I7 Question - Hyperthreading virtual cores

So I have a new macbook pro with the 2.66 GHz Intel Core i7 processor and I have a question. I don't consider myself crazy knowledgable with Macs so I'm not entirely sure what's going on
The guys behind the genius bar told me there was a way to push my processor to do 8 virtual cores instead of 2 using the developer tools. I don't really know my way around the code so I have no idea what does what. I've been looking through forums and such and I can only find people talking about disabling hyper-threading.
I went into the CPUpalette and only see an option for disabling the already existing extra 2 cores.
I ran the Mac OS X install DVD and installed the developer tools.
If anyone could guide me through activating the extra virtual cores, that'd be sweet. Or just tell me if it isn't possible to do more than what's already activated.

I'm not familiar with the hardware, but the i7 supports what is called "Turbo Mode." As I understand this mode is automatic. Depending upon core usage elsewhere processor turbo charging will occur as needed. Thus, it's possible to have all 8 v-cores running at normal speed when fully loaded or fewer threads at higher speeds.
The Developer Tools contains a preference pane in the Extras folder that you might install, but I do not believe that "Turbo Mode" is user controllable since it's always turned on.

Similar Messages

After Effects not reporting virtual cores

I'm currently installing my new workstation and came across the same issue however, I have 36 physical cores, 72 virtual cores but only 36 are visible by AE.
Using latest CC2014.

Hi Todd, thanks for the feedback, managed to change it.
However onto next thing when I look at the resources AE is using it's far from using the potential of my new workstation.
Are there specific things I should look at or change to get AE more up to speed ?
Current hardware setup:
2x Intel Xeon E5-2699v3 @2.30Ghz (2x18core)
256GB Ram
System disk: 2x120gb SSD RAID0
Scratch disk: 2x120gb SSD RAID0
Workdisk: 4x512GB SSD RAID0
Video: 2x GTX980
Windows 8.1 Pro
So for example, I'm loading in a 4K DNG sequence, I would expect Disk Usage would get up to maximum speed, however in Resource monitor it shows it's using only a mere 10MB/sec
For this example CPU & RAM are behaving quite normal as I don't expect it to be CPU intensive or Fill up my RAM completely.

LR 4.2 - not using virtual cores?

I've just updated from 4.1 to 4.2 -
First thing I noticed while exporting from NEF to jpg is this:
Before my CPU would be rockin' along between 600-700% (2.2GHz i7 MacBook pro) - nearly all cores - 4 primary and 4 virtual (8 total) - would be being used.
Now with 4.2 my CPU load is between 300-400%, with all 4 primary cores being used, but the 4 virtual cores just kinda hang out without being used.
Something is different by example of the load it stresses on the CPU cores.
But...
That said, it all seems zippy enough and is totally usable. I honestly couldn't tell you if it's exporting any faster or slower...
Any ideas what's going on?
Ben

Lightroom 4.2 should have no problems recognising and importing Canon 5DMk3 files. Actually, I imported around 200 such files late last night. So, there is something else going on with your installation. Have you tried deleting the Lr preference file ? More info where it's located can be found at http://forums.adobe.com/thread/358041?tstart=0

'8 virtual cores' machine

Like to know if I should be setting the number of cores in Logic to 8 or 4 for a recent Macbook Pro 2.2 Quad core with '8 virtual cores'?
The CPU readout shows me 8 cores, and this machine seems to perform as well as my old Macpro which really was a full 8 core machine, but this does the business without the huffing and puffing, the heating up and the fan-drama. A-mazing.
At the moment its set to Automatic and the distribution across the cores is reasonably even

"At the moment it's set to Automatic and the distribution across the cores is reasonably even."
Unless you are having issues with logic's performance I'd stick with automatic. Reasonably even distribution not maxing out is juuuuust fine :)

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.....

Software license question about Virtual PC 2007

Hi All,
I have craeted a virtual PC (Win XP) on my Win 7 PC virtual PC 2007. This virtual PC have installed crystal report 10. My question is, if I create another virtual PC (Win XP) on my Win 7 PC virtual PC 2007 and also install the crystal report 10. Does
I need to purchase another software license for the new one?
Best Regards,
Kenneth Lam

Microsoft does not provide support for the Crystal Reports products because Crystal Reports are SAP products, （http://support.microsoft.com/kb/317789）and we're not familiar with the license issue of this
product, I think you might need help in this SAP products support forum
http://scn.sap.com/community/support
Thanks for your understanding.
NOTE
This
response contains a reference to a third party World Wide Web site. Microsoft is providing this information as a convenience to you.
Microsoft
does not control these sites and has not tested any software or information found on these sites.
Yolanda Zhu
TechNet Community Support

Questions about iMac Core i7 Photoshop performance

Hello Everyone,
I am in the market for a new Mac and was thinking about the iMac Core i7.
Now my question is, how the performance of Photoshop is on that machine ?
I work on 24 Mpix raws and occasionaly on 30-40+ Mpix raws from Medium Format cameras.
My files quickly get up to 100 layers and I only work in 16 bit, so I am a little bit concerned if such an iMac would meet my expectations and the files get 1 or 2 GB big. I would definately pump as much RAM inside as possible to get more speed.
What are your experiences ?
Your help is greatly appreciated.
Thank you very much in advance.
Cheers,
Martin.

Thank you guys for your answers.
If I am going to buy that iMac i definately would buy some Kingston Ram, not the apple one way too overpriced.
I am also concerned about the R/W speed of the iMac. What are you experiences with FW drives as Raid-sets ?
I also can't wait for CS 5. The 64 Bit version would definately speed up things and photoshop could finally access more than 3 GB of RAM and hope this will end my concernes about scratch disks.
@Wade: Partitioning the internal hard drive and using the second partition as scratch disk is not good. The needle of the drive would go crazy skipping between partitions.Never have the scratch disk on the same disk as photoshop. Also it would decrease your hard drives lifetime.
Cheers,
Martin.

Questions about iMac Core i7 Photoshop and Capture One performance.

Hello Everyone,
I am in the market for a new Mac and was thinking about the iMac Core i7.
Now my question is, how the performance in Photoshop is for that machine ?
I work on 24 Mpix raws and occasionaly on 30-40+ Mpix raws from Medium Format cameras.
My files quickly get up to 100 layers and I only work in 16 bit, so I am a little bit concerned if such an iMac would meet my expectations and the files get 1, 2 or 3 GB big. I would definately pump as much RAM inside as possible to get more speed.
What are your experiences ?
And the other thing I would like to know is how Capture One performs on that machine regarding tethered shooting and Batch Processing files into Jpegs ?
Thank you in advance !
Cheers,
Martin

Thank you guys for your answers.
If I am going to buy that iMac i definately would buy some Kingston Ram, not the apple one way too overpriced.
I am also concerned about the R/W speed of the iMac. What are you experiences with FW drives as Raid-sets ?
I also can't wait for CS 5. The 64 Bit version would definately speed up things and photoshop could finally access more than 3 GB of RAM and hope this will end my concernes about scratch disks.
@Wade: Partitioning the internal hard drive and using the second partition as scratch disk is not good. The needle of the drive would go crazy skipping between partitions.Never have the scratch disk on the same disk as photoshop. Also it would decrease your hard drives lifetime.
Cheers,
Martin.

Another newb question: multiple virtual servers

Hi, I have yet another ignorant question. I have several unrelated web projects that I am working on, and I would like to be able to set up a virtual server for each one for testing purposes, such as: http://project1, http://project2, http://project3. Can someone tell me if this is doable, and if there are any tutorials/resources on this for someone who has 0 experience running a web serer? Sorry for being so ignorant!

Yes, it is doable.
You can setup virtual server either by IP or by name.
If you have one IP, and want to set them up by name (ex. http://project1, http://project2, http://project3) you can do so easily with this type of configuration:
<virtual-server>
    <name>mydomain</name>
    <http-listener-name>http-listener-1</http-listener-name>
    <host>*.mydomain.com</host>
    <document-root>/www/domain</document-root>
</virtual-server>
<virtual-server>
    <name>myotherdomain</name>
    <http-listener-name>http-listener-1</http-listener-name>
    <host>*.myotherdomain.com</host>
    <document-root>/www/myotherdomain</document-root>
</virtual-server>
....The important part here is that
a) all virtual servers share the same HTTP listener
b) which virtual server serves the request depends on the $HOST request header send by the client. Sun Web Server does the matching for you. It will match $HOST vs. the virtual server's host attribute. Depending on which site you connect to the right virtual server will be used.
c) if the $HOST request header does not match any of the virtual servers, then the default virtual server defined in the HTTP listener will be used.
To create a virtual server, use the Admin GUI, access the configuration, and then add new virtual server. Or use the following CLI command.
wadm> create-virtual-server --config=myconfig --http-listener-name=http-listener-1 --document-root=/www/docs/myserver.com --host-pattern=myserver.com --log-file=../logs/myserver.com-error_logs myserverHost pattern will be used for matching. Some of this elements might be optional.
Hope that helps. And keep the questions coming :D
Edit: Also check the documentation
Using Virtual Servers in SJS Web Server 7.0

Questions Re: Virtual Hosts & MAMP

I hired a computer science student to install and configure MySQL, phpMyAdmin and virtual hosts on my MacBook Pro, but he screwed it up. So I tried to figure it all out myself once again. I finally downloaded a preconfigured package called MAMP. I now apparently have PHP, MySQL and phpMyAdmin up and running on my machine. But that still leaves virtual hosts.
I checked out the MAMP Pro version ($50) at
http://www.living-e.com/products/MAMP-PRO/index.php and read "You can set up many virtual hosts."
That doesn't make sense to me; shouldn't you be able to set up many virtual hosts even with the free version of MAMP? Or does MAMP somehow make it EASIER to create virtual hosts, and the Pro version simply allows you to make many of these simplified virtual hosts?
Unfortunately, MAMP's support forums seem pretty lame, so I decided to ask some questions here. If MAMP Pro does indeed make it easy to create virtual hosts, then I'll purchase it immediately.
If it doesn't, then can anyone point me to a tutorial that explains the entire process, as clearly as possible? I've modified my httpd.conf, hosts and NetInfo files till I'm blue in the face and have asked questions on three different forums. I was able to create virtual hosts even on my PC; surely it can't be that much harder on a Mac.
Thanks!

Yeah, in another post he decided he does not like the Netinfo solution as he is a new Mac user and wants to keep it simple. I believe Netinfo is for DNSing the localnet anyway.
It turns out it is incredibly simple to configure Virtual Hosts. In fact, it is even simpler in Apache 2 than Apache 1.3 because there is a separate component for configuring the Virtual Domains. Here's hoping OSX 10.5 includes Apache 1.2.
What you do is you first edit your hosts file:
sudo nano /private/etc/hosts
Add these lines to point to your local machine domains:
127.0.0.1 host2.example.com
127.0.0.1 Test
Here we are using
http://host2.example.com/
and
http://Test/
as our domains. When you are set up click these links and the pages should open in your browser.
Edit the file at
sudo nano /private/etc/httpd/httpd.conf
to include these Virtual Domain blocks somewhere in the file:
<VirtualHost *:80>
ServerAdmin [email protected]
DocumentRoot /Library/WebServer/Documents/Test/
ServerName Test
ServerAlias Test
ErrorLog /Library/WebServer/Documents/logs/Test-error_log
CustomLog /Library/WebServer/Documents/logs/Test-access_log common
</VirtualHost>
<VirtualHost *:80>
ServerAdmin [email protected]
DocumentRoot /Library/WebServer/Documents/host2/
ServerName host2.example.com
ErrorLog /Library/WebServer/Documents/logs/host2.example.com-error_log
CustomLog /Library/WebServer/Documents/logs/host2.example.com-access_log common
</VirtualHost>
Note that the file does not even contain sample blocks in the config file as Virtual Hosts has been a recent invention. Apache 2, however, integrates VHosts seamlessly.
In this example, I transcribed paths from the default OSX 10.4 Apache installation, so you may need to adjust the paths a bit since it is untested. Please report back so we can adjust the documentation accordingly.
When finished, put some default docs in the target folders and restart Apache:
sudo apachectl restart
You should be up and running. You may need to reboot for the hosts file to activate, unless you know how to dump the cache like a Unix geek.
Oh, and thanks for the patience on this one, I have been figuring it out too.

