Performance decrease with xorg 1.6 and intel

i have a box with
gigabyte ga-8ig1000mk mainboard
intel 865G graphics
celeron 2.6 cpu
512 M ram
arch linux
x does not start with xorg 1.5/intel or xorg 1.6/intel (video memory related error message)
kde 4 performance with xorg 1.6/intel-legacy is noticably lower than with xorg 1.4/intel
glxgears in its default window size gives 460 fps with xorg 1.4/intel and 300 fps with xorg 1.6/intel-legacy
currently the only way to have xorg 1.4 is
IgnorePkg = xf86-video-intel
IgnorePkg = intel-dri
IgnorePkg = glproto
IgnorePkg = xcb-proto
IgnorePkg = libxcb
IgnorePkg = libx11
IgnorePkg = dri2proto
IgnorePkg = libdrm
IgnorePkg = mesa
IgnorePkg = libgl
IgnorePkg = libxdamage
IgnorePkg = damageproto
IgnorePkg = xcb-util
IgnorePkg = gtk2
IgnorePkg = pango
IgnorePkg = libthai
IgnorePkg = libxinerama
IgnorePkg = libxcursor
IgnorePkg = libxklavier
IgnorePkg = xkeyboard-config
IgnorePkg = libxi
IgnorePkg = libxext
IgnorePkg = libx11
IgnorePkg = libxcb
IgnorePkg = xcb-proto
IgnorePkg = xextproto
IgnorePkg = inputproto
IgnorePkg = cairo
IgnorePkg = libpng
IgnorePkg = pixman
IgnorePkg = xf86-input-keyboard
IgnorePkg = xf86-input-mouse
IgnorePkg = xf86-video-vesa
IgnorePkg = libfontenc
IgnorePkg = freetype2
IgnorePkg = fontsproto
IgnorePkg = libxfont
IgnorePkg = xproto
IgnorePkg = xorg-font-utils
IgnorePkg = xorg-fonts-encodings
IgnorePkg = xorg-fonts-alias
IgnorePkg = expat
IgnorePkg = fontconfig
IgnorePkg = xorg-fonts-100dpi
IgnorePkg = xorg-fonts-75dpi
IgnorePkg = libxau
IgnorePkg = libxdmcp
IgnorePkg = xcb-proto
IgnorePkg = libxcb
IgnorePkg = kbproto
IgnorePkg = inputproto
IgnorePkg = bigreqsproto
IgnorePkg = libx11
IgnorePkg = xextproto
IgnorePkg = libxext
IgnorePkg = libice
IgnorePkg = libsm
IgnorePkg = libxt
IgnorePkg = libxmu
IgnorePkg = libxpm
IgnorePkg = printproto
IgnorePkg = libxp
IgnorePkg = libxaw
IgnorePkg = xorg-res-utils
IgnorePkg = libxkbfile
IgnorePkg = libxkbui
IgnorePkg = xf86miscproto
IgnorePkg = libxxf86misc
IgnorePkg = xf86vidmodeproto
IgnorePkg = libxxf86vm
IgnorePkg = xcursor-themes
IgnorePkg = xorg-xkb-utils
IgnorePkg = xkeyboard-config
IgnorePkg = fontcacheproto
IgnorePkg = libxfontcache
IgnorePkg = libxi
IgnorePkg = liblbxutil
IgnorePkg = renderproto
IgnorePkg = libxrender
IgnorePkg = randrproto
IgnorePkg = libxrandr
IgnorePkg = trapproto
IgnorePkg = libxtrap
IgnorePkg = mcpp
IgnorePkg = xtrans
IgnorePkg = xorg-server-utils
IgnorePkg = xf86dgaproto
IgnorePkg = libxxf86dga
IgnorePkg = recordproto
IgnorePkg = libxtst
IgnorePkg = xineramaproto
IgnorePkg = libxinerama
IgnorePkg = videoproto
IgnorePkg = libxv
IgnorePkg = dmxproto
IgnorePkg = libdmx
IgnorePkg = libxft
IgnorePkg = xorg-utils
IgnorePkg = libdrm
IgnorePkg = xorg-fonts-misc
IgnorePkg = pixman
IgnorePkg = xbitmaps
IgnorePkg = xorg-server
IgnorePkg = xorg-twm
IgnorePkg = xorg-xauth
IgnorePkg = xorg-xinit
IgnorePkg = fixesproto
IgnorePkg = libxfixes
IgnorePkg = libxcursor
IgnorePkg = libpng
IgnorePkg = xorg-apps
IgnorePkg = xterm
i want a better solution
Last edited by ash (2009-04-19 22:48:49)

