Imac performance question.

After recently poking and prodding Logic Express, I've come to realization my computer isn't really cutting it. I run a late 2004 1.8ghz PowerMac with 4gb of ram. I could upgrade the ram a bit, but my understanding is that won't help as much as a faster processor.
I really wish I had the money to buy a new Mac Pro, but that amount of cash isn't in hand. So, based on budget, I'm curious how Logic Express performs on Imacs. If you could please reply and let me know your specs and how the program performs on your machine I'd be delighted.

Excuse those typos, it was before coffee. I'm going to re-type that entire repsonse.
"Here's the thing when I make a new song or open any of the files I had previously made in Garageband, they simply put, aren't running well. I'm talking about a basic six tracks songs. Usually consist of 3 audio input tracks: 2 guitars and one vocals. Then I usually have a midi drum track and bass line to accompany and sometimes a synth makes it in the mix. I'm not running a super amount of effects on these tracks either. When I go to try to play back I get an error message about performance issues. "
I thought my G5 would be able to handle the program and that it was still a "good" system. I'm at a loss here. Maybe something I'm doing is wrong?
Do you think upgrading the ram would help a bit? I've got 4gbs but could go to 8... would it be worth it?

Similar Messages

  • Simple performance question

    Simple performance question. the simplest way possible, assume
    I have a int[][][][][] matrix, and a boolean add. The array is several dimensions long.
    When add is true, I must add a constant value to each element in the array.
    When add is false, I must subtract a constant value to each element in the array.
    Assume this is very hot code, i.e. it is called very often. How expensive is the condition checking? I present the two scenarios.
    private void process(){
    for (int i=0;i<dimension1;i++)
    for (int ii=0;ii<dimension1;ii++)
      for (int iii=0;iii<dimension1;iii++)
        for (int iiii=0;iiii<dimension1;iiii++)
             if (add)
             matrix[i][ii][iii][...]  += constant;
             else
             matrix[i][ii][iii][...]  -= constant;
    private void process(){
      if (add)
    for (int i=0;i<dimension1;i++)
    for (int ii=0;ii<dimension1;ii++)
      for (int iii=0;iii<dimension1;iii++)
        for (int iiii=0;iiii<dimension1;iiii++)
             matrix[i][ii][iii][...]  += constant;
    else
    for (int i=0;i<dimension1;i++)
    for (int ii=0;ii<dimension1;ii++)
      for (int iii=0;iii<dimension1;iii++)
        for (int iiii=0;iiii<dimension1;iiii++)
           matrix[i][ii][iii][...]  -= constant;
    }Is the second scenario worth a significant performance boost? Without understanding how the compilers generates executable code, it seems that in the first case, n^d conditions are checked, whereas in the second, only 1. It is however, less elegant, but I am willing to do it for a significant improvement.

    erjoalgo wrote:
    I guess my real question is, will the compiler optimize the condition check out when it realizes the boolean value will not change through these iterations, and if it does not, is it worth doing that micro optimization?Almost certainly not; the main reason being that
    matrix[i][ii][iii][...]  +/-= constantis liable to take many times longer than the condition check, and you can't avoid it. That said, Mel's suggestion is probably the best.
    but I will follow amickr advice and not worry about it.Good idea. Saves you getting flamed with all the quotes about premature optimization.
    Winston

  • BPM performance question

    Guys,
    I do understand that ccPBM is very resource hungry but what I was wondering is this:
    Once you use BPM, does an extra step decreases the performance significantly? Or does it just need slightly more resources?
    More specifically we have quite complex mapping in 2 BPM steps. Combining them would make the mapping less clear but would it worth doing so from the performance point of view?
    Your opinion is appreciated.
    Thanks a lot,
    Viktor Varga