Last Questions on Multi Cores....

I'm sure it's been asked before so apologies in advance, first correct responses get a 'helpful' and 'solved'.
So a 2.66G quad core, does that mean it works just like 4 separate 2.66G processors? And similarly a 3.06G Core 2 Duo, is that like 2 separate 3.06G processors? And finally, what is the difference between a 'Core Duo' and a 'Core 2 Duo'??
Apologies again for these elementary questions which I'm sure you're all bored of answering by now. Thanks in advance.

It's not quite as simple as that but along those lines, if you have a Core 2 Duo 2.8GHz, although you have two 2.8Ghz processors, you can't just say that you have a 5.6 GHz machine.
Two or more Cores are only of benefit to software that support them, so if you use older software you'll often find that fewer higher speed Cores will actually give you better performance, I think multi-core is something that will come into life more in the future as software is written to take advantage of the extra cores, however at the moment, there is still little software that can use more than one or two cores.
As for the Core Duo/Core 2 Duo, the Core Duo was an earlier 32-bit chip with 2 cores (hence the core duo), they also did a Core solo edition. Core 2 is the later 64-bit Duo/Quad series of CPU's.

Very specific question involving GarageBand, Core Audio, and ext. sound.

I plan on purchasing a MacBook and using it for live music performances. Here is my question:
Using Tiger's Core Audio, would I be able to connect an external sound card, and, using GarageBand 3, play a click track (for timing) through the audio out on the book and run the rest of the tracks (the music for the audience) out of the external sound card?
I need to be able to play acoustic instruments live and keep in rhythm so when the rest of the music (beats, samples, etc) come in the instruments are all in the same time.
Any information would help. Thanks.
Planning on buying a MacBook.

Yes, I need 2 separate outputs. The guitarists will be listening to a click track for rhythm but I obviously don't want the audience to hear the clicks, just the music, live AND from the laptop.
And I could just play the audio back from iTunes, but I want real-time control on them. I guess my real question (which does not belong in this forum) is what software can I use that will allow multiple audio outputs, midi-triggering (midi loops AND static audio loops (i.e. mp3, etc), and let me play a midi keyboard with the desired plugins I want?
Does that exist? If so, just tell me what that is and I'll buy it. This is really perplexing me.

Hyper-V: Questions about Virtual Switches

Hello,
This question concerns a computer running Windows 8 Pro.
Using Hyper-V, I have created a virtual machine running Windows XP Pro. (we must use it to run a very old CAD program so that we can access our legacy drawings from years ago)
I am not concerned with Internet access for the virtual machine; I just want it to connect to our LAN.
Anyway, so far, so good; I created an external virtual switch, and it works just fine. However, I have noticed that the virtual switch "takes over" the computer's physical NIC. This is making network access from other computers to
this machine very, very slow. (it has other functions in this office)
So, I tried changing the virtual switch to either Internal or Private. This "released" the physical NIC and greatly sped up access to the physical machine, but now I cannot access the LAN from "inside" the virtual machine.
So, my questions are:
1. How do I access the LAN with a virtual switch that is set to Internal or Private? Is that possible?
2. If not.... if I added a second physical NIC to the computer just for the virtual switch, would that work?
Thanks in advance,
-Kevin