you do not need nearly as many packages on hold. Haven't logged into my 32-bit arch install for a month now, but I've maintained a xorg 1.4 install with this line just fine:
IgnorePkg = xf86-video-intel xf86-input-evdev xorg-server xorg-apps xorg-xkb-utils xorg-server-utils xorg-utils intel-dri synaptics libgl libdrm xorg-res-utils xf86driproto xf86-input-keyboard xkeyboard-config
That said, I expext to upgrade next time I use it (probably to play around with some fast boot). I would look into troubleshooting with the latest xorg and intel driver as it really should work, if I were you. I presume you have already tried starting x without a xorg.conf as a baseline test with those versions?

Similar Messages

JDev10g: General performance decrease with JClients like Oracle BC Browser

Hi,
I'm observing a significant performance decrease of JClient applications (homegrown and Oracle Business Components Browser)in JDev10g compared against JDev9i (9033)?
Can anyone confirm my observation?
Just create a default Dept-Emp business components package and start the Business components browser. Scroll to some data (it takes some time...) and resize the window (takes even more time)!
My guess: JDev9i-style data binding for JClients is simulated in JDev10g with ADF-Data-Binding?? My own application is a simple "recompile"-migration of a JDev9i project with JDev10g. Does this apply to Oracle Business Components Browser too?
My own application runs still faster with JDev9i!
What is the problem? Any hints are welcome!
Thanks,
Markus

Excellent Blog. Thank You
Small clarification on Step **6) Oracle Home Directory, ...a) Resize the Root Partition**
Ubuntu 11.10 has Gparted available as a Ubuntu software download, DONT use that while trying the above step, instead download the ISO file from http://sourceforge.net/projects/gparted/files/gparted-live-stable/ gparted-live-0.12.0-5.iso (124.6 MB)
Burn that ISO file on a Blank DVD, reboot the Ubuntu , during startup select Boot from DVD Option if not already selected. this will take to Boot Menu Options of Gparted Live then select the first menu option, and this allows to do further action such as Re-sizing .
and once you have chosen and executed step a) . do NOT run step b) also that is "Setup External Storage"
I hope this minor clarification can avoid some confusion
Regards
Madhusudhan Rao
Edited by: MadhusudhanRao on Mar 24, 2012 11:30 PM

