Testing 4x E5-4650s and 128GB RAM - tweaks for 32-core performance?

Howdy. I've got the following system:
4x E5-4650 eight core CPUs (32 cores/64 HTs total)
16x 8GB EEC RAM - 4 sticks per CPU
2x 512GB Samsung 840 Pro SSDs
5x 3TB Hitachi HDDs in RAID5
1x GTX 670 w/ 4GB RAM
Windows Server 2012
When I'm exporting 1080p from Premiere Pro CC with software encoding I'm getting really low CPU usage - around 4% usage, If I enable Mercury Engine it jumps to about 20%. Any tips or tricks?
*EDIT: I'm exporting from various sources and frame rates to 1080p H.264@50fps I'm happy to run some tests.

Just finished PPBM7 and got the following:
Disk I/O Time = 244s
Premiere disk write rate is 152.02MB/s
H.264 Encoding = 126s
MPE gain = 293/97 = 3
The disk I/O time is strange as I get the following with CrystalDiskMark:
While doing the PPBM disk test this is the disk activity reported:
It seems to average out at about 500MB/s according to the resource monitor but only is shown as 152MB/s? It also has the OS on it so that might be an issue. Here are the ATTO Benchmarks, which seem pretty on the mark for the specs:
I think there are definitely major changes needed to get better performance out of this system. I'm just running a few tests now and it seems that Windows 2012 is pretty shocking compared to WinSvr 2008: Supermicro X9QR7-TF+/X9QRi-F+ vs Supermicro X9QR7-TF+/X9QRi-F+ - Geekbench Browser
Having a look at the benchmarks for the 11TB RAID5 shows some amazingly bad performance - 11MB sequential write, 200KB/s random 4K write. I get better write speeds on my USB stick. Either CrystalDiskMark is screