Improving Video/Graphics Performance

Okay, so one cannot upgrade one's iMac graphics card. Any other strategies to improve video performance? I have done the obvious like closing all other apps and maxing out RAM (4GB).

Thanks Dan but maybe I didn't make myself clear. What I'm interested in is whether or not one can expect a noticeable difference in video graphics performance between a 20" Cinema Display and a 23" Cinema Display, when connected to a Mac Mini Core Duo.

Similar Messages

Mac Mini Core Duo and 23" Cinema Display: video graphics performance

I know the Mac Mini Core Duo and the 23" Cinema Display are compatible but can anybody tell me if one can expect better graphics performance when using a 20" display or does it not make any difference?

Thanks Dan but maybe I didn't make myself clear. What I'm interested in is whether or not one can expect a noticeable difference in video graphics performance between a 20" Cinema Display and a 23" Cinema Display, when connected to a Mac Mini Core Duo.

Do you think mbp 13 can be used for using auto cad,catia,ansys and cfd software if not where can i give them suggestion to improve their graphics performance on mbp13 (i cant afford mbp15 and also it is not portable)

i need to use powerfull application like auto cad,ansys,nxcad,catia(i am going to use Windows 7)
is the intel 5100 enough for these pourpose
i am not use it as professional level but i need a performance of GT 650m
i am not going for mbp 15 becuase
-price
-portability
-battery life
please dont suggest me other windows machine becuase i consider to buy razer blade but battery was very poor and over heating
i think apple can improve their mbp 13 by
-intel i7 quad processor
-extra graphics nvidia gt or gtx series (without sacrificing battery life)
-touch screen
-4k screen

I would strongly not recommend the 13" MBP for use with software like AutoCad, ANSYS and any CFD program, not due to the graphics porcessor but due to the cpu. If you are going to run a CFD program like FLUENT or CD STAR this is the wrong platform to use. You need to use something of the class of the Mac Pro with the 6-core Xeon processor and a lot of memory. That software is a huge computational load and the cpu in the 13" MBP will overheat even with a small problem to analyze.
ANSYS and FLUENT are multi-threaded and will benefit for the capabilities of the Mac Pro.

How to measure slow disk i/o impact on video graphics performance???

The problem is when an application runs in fullscreen with a high FPS and still shows lag/stutter issues in graphics ...
Windows 7 doesn`t seem to have any tools that report of stuck disk i/o traffic and neither does the graphic card controls (nvidia). The missing information seem to be:
1) Whether it is because of a slow drive (fx. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF-SBypQBuw); (Solution: buy a faster drive)
2) Whether it is because of other programs using the same disk - fx. windows pagefile(?); (Solution: move the app to another drive)
3) Or whether it is because of a layer program - fx like Sandboxie that redirects filesearch etc.; (Solution: run the app outside the layer)
Is it really necessary to buy and install and configure a new harddrive and then install the app on this drive uncertain of results just to compare to try solving some graphics lag because of disk i/o issues?

1) the Windows performance index gives a view of the hardware's expected performance the subscores for harddrive tests should allow you to determine if your harddisk is 'slow'
2) Resource monitor can help to identify processes that have a lot of IO. Most important measurement will be teh disk queue length. To get even more detailed information, you could use perfmon.
http://blogs.technet.com/b/askcore/archive/2012/02/07/measuring-disk-latency-with-windows-performance-monitor-perfmon.aspx
3) virtualisation and/or sandboxing always has a performance impact. You should check with the software vendor how to check for/test the performance impact the application has.
no, it is not neccasary to buy hardware or software to identify a performance issue. note that in some cases is might be easier/cheaper to buy some new hardware of which you are sure it will meet all requirements.
PS: consider purchasing an SSD if yous suspect IO issues and are willing to spend some: it will be your best hardwareupgarde you did over the last 10 years!!!
MCP/MCSA/MCTS/MCITP

Improving graphics performance in DIAdem 11.0 Report?

