MS-7360 CPU replacement issues

Having being plagued by blue screen of death issues and after many google searches I came to the conclusion that my Intel E6550 had developed a fault. I've now bought an E7600 to replace it. After fitting it it firstly just gave a blank screen. After a CMOS reset it now powers itself on and off a couple of times before sticking on the MSI logo screen. Pressing Del does nothing.
I believe the MB is a MS-7360 (P35 NEO-F).
Do I have to somehow update the BIOS?
Any help is much appreciated.

Quote from: Henry on 17-January-12, 04:49:55
For future reference should you need to download anything for your MB you need the G33 Neo stuff. I had the same MB as you and BIOS and other stuff is the same as for G33 Neo.
Ignore the P35 Neo you see on MSI website as that is somewhat different version especially the BIOS.
http://eu.msi.com/product/mb/G33-Neo.html
or here:
http://www.msi.com/product/mb/G33-Neo.html
Just been looking at this again and I think you may be wrong about this. The specs for the G33 state that there should be a VGA port on the MB where the P35 does not have one. Mine does not have a VGA port so I can only assume it is a P35 ( as it states on the board).
I'm going to try installing the latest bios for the P35. Got nothing to loose.

Similar Messages

Re: MS-7360 CPU replacement issues -l- Split

Greetings from Serbia!
I have the same problem with this MB!
MSI P 35 NEO-F ms-7360 ver 1.0
1.a0 bios
CPU Celeron 430 and C2D e6400
GPU 7300 gt and 9800 gt
PSU 450V linkworld

Topic split
In the future if you have any problem please start your own new topic instead of hijacking someone elses even if you have a similar problem.
>> Please read and comply with the Forum Rules <<
Please describe your problem, do not link to the other topic, we want you to describe your own problem.
>> Posting Guide <<

Lenovo 3k out of warranty -is it worth getting MB or CPU replaced?

Just getting started on this repair for my friend, so haven't priced out a MB or CPU replacement;
Is it worth (cost effective) to work toward replacing a cpu or mb if one or the other is defective?
The system is reliably turning off on its own within 10 seconds or 10 minutes; with most all accessories removed, and wether in the bios or booted into the utilities section of the hdd, the system will turn off after a short period of time -on a/c power-.
It's a Lenovo Product: 3000 N100 0768-DLU
any replies i'm very interested in. THANKS. Matt

Mark_Lenovo wrote:
narukthul,
Sorry you had a bad experience. Can you explain a bit more? It sounds like you had some service while still in warranty, that may or may not have been related to the GPU, and now you are having these symptoms.
How far outside of warranty are you?
When was your last repair that you reference and when did these symptoms occur?
Best regards,
Mark
i had my display replaced with the rubbishy refurbished parts lenovo uses to repair warrantied computers. It came back unsurprisingly worse off than when i sent it in. I believe they had attached the display cable incorrectly to the motherboard causing the display to flicker and to display a garbled picture as well. it took 3 more send ins to the lenovo depot for them to fix it and by the last time i got my computer back my warranty was expiring then less than a month later my display picture would consistently become more garbled overtime both when viewed via laptop display and external monitor.
I did not have these issues before sending my computer in for "service" The fact that external monitor display was also garbled beyond recognition indicates either damaged GPU hardware or software. Operating under the assumption that the video driver software had become corrupted I tried several different driver versions and even uninstalled and reinstalled from scratch to no avail. Given that a reinstall of the video driver was inneffective I am confident that when I sent my computer in for "service" the technicians attaching the display cable to the motherboard caused damage to the GPU over the 4 times I had to send my computer back in because of the loose display cable. Essentially I sent in a working computer for service and lenovo sent me back a paperweight.

What setting should I use for Abbey Road drums? Getting a cpu overload issue

What setting should I use for Abbey Road drums (i.e. multi-output, stereo, etc)? Getting a cpu overload issue. I have a macbook pro, 4 gb ram, running Logic Pro 9. Just 3 tracks of drums and a few real instrument tracks. Can't find a guide in the manual for either Kontakt or Logic. Thanks in advance!