    Hi,
    In SXMB_ADM you can set the time out higher for the sync processing.
    Go to Integration Processing in SXMB_ADM and add parameter SA_COMM CHECK_FOR_ASYNC_RESPONSE_TIMEOUT to 120 (seconds). You can also increase the number of parallel processes if you have more waiting now. SA_COMM CHECK_FOR_MAX_SYNC_CALLS from 20 to XX. All depends on your hardware but this helped me from the standard 60 seconds to go to may be 70 in some cases.
    Make sure that your calling system does not have a timeout below that you set in XI otherwise yours will go on and finish and your partner may end up sending it twice
    when you go for BPM the whole workflow
    has to come into action so for example
    when your mapping last < 1 sec without bpm
    if you do it in a BPM the transformation step
    can last 2 seconds + one second mapping...
    (that's just an example)
    so the workflow gives you many design possibilities
    (brigde, error handling) but it can
    slow down the process and if you have
    thousands of messages the preformance
    can be much worse than having the same without BPM
    see below links
    http://help.sap.com/bp_bpmv130/Documentation/Operation/TuningGuide.pdf
    http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/43/d92e428819da2ce10000000a1550b0/content.htm
    https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/com.sap.km.cm.docs/library/xi/3.0/sap%20exchange%20infrastructure%20tuning%20guide%20xi%203.0.pdf
    BPM Performance tuning
    BPM Performance issue
    BPM performance question
    BPM performance- data aggregation persistance
    Regards
    Chilla..

  • Have v10.6.8 and iMac performs slowly, spirals for very long periods, feels like back to dial-up. What can I do?

    Have v10.6.8 and iMac performs slowly, spirals for very long periods, feels like I'm back to dial-up. What can I do to speed things up?

    How large is you HD and how much space do you have left?
    Check out the following & do the necessary: 
    User Tip:  Why is my computer slow?
    What to do when your computer is too slow
    Speeding up your Mac

  • How can I improve my imac performance?

    Hi guys,
    When I'm using a complex files on Adobe illustrator CS4, it crashes...
    How can I improve my imac performance?
    Here's my system's specs:
      Model Name:    iMac
      Model Identifier:    iMac11,1
      Processor Name:    Intel Core i5
      Processor Speed:    2.66 GHz
      Number Of Processors:    1
      Total Number Of Cores:    4
      L2 Cache (per core):    256 KB
      L3 Cache:    8 MB
      Memory:    4 GB
      Processor Interconnect Speed:    4.8 GT/s
      Boot ROM Version:    IM111.0034.B02
      SMC Version (system):    1.54f36
    Thanks for youyr help!

    I figured you'd ask for those    Since I can't remember the topic/subject line, I have no idea if I have enough time  in this life to try to find them - I had subscriptions for all of them, but of course, those went poof into cyberspace.
    Edit: Athough the search function does not work well (could not specificy 'iMac' - would get "unauthorized to search" every time), so I had to go through quite a few, but I found two of the major threads:
    https://discussions.apple.com/message/12417693#12417693
    https://discussions.apple.com/message/12807961#12807961
    Enjoy reading....
    Barbara

  • Will more memory increase my iMac performance ?

    will more memory increase my iMac performance ?

    Depends.
    Adding RAM only makes it possible to run more programs concurrently.  It doesn't speed up the computer nor make games run faster.  What it can do is prevent the system from having to use disk-based VM when it runs out of RAM because you are trying to run too many applications concurrently or using applications that are extremely RAM dependent.  It will improve the performance of applications that run mostly in RAM or when loading programs.

  • Swing performance question: CPU-bound

    Hi,
    I've posted a Swing performance question to the java.net performance forum. Since it is a Swing performance question, I thought readers of this forum might also be interested.
    Swing CPU-bound in sun.awt.windows.WToolkit.eventLoop
    http://forums.java.net/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=1636&tstart=0
    Thanks,
    Curt

    You obviously don't understand the results, and the first reply to your posting on java.net clearly explains what you missed.
    The event queue is using Thread.wait to sleep until it gets some more events to dispatch. You have incorrectly diagnosed the sleep waiting as your performance bottleneck.