Dear Forum,
when working on a Report layout, the poor graphic performance of DIAdem is a real problem for me.
For example, many diagrams with lots of data are on one page. One opens the proficiencies of one of the diagrams and changes e.g. the curves color or whatever and closes the dialog window. After this, the whole Report page is refreshed - wich takes up to one minute, depending on the amount of data displayed.
The strange thing is, when I close the given dialog window, and while the report page is being refreshed sent DIAdem to the taskbar and open any other application window, the process of refreshing the screen takes only 1 second instead of 30 seconds.
The question is: Is there a tweak to improve the speed how DIAdem refreshes the report page? Or is there any workaround other than switching applications during refreshing?
Thanks a lot.
Greetings from Germany
Oliver

Hello Oliver,
The easiest way to speed up the graphics performance in Report with large data files (or 3D graphs with lots of nodes) is to turn off the "Data Layer" (German: "Datenebene") in the "View" menu (German: "Ansicht").
That function basically turns off the display of all data in Report, but retains the axis systems, texts, etc., so you can still move them, place them and edit them without having to guess sizes. Once you're done with the report, simply turn the data layer back on and you're ready to create a PDF, print or save the result as an image file (JPG, BMB, etc.).
I think the performance difference you described (1 vs. 30 seconds) is due to the fact that once DIAdem has drawn a page, it retains an image in memory and will simply draw that image when you bring DIAdem to the foreground (or maximize it). After any edits you make to the report (e.g. change the color of a graph), DIAdem redraws the complete page from scratch, which takes much longer then just re-displaying an image that has already been drawn previously. Someone from the DIAdem R&D team could probably do a better job explaining this, but I think this is the explanation for the time difference in drawing.
Anyway, the "Data Layer" trick should hopefully solve your problem, let us know if that works for you.
Greeting from Austin, TX.
Otmar D. Foehner
Business Development Manager
DIAdem and Test Data Management
National Instruments
Austin, TX - USA
"For an optimist the glass is half full, for a pessimist it's half empty, and for an engineer is twice bigger than necessary."

Dedicated graphics shuts down (?) ... stuttering videos and low framerate graphic performance

Hi,
Since quite some time now I have an issue with my macbook pro that seems to be related to the dedicated graphics card and/or the dynamic switching from integrated to dedicated.
The computer runs fine and then suddenly, while watching a flash video, a high resolution html5 youtube video, or playing the video game hearthstone the frame rate of the video / video game drops dramatically.
The only fix is a reboot of the computer and then it is fine again for some time.
It might be related to the power management as it seems to occur more often when on battery or when the battery is low.
I have gfxCardStatus 2.3 installed and when this happens it still tells me that I am running on the dedicated graphic card.
Is that a known problem and is there a fix to it?
I tried to turn off "automatic graphics switching" in the energy saver settings. But this did not help.
specs:
Macbook Pro 15inch Mid 2010
8GB RAM – 2.66 GHz i7
NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M 512 MB graphics
OS X 10.9.5
Thank You!

The model identifier 6.2 MBP that you have has experienced GPU problems. There was a replacement program, but that has expired.
I suggest that you make an appointment at an Apple store genius bar and have the MBP evaluated for FREE. Mention the GPU issue because there is a special test for it.
If it turns out that the discrete GPU is the problem, then you can download this application which will allow you to disengage the discrete GPU and use only the integrated one. This will compromise graphics performance.
https://gfx.io/
A permanent solution would be a logic board replacement.
Ciao.

GMABooster to improve graphics performance

Hi,
Has anyone try using the GMABootser utility on a Ideapad S10 ...?
It was mentioned in Digital Life" that it can improve up to 2.5x your graphics performance.
Thank You.

Read this: http://www.umpcportal.com/2009/04/gma-booster-increases-your-gma-based-device%E2%80%99s-graphical-pe... - and also the comments.
Message Edited by Loser on 07-09-2009 03:38 PM

[SOLVED] [QEMU] Improve graphics performance/resolution

Hi,
I use qemu's kvm feature and successfuly installed Windows 7 in it.
Everything works quite well except the graphics performance being very poor.
When I move the cursor it starts flickering ('lagging') and I can't set the resolution fitting my laptop screen with a native resolution of 1366x768. (So currently using 1024x768 in the VM)
I start qemu with -vga vmware.
command I use for starting qemu:
qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -machine type=pc,accel=kvm -cpu host -vga vmware -full-screen -k de -usb -usbdevice tablet -m 3072 /path/to/image.qcow2
Is there a way to fix this??
Last edited by kanikuleet (2013-04-15 10:49:36)