SQL Server 2005 performance decreases with DB size while SQL Server 2012 is fine

Hi,
We have a C# windows service running that polls some files and inserts/updates some fields in database.
The service was tested on a local dev machine with SQL Server 2012 running and performance was quite decent with any number of records. Later on the service was moved to a test stage environment where SQL Server 2005 is installed. At that point database
was still empty and service was running just fine but later on, after some 500k records were written, performance problems came to light. After some more tests we've founds out that, basically, database operation performance in SQL Server 2005 decreases with
a direct correlation with the database size. Here are some testing results:
Run#
1
2
3
4
5
DB size (records)
520k
620k
720k
820k
920k
SQL Server 2005
TotalRunTime
25:25.1
32:25.4
38:27.3
42:50.5
43:51.8
Get1
00:18.3
00:18.9
00:20.1
00:20.1
00:19.3
Get2
01:13.4
01:17.9
01:21.0
01:21.2
01:17.5
Get3
01:19.5
01:24.6
01:28.4
01:29.3
01:24.8
Count1
00:19.9
00:18.7
00:17.9
00:18.7
00:19.1
Count2
00:44.5
00:45.7
00:45.9
00:47.0
00:46.0
Count3
00:21.7
00:21.7
00:21.7
00:22.3
00:22.3
Count4
00:23.6
00:23.9
00:23.9
00:24.9
00:24.5
Process1
03:10.6
03:15.4
03:14.7
03:21.5
03:19.6
Process2
17:08.7
23:35.7
28:53.8
32:58.3
34:46.9
Count5
00:02.3
00:02.3
00:02.3
00:02.3
00:02.1
Count6
00:01.6
00:01.6
00:01.6
00:01.7
00:01.7
Count7
00:01.9
00:01.9
00:01.7
00:02.0
00:02.0
Process3
00:02.0
00:01.8
00:01.8
00:01.8
00:01.8
SQL Server 2012
TotalRunTime
12:51.6
13:38.7
13:20.4
13:38.0
12:38.8
Get1
00:21.6
00:21.7
00:20.7
00:22.7
00:21.4
Get2
01:38.3
01:37.2
01:31.6
01:39.2
01:37.3
Get3
01:41.7
01:42.1
01:35.9
01:44.5
01:41.7
Count1
00:20.3
00:19.9
00:19.9
00:21.5
00:17.3
Count2
01:04.5
01:04.8
01:05.3
01:10.0
01:01.0
Count3
00:24.5
00:24.1
00:23.7
00:26.0
00:21.7
Count4
00:26.3
00:24.6
00:25.1
00:27.5
00:23.7
Process1
03:52.3
03:57.7
03:59.4
04:21.2
03:41.4
Process2
03:05.4
03:06.2
02:53.2
03:10.3
03:06.5
Count5
00:02.8
00:02.7
00:02.6
00:02.8
00:02.7
Count6
00:02.3
00:03.0
00:02.8
00:03.4
00:02.4
Count7
00:02.5
00:02.9
00:02.8
00:03.4
00:02.5
Process3
00:21.7
00:21.0
00:20.4
00:22.8
00:21.5
One more thing is that it's not Process2 table that constantly grows in size but is Process1 table, that gets almost 100k records each run.
After that SQL Server 2005 has also been installed on a dev machine just to test things and we got exactly the same results. Both SQL Server 2005 and 2012 instances are installed using default settings with no changes at all. The same goes for databases
created for the service.
So the question is - why are there such huge differences between performance of SQL Server 2005 and 2012? Maybe there are some settings that are set by default in SQL Server 2012 database that need to be set manually in 2005?
What else can I try to test? The main problem is that production SQL Server will be updated god-knows-when and we can't just wait for that.
Any suggestions/advices are more than welcome.

...One more thing is that it's not Process2 table that constantly grows in size but is
Process1 table, that gets almost 100k records each run....
Hi,
It is not clear to me what is that you are doing, but now we have a better understanding on ONE of your tables an it is obviously you will get worse result as the data become bigger. Actually your table look like a automatic build table by ORM like Entity
Framework, and it's DDL probably do not much your needs. For example if your select query is using a filter on the other column that [setID] then you have no index and the server probably have to scan the entire table in order to find the records that you
need.
Forum is a suitable place to seek advice about a specific system (as I mentioned before we are not familiar with your system), and it is more suitable for general questions. For example the fact that you have no index except the index on the column [setID]
can indicate a problem. Ultimately to optimize the system will need to investigate it more thoroughly (as it is no longer appropriate forum ... but we're not there yet). Another point is that now we can see that you are using [timestamp] column, an this
implies that your are using this column as a filter for selecting the data. If so, then maybe a better DDL will be to use clustered index on this column and if needed a nonclustered index on the [setID] if it is needed at all...
what is obviously is that next is to check if this DDL fit
your specific needs (as i mentioned before).
Next step is to understand what action do you do with this table. (1) what is your query which become slowly in a bigger data set. (2) Are you using ORM (object relational mapping, like Entity Framework
code first), and if so then which one.
[Personal Site] [Blog] [Facebook]

Adobe CS4 OpenGL issues with 10.6.2 and Intel GMA950 video card

I just upgraded to Adobe CS4 and in PS I cannot enable OpenGL. I'm running 10.6.2 on a Macbook with the Intel GMA950 video card.
I was wondering if 10.6.2 does not have the relevant drivers for CS4 to recognize this chipset or that since the video card is integrated (as opposed to a stand alone with the newer Macbooks) that Intel has not update the drivers? It ***** since I cannot use some functions inside PS without OpenGL.