  • Xcontrol: performance question (again)

    Hello,
    I've got a little performance question regarding xcontrols. I observed rather high cpu-load when using xcontrols. To investigate it further, I built a minimal xcontrol (boolean type) which only writes the received boolean-value to a display-element in it's facade (see attached example). When I use this xcontrol in a test-vi and write to it with a rate of 1000 booleans / second, I get a cpu-load of about 10%. When I write directly to a boolean display element instead of the xcontrol,I have a load of 0 to 1 %. The funny thing is, when I emulate the xcontrol functionality with a subvi, a subpanel and a queue (see example), I only have 0 to 1% cpu-load, too.
    Is there a way to reduce the cpu-load when using xcontrols? 
    If there isn't and if this is not a problem with my installation but a known issue, I think this would be a potential point for NI to fix in a future update of LV.
    Regards,
    soranito
    Message Edited by soranito on 04-04-2010 08:16 PM
    Message Edited by soranito on 04-04-2010 08:18 PM
    Attachments:
    XControl_performance_test.zip ‏60 KB

    soranito wrote:
    Hello,
    I've got a little performance question regarding xcontrols. I observed rather high cpu-load when using xcontrols. To investigate it further, I built a minimal xcontrol (boolean type) which only writes the received boolean-value to a display-element in it's facade (see attached example). When I use this xcontrol in a test-vi and write to it with a rate of 1000 booleans / second, I get a cpu-load of about 10%. When I write directly to a boolean display element instead of the xcontrol,I have a load of 0 to 1 %. The funny thing is, when I emulate the xcontrol functionality with a subvi, a subpanel and a queue (see example), I only have 0 to 1% cpu-load, too.
    Okay, I think I understand question  now.  You want to know why an equivalent xcontrol boolean consumes 10x more CPU resource than the LV base package boolean?
    Okay, try opening the project I replied yesterday.  I don't have access to LV at my desk so let's try this. Open up your xcontrol facade.vi.  Notice how I separated up your data event into two events?  Go the data change vi event, when looping back the action, set the isDataChanged (part of the data change cluster) to FALSE.  While the data input (the one displayed on your facade.vi front panel), set that isDataChanged to TRUE.  This is will limit the number of times facade will be looping.  It will not drop your CPU down from 10% to 0% but it should drop a little, just enough to give you a short term solution.  If that doesn't work, just play around with the loopback statement.  I can't remember the exact method.
    Yeah, I agree xcontrol shouldn't be overconsuming system resource.  I think xcontrol is still in its primitive form and I'm not sure if NI is planning on investing more times to bug fix or even enhance it.  Imo, I don't think xcontrol is quite ready for primetime yet.   Just too many issues that need improvement.
    Message Edited by lavalava on 04-06-2010 03:34 PM

  • MBP with 27" Display performance question

    I'm looking for advice regarding improving the performance, if possible, of my  Macbook Pro and new 27'' Apple display combination.  I'm using a 13" Macbook Pro 2.53Ghz with 4GB RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics card and I have 114GB of the 250GB of HD space available.  What I'm really wondering is is this enough spec to run the 27" display easily.  Apple says it is… and it does work, but I suspect that I'm working at the limit of what my MCB is capable of.  My main applications are Photoshop CS5 with Camera RAW and Bridge.  Everything works but I sometimes get lock ups and things are basically a bit jerky.  Is the bottle neck my 2.53Ghz processor or the graphics card?  I have experimented with the Open GL settings in Photoshop and tried closing all unused applications.  Does anyone have any suggestions for tuning things and is there a feasible upgrade for the graphics card if such a thing would make a difference?  I have recently started working with 21mb RAW files which I realise isn't helping.  Any thoughts would be appreciated.
    Matt.

    I just added a gorgeous LCD 24" to my MBP setup (the G5 is not Happy) The answer to your question is yes. Just go into Display Preferences and drag the menu bar over to the the 24 this will make the 24 the Primary Display and the MBP the secondary when connected.

  • Logic 8/Leop - Performance question in the interface...SLOW???