Hi
AR drums are complete resource (CPU) hogs. They work better if you turn off as many of the AR internal plugins as you can.
See section 4 (?) of the AR manual, which you can find within Kontakt (In the library area of Kontakt click hold the small "i" on the right of the "AR drummer" Library).
Alternatively, your only solution is to increase the I/O buffer in Preferences:Audio, with the associated increase in latency
CCT

JCaps 5.1.3 Sun Solaris CPU performance issue

Folks,
We are experiencing a serious CPU performance issue on our Solaris server with HL7 projects deployed.
The projects consist of the sample HL7 inbound and outbound projects with an additional service sending to a batch local file external for writing journals.
The performance issue occurs when there is volume of data in the queues/topics. As we continue to deploy additional HL7 projects (usually about 6 interfaces), the CPU increases until it reached 100%.
This sanapshot is prstat when no date is transmitting through the interfaces (One inbound - one outbound):
B PID USERNAME SIZE RSS STATE PRI NICE TIME CPU PROCESS/NLWP
15598 jre 379M 177M sleep 59 0 2:49:11 3.1% eManager/74
21549 phs 1174M 1037M sleep 59 0 14:49:00 2.5% is_dm_phs/113
23090 phs 3456K 3136K cpu1 59 0 0:00:01 0.4% prstat/1
23102 phs 3792K 3496K sleep 59 0 0:00:00 0.2% prstat/1
21550 phs 46M 35M sleep 59 0 0:13:27 0.1% stcms.exe/3
1272 noaccess 209M 95M sleep 59 0 0:26:30 0.1% java/25
11733 jre 420M 212M sleep 59 0 1:35:40 0.1% java/34
131 root 4368K 2480K sleep 59 0 0:02:10 0.1% nscd/30
23094 phs 3064K 2168K sleep 59 0 0:00:00 0.1% bash/1
This sanapshot is prstat when data is transmitting through the interfaces(One inbound - one outbound):
PID USERNAME SIZE RSS STATE PRI NICE TIME CPU PROCESS/NLWP
21549 phs 1174M 1037M cpu1 20 0 14:51:20 88% is_dm_phs/113
15598 jre 379M 181M sleep 59 0 2:49:18 1.3% eManager/74
21550 phs 46M 35M sleep 49 0 0:13:29 1.2% stcms.exe/3
23090 phs 3456K 3128K cpu3 49 0 0:00:03 0.4% prstat/1
1272 noaccess 209M 95M sleep 59 0 0:26:30 0.1% java/25
11733 jre 420M 212M sleep 59 0 1:35:40 0.1% java/34
21546 phs 118M 904K sleep 59 0 0:01:21 0.1% isprocmgr_dm_ph/13
This sanapshot is prstat -L when data is transmitting through the interfaces (One inbound - one outbound):
PID USERNAME SIZE RSS STATE PRI NICE TIME CPU PROCESS/LWPID
21549 phs 1174M 1037M cpu1 41 0 0:00:45 22% is_dm_phs/13971
21549 phs 1174M 1037M sleep 51 0 3:31:06 21% is_dm_phs/1394
21549 phs 1174M 1037M run 51 0 3:14:16 20% is_dm_phs/1296
21549 phs 1174M 1037M sleep 52 0 3:14:13 19% is_dm_phs/1380
15598 jre 379M 181M sleep 50 0 1:49:57 3.1% eManager/4
21549 phs 1174M 1037M sleep 59 0 0:15:36 1.7% is_dm_phs/4
21550 phs 46M 35M sleep 59 0 0:10:52 1.0% stcms.exe/1
21549 phs 1174M 1037M sleep 59 0 0:10:45 0.9% is_dm_phs/6
15598 jre 379M 181M sleep 54 0 0:33:35 0.3% eManager/35
21549 phs 1174M 1037M sleep 59 0 0:03:34 0.3% is_dm_phs/5
21550 phs 46M 35M sleep 59 0 0:02:37 0.2% stcms.exe/2
21549 phs 1174M 1037M sleep 59 0 0:02:17 0.2% is_dm_phs/3
21549 phs 1174M 1037M sleep 59 0 0:02:17 0.2% is_dm_phs/2
Solaris 10 server details:
CPU's (4x900 Sparc III+)
4096 MB RAM
SunOS testican 5.9 Generic_118558-39 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-880
Disk: 6 internal Fujitsu 72GBs
swapspace on the server:
total: 4305272k bytes allocated + 349048k reserved = 4654320k used, 10190536k available
My sysadmin has run statistics (iostat, vmstat, psig, pmap, pfind, pstack, mpstat, etc.) - and has reported that the server is performing fine - with the exception of the CPU. It also looked like the swap space was not being utilized.
We have increased the MaxPerm value to 512, and increased the heapsize on isprocmgr_dm_phs to -Xmx2048m, and increased the heapsize on the domain to 2048 per KB 103824
We have also added the -d64 value (specific to Solaris) per the Deployment Guide.
We increased the value of Maximum Pool size in the JMS clients to 128 - per the deployment Guide.
We increased the swapspace on the server to 10Gb:
total: 4305272k bytes allocated + 349048k reserved = 4654320k used, 10190536k available
We have modified the tcpip and kernal parameters per the Sun Administration server 8.2 performance tuning guide:
core file size (blocks, -c) unlimited
data seg size (kbytes, -d) unlimited
file size (blocks, -f) unlimited
open files (-n) 8192
pipe size (512 bytes, -p) 10
stack size (kbytes, -s) 8192
cpu time (seconds, -t) unlimited
max user processes (-u) 29995
virtual memory (kbytes, -v) unlimited
None of these modificatons appear to increase performance.
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks
Rich...