Hello blue20 & welcome to discussions
1.) You can search these forums for the topic of:
Adobe CS4 GMA950
As an example, if you haven't already, in an effort to parse what's already been discussed.
2.) Have you looked at any of the Adobe forums:
http://forums.adobe.com/message/2356530
3.) How many fonts are you working with?
The general approach at this time is to ask if you've checked for any problematic fonts (all languages) with Apple's Font Book (look in the Applications folder). Find and remove all duplicates also.
Start there to be sure all fonts that are in play come out with a clean bill of health.
Don't hesisate to perform wholesale deletion of old and/or little used fonts - be skeptical of anything that has come from Office 2008, including those related to an Equation Editor installation.
By all means be sure any 3rd party apps AND plug-ins are Snow Leopard compatible.
An additional measure is to clear the existing font caches:
http://www.macworld.com/article/139383/2009/03/fontcacheclear.html
That said, 10.6.2 release notes have this to say about fonts:
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3874
Fonts fixes provided for:
• an issue with font spacing
• an issue in which some Fonts are missing
• font duplication issues
• an issue with some PostScript Type 1 fonts not working properly
Good luck in any case.

Performance Decrease with ComboBoxes

Memory consumption and bad performance decrease when closing and reopening panels containing ComboBoxes.
Context:
- Running localMode
- Jdev 9.0.3.1 DE
- Business Component Version 9.0.3.10.62
- jdk 1.3.1_02
Panel (within an JInternal frame) with some JUComboBoxes with LOV-Binding to ViewObjects, only with a few entries (2-20)
We observed, that the count of JUIteratorBindings encreases with every new Panel (re)open.
After closing the Internal Frame (including the Panel) the IteratorBindings of all ComboBoxes keep alive and a set of new ones are added to the PanelBinding when opening the (same) Panel once more.
Is it a bug?
Have one to remove the IteratorBindings explicitly?
Is there any configuration possibility, that the IteratorBindings die with the Panel?
Has anyone the same problem?
Roswitha Stepputtis

Yes, we experience similar problems. My suggestion would be to simply hide (setVisible(false)) your internal frames and reuse them when you open them again.
So, instead of dynamically re-creating your JInternalFrame instances, you keep a reference to them once they are created and reuse them each time they should be made visible. I think this will make your application more efficient as a whole.

Performance Problems with "For all Entries" and a big internal table

We have big Performance Problems with following Statement:
SELECT * FROM zeedmt_zmon INTO TABLE gt_zmon_help
FOR ALL ENTRIES IN gt_zmon_help
    WHERE
    status = 'IAI200' AND
    logdat IN gs_dat AND
    ztrack = gt_zmon_help-ztrack.
In the internal table gt_zmon_help are over 1000000 entries.
Anyone an Idea how to improve the Performance?
Thank you!

>
Matthias Weisensel wrote:
> We have big Performance Problems with following Statement:
>
>
SELECT * FROM zeedmt_zmon INTO TABLE gt_zmon_help
>   FOR ALL ENTRIES IN gt_zmon_help
>     WHERE
>     status = 'IAI200' AND
>     logdat IN gs_dat AND
>     ztrack = gt_zmon_help-ztrack.
>
> In the internal table gt_zmon_help are over 1000000 entries.
> Anyone an Idea how to improve the Performance?
>
> Thank you!
You can't expect miracles. With over a million entries in your itab any select is going to take a bit of time. Do you really need all these records in the itab? How many records is the select bringing back? I'm assuming that you have got and are using indexes on your ZEEDMT_ZMON table.
In this situation, I'd first of all try to think of another way of running the query and restricting the amount of data, but if this were not possible I'd just run it in the background and accept that it is going to take a long time.

