. 21:4

    The only issue I have found is that the there are no additonal display resolution settings to adjust.
    So the iMac is stuck with its native resolution in OS X 10.5.8 Leopard (I hate the iMac's 2550 x 1900 resolution. Everything is just too small for my 50 year old eyes.)
    You can adjust the size of icons and icon text size in the Finder Prefs and View Options, you can adjust the Dock size, but that is pretty much it.
    No way to adjust the size of the text in the top main menu bar or make the text in the title bar on Finder windows larger, either.
    But everything else works.
    I can access all of my other external drives, most of the applications, that are mostly updated to work just with OS X 10.5.8 Leopard, launch and work fine. My Wacom Intuous3 tablet seems to work fine add I can adjust the preferences and controls of all of by pens and airbrush tool.
    My older IR Microsoft and Logitech mice work fine.
    I can't believe how much faster OS X 10.5.8 runs on this iMac.
    If I hadn't updated all of my Apple apps on OS X 10.6.8 Snow Leopard and all my updated iTunes, iPhoto and Aperture Libraries, long ago, needed more up to date web browsers (TenFourFox wasn't available back in 2011) and Mail clients, more up to date Flash and security updates, I might have just stayed using OS X 10.5 Leopard on this iMac.
    It is quite a bit faster than Snow Leopard. Even that much faster considering I am  running OS X 10.5.8 from my external FW800 drive.

  • Question about Quad Core 2.93 and Octo-Core 2.66

    OK, so forgive me cause I am asking a question that has been asked a zillion times. I have read and searched and read and searched, however, I still don't quite understand a few things.
    I am a huge Aperture user. I shoot the Canon 1Ds Mark III and use photoshop a lot as well.
    I am still confused. What is the difference in performance between a
    loaded 8 GIGs ram Quad Core 2.93 or
    a middle 8-Core 2.66 12 gigs RAM
    I read benchmarks after benchmarks, but most use games for their stats and that does not help me. I read the boards, but it is all so confusing what people think. I went to the Apple store, and of course, they immediately said 8-core! hahaha.
    I hear an 8-core can be slower at single core apps than a quad core and so on and on.
    please help me!

    Hi-
    this question si about what the ** is the difference between a Quad 2.93 and a Octo 2.66.
    The question is pretty vague.
    Maybe asking "What benefit do I get from an octo core as opposed to a quad core?" would be better.
    To understand the main difference, and the main benefit of an octo core over a quad core, understanding the concept of multithreading is necessary.
    Basically, Multithreading is the ability of a system to break tasks up into portions (threads), and assign these portions across multiple CPU cores, enabling the calculation, thus the process, to be be completed faster than if the entire process were to be done on a single core.
    Because of this, more cores allows for faster completion of system functions. Yes, it's faster.
    Currently, some software isn't quite up to snuff in supporting/utilizing multithreading abilities of multi core systems.
    But, that is changing, and changing rapidly.
    Soon, all software will be able to utilize the multithreading ability of a multi core system, and greater increases in system performance will be realized.
    In the upcoming OS 10.6 release, further enhancement of multithreading operation will be seen.
    What this all means to the end user, say in Photoshop, is, work will fly, complex enhancements will be almost instantaneous, and productivity can be increased.
    Along with the multi core, multi channel memory will also allow for the use of larger amounts of RAM, with out the bottlenecking that occurs in singe channel systems.
    Again, everything works faster.
    The octo core allows for more physical RAM, which, even now, but more so in the near future, always helps with memory hungry applications like Photoshop.
    Basically, the biggest difference between the two machines, is the octo core is more future proof- that is, it will support future software enhancements better than the quad core.
    And, we are talking +near future+.
    I believe the Quad is limited to 8 gigs RAM, not 16.
    Both machines can use 4GB DIMMs, so the quad core can use 16GB and the octo core can use 32GB.
    Buying RAM from a trusted third party vendor can reduce costs greatly, without affecting the Apple warranty.
    Again, Apple employees are telling you what the book says, what they currently offer, not what can be done.
    Apple store said SDD in a Mac Pro is not a good idea at all. Again, more conflicting suggestions.
    The Apple store will not recommend anything that Apple is not officially selling.
    SSDs work, and they work well.
    Just ask Samsara, or some of the other hot rodders on these forums.
    And because I don't understand scratch disk, SDD disks, raptor drives etc, this all is not getting me anywhere. thus, why i tried the Apple store.
    Ask. Study. Use Wikipedia.
    Educating oneself is paramount to improving decisions, questions, work and life........
    SSD - The future, now. Fast, expensive (but coming down in price), no moving parts (reliable)Solid State Drive
    *Raptor Drives* - A family of 10,000 RPM SATA drives from Western Digital. These drives are high performance. They make systems run faster.
    *Scratch Disks* - These are additional hard drives (in addition to the system drive) that allow for greater utilization of virtual memory- the writing of files, temporarily, to hard drive, to free up physical memory and allow faster calculations of processes.
    Anyone who does work with video or photography software, must have a working knowledge of the benefits of a scratch drive.
    Photoshop runs +way faster+ with a fast scratch disk.
    When seeking advice on any forum, the more specific the question, the easier it will be for contributors to provide advice that is pleasing to your senses.
    I've given you my take on what I feel may be your questions intent.
    Hopefully, it wasn't a waste of time.....

  • Will It Work on Tiger: iMac Late 2009 with Quad Core i7, 8GB and 4850 Mobility GPU

    Hi. I'm doing an experiment if the garbled screen (unreadable but the OS and files are not being corrupted at all) I'm experiencing since I upgraded to Lion (up to Yosemite) is a software bug (specifically when it's running it's 3D drivers) or a hardware bug (possibly the GPU is failing). I would rule it as a hardware, that the iMac's GPU is failing but when I used Ubuntu 14.04 Live CD which does not use any of the 3D drivers (it doesn't use OpenGL) for its 3D acceleration, it's perfect there which is why I feel it may be a software bug- no problems with 3D acceleration.
    If Tiger would work on the late 2009 iMac with i7 quad core, that'd be great.
    Thank you in advance.
    God bless, Rev. 21:4

    Tiger won't work.
    Install OSX Restrictions

Maybe you are looking for