My Quad-Core can't handle CS3

I can't seem to run simultaneous Adobe programs - I typically have InDesign and/or Photoshop and Illustrator open simultaneously. I used to be able to multitask on my previous work PC (it was old and lagging but it let me use multiple programs). Work have recently upgraded me to a Quad-Core (specs at the end of post) and I am having troubles like never before.
Some examples off the top of my head include:
- The other day after a reboot, I went to start a new document in Photoshop and some of the fields/drop down menu was missing. InDesign was open at this stage
- Went to open a psd file from File>Open Recent and when I clicked on my psd file and hit open, Photoshop crashed without any error messages
- Tried opening Illustrator and the yellow starter window popped up and then nothing happened, the program didn't fully launch. So I went to my task manager and it didn't appear in there either. So I clicked it again and this happened 2-3 more times
- Tried to 'Edit original' in InDesign (right click on image) which would typically launch in Photoshop - it didn't launch
The only way I have resolved these issues are by rebooting my PC which is a royal pain.
My new PC's specs are:
- Dual Quad-Core 3GHZ processor (This was recommended by Adobe)
- 4GB RAM
- 768MB video card
- Windows XP w/Service Pack 3 (I saw a thread which said SP3 doesn't create any issues for CS3)
Does anyone have an idea of why this is happening? Any help would be most appreciated...
Tara.

I have a system with similar specs, but Vista 32-bit SP1 without any of the problems you are seeing.
How big is your paging file? I would try to force a paging file size of between 9 and 12 gigabytes as opposed to letting XP "automatically" handle that. (BTW, you do know that although you may have 4 GB or real memory on your system, only 3 gigabytes of that will really be available due to your video card, BIOS, and memory-mapped I/O requirements!)
If that doesn't work, what happens if you "roll back" SP3?
- Dov

Similar Messages

Can my mid '12 MacPro 3.2 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon handle Final Cut Pro X?

Thanks in advance for your help!
Model Name: Mac Pro
Model Identifier: MacPro5,1
Processor Name: Quad-Core Intel Xeon
Processor Speed: 3.2 GHz
Number of Processors: 1
Total Number of Cores: 4
L2 Cache (per Core): 256 KB
L3 Cache: 8 MB
Memory: 6 GB
Processor Interconnect Speed: 4.8 GT/s
Boot ROM Version: MP51.007F.B03
SMC Version (system): 1.39f11
SMC Version (processor tray): 1.39f11
ATI Radeon HD 5770:
Chipset Model: ATI Radeon HD 5770
Type: GPU
Bus: PCIe
Slot: Slot-1
PCIe Lane Width: x16
VRAM (Total): 1024 MB
Vendor: ATI (0x1002)
Device ID: 0xXXXX
Revision ID: 0x0000
ROM Revision: 113-C0160C-180
EFI Driver Version: 01.00.436
Displays: P191W:
Resolution: 1440 x 900 @ 60 Hz
Pixel Depth: 32-Bit Color (ARGB8888)
Main Display: Yes
Mirror: Off
Online: Yes
Rotation: Supported
Macintosh HD:
Available: 829.06 GB (829,058,117,632 bytes)
Capacity: 999.35 GB (999,345,127,424 bytes)
Mount Point: /
File System: Journaled HFS+
Writable: Yes
Ignore Ownership: No
BSD Name: diskXXX
Physical Drive:
Media Name: WDC WD1001FALS-XXXXXX Media
Medium Type: Rotational
Protocol: SATA
Internal: Yes
Partition Map Type: GPT (GUID Partition Table)
S.M.A.R.T. Status: Verified

Most don't know this...
If your Blue-Ray video is under 30 minutes, you can burn it to DVD disc using a DVD burner. I haven't had any problems playing these discs in a Blue-Ray player. The quality is the same as burning to a Blue-Ray disc.
First I make a disc image and open that in the VLC player to check the quality... after that... burn to disc.
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/download-macosx.html

Quad Core or Eight Core?