Massive artifacts, redraw and performance problems: xorg 1.8 and Intel

Hi there.
Since the update to xorg-server 1.8 my intel GMA950 powered lap top is seriously acting up.
*Performance has dropped significantly, Games or compiz run slower than before
*Font drawing is sometimes garbled, sometimes not
*Some windows or parts of windows (sometimes only the decorations) show artifacts
*Drawing of fonts while typing is delayed by 1 or more characters sometimes
It might be related to this bug or the problem described in this thread.
Just look at this screenshot:
I tired moving xorg.conf, I tried running compiz with --indirect-rendering, I tried all kinds of options in xorg.conf and all but it just remains broken like this. Has anyone got similar problems and a solution?
Last edited by Shapeshifter (2010-06-28 15:07:21)

I've been having the same issue but not to the extent of the OP.
I read the man for intel
man intel
and added these three lines to my xorg.conf
Option "XvPreferOverlay" "false"
Option "SwapbuffersWait" "false"
Option "Tiling" "false" #{edit: after doing some testing I found tiling made no differnece so I ended up commenting it out}
The first option I added because the man says
The overlay
behaves incorrectly in the presence of compositing, but some
prefer it due to it syncing to vblank in the absence of com‐
positing
I use compiz ergo i have compositing and I noticed my video tearing and skipping sometimes. Seems to work fine now (more testing will be required)
The second option I added because the man says
Note that when enabled, this option can
adversely affect the framerate of applications that render
frames at less than refresh rate.
I have a hunch compiz probably isn't rendering at the refresh rate and also video would be rendered at less than my vert refresh of 60. So I disabled it.
The third and last option I added was because the man says
In most cases (especially for complex rendering),
tiling dramatically improves performance.
Well this may be a case where it doesn't and the posters above have noticed improvements. {edit: after doing some testing I found this made no differnece so I ended up commenting it out}
In the end moving windows around the screen do not tear anymore and my video is smoother. I enabled all three at once so it maybe that one or a combination of 2 or possibly all 3 resulted in change. I suspect I will do some more testing but hopefully this is a place to start fro some of you having this issue.
Last edited by George.Harmony (2010-07-11 21:21:17)

Performance Issues with 10.6.7 and External USB Drives

I've had a few performance issues come up with the latest 10.6.7 that seem to be related to external USB drives. I have a 2TB USB drive tha I have my iMovie content on this drive and after 10.6.7 update, iMovie is almost unusable. Finder even seems slow when browsing files on this drive as well. It seems like any access to the drive is delayed in all applications. Before the update, the performance was acceptable, but now it almost unusable. Most of the files on this drive are large dv files.
Anyone else experience this?

Matt,
If you want help, please start your own thread here:
http://discussions.apple.com/forum.jspa?forumID=1339&start=0
And if your previous thread you aren't getting sufficient help for your iPhone, post a new topic here:
http://discussions.apple.com/forum.jspa?forumID=1139
You'll get a wider audience, and won't confuse the original poster. Performance issues can be caused by numerous issues as outlined in my FAQ*
http://www.macmaps.com/Macosxspeed.html
If every person who had a performance issue posted to this thread, we'd never find a solution for the initial poster. Let's isolate each case one by one. It is NOT necessarily the same issue, even if the symptoms are the same. There are numerous contributing factors at work with computers, and if we don't isolate them, we'll never get to the root cause.

Running 9.0.1 Firefox. I get a msg from AVG that Firefox is using too much memory and then the computer (not just Firefox) shuts off. Running Win7 (64-bit) with 4 GB Mem and Intel i-5. Only 4-5 "normal" windows are open at the time this happens.