Hi,
I noticed this behavior with the Alert + SNMP Agents installed but not configured. In this situation, the SNMP agent generates traps for all events, leading to high CPU using, even when nothing was processed. Are you in a similar case?
Regards

Analyzing the "idle CPU whine" issue

Hi All,
I have been waiting for a solution for the "idle CPU whine" issue since I returned my MacBook Pro because of the whine.
First of all, we need to filter out all the posts where a person says that he does not have the whine but has not heard a whining unit. So, we need to focus only on experiences of people who hear the whine or do not hear whine but have heard the whine in another unit.
Secondly, I think that the build week number has no significance on the whine issue. More interesting would be to have people sending here the last part of their serial number, which supposedly is some kind of configuration code, and stating if they have the idle CPU whine or not. Maybe we could get some new information out of that.
Do also state, if you have actually compared a whining and a non-whining unit. If you have not compared the no-whine opinions are useless as they are merely opinions without a reference to a faulty unit.

This was posted on MacFitIt today (www.macfixit.com)
" Mike, I thought you might find this reply from Apple regarding my contacting them with a noise issue with the MacBook Pro. I noticed that if I were to disable a processor core the noise immediately stopped and this is Apple's reply.
Eric"
Begin forwarded message:
"Hi Eric, I heard back from engineering and was informed that this normal behavior for the MacBook Pro. When the processors are idle a capacitor on the logic board will take on additional power loads causing the capacitor to vibrate, thus creating the noise. Turning off the second processor and/or using better energy saver settings reduces the load on the capacitor causing the noise not to occur.
For more information check out http://www.apple.com/support/macbookpro/. Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions..."

Satellite A200 - CPU replacing

Hi
I have an Satellite A200-130 with CoreDuo 1,86 CPU and I'm thinking about replacing it for Core2Duo 2,0 mainly for ot's little better performance and virtualization options.
Anyone done that?

Generally the CPU replacement is not very easy on the notebooks.
Its trickier as the replacement on the desktop PCs.
First of all you should check if your chipset supports the Core2Duo 2Ghz CPUs.
Usually you could find such info on the Intel page.
Secondly you have to know if the BIOS would support the new Core2Duo CPU.
This is very important because the fan table which is stored in the BIOS controls the cooling modules. If the cooling modules dont work correctly then the notebook would overheat and this could damage the notebooks hardware.
Therefore such CPU upgrades are not advisable and mostly not possible