I have a G5 PowerPC Dual 2.0 and wanting to upgrade to a MacPro. My question is should I buy a Quad-Core or 8-Core? I could purchase a 2.66 Quad-Core "Nehalem" MacPro which is 800.00 less money than the 8-Core. Who benefits from 8 cores? I run Lightroom & Photoshop CS4 and primarily use the computer for photography, I occasionally render video but that is not very often. I also could look at the 2008 MacPro's but I have been told the "Nehalem" processors are a big improvement. My thought was this.....if the software does not take advantage of the extra "core" technology then going from 2.26 to 2.66 would be a good speed bump. Any advise is greatly appreciated........
Thanks in advance,
Kevin

Well I'd like to clarify a few things...
I remain very, very happy with my purchase. I have the latest version of Final Cut Studio on my Dual-Quad Mac. I am presently learning Motion, which ought to give Adobe's After Effects a good run for its money. I have been using After Effects extensively at work, where I work on a Pee Cee (A Dell XPS 600 that is about five years old and has 4GB of system RAM out of which the applications tend to see a maximum of 2GB).
I remain committed to the concept of buying as much processor as one can possibly afford, despite Joerollerblade's comments. He's correct in that spending the extra money for a slight processor increase is expensive. But he's not valuing his time as a professional. If he saves just one hour a day in processing time for his workflow, he's paying off the processor cost pretty quickly, assuming he is charging a professional rate.
As to Final Cut Pro, Apple's applications are written under the Cocoa framework and take advantage of Snow Leopard's Grand Central Dispatch for sending multiple threads to multiple processors. Thus, the more processors you have, the faster the application will work for processor-intensive tasks.
Now for some clarification.
Adobe's applications are all written under the Carbon API. Apple, when they released OS X in 2000 told developers that Cocoa was the way they ought to put together their applications and that Carbon was a transitional API to help them get from Apple's earlier System Software to the new Unix-based OS X. Apple has continued support for Carbon in order to support infrequently-updated legacy applications. We're talking applications like Leister Productions' Reunion (though I note they have recently updated their software to version 9, which supports Snow Leopard). Back in 2000, Adobe released Photoshop 6. There have been five releases of Photoshop since, which works out to a new release every two years. Surely, the folks at Adobe can develop for a new API in 9 years.
Carbon applications cannot take advantage of Apple's Grand Central Dispatch in Snow Leopard, so what Adobe has to do is detect and code for multiple processors and multiple cores in their application the hard way. And Adobe's programmers (as talented as they are) can hardly be expected to write code for eight processor cores when most computers out there have no more than four (and many have only two). Apple has just released its first all-in-one Mac with four cores at a very attractive price point. The way computers will get faster in the future is to add more cores.
But Adobe is sticking with Old Skool.They're essentially stuck in code that worked under System 8 and 9. Photoshop 11 (CS4) for Windows runs in 64-bit but, on the Mac, it's still a 32-bit application and that is probably because it's trapped in Carbon (kind of like how Jabba the Hut encased Han Solo). Frankly, it's time for Adobe to come out of the cold and have a nice, steaming hot cuppa Cocoa.
So, if we're assuming Adobe applications, does the Eight-Core Nehalem system give you advantages?
I read the review of Apple's new Quad and Eight-Core Nehalems in Macworld and they tested the two computers using their "Speedmark" test. The stock Eight-Core comes in with a Speedmark rating of 343 to the Quad-Core's rating of 348. Macworld explained that raw processor speed alone seems to place the Quad ahead of the Eight because:
"Many applications have a difficult time using even four processors efficiently, the advantage of having eight was not apparent in most of the application tests that make up our Speedmark benchmark test suite. In fact, the new eight-core system posted a lower Speedmark score than the quad-core system, and bested it in just one test—Cinema 4D, where it posted a 28 percent faster time."
I'm betting Adobe's Photoshop was one of those applications. Since the stock Eight-Core Mac Pro runs 15% slower than the stock Quad-Core, it's the raw processor speed that gave it the bump in performance over the Eight-Core. That is reason enough to upgrade the Eight-Core system's processor. The second reason why it's a good idea to get the more expensive computer is RAM.
The Quad-Core Mac Pro has slots for a maximum of 8GB of 1,066MHz DDR3 SDRAM modules. The Eight-Core can fit 32GB. That's eight times as much RAM in the more expensive computer, which will lend itself to a longer life. If you are using Photoshop to make really large images or you are using Photoshop with Adobe's suite of applications that include Illustrator and InDesign and you need to keep all of these applications open so that you can quickly modify images to suit your publication, 32GB of system RAM will come in handy as time goes on.
My current system has 8 GB installed in it by Apple. That's as much as you can fit into the Quad-Core and I'm all set for another 8GB as the demands of my software increase (which they will).
To jthunders particular question, I have Final Cut Studio on my system. I am running Leopard and not Snow Leopard and this is because Intuit's Quicken 2007 will not run on Snow Leopard. When Intuit finally updates their software, I shall upgrade my OS (assuming I do not have any current projects running and assuming I have a complete clone of my boot drive with a good installation). I routinely have both Motion and Final Cut Pro open at the same time and have had Motion, Final Cut Pro and Color open at the same time for a stretch. I was hitting my hard drive for extra RAM, but the applications handled what was needed with no problems. I contrast that to being at work on the Pee Cee running Windows XP Pro, Adobe's Premiere Pro 1.5 and After Effects 6.5. If I open up Premiere Pro and then open up AE to do something quick, Premiere slows to a crawl until it collects enough memory to get done. Typically, I need to exit Premiere Pro in order to free up enough RAM for the system to get out of its own way when I'm working on anything complex. I'm editing in NTSC (Standard Definition) in Premiere Pro and AE. I can easily work on HD video in Motion and Final Cut Pro.
Back at the beginning of March, Macworld quoted Envisioneering Group's Richard Doherty:
"Apple’s decision to upgrade the Mac Pro falls in line with the growing adoption of high-definition video. Apple is delivering all the processing power it can get for users to edit real-time HD video through the upgraded Mac Pro workstations."
So if all jthunders intends on doing is SD video, he's probably fine with what he has. But if he intends to move forward with HD video on his system, the Mac Pro line (and arguably the new Quad-core iMac) will handle the processing requirements of HD projects.
I would mention one caveat here. Mac Pros can take expansion cards and, if you want to edit HD video, you're going to need a RAID array to play back HD. The only way you can play back uncompressed HD on an iMac is by connecting a RAID array to the built-in Firewire 800 port on the iMac. You cannot choose SAS or SCSI or a Fibre Channel solution on an iMac for video.