Finally got it working now, performance is surprisingly good!!!
I used to have Windows 7 Home Premium, then I discovered you cannot remote-connect to Home Prem as this version lacks that feature
So I got me Ultimate 64bit and it works.
I start the qemu vm with:
qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -machine type=pc,accel=kvm -cpu host -nographic -k de -usb -m 4096 -net nic -net user,hostfwd=tcp::3389-:3389 /home/kanikuly/Pictures/ISO/Win7Ult64Bit.qcow2
and rdesktop with:
rdesktop -g 100% -E -D -K -P -f -z -x b -r sound:off -a 32 -u *** -p *** localhost

Apple DVI to Video Adapter performance issues in Lion

I'm an active Apple DVI to Video Adapter user for a couple of years already and everything worked perfectly well until I've upgraded to Lion.
Everything on my TV screen is lagging now, even mouse pointer, and there is no change to watch any movie like that.
Does anyone have the same issue? Maybe someone could give me an advice of what could I do in order to improve graphics performance on TV screen using Apple DVI to Video Adapter? I'm using late 2007 MBP with 8600M GT video adapter.

I am having the exact same problem. I have a late 2007 MBP. I use it everyday where I teach. I use the adapter to project on a large white screen using S-Video. SInce the Lion update, it is very slow and has even completely crashed my computer a few times. I realize the MBP is getting a bit dated, but the difference between Snow Leopard & Lion is remarkable.

Is there a way of improving my graphics on my early 2011 macbook pro 13"?

Does anyone know a way of improving the graphics capability for OpenGL with the Intel 3000 chips in the early 2011 MBP 13"? I bought it not realising the graphics chips had been downgraded and now as a result struggle to do any CGI work that I rely on my computer to do.

CHRIBAM wrote:
I'm more inclined to go with Ogelthorpe's advice (if I had the cash).
I agree with Ogelthorpe as well, the 15" and the 17" MacBook Pro also have dedicated graphics cards which give more performance than the Intel HD 3000 only graphics, which is really of MacBook type performance for consumer user. (playback of video and that's about it)
Still wondering why Apple went backwards for graphics in the 13", I completely missed the change.
I'm peeved at Apple for the fact that they didn't make a clear distinction of the disadvantages of the 13" with no dedicated graphics card then lumped it in with the 15" and 17" which do.
To Apple it's a matter of performance for price, the 13" scores 11 on Cinebench, the 15/17" score 30 and 45, so the 13" doesn't even come close. But it comes in the same silver case, the same "MacBook Pro" name, when in fact it's not so.
Apple knows people would be attracted to the performance of the MacBook Pro name in a small size factor, the price is also attractive to the younger crowd, the younger crowd are also interested in running 3D games, which need a more powerful video card.
Your not the first who's complained and feels burned, you trusted Apple was selling you a powerful MacBook Pro machine and you've got a consumer machine instead.
The 13" Mac laptop should have gotten it's own category, called it a MacBook instead and it should have come with white or black case. But that would have angered Intel most likely, who are trying to push integrated graphics on their CPU's so they own the whole show eventually.
It's going to take a long time before CPU integrated graphics is ever going to beat dedicated GPU graphics, because 3D game detail is always going to go up until it finally reaches 3D raytracing at 200 fps.
What Apple is doing is trying to get folks hooked on lessor quality/detail games, the ones you see on iPads and iPhones, and away from wanting rich detail which needs a powerful dedicated video card.
So Apple lumps the 13" MacBook in with the MacBook Pro line, try to force the issue, next they will try it with the 15", integrated graphics on the low end model. Then again only dedicated graphics on the 17" model and so forth. Eventually developers won't make as many 3D games for Mac's because most people buy laptops, cuts into their potential sales.
If you really want to run 3D games, you have to go with a Windows 7 desktop where the video card can be swtiched out.
http://www.cbscores.com/index.php?sort=ogl&order=desc

Pavilion 500-017c Compatible Video Graphics Cards

Hello everybody,
I just registered to this forum and I only have one question:
I have an HP Pavilion 500-017c and I wanted to get a compatible graphics card that isn't much high-end (minimum $90, max $150) for my PC gaming purposes. Here are the specs of my current setup:
HP Pavilion 500-017c
AMD Radon HD 7560D Integrated Graphics Card
AMD Quad-core A8-5500 Accelerated Processor
8GB PC3-12800 DDR3-1600 SDRAM memory
Windows 8.1
For some reason, the integrated graphics card that I have slows down some of the games/software that I use. Not because of other running processes, but it just does. I would appreciate for the response. Thanks!