Droid 3 Replacement issues

i am on my 10th replacment
issues
restarting, randomly
not calling when i hit call - that makes me the maddest -
camera doestn work
microphone didnt work ( could only talk on speaker phone )
touchscreen didnt work

statman wrote:
Droid 3 Camera issues I am running into:
- - First - If I can start the camera without it causing the phone to crash.... (how do you disable the "Droid" sound on reboot - getting VERY annoying)
Try Settings / Applications / Manage Applications / All Tab / Camera / Clear Data to resolve camera issue.... To disable startup sound try disabling Settings / Sounds / SD Mount or something along this.
- - I have to use a task killer to keep the camera from burning up the battery after using it. - WHY????
I understand where you coming from but I would use System Panel instead of a task killer, a number of users helped me see the light of not using a task killer.
- - I bought my phone to keep in touch via skype with my son @ college - but now learn that the droid 3, with it's front facing camera DOES NOT WORK - (not on the Verizon-specific Skype - what a lame app), but using the real Skype app... on a video chat, the Droid gives a black screen, not my image. ??? From what I see online, same response from other video chat tools. This was one of the biggest selling points for me!!! Am more than mildly annoyed at this one.
That strange because the Droid 3 is supported on Skype's site.
Previous phone was a Droid 2 - with none of these problems.... appears that the Droid3 was released before testing and fixing issues.
PLEASE ADDRESS THIS!!!

H.P. 635 CPU Replacment.

Is it possible to upgrade the CPU in the H.P. 635 and if not, is it possible to replace the mother board?
This is a (H.P. 635, 2.60 ghz. CPU , Windows 7, 64 bit).

Hello danielrwaters. I understand you'd like to upgrade your CPU or replace your motherboard.
I can locate the parts and information for you if you provide me with your product number. This identifies the notebook. This document can show you where it is located.
Once I have this information I'll see what parts are available for your notebook.
I hope you have a great weekend!
Please click the white star under my name to give me Kudos as a way to say "Thanks!"
Click the "Accept as Solution" button if I resolve your issue.

Help with Mainstage 3.1 CPU overload issue

I was using Kontakt 5, UVI Workstation and Pianoteq 5 in MainStage 3 without any issues.
Since I updated to MS 3.1, The CPU is always above 100% !!! I am facing audio dropouts and it is absolutely impossible to play a show
Is anyone else facing the same issue? Any tips to help reduce CPU overload will be helpful.
I have Contact and UVI workstation running from an external hard disk. I thought that might be the issue but i tried with a keyboard template set in MS 3.1 and still while playing CPU usage shoots to 100% plus!
I am on a MacBook Pro (Retina, 13-inch, Late 2013), 2.4 GHz Intel Core i5, 8 GB 1600 MHz DDR3.

Try to get the Mainstage 3.0.4 from a timemachine backup.
Try to update all your programs like pianotec.
For me, 3.1 feels better concerning timing/ latency. This might cause more stress for the processors.
My system i7 2,2 GHz is always getting hot, fans go crazy. There's a limit: Better than 64 Samples buffer is not possible.
To be serious: A real Piano needs 0,25ms to produce a sound. We have to deal with 4ms. That's bad. So you could increase buffersize to 128 and try playing? It makes no big difference if you play the poor 4ms ore poor 6ms for example. In every case we are far away from the real thing.
Check, if you activated the "savety buffer" checkbox in audiodriver window.
If you can't find 3.0.4., you could try to reduce the installed channelstrips in your patches. Effects in concert level should be reduced. Evt. you have Efx in busses that are not needed in most patches. So cancel them in concertlevel and install them in selected patches.
I replaced a spacedesigner reverb with an reverb outside the system, it's processed from the interface. Same with a chorus.
I tested a newer MacbookPro retina, that was not better than mine. The difference was, it produced little dropouts every 10 seconds.
Hopefuly there will be a update for 3.1 soon.
And be serious: Before 3.1 you could play a show without dropouts, but was it fun? Mainstage urgently needs better latency capabilities, generally.

MainStage continually crashes; CPU load issues

Love the MainStage interface design! However, it keeps randomly crashing and it sure is frustrating. My soft synth plug-ins are Ivory 1.01, Sonic Synth 2, Sample Tank 2.2. Are there any known compatibility issues with these? I am attempting to replace Rax as my host, but so far Mainstage is not handling the CPU load when running four plug-ins quite as well as Rax. Crashes have been reported to Apple. Any advice would be appreciated.