Quad core help

hi i bought the msi 975x platinum but im not to sure if it supports quad core i read on the site it did but on other sites it says it isnt im so confused with it all if this mother board dosent support quad core can some one tell me one that is quad core compatible and preferbly out the box compatible im too scared to install a new bios on it i be too scared il mess it up .
thanks alot for your help guys

Quote from: Maesus on 02-January-07, 12:06:22
definity, is your 975x Platinum a "Power Up Edition" ? besure you have this power up edition to support Quad Core.
yeh it is thanks, i just need to find a psu that has the right ampage and wattage budget is about 170 british pounds (sterling)

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.....

CS3 + Win 7 64 + Quad Core = Rendering nightmare

I really need some help here.
I installed Win 7 Ultimate 64 with 8 GB ram and a Q6600 quad core processor. I have a WD Caviar black 7200 RPM HD with 32 meg buffer as my OS drive and two WD 7200 160 GB HDs in RAID 0 as a video drive. Im also using a EVGA GTX275 Nvidia card with 868MB RAM and the latest driver.
I have some serious concerns about Premiere Pro CS3s abiltity to render in Win7.
Here is the video I am attempting to render. I am making a Star Wars type intro with rolling text. I have two rolling text titles (each on their own layer) over a starfield video (on its own layer) that is being held on the INPOINT (the star field is). One rolling title starts where the other ends in order to give the effect of one long rolling title off to the far distance.
When I render this....and while watching my CPU Usage gadget, all four cores peg at 100%. Thats good. However, the render takes forever..and crawls. Sometimes it ticks off one frame per second. To make a segment that runs about 1min 30secs, its takes a good 8-10 mins to render. All the while, the four cores show 100%.
What is the problem? Ive tried to defrag. I tried to turn off Aero. Ive run it AS ADMINISTRATOR. Ive run CS3 in XP SP2 mode etc. Nothing. There is no way it can be this slow to render that. Overall, I think I see slow renders in other areas too. And the previews themselves, are choppy.
Tell me there is a fix or a patch or something. This is ridiculous.

