Processor Performance Question

I'm a new Mac user and there's something I don't get:
I bought this MacBook last week (2.0MHz) and its performance is awesome.
The thing is that I downloaded this processor temp checker and it says that the current frequency is 1.5MHz. Should I trust this? How could I double check?
Thanks.

Under this energy scheme the processor shuold step up and down in processor speed based on CPU demand. The 1.5GHz figure that is being reported is more than likely right. What you can do is run a processor intensive task and it should step up to 2GHz.

Similar Messages

Multi-Processor Performance

I would like to know what performance gains I might expect from moving our
weblogic application server to a multi-processor machine. Will 2 processors
handle twice server the load of the one processor machine?
Platform: Solaris 2.6
Weblogic Server: 4.5.1 SP7
NativeIO enabled
Weblogic Server is the only thing running on the machine.
Other Questions:
1. Is there anything that needs to be done(other than purchase another
license) for the weblogic server to work on a multi-processor system?
2. Will the weblogic server naturally take advantage both processors?
3. Will performance gains be uniform or will certain features gain more
from multiple processors?
Any links or suggestions are appreciated.
thanks,
Jeremy

Hi Jeremy -
If you are interested in modeling this before implementing it to determine
performance gains, you might want to check out our scalability assessment
services description, see attached. We are a BEA Technology Alliance Partner
that specializes in answering those specific performance questions, and have
done that for a number of clients in the past few weeks.
(See also eQASEsheet2.pdf) - this describes our capacity sizing tool that works
particularly well for Weblogic.
Todd
jeremy wrote:
I would like to know what performance gains I might expect from moving our
weblogic application server to a multi-processor machine. Will 2 processors
handle twice server the load of the one processor machine?
Platform: Solaris 2.6
Weblogic Server: 4.5.1 SP7
NativeIO enabled
Weblogic Server is the only thing running on the machine.
Other Questions:
1. Is there anything that needs to be done(other than purchase another
license) for the weblogic server to work on a multi-processor system?
2. Will the weblogic server naturally take advantage both processors?
3. Will performance gains be uniform or will certain features gain more
from multiple processors?
Any links or suggestions are appreciated.
thanks,
Jeremy--
Todd Wiseman
Dir/Business Development
eQASE LLC
(303)790-4242 x130
(303)790-2816
www.eqase.com
Java Performance & Scalability
[eQASE WLS Consulting Offerings.pdf]
[eQASEsheet2.pdf]

Infamous WHINE & lack of Processor Performance settings?

I have owned all of the Al books from the 1ghz 17" to the 1.67 17". I noticed the whine first on the 15" 1.25 AlBook 2 yrs ago. During that time we were able to throttle the Processor settings ourselves via the Energy Saver setting in System Preferences. As of the release of the 1.67 AlBooks that option is no longer available. When the Processor Setting was set to Automatic, the AlBooks ALAWYS had the WHINE & HISS from under the keyboard in the same spot the MacBook Pro's demonstrate today.
I called Apple Tech support this afternoon and spoke to a tier 2 "guy". I asked about Speedstep / Processor throttling and that option being taken away from us - his reply was that the new processors control that now and are able to go from reduced settings to highest in a fraction of a second never noticed by the user. WRONG ANSWER. What he's telling me is the Processor is ALWAYS set to AUTOMATIC and we can't do anything about that. While his answer may be true, these units have the same whine & hiss as the previous AlBooks when set to Automatic. THIS IS A PROBLEM.
I do want that option BACK on my portable!!! It was nice knowing that if I was only wanting to watch a DVD on battery power that I could ensure low power consumption by going to the Energy Saver and setting the processor performance to "Reduced" or to always have it set to Highest if so desired. I have never been able to set the processor performance to Automatic and NOT hear the whine & hiss.
I have the 2.0ghz MacBook Pro w/ 2g RAM. I do not hear the whine whie the unit is plugged in - but on batter power it's very very loud. I could be wrong, but past experiences have proven that the automatic setting which WE ALL HAVE BY DEFAULT on our MacBook Pro's will produce this unwanted noise. This is an amazing laptop. But I am feeling a bit gimped having those settings taken away.
PJ
MacBook Pro & Dual 2.7 G5 Mac OS X (10.4.5)

Since when does people saying something is so make it so? I'm curious; exactly how many people does it take to repeat some random statement before it automatically becomes fact?
And no, what I said was not meant as a flame. I just wanted to explain why it is hard to take the post seriously. Apparently you took what I said in the opposite way I'd intended. That being said, I did not mean it that way, so sorry for any offense.
Of course a support forum is going to be filled with posts about problems. What would you say is more likely to compel you to make a thread in a support forum, a problem (of any sort), or no real reason at all, just for kicks? Granted , when a product first comes out, there will be a few "I love my MBP!" type threads, but those go away after awhile. The complaints remain, because, let's face it, life is full of problems, and computers have more than their share as a whole.
The reason it's important that this is your first post is that is isn't very hard to imagine people registering to stir up controversy, goof around, or incite even more inflammatory responses (read: troll), when ANY new product is released. My post wasn't accusing you of any of this, merely trying to explain (beforehand) some responses you may get later on.
My only advice is that if you are unsatisfied with your machine, exchange it for a new one. If a noisy screen/processor/speaker is enough to make you reconsider your purchase entirely, then perhaps it would be wiser to wait until this particular issue has been ironed out on Apple's end (certainly not a terrible idea).
I do understand where you are coming from with the processor settings, by the way, and I do miss those settings at times, mostly because I'm a control freak. However, I am assuming that the MBP uses Intel's speed-step technology, and I don't know of a way to manipulate that, so it looks like that little feature is gone. It very well could be at the root of the noise issues, but at this point, that is only speculation.
MBP Mac OS X (10.4.5) 2GHz, 2GB RAM, 256MB ATi, 100GB/7200rpm HDD