    Dears,
    just installed Logic Studio.
    I'm running it on the latest G5 Imac, Leopard, 2.5 GB of RAM.
    To note, i installed some of the audio content (actually the ~22GB pack that you can choose where to install) on a fast external HD, connected via FireWire (FW 400 on the old imacs ).
    Audio card is M-Audio Firewire 410.
    Quite simply, in the 20 minutes i could play with it, i noticed the overall interface is really slow.
    For example, i click on the right side on "explore", half-a-second-delay than the tab is highlighted. All like this...it's like when you have the CPU overloaded with something in Windows and every single click get response with a bit of delay.
    Also, when exploring "all" apple loops, i really have to wait some 5-10 secs minimum of "thinking" (this maybe is normal, as they're 1,000s and stored externally). When choosing a sample/instrument and loading it, on the contrary, everything goes fast.
    But it's the overall feeling of browsing, clicking, selecting instruments, choosing effects....wherever i click, there is some sort of delay.
    Obviously on the system i shut down every single other application when i run Logic.
    Audio wise, i only had the chance to gig a bit with a piano, and all was fine (no lag, loads of voices, all regular).
    1- Anyone has noticed the same? Suggestions?
    2- Plus, would you think it's better to keep ALL of the audio samples from Logic in the internal HD, and maybe use the external one for other libraries (i also have Colossus, which streams from HD)?
    3- I final note...i had installed a plethora of demos, VSTs, old AUs, etc. that i want to get rid of. I want to start with a clean setup of Logic (with all of his instruments/effects), and then start adding only the real few that i need. If i cancel the AU placed in library/audio/etc. will i also take out logic instrments/effects, or are they stored in a different place?
    Thanks for your patience and help
    Ciao,
    Vanni

    Hit up a studio earlier this week running L8 and Leopard, just did the Leopard install the day it came out. Guy running the studio definitely noticed a difference; after placing a call to a couple 3-party manufacturers of interfaces and two other computer-recording-expert colleagues (invaluable resources, lemme tell ya), it turns out that there's a lot of little things about the OS update that are contributing to not-so-super performance using Leopard. I've decided to wait at least one, maybe two major updates to 10.5 before I upgrade.
    In the meantime, try verifying and repairing your disk permissions. And actually, there's a little freeware tool out there called Maintenance 3.7 that might help you, it's essentially an Automator Action/Applescript tool that automatically runs a whole bunch of little tasks that help keep the Mac system running smooth and error-free. Check it out here: http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/automator/maintenance.html. I don't know if it has any conflicts with Leopard, shouldn't hurt to try it. Hope this helps.

  • Performance question about 11.1.2 forms at runtime

    hi all,
    Currently we are investigating a forms/reports migration from 10 to 11.
    Initialy we were using v. 11.1.1.4 as the baseline for the migration. Now we are looking at 11.1.2.
    We have the impression that the performance has decreased significantly between these two releases.
    To give an example:
    A wizard screen contains an image alongside a number of items to enter details. In 11.1.1.4 this screen shows up immediately. In 11.1.2 you see the image rolling out on the canvas whilst the properties of the items seem to be set during this event.
    I saw that a number of features were added to be able to tune performance which ... need processing too.
    I get the impression that a big number of events are communicating over the network during the 'built' of the client side view of the screen. If I recall well during the migration of 6 to 9, events were bundled to be transmitted over the network so that delays couldn't come from network roundtrips. I have the impression that this has been reversed and things are communicated between the client and server when they arrive and are not bundled.
    My questions are:
    - is anyone out there experiencing the same kind of behaviour?
    - if so, is there some kind of property(ies) that exist to control the behaviour and improve performance?
    - are there properties for performance monitoring that are set but which cause the slowness as a kind of sideeffect and maybe can be unset.
    Your feedback will be dearly appreciated,
    Greetigns,
    Jan.

    The profile can't be changed although I suspect if there was an issue then banding the line would be something they could utilise if you were happy to do so.
    It's all theoretical right now until you get the service installed. Don't forget there's over 600000 customers now on FTTC and only a very small percentage of them have faults. It might seem like lots looking on this forum but that's only because forums are where people tend to come to complain.
    If you want to say thanks for a helpful answer,please click on the Ratings star on the left-hand side If the the reply answers your question then please mark as ’Mark as Accepted Solution’

  • Controlfile on ASM performance question

    Seeing Controlfile Enqueue performance spikes, consideration are to move control file to separater diskgroup(need outage) ? or add some disk(from different luns,( i prefer this approach) in the same disk group , seems like slow disk is casing this issue...
    2nd question :can snapshot controlfile be placed on ASM storage?

    Following points may help:
    - Separating the control file to another diskgroup may make things even worse in case that the total number of disks are insufficient in the new disk group.
    - Those control file contention issues are usually nothing to do with the storage throughput you have but the number of operations requiring different levels of exclusion on the control files.
    - Since multiple copies of controlfiles are updated concurrently a possible, sometimes, problem is that the secondary copy of controlfile is slower than the other. Please check that this is not the issue (different tiers of storage may cause such problems)
    Regards,
    Husnu Sensoy

  • Editing stills with motion effects, performance questions.