Thanks for the input. I ran it again.
TeachDJs PC,   Personal or Computer ID
MSI, Computer Manufacturer
MS-7350,   Computer Model
103.2, secs Total Benchmark Time
6.2, secs AVI Encoding Time
62, secs MPEG Elapsed Time
35, secs Rendering Time
Intel,    CPU Manufacturer
QX6850,    CPU Model
3.00,    GHz CPU speed
1,    Number of CPU chips
4,    Total Number of Cores
8,    GB RAM
4.2.1,    APP Version PPBM4 DV
Win 7 64,    OSVersion
SATA,    OS Disk Interface
640,    GB OS Disk Capacity
7200,    OS Disk Speed
SATA,    Project Disk Interface
160x2 R0,    GB Project Disk Capacity
7200,    Project Disk Speed
SATA,    Preview Disk Interface
160x2 R0,    GB Preview Disk Capacity
7200,    Preview Disk Speed
Project Disk,    Output Disk Interface
Project Disk,    GB Output Disk Capacity
Project Disk,    Output Disk Speed
1xEvga Nvidia GTZ 275 896 MB RAM,
Neither of my disks are at or above 70% fill capacity. I am not using compression or indexing on either drive. They are turned off.

Installing CS3 on a Quad core with Raid 5

I recently bought a new computer and tried installing CS3 Master collection on it and I'm having some problems.
The new computer has an AMD quad core processor, 4GB of ram, 3 hard drives set up in a RAID 5, and a high end Nvidia graphics card. I'm using Windows XP Pro 32bit for an OS. I've already updated all drivers for everything and there are no hardware conflicts.
When I start Photoshop, it stops responding as soon as the Photoshop window opens. It doesn't even bring up the activation screen. When I try Illustrator, In Design or anything else, I don't even get the window to open. If I leave it for 5 minutes or so, it eventually gives me an error stating I have a license and activation issue. Since I can't even get an activation screen to input a license key, I can't even try to fix it. I've already tried uninstalling and reinstalling twice on this computer.
Does anyone have any suggestions for what is causing CS3 to not work correctly and/or how to fix it?
Thanks for any help.
~N

Hi Nathan,
I do have exactly the same problem on dual Xeon with RAID 5. The culprit is RAID 5, but I did not found any solution yet. Did you?
I had an identical issue when previously installed CS2 on the same machine (i.e. with RAID 5) but only with Acrobat, and with some updates from Adobe the problem was solved.
If you find any solution for the problem, please let me know ([email protected]). Thanks! Dani

New Quad-Core Computer with Vista64, 8gb ram ; Should I install CS3 or CS4?

Hello Friends,
I have been reading the forum trying to gain foresight before I spend very limited cash for hardware and software.
On Black Friday eve, I spent the night waiting at Best Buy to get the door-buster-deal on an HP desktop with AMD 9500 quad-core, 8gb ddr2 800MHz ram, Windows Vista 64 Home Premium, 760gb hard drive (7200rpm, ESATA 3.0gb transfer), second internal capture drive 500gb(7200rpm ESATA 3.0gb transfer), 1 TB external storage. This machine is only for my photography and video editing. I do wedding photography.
I have photoshop CS3 full version, so I can upgrade to CS4 Creative Suite for $1,100.00. I can also buy a full version copy of CS3 Creative Suite for $500.00 new in the box with all manuals.
With all the complaints about CS4, would I be better off buying CS3? Is CS4 worth $600 more? Have all the bugs been worked out of CS3?
I can upgrade 3 months after they release CS 5 for the $600 and skip some of the heart ache?
Please tell me what you think?
Jeffrey

Any option (CS3, CS4 or waiting for CS5 in 16-18 months) are all logical options for various reasons.
For you though, you might get the best mileage out of CS4, as there are certain advantages when running on Vista 64 (versus CS3, for which very little was done to take advantage of the extra features of Vista 64). In particular, Photoshop will run a 64-bit app on Vista 64. Premiere Pro also has some additional functionality on Vista 64.
CS5 should probably bring more full-fledged 64-bit apps, and better features in general (or at least one would hope). but it's not likely to be released or announced even until Q1 2010.

Can it run quad core

Hey, just got my MSI K9A2 CF-F and im wondering if it could handle AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition or any other quad core. best regards Johannes

Quote from: elefantpung on 22-June-10, 02:44:15
just 1 last thing is this motherboard any good for OC?
The V1 was not. I can't comment on the V2 version of the board, however.

Can InDesign take advantage of quad core processors?

I've been having trouble importing a large excel table in InDesign CS3 on windows 7, and found that indesign was only using 1 of the 4 cores of my processor, maxing it out and crashing because of it. So my question is, is there a way to make CS3 use all 4 cores, or failing this, does InDesign CS6 use quad cores?
Thanks for any help on this.