Right now Task manager Performance tab on Memory says: Total 3958; Cached mem 1588; Avail 2239; Free 722; Physical Mem 43% and this window is the only thing open. Kernel mem (MB) says Paged 179 and Nonpaged 80.
I can get you more info if you tell me what you need (and where to find it - I am 60 y.o. woman and this is not my forte :=)
Thanks,
sandy

If you want to reduce memory(60%) '''when firefox minimize[only in windows os] '''there is an easy old good trick:
type in the address bar '''about:config'''
then press the button '''i'll be careful i promise'''
then '''right-click''' anywhere in the list of preferences and choose '''new''' > '''boolean'''
then type in the open window '''config.trim_on_minimize'''
then click''' OK''', and in the next window select '''TRUE''' and click '''OK'''.
exit firefox and restart-it.
'''works only in windows os'''
see for more info :
[http://kb.mozillazine.org/About:config About:config]
[http://kb.mozillazine.org/Config.trim_on_minimize Config.trim on minimize]
thank you
Please mark "Solved" the answer that really solve the problem, to help others with a similar problem.

Performance bottleneck with 2.2.1 and 2008 R2 os VM's

Hi,
I have DL370 g6 with Oracle vm server 2.2.1 installed
*72 GB of Memory and 2 dual + quad core processor*
All VM's are installed on local disk ( 6 300 GB in Raid 5 )*
I have 2 nic connected to siwtch for lan traffic
We have 10 VM's with 2008 R2 OS on it.
The overall performance of these VM's is really horrible.
They are very very very slow
To install Databse on it takes 4 hours even though RAM is 6 GB for each VM
To restar the system it takes around 20 minutes .
Has anybody tried thiese many VM's on 1 server.
Is there any tool or any way i can see what is the issue or is there any bottlneck on the server .
2008 R2 is generally a resource hungry OS but still the overall performance is really horrible

hi,
hdparm -T /dev/cciss/c0d0 which is the drive gives
/dev/cciss/c0d0
Timing cached reads: 31088 MB in 1.99 seconds = 15595.54 MB/sec
HDIO_Drive_CMD(null) (wait for flush complete ) failed : Inappropriate ioctl for device
HDIO_Drive_CMD(null) (wait for flush complete ) failed : Inappropriate ioctl for device
hdparm -T /dev/cciss/c0d0p5 whichi is /OVS - it gives
/dev/cciss/c0d0p5
Timing cached reads: 30636 MB in 1.99 seconds = 15364.10 MB/sec
HDIO_Drive_CMD(null) (wait for flush complete ) failed : Inappropriate ioctl for device
HDIO_Drive_CMD(null) (wait for flush complete ) failed : Inappropriate ioctl for device
My all VM guests are windows 2008 R2 64 bit OS which is very new OS of windows.Oracle came up with New PV drivers for it and I suspect can that be a reason for all this resource bottleneck ???????????
For I/O test use :On the VM server
1) iostat
avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle
0.11 0.00 0.03 0.24 0.00 99.61
Device tps BLK_read/s Blk_wrtn/s
ciss/c0d0 - disk 41.90 186.32 26.05
cciss/c0d0p1-/boot 0.00 0.00 0.00
cciss/c0d0p2 - 0.00 0.00 0.00
cciss/c0d0p3- / 1.90 1.83 43.06
cciss/c0d0p4 0.00 0.00 0.00
cciss/c0d0p5 - /OVS 40.00 184.49 295.82
2) vmstat
swpd free buff cache
92 166632 94940 53444
3) sar
To display block I/O activity:
sar -b 3 100
Average : tps - 41.18 rtps - 7.17 wtps - 34.01 bread/s 188.99 bwrtn/s - 588.64
To display block I/O activity for each block device:
sar -d 3 100
Does this look ok .Is there any way to improve overall performance.Like enabling or disabling something .We are facing a very bad problem here with all the VM with 2008 R2 OS on it

Performance decrease with custom cell renderer

Hi,
Finally, I have my cell renderer working fine (it was simpler than I thought). Anyway, I'm suspecting something is not working quite well yet. When I try to reorder my colums (by dragging them) they move like slow motion. If I don't register my custom cell renderer, I can move my columns fine. Next is the code of my custom renderer.
class PriorityRenderer extends DefaultTableCellRenderer {
public Component getTableCellRendererComponent(
JTable table, Object value,     boolean isSelected,
boolean hasFocus, int row, int column) {
    if(value instanceof coloredValue) {
    coloredValue cv = (coloredValue)value;
    if(isSelected) this.setBackground(table.getSelectionBackground());
    else this.setBackground(cv.getbkColor());
    this.setForeground(cv.gettxColor());
    this.setText(value.toString());
    this.setOpaque(true);
    return this;
}All the cells of my JTable are "coloredValue"s. This is a little class with a String, two colors and some getter methods.
Can anyone giveme a hint ?
Thanks!!