Well, of course NOW it won't crash! However, I am just using "Musical Typing" to test it because I don't have it hooked to my Controller (Alesis Q8.2) and Audio Interface (M-Audio 410). Maybe that means there is a glitch in the controller/interface hardware or software? It has always worked before with Rax, but when I hook everything up again using MainStage I will surely get it to crash, and post a crash log. Thanks!

High CPU & Memory issues - Excessive and unnecessary CPU usage in Firefox for Windows (see also questions1003966 & 998289)

I am using the latest version of Firefox, 32.0.1, on an HP Pavilion dv7-4141sa laptop computer, running Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit. There should be more than enough power here to run a browser without any problem, yet the computer is regularly being overloaded by the browser's resource usage.
I am currently measuring typical average CPU usage of 45% - with the browser minimised. That is to say, Firefox is not doing any browser jobs - it is not drawing on the screen - but it is using the most CPU of any process currently running. Why?
I am an ex-software engineer, and my understanding of current application development technology is limited, but I think I can say with some confidence that many techniques and software architectures exist that enable the suspension of program activity, or at least its reduction to a very low bare minimum, when the program is not actually carrying out its design function, which is in this case to draw pictures of website data on a screen.
There is a very serious problem here, one which means that I cannot run Firefox all the time, but have to kill it when I am not actively browsing, otherwise other applications cannot run to their full capacity. This is a great pity, because I have committed a lot of effort to making Firefox my primary web tool. It manages all my many bookmarks, contains my secure password manager (LastPass), manages my web security (via NoScript, AdBlock, and FlashBlock), just for a start.
Before any well-meaning moderators or other commenters start down the usual trail of "have you done this, tried that, disabled the other", I should point out that I have followed all the advice I can find, with no positive outcome. This computer is running a fresh installation of Windows, and a fresh installation of Firefox. At the moment I am running a new test Firefox profile.
The latest version of Adobe Flash, 14.0.0.179, is installed but disabled. When it is enabled and in use, Firefox's CPU usage seems high over longer periods, but overall there is little difference. It doesn't look as though the problem can be laid at Flash's door. A few other add-ins are installed, mainly those mentioned above, and Firefox is skinned with LavaFox v2-Green, but I have previously started from a clean installation, which has made little difference after an initial period during which things seemed to be better. Turning off or disabling various add-ons has made no discernible difference.
Just now I turned Flash on, and after a long period with Firefox minimised, Resource Monitor reported Firefox at 8% average CPU and FlashPlayerPlugin at 0.32%. While running a small video, RM reports FlashPlayerPlugin at about 45% and Firefox at 8%. After the video, Flash went back down to around 0.4%, and after a bit more browsing Firefox went to around 17% minimised. There seems little rhyme or reason here, except that Flash does not seem to be the culprit, although Firefox does seem to consume less when fewer tabs are actually active, as you might expect. I just refreshed more than a dozen tabs, and now Firefox is at 30%, but still not back up to the higher figures. Weird.
The CPU usage does vary a lot around the average, but 30% is still a lot for a program that shouldn't be doing anything above the minimum status maintenance, and still puts it at the top of my Top Process Monitor list. (Right now it's gone back up to 45%, without my using it in any way).
I have Telemetry turned on, so presumably Mozilla is recording some of the relevant data.
This is a very serious fault, which is more or less reproducible and which a lot of people seem to be experiencing. Probably more people have it than realise, because most users will not know anything other than that their computer slows down for some non-obvious reason; they may just think it's something to do with the computer itself, not knowing how to use the Resource Monitor and interpret the results.
Oddly, the problem does not seem to occur when running Firefox under Linux Mint 17, where the response is snappy and the CPU usage ostensibly low; I am going to look at this in more detail shortly.
I am not posting here for advice, but for information and as a form of bug report which hopefully other users will see. It will hopefully spare them a lot of effort and time in trying a lot of recommended "solutions" which will not work. The problem is inherent in the software, and can be solved only by Mozilla.
I am willing to supply any diagnostic data requested; as I said above, I have also turned on "Telemetry". However, I will not be trying out any more reinstallation/new-profile/add-on disable-enable-delete cycles unless I am asked to for very specific reasons. Please do not suggest courses of action which have already been mentioned elsewhere on this forum. I have tried them all.
The situation is very disappointing, but I have confidence that the Firefox developers will pin down the fault eventually and engineer a satisfactory solution that makes it viable to leave Firefox open all the time. Even with that restriction, it's still far better than the alternatives.