1. How do I access the LAN with a virtual switch that is set to Internal or Private? Is that possible?
Not possible. Internal is local to the hardware. Private is local to the VMs that are being managed only.
2. If not.... if I added a second physical NIC to the computer just for the virtual switch, would that work?
Yes, this is one solution.
The other solution is most likely to tune the driver settings of the physical NIC. Disabling the multiple TCP Task offloading options.
Brian Ehlert
http://ITProctology.blogspot.com
Learn. Apply. Repeat.
Disclaimer: Attempting change is of your own free will.

Fan and temp questions about 8 core

My 8 core Mac Pro was just delivered this morning and I have a couple questions. First, it runs quiet...much quieter than my parents quad G5. Intake and exhaust fan speeds at idle are 500/600 rpm respectively. That's about half of the quad G5. From Hardware Monitor, my core temps range from 132F to 145F which is much hotter than the 110-ish of the G5. One interesting thing to note is that CPU A heatsink is at 109 degrees while CPU B is over 125. It always runs 15-20 degrees cooler than the other. Does this look alright?
I ran some Cinebench and Altivec Fractal tests which also came up with some interesting results. The Altivec Fractal maxed out all cores. Their temps rose quickly to the 180-200 degree F range. Two of the cores got into the low 200's. The fans didn't even look like they had sped up yet. I closed the program in fear of doing any damage and took a look at the fan graph. The fans were actually starting to speed up after I quit the program. I ran the test again and the fans seemed to ramp up a lot faster than before and caught the cores at 200 degrees. Maybe they were a little lazy on the first try?
An comments would be appreciated. Other than that, I'm very happy with the performance of the octa-core.

They are thankfully very very quiet. The air coming out is hot none the less.
you might want to look into installing smcFanControl
http://www.versiontracker.com
which can be used to set higher default fan speed, as well as let you change it from menu bar to other settings / preferences.
I have settings for 750-1000-1500-2000 rpm. 1000 or less and it is still quiet.
Someone asked about max temps and 'frying' an Xeon, but apparently it is kind of a complex cpu, it has a number of built-in safeguards to shut itself down... but the Intel rep that someone emailed with wouldn't get into specifics.
I would worry about heat affecting drives and also an X1900. That think is good at pushing air out the back, but it also pulls in the internal (hot) air, and can pull fine dust etc into the sealed video card housing, which can be a problem of its own.
Always give the Mac Pro time to cool off before opening the doors. Those FBDIMMs don't like sudden shock stress of changes in temperatures.

Question on virtual copy

shortly I decided to switch from bibble labs software to LR. There's one thing i cannot find.
After I worked on all my files I want to make virtual copies to set the files into black and white so i can do some extra adjustments typical for B&W and keep both the color and the B&W files.
What i do bibble labs :
select all the thumbs and give them a color mark (for example blue)
make virtual copy of all these files in one instruction
now the copies are the active thumbs and give them another color mark for example green)
so if i needed the color files I select the color marks blue and if i needed the b&w i select the green marks
In LR i can't even select all the files and give them a color mark with one instruction ? and I also can't make a virtual copy with one instruction ?
Anyone who can help me with this problem
karlsta

It works also in the Loupe View but you have to click the small button to change from <Sync> to <Auto Sync> (lower right). See the small rectangles to the left of "Sync" and "Auto Sync" - one light grey, one dark?
Click on the black rectangle and <Sync> changes to <Auto Sync>. In <Auto Sync> the color label is applied to all selected images. BUT be careful, because this applies also when you set titles, captions, etc. You can create real havoc in <Auto Sync> .
WW

I7 Question - Hyperthreading virtual cores

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for