I installed InDesign CS6 trial, but this problem still persists. I import the file (about a 14000 line excel table, with formatting (this is required for what I'm doing)), but it only uses 1 core of the processor. Only 25% of what it could be using to do this. Photoshop cs3,4,5,6 use all quad cores and flys!
Anyone know how I can get this to work please? I'll try anything that might help.
ps I can't import without formating as I need some items to be styled so I can do a find and replace on them, to add indexing elements later.

Can I install Snow Leopard on a MacBook Pro 2.0GHz quad-core Intel i7?

I need to reformat my MacBook Pro 2.0GHz quad-core Intel i7 with OS X Lion with Snow Leopard in order to install Final Cut Pro Studio 2. Does anyone know if this can be done? Thanks in advance!!!

Hi z,
Contact Apple and ask them for the install disc that would have shipped with your machine if Lion had not been released. Others have been successful in obtaining the disc and installing SL.

I recently bought two iMac quad core i5 processor speed 2.5 Ghz. Every time I use Air Drop and I send a file from one iMac to the other, a black curtain drops and I am asked to restart the computer!!! What can I do?

I recently bought two iMac quad core i5 processor speed 2.5 Ghz. Every time I use Air Drop and I send a file from one iMac to the other, a black curtain drops and I am asked to restart the computer!!! What can I do?

That's a kernel panic and indicates some sort of problem either with the computer's hardware or software. Visit The XLab FAQs and read the FAQ on diagnosing kernel panics. It would help to post the panic log: Mac OS X- How to log a kernel panic.
Meanwhile, try booting the computers into Safe Mode then restarting normally. If this is simply a disk repair or cache file problem then this may fix it.
You can also try creating a new admin account on each computer then booting into the new account. This would help determine if the problem is related to a bad file in the user accounts.

Hi...m using a mac pro quad core.....its not booting up...i can only see the apple logo and a circle loading...could not get into the login screen

hi...m using a mac pro quad core.....its not booting up...i can only see the apple logo and a circle loading...could not get into the login screen...any suggestions please.....m in the middle of a project and now i have got this one
regards,
v.s.bharan

Welcome to Apple Discussions!
Do you keep your data backed up?
If not, you should always do so*:
http://www.macmaps.com/backup.html
You never know when a hard drive or a directory might go bad. Having a bootable clone is a must.
That link also shows you some tools you can use to recover data.
If you aren't backed up, try buying those tools first, before attempting to repair the directory.
Directory issues can be fixed with these tools*:
http://www.macmaps.com/directoryfaq.html

Can someone tell me how to fix this error in 10.4.11 on a G5 Quad Core 2.5GHz Tower...A valid video device could not be found for playback. [-70017]

Can someone tell me how to fix this error in 10.4.11 on a G5 Quad Core 2.5GHz Tower...A valid video device could not be found for playback. [-70017]

That's an error reported from DVD Player I believe...
kDVDErrorMissingGraphicsDevice = -70017, // A valid graphics device is not available.
There's some conjecture it has to do with HDCP, or Video Card problems, but the only 2 cures/fixes I found were Software related, one was cured by updating the OS, another by replacing the Video kexts.
I think this error also shows up if trying to use DVD player in Safe Mode, (too much research isn't good! ).
At the Apple Icon at top left>About this Mac.
Then click on More Info>Hardware>Graphics/Displays and report like this...
NVIDIA GeForce 7800GT:
Chipset Model:          GeForce 7800GT
Type:          Display
Bus:          PCI
Slot:          SLOT-1
VRAM (Total):          256 MB
Vendor:          nVIDIA (0x10de)
Device ID:          0x0092
Revision ID:          0x00a1
ROM Revision:          2152.2
Displays:
VGA Display:
Resolution:          1920 x 1080 @ 60 Hz
Depth:          32-bit Color
Core Image:          Supported
Main Display:          Yes
Mirror:          Off
Online:          Yes
Quartz Extreme:          Supported
Display:
Status:          No display connected
Can't think of much to try at the moment, but perhaps reapplying the big 10.4.11 combo, Repair Permissions, & reboot would help, not sure.
The combo update for PowerPC-based Macs...
http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/macosx10411comboupdateppc.html

Can anyone tell which i7 quad core processor Macbook pro 15 inches has? i7-4800MQ or i7-4900HQ?

Can anyone tell which i7 quad core processor Macbook pro 15 inches has? i7-4800MQ or i7-4900HQ?
Thanks
Mahi

Information is not available.
http://www.everymac.com/systems/by_processor/intel-core-i7-macs.html

My Quad-Core can't handle CS3

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for