I share jmward's frustration. This is not a bug report so much as a request for a badly needed feature, ie the ability to have Firefox be able to tell us which tabs on which windows are eating time so we can target them. There are some very poorly written web pages out there which just plain loop while making no updates or inconsequential updates on the page.
This is not a OS problem; jmward runs Windows and I run Linux but we have the same issue. It is not a question of Firefox plugins or extensions, or even viruses; I have a new, clean Linux install but have the same problem on both my regular Firefox AND on a FRESH install of the latest Firefox (35.0.1) which has *NO* non-default plugins or extensions.
Here is an example of a web page which will eat 100% of one CPU's time:
http://patch.com/massachusetts/arlington/arlington-woman-allegedly-attacks-neighbor-snow-blower-0
I will attach 3 images to back up my claim. All of the images show my dark blue system monitor (gkrellm) superimposed on the web page. The top graph shows CPU time. I have 4 CPUs in my machine, so 25% means the web page is eating 100% of one CPU equivalent.
The first image shows the load of the offending page with elevated CPU usage along with the download net activity on eth0, but the CPU activity does not stop when the download activity is over.
The second images show the steady state 100% CPU equivalent of this page just sitting there apparently doing nothing. It IS, however, doing at least two different things. I know from my regular Firefox where I have "Remove It Permanently" installed that if I remove the the little weather indicator in the upper right of the offending page that CPU utilization drops to about 40% of one CPU equivalent. If I use RIP to remove everything else right down to a bare screen that 40% utilization stays until I delete the tab.
The third image shows the CPU utilization drop to zero when I delete the tab holding the offending page.
Now I will add a note here: If the offending page is NOT the top tab in a window then it stops eating time. The offender will also stop eating time if I minimize the window. However if I have another window up but leave the offender up on top in its window it continues to eat time even tho I am looking at another window. The offender will continue to eat time even if its window is completely covered by another window, and it will also eat time if I switch to another desktop.
I will often have half a dozen windows open, and there are many pages out there which will suck endless CPU time. Unless I want to open up a new tab on each window before I leave it there is likely to be some tab on top eating time uselessly. Get a couple of those going and Firefox becomes sluggish and can even stop responding for many seconds.
I guess I not only want to have Firefox tell us which tabs are eating time, but I would also like it if Firefox would stop giving CPU time to any tab which is not visible because it is covered by some other window and/or it is on a desktop which is currently not showing. If you can stop a tab's CPU usage by reason of tab-not-showing then you should also be able to stop its CPU usage when the window is covered or on the not-top desktop. Indeed is there any reason to not schedule absolute CPU utilization priority to the visible tab on the window with focus and give time to the other tabs only when the visible tab isn't using time?
My final thought on this is that I have had Firefox SO tied up sometimes that I swear their are web pages which are eating time even tho they are not the top tab. I regret that I do not have an example to show you. But Firefox grinds to a complete halt on a regular basis, and that is not acceptable. I am a programmer with long experience in multi-threaded programs so I *know* there is no reason you cannot do better. If there were another browser around which had the commitment to privacy which Firefox has I would probably switch out of shear annoyance. :-(

Internal hard drive replacement issue...(a bit wordy)