OK! Now the performance problem is gone!! (I don't know why, I didn't touch a thing)
Thanks anyway

Recent trouble with a Billion 7100s and Intel Core 2 Duo

Hey folks,
I'm on a shared wireless network in my flat using a Dlink wireless router and Billion 7100s modem. This has been working fine for about 4 or 5 months on my iMac, but over the past week troubles have arisen.
Now, the Billion seems to randomly disconnect me. I can still contact the router, and see the router's page, but all attempts to browse the internet or view the modem completely fail.
I can solve this by hard restarting the modem, but after a seemingly random interval it disconnects me again.
What's odd is that it doesn't happen to any of the PCs on the network, and it works fine if I go through Windows on Parallels.
Anything to do with the recent iMac firmware updates, perhaps?
Any help would be appreciated immensely.

Hello grimskunk,
The Intel E6600 processor should be supported by BIOS v1.5 as well. A lot of users were using E6600 + P965 Platinum before BIOS v1.6 was available, so the problem is not your current BIOS version.
Please provide more information about your system. Read the >>Posting Guide<< to get an idea of what we need to know.
Have you cleared CMOS with main A/C power cable removed from PSU after assembling the system?

Performance boost with 10.5.3 and LP 7/multicore ?

There is a HUGE performance boost reported from LP8 users when updating to 10.5.3. They can run up to 40 percent more plugins on 4 and 8 core machines.
I wonder if it is due to the 10.5.3 update or the combination 8.0.2 and 10.5.3.
It would be nice to hear some reports from 7.2 users with 4/8 core Mac:s.
Logic has been optimized for only two cores too long, only been using 50 percent of each core on 4/8 core machines. Maybe 10.5.3 is a booster even for LP7 users?

Here's one person's experience with LP7 and 10.5.3:
http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=7305592#7305592
Disuye,
I've got a Mac Pro with LP 7.2.3 and OSX 10.5.2, and it runs pretty smoothly. I get the occasional core audio overload, but not enough to cause a concern.

Performance Problems with UI Element Tabstrip and IE

Hi,
I use the UI Element "Tabstrip" in a Java Web Dynpro Application. The application gets slower the more I jump from one tab to the next. All the other UI Elements (e.g. ComboBox, TextField) are affected, too.
A system trace on the Web AS seems to indicate that it is a client problem.
We are using the Internet Explorer 6.0.2900.2180 XP SP2 and the J2EE Engine 6.40.
It seems to be a problem with the Tabstrip element in combination with the IE (Firefox 3 works fine). We created a test application with only the tabstrip element, three tabs, and a combo box. After several clicks on the tabs, the test application gets slower...
Does anyone has had the same problem with the tabstrips, or anyone an idea what might be the reason??
Thanks,
Sabine

Open an OSS message (BC-WD-UR).
Armin

Performance decrease with flash animation/games

When I try to view embedded flash using firefox or safari, it seems to hog a ton of memory. It starts out at a reasonable ammount (usually ~300MB of Physical plus Virtual) but eventually it gets up to 1.39 GB (out of my 2.00 GB available). The whole system slows considerably and often crashes.
I have noticed that the same flash animations work fine on my windows based PC with only 1 GB of physical memory. I have a 256 MB graphics card along with 2 GB of memory and a fast processor. Is there a way I can pipeline the system more to use the graphics chip rather than the memory or any software that might prevent this issue?
Thank You

Make sure you have the latest versions of Adobe Flash Player Software.
Try running repair permissions from your HD and afterwards run +repair disk+ _from your software install DVD._

Performance decrease with xorg 1.6 and intel

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for