No Automatic Processor Performance Setting

I am the new owner of a refurbished 17" Powerbook G4, 1.67GHZ, Dual Layer Superdrive. On my previous Powerbooks, in the energy saver control panel there always was the option for Automatic Processor Performance Setting, where one could set the processor to reduced, automatic or highest. On this new machine, there is no Automatic Processor Performance Setting! Any explanation?
Powerbook G4 17" 1.67GHZ Mac OS X (10.4.8) 2GB RAM, 160GB 128MB VRAM DL SuperDrive

Thanks again, I found the answer in the Developer notes here: http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/DeveloperNotes/Macintosh_CPUs-G4/17inchPowerBookG4/1Overview/chapter_2_section_6.html#//a ppleref/doc/uid/TP40003166-CH205-TPXREF115.
Powerbook G4 17" 1.67GHZ Mac OS X (10.4.8) 2GB RAM, 160GB 128MB VRAM

Simple performance question

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

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

BPM performance question

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

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

Processor Performance??

I read a discussion on mac gaming (http://discussions.info.apple.com/webx?128@@.68adc78a) It says that for certain games, an idea is to change something called processor performance. I am currently on my dads G4 Power mac as my imac has not arrived yet but in system preferences i cannot find anything about the processor (i even did the search using spotlight in system pref.) is this something that is only accessable on the G5 imac or do i find it somewhere else?
Thanks in advance
Adi

This option was added to the operating system for laptops. Setting the performace to lowest results in increased battery life and less heat. It only shows up for G5s and it's usually only changed once on a desktop system.
I'm waiting for "ultra-fastest" and "frackin-fastest" to be added to the drop down menu in 10.5

[help] can't find "processor performance" option in the energy saver

hello....i've just bought my new macbook white 2.0 Ghz. the Mac OS version is 10.5.6
*i can't find any option to change my processor performance* on the "energy saver preferences"....here is the screenshot
it's odd when compared to the screenshot from apple support page
http://km.support.apple.com/library/APPLE/APPLECAREALLGEOS/HT3092/HT30923b.jpg
please help me on this, i can't perform image editing well when the battery get low....thanks a lot

On PowerPC machines, there is an option specifically for Processor Performance, while on Intel machines, the only option is for the entire computer - Better Energy Savings, Normal, Better Performance, or Custom. These can be selected for both on power adapter and battery and affect not only the processor, but also the display, sleep, and hard drive.
On 10.5.6, part of the update removed the option to change power settings from the menu bar drop-down menu - perhaps that is what you are looking at.

"Processor performance" preference change not taking?

I'm used to keeping my "processor performance" at "reduced" most of the time, unless I'm doing something cpu-intensive like encoding. Lately I've noticed that changing from "reduced" to "highest" (in preferences / energy saver / options) has no affect. (I can tell because my fans don't ramp up as they do when the processor is being taxed.)
Anyone else experience this?

NO, but I can speculate why. The power is more evenly distributed, like the PRAM, NVRAM. It really makes sense spreading the power around like OSx does by default.I think your new method is better for your system over the long hall.'''
Peace,
Ray

Processor Performance with Battery

Hi All,
When using the battery, is your processor speed / performance capped at all?
I was playing with iDVD the other day on battery and when the app was rendering the menus in real-time I noticed a significant stuttering... I havent tried with main power yet, but would of thought my spec machine could handle it...
Any thoughts?

When using the battery, is your processor speed / performance capped at all?
Check in System Preferences -> Energy Saver. Next to "Settings for" choose "Battery" in the drop-down menu. Then click on the Options tab. Towards the bottom there should be a Processor Performance setting, which by default is (at least for other notebooks) set to "Reduced."
Changing that to "Highest" is a good option if you're doing work that requires the best possible processor performance.
And there are other options in the Energy Saver preferences that you might want to take a look at while you're there. Just keep in mind that anything you change in the Battery sections will also affect battery life.
You can also choose some basic Energy Saver settings from a menu when you click on the battery icon in your menubar.
Note that I'm still using a PowerBook and can't check this on a MacBook Pro... yet. (Tomorrow I'll be able to. ;-))

Swing performance question: CPU-bound

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

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

Xcontrol: performance question (again)

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

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

MBP with 27" Display performance question

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

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

Editing stills with motion effects, performance questions.

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

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

Lion Performance Question

My wife's MacBook Pro has the 2.26 GHz Core 2 Duo with 4 GB of RAM. It currently runs Snow Leopard. We've been using MobileMe to sync the calendar and address book with her iPhone, but that is going away. So if I upgrade the MS Office and VMWare Fusion, we can upgrade to Lion.
My question is whether Lion's performance is adequate on the 2.26 GHz Core 2 Duo processor, because that CPU is listed as the minimum CPU for Lion. Snow Leopard runs well and I don't want to upgrade and lose performance. Thanks in advance.

A Core 2 Duo is the minimum processor but not the actual one that's in your computer. It's quite sufficient for Lion. After all the first C2Ds ran at 2.0 GHz and are not nearly as fast as yours. Of greater importance is RAM. 2 GBs is the minimum, but 4 GBs would be much better. More if possible since you also run Fusion.

Processor Performance Question

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for