I am the second user of this white core duo MacBook - the boss's hand-me-down.
The original hard drive was almost full when I received the unit, so after using it for a while I decided to replace the internal drive. I have an external WD 320GB "My Passport" formatted for Mac use that works just fine - it keeps the Time Machine backups on one partition and a Carbon Copy Cloner image of the original internal drive on another.
I recently bought a WD 250GB Scorpio Blue (WD2500BPVT-00ZEST0), stuck it in the computer, formatted it (Mac OS Extended (Journaled), GUID) as a single partition and put the CCC image of the original drive on it. All was good. New drive booted and functioned as expected. Four days later it failed (question mark appearing on restart attempts). The disk utility applications in four different OS's failed to recognize the disk. Short story is WD sent me a replacement, but 320GB rather than the 250 - a WD3200BPVT-00ZEST0.
I eventually got the new drive partitioned and formatted and installed Snow Leopard from my update disk. All this transpired with the drive docked in an external USB dock.
During the OS install I took the opportunity to set it up in my name rather than my boss's name. (was this a mistake and the source of my problem, I wonder?)
I can boot from this newly built drive when it is docked, BUT NOT when it's installed internally in the laptop. It is recognized as an available start drive during restart, and I get the "apple", but the spinning wheel keeps on spinning without actually booting (or at least I get tired of waiting and the fan keeps spooling up - I eventually just turn the power off).
Is this drive, at 320Gb, too big for this laptop to use internally? (but the 250GB one worked)
Did I make a mistake in creating a different default ID (me rather than the boss) while installing the OS? Is the laptop "remembering" the user setup from the original small drive somehow and refusing to work with the new drive's new user?
This is my first "Mac" experience and I really like the way the OS treats me and the "look and feel" of the GUI, but this has been somewhat frustrating. (I WILL stick with it though, I plan on buying a new MBP next summer.)
Am I forever destined to live with the tiny original drive and be relegated to carrying around Passport drive to get most of my data files?
I now have three drives I can boot from, but I'd really like to have the big new one actually usable from inside the laptop rather than sitting in a dock (with all it's cables).
Thanks for reading this far.
Dave
Message was edited by: Dave Swinnard

Dave Swinnard wrote:
Booted from the SL update disk and ran disk utility to attempt to erase the existing data and repartition - no go. Attempts to erase, change partition size, repartition, verify, or repair all met with an error about being unable to unmount the drive.
OK, so push ahead...
He's dead, Jim.
The hard drive works outside of the laptop.
Your USB enclosure probably runs slower or something.
Has there been some (unknown to me) change in the specifications of 2.5" SATA hard drives since the original one was spec'd for this laptop that renders the newer ones unusable?
I prefer to have other people keep up with this stuff instead of me. I buy pretty much all of my equipment from OWC. If they sell it, it will work with your Mac. Even if you don't buy from OWC (but you should), if you buy the same model numbers that they sell, you should be fine. OWC doesn't sell this drive. For me, that would be a red flag.
(WD claims their "advanced formatting" is OS X compatible without the realignment required by certain versions of Windows, but is it possible this is a hardware related issue with the MacBook?)
OWC does sell the "regular formatting" version of this drive (WDGWD3200BEVT). Perhaps it only works in newer machines. The WD support page also mentioned that cloning can screw up the drive. I never recommend cloning except in some very specific circumstances. I do that not because I know something, but because I don't. I'm not entirely sure what those clone tools are doing underneath and if they've been tested on these new drives.
Maybe put it back into the enclosure and partition it again into a single volume. Make sure to use the GUID option. Don't do anything else with it. Put it back into the Mac and try again. If it fails again, get a different drive.