Hi,
HP BIOS defaults indicate that PCI-E slot security is disabled. The five beeps means your PC is having a pre-video failure. This is a very common occurrence when a video card is installed and Secure Boot enabled. See the below information that has been posted by HP.
HP Secure Boot Windows 8 Topics Computer Does not Start After Installing a Video Card (Windows 8)
If you want to improve your gaming performance then try one on the below referenced video cards. If NewEgg is out of stock then try Tiger Direct, Amazon or Google. You will not need to change out your power supply.
MSI NVIDIA GTX N750 TI and the MSI GTX N750 TF
HP DV9700, t9300, Nvidia 8600, 4GB, Crucial C300 128GB SSD
HP Photosmart Premium C309G, HP Photosmart 6520
HP Touchpad, HP Chromebook 11
Custom i7-4770k,Z-87, 8GB, Vertex 3 SSD, Samsung EVO SSD, Corsair HX650,GTX 760
Custom i7-4790k,Z-97, 16GB, Vertex 3 SSD, Plextor M.2 SSD, Samsung EVO SSD, Corsair HX650, GTX 660TI
Windows 7/8 UEFI/Legacy mode, MBR/GPT

How about the Graphic Performance?

Hello all!
May someone can help me to get that clarified ...
I have a MacMini with Thunderbolt connection. Latley I started to use RC Flight simulator which challenges the video card of my MacMini pretty much.
How about a Thunderbolt Display? Will TB just "substitute" my current HDMI-Connection or will some computing power be "outsourced" to the display? In other words: will the graphic performance of my MacMini improve using a TB-Display or does it stay the same because the build in video card is still "in charge"?
Thx for your help!

No question the Thunderbolt is without doubt a fantastic display, however to answer your question I'm personally experiencing a performance drop (see my very recent thread in this forum).
One of my reasons for finally getting the Thunderbolt Display was to enjoy some proper gaming on a big screen for 3D games both within OS X and Bootcamp. Even when I match my MacBook Pro 17" unibody's (early 2011) top resolution with the Thunderbolt Display for a like for like comparison, I get a performance drop which I was hoping would never happen. I was hoping that with the MacBook Pro in closed 'clamshell' and thus the MacBook Pro switching it's own display 'off' and presumably diverting all of the GPU's performance power straight to the Thunderbolt Display via it's direct fast Thunderbolt bus; that it would at the very very least match the performance when using the MacBook Pro's own display, but currently I have to choose the 'very low' graphics setting on some games to maintain a decent frame-rate for smooth game play.
Mybe this is not a permanent Thunderbolt Display problem/fault and might be resolved at some point by means of a software, display driver or display/thunderbolt/GPU firmware update. If that be the case then I'll know there's hope at the end of the tunnel. Understandably I wasn't expecting my MacBook Pro 17" early 2011 to perform miracles with it's graphics performance anyhow, but it's 1GB Graphics adapter isn't all that bad either and is a half decent card that can give acceptable results. But If you where to match the resolution of the Thunderbolt Display to that of the MacBook Pro for comparison for yourself and then run a 3D game like say 'Dirt 2', you will soon realise there are slight performance issues; unless of course I'm doing something wrong.
Here's hoping this may only be a temporary drawback for the Thunderbolt Display with 3D applications/gaming.

CS6- Sluggish Graphics performance

Hi;
I just installed Photoshop CS6 on a Windows 7 64-Bit system with an ATI 5870 Graphics card and the latest ATI 12.4 drivers. Graphics performance seems to be noticeably worse than CS4 that I upgraded from.
   The very first thing I tried was pasting a copy of an open Desktop Window (Alt-Printscreen) into Photoshop (File/New then paste). Then I simply alternated between 'Fit on screen' and 'Actual Pixels' to watch the magnification change.
'Zooming' performance seems noticeably slower/jerkier than with CS4.
I played around with the 'performance' options and I discovered that the fastest setup seems to be when I go to Graphics Processor Setting and uncheck the 'Use Graphics processor' box (It was checked by default) . Then, things seem pretty snappy. The zoom doesn't seem to have much of any 'animation' as it changes level.
The next quickest seems to be when I leave the 'Use Graphics processor' box checked, but change the 'Advanced settings'/Drawing Mode to 'Basic' (down from the default 'Advanced').
Here, the zoom seems to be smooth, but seems to have a little bit of an 'animated' appearance as it is growing or shrinking (as it changes the zoom level). The worst performance is the default drawing mode of 'Advanced'.
Does anyone else see this issue with CS6 and ATI graphics? Is it expected to have to turn down the graphics setting to get improved performance?
The ATI 5870 isn't too shabby of a video card, and I expected better with CS6.
The 64-Bit version speed doesn't seem any different, although the Graphics setting for 'Use OpenCL' is checked in 64-bit version of CS6
My CPU is an Intel I980X (3.33 GHz) 6-Core system, in case that helps.
   Thanks;
     -Greg