    I am editing a video in FCE that consists solely of still photos.
    I am creating motion effects (pans and pullbacks, etc) and dissolve
    transitions, and overlaying titles. It will be played back on dvd
    on a 16:9 monitor (standard dvd,not blueray hi-def). Some questions:
    What is the FCE best setup to use for best image quality: DV-NTSC?
    DV-NTSC Anamorphic? or is it HDV-1080i or 720p30 even though it
    won't be played back as hi-def?
    How do best avoid squiggly line problem with pan moves etc?
    On my G-5, 2gb RAM, single processor machine I seem to be having
    performance problems with playback: slow to render, dropping frames, etc
    Thanks for any help!

    Excellent summary MacDLS, thanks for the contribution.
    A lot of the photos I've taken on my camera are 3072 X 2304 (resolution 314) .jpegs.
    I've heard it said that jpegs aren't the best format for Motion, since they're a compressed format.
    If you're happy with the jpegs, Motion will be, too.
    My typical project could either be 1280 X 720 or SD. I like the photo to be a lot bigger than the
    canvas size, so I have room to do crops and grows, and the like. Is there a maximum dimension
    that I should be working with?
    Yes and no. Your originals are 7,000,000 pixels. Your video working space only displays about 950,000 pixels at any single instant.
    At that project size, your stills are almost 700% larger than the frame. This will tax any system as you add more stills. 150% is more realistic in terms of processing overhead and I try to only import HUGE images that I know are going to be tightly cropped by zooming in. You need to understand that an 1300x800 section of your original is as far as you can zoom in , the pixels will be 100% in size. If you zoom in further, all you get are bigger pixels. The trade off you make is that if you zoom way out on your source image, you've thrown away 75% of its content to scale it to fit the video format; you lose much much more if you go to SD.
    Finally, the manual says that d.p.i doesn't matter in Motion, so does this mean that it's worth
    actually exporting my 300 dpi photos to 72 dpi before working with them in Motion?
    Don't confuse DPI with resolution. Your video screen will only show about 900,000 pixels in HD and about 350,000 pixels in SD totally regardless of how many pixels there are in your original.
    bogiesan

  • IMacs intel question

    Hi everybody,
    I am new to Macintosh and I am just about to buy an INTEL iMac, but how can I differentiate between the "old" iMac with the Core Duo processor and the very "new" one with the Core2 Duo processor ?
    I am asking this Q. because my sister is buying it for me and bringing it to Mexico and she is completely computer iliterate.
    So maybe a text or a logo printed outside on the box containing the computer or does she have to unpack it and look for this info printed on the computer itself?
    Sorry for the dumb question, but I would like to make sure that she is not buying the "old" model.
    Thanks a lot for any advice.
    Diazruanova

    It will say on the box that it has an Intel Core 2 Duo. Maybe you could just explain to her the difference, and make sure she gets the one with Core 2 Duo written on it? Another thing that might be helpful to know is that the 17" model didn't come in 2.0 GHz before, it was 1.83 GHz. So if she gets a 17" iMac that says 2.0 GHz on the specifications, it's definitely a new one.

  • 27" iMac Firewire Question

    Hi Folks,
    I recently got the 27inch i7 iMac. I use it for Music Production and just general internet surfing.
    My question is - I current use a Firewire audio interface (M-Audio Profire 2626) and with only 1 Firewire connection on the iMac.
    Is it possible to plug a Firewire external hard drive into the back of my audio device, In a daisy chain type connection
    (eg - iMac TO Audio Interface TO External HD)
    to store my audio files and have no latency issues?
    Any help on this would be greatly appreciated
    BTD

    Yes you can daisy chain them, the connection on your iMac is FW 800 so if your Profire only has FW 400 then you will need a cable like this. My suggestion would be to get an external HD that has 2 FW 800 ports (OWC Mercury, Lacie Quadra D2 or G-Tech) and you are set.
    Regards,
    Roger

Maybe you are looking for