X230 CPU performance issue on AC power without battery

Dear Lenovo & Community Members,
I've recently received my X230 (model no.: 2320-24B), and discovered an issue related to the CPU performance of X230 on AC power. To make the long story short, my X230 is not running at full performance on AC power with battery detached. Accordingly, the X230 was shipped with setting at "Maximum Performance" under "Intel Speed Step" in BIOS by default on AC power.
Full Story:
My notebook is X230 (model 2320-24B) which comes with Ivy Bridge i7-3520M. I have a habit to detach the battery when it was fully charged, as I want to reduce the battery aging and my job does not always require me to work on the go. And by accident, I've discovered that X230 performs differently on AC power with and without battery. To be more precise, when my X230 runs on AC power with battery detached, it runs as slow as my Sandy Bridge i3-2100 desktop, which sounds very weird to me for a notebook costing me more than $1000.
Accordingly, I've benchmarked my X230 and here are the results, both with BIOS setting to "Maximum Performance" under AC Power:
AC power, without battery - WEI CPU Score: 4.9, WinRAR 4.2 benchmark: ~1,900kb/s, CPU @ 1.189Ghz on load
AC power, with battery - WEI CPU Score: 7.2, WinRAR 4.2 benchmark: ~4,000kb/s, CPU @ 3.6GHz on load
On battery power - WEI CPU: 7.2, WinRAR 4.2 benchmark: ~4,000kb/s, CPU @ 3.6GHz on load
Based on my tests, I’ve found that X230 is only performing at maximum performance when attached with its battery, and it is underperforming at its lowest clock speed when not being attached with the battery.
Conclusion:
I would like to ask if other owners of X230 in this community have the same problem (and are able to repeat my findings). I'm quite disappointed to find that my X230 is running even slower than my i3-2100 desktop, and it simply doesn't make sense for a notebook with removable battery yet unable to run at full performance without battery. I demand Lenovo to address this issue.
- Joseph (PhD Information Systems)
Edit: I'm already running the latest BIOS 1.12
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Hi slkong, welcome to the forum,
allow me to assume that you have the 65W AC power supply. If this is the case in order to reach full CPU performance you do need to have the battery attached, there are several threads on this within the boards concerning different systems and also this Knowledgebase article.
Hope this explains the situation for you.
Andy ______________________________________
Please remember to come back and mark the post that you feel solved your question as the solution, it earns the member + points
Did you find a post helpfull? You can thank the member by clicking on the star to the left awarding them Kudos Please add your type, model number and OS to your signature, it helps to help you. Forum Search Option T430 2347-G7U W8 x64, Yoga 10 HD+, Tablet 1838-2BG, T61p 6460-67G W7 x64, T43p 2668-G2G XP, T23 2647-9LG XP, plus a few more. FYI Unsolicited Personal Messages will be ignored.
Deutsche Community Comunidad en Español English Community Русскоязычное Сообщество
PepperonI blog

Strange CPU Performance issue Mac Pro, Logic 7.2.3......

Hi there,
I am experiencing a strange issue with Logic 7.2.3 and my Mac Pro.
I am running about 70 tracks in a tune I'm writing, with a lot of the EQ and dynamics processed on a Liquid Mix, but am experiencing a lot of CPU spikes, and drop outs in logic.
The System Performance meters are showing that one of the CPU cores is at full capacity, whilst the Activity Monitor is showing a total usage of about 40%.
http://www.ephexis.co.uk/images/cpu-grab.jpg
I have tried every combination of settings in the audio preferences, but cannot seems to get this track to play properly.
With 71 tracks, this machine is currently LESS powerful than the G5 that I have been working on until purchasing the Mac Pro.
I there anything else I can try? Are there any other means of controlling buffer size?
I have a suspicion that this may have something to do with the Plugin Delay Compensation set to 'All' - But without doing this, I cannot use the DSP effects of the liquid mix to work on a Bus! Very frustrating.
Many thanks for the help, any ideas at would be deeply appreciated,
Adam Ephexis
Mac Pro 2.66, 2GB, 1.5TB -=- MacBook Pro 2.16, 1GB, 100GB Mac OS X (10.4.8) Liquid Mix, Fireface 800, Apogee MiniDAC, Creamware A16 Ultra

Great!
Thanks for the tips guys.
I have tried to find an offending loop or part in the sequence, but cannot find anything at all thats causing the issue.
My suspiscion is that using the focusrite Liquid mix on a part, that is in turn going into a delay compensated bus, which has another Liquid mix plugin on it, is causing the issues. I use the total mix software in the fireface to perform the summing of the busses, which I think in turn may be causing the PDC to glitch a bit more.
Which is a bit annoying, as the mix in this tune is my best yet!
So I will attempt to remove the liquid mixes that are running in series in a chain, and see if thats the problem, but if that fails, time to re-format again!
I'll let you know how I get on in the next couple of days!
Thanks again,
Adam
Mac Pro 2.66, 2GB, 1.5TB -=- MacBook Pro 2.16, 1GB, 100GB Mac OS X (10.4.8) Logic 7.2.3 - Fireface 800, Focusrite Liquid Mix, Apogee MiniDAC, Creamware A16 Ultra

MS-7360 CPU replacement issues

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for