I rolled back the drivers to the AMD 12.2 Catalyst video driver version and things do seem much improved.
With only limited testing so far, things now appear to be (mostly) at least as fast as without the 'Use graphics card' option checked.
I say mostly because with the graphics card being used, I now see some short 'delays' in some actions that aren't there without it. For example, starting CS6 and then doing a 'new' followed by 'paste' seems to have a little delay in there that's not present without the use graphics card option. (Maybe it's initializing the card, I don't know).
It seems like the graphical effects for things like 'Iris Blur' look fancier with the graphics card being used, but so far it's not clear if they are actually any faster/more responsive. 'liquefy' looks very smooth with or without the 'use graphics card' option.
At least performance is no longer absolutely horrible (using the 'Graphics acceleration')... . I'll have to try it out some more.
Thanks!
     -Greg

Improving hard drive performance with onboard RAID.

After completing a recent PPBM5 test and being disappointed I would like to improve the disc performance of my system and would appreciate the thoughts of the forum.
System:
MB: Asus P6X58D-E
CPU: Intel Core i7 930 2.8GHz
RAM: 12GB (6 x 2GB) Corsair Dominator DDR
Graphics: 1.28GB Asus GTX 470 3.3GHz
My current hard drive set-up is:
OS (Win 7 64bit)
WD Velociraptor
300GB
10,000rpm
Storage
Seagate Barracuda
1.5TB
7,200rpm
SATA II 3Gb/s
Media
Seagate Barracuda
1.5TB
7,200rpm
SATA II 3Gb/s
Project/Source Video
Samsung Spinpoint F3
1TB
7,200rpm
SATA II 3Gb/s
Media Cache/Page File/Export
Samsung Spinpoint F3
1TB
7,200rpm
SATA II 3Gb/s
Drive Bay (back-up and archive)
Various bare drives
My motherboard has 6 x 3Gb/s and 2 x 6Gb/s SATA ports and has an onboard RAID, using an Intel ICH10R Southbridge controller. The motherboard also has USB 3.0. I have a DVD drive using one of the SATA ports.
Although I understand the principal of RAID I’ve never used it before. So, what would be the best way of improving performance?
I presume that as all my drives currently have data on them I’ll have to copy this data to another drive before formatting them and then creating the RAID drive.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts and suggestions.
Many thanks.

Thanks Harm. I've gone through your suggestions.
As my computer has to function for several other tasks in addition to video editing, I realise that I will have to compromise somewhat on the performance to make sure that it's still useable for other things.
Using Black Vipers tips I've reduced the processes running from 100+ to 89.
Indexing and compression turned off for all drives except Storage, which isn't used for video related tasks. Although it wouldn't surprise me to learn that having any indexing turned on will have a degree of drain on resources.
Discs all defragged.
Media Cache cleared.
Any further advice on how to optimise the hard drives would be very much appreciated.

IMac 27 mid 2010 graphics performance issue

Hi all
my iMac has a strange problem and I need to understand how to fix it.
First of all, this my configuration:
iMac 27'' - 2.8 ghz - 12 Gb RAM - ATI 5750 1GB GDDR5, Mountain Lion 10.8.2
The problem is simple. After a while, the graphic performance slows down quickly with fluctuant speed (fast then slow, then fast...). I've noticed that in 3D games, in Photoshop and in other applications that uses GPU or intense graphics operations (also Finder animation like window animations)...
I can't understand if it's a hardware failure (but note that Apple made me an AHT just a couple of days ago, during the 1 Tb Seagate Hard Drive Replacement Program and nothing was found) or a Software problem... But OSX is a fresh install, for example...
Is there a way to check GPU deeply?
Please help me, i'm really hopeless

It certainly sounds possible that your video card is failing. You might want to reboot from your Original Installation Disk and run the AHT (Apple Hardware Test) or the Extended Apple Hardware Test to check for hardware failiure.. Other than that, time for a trip to the Apple Store for a check up.
Hope this helps

Improving Video/Graphics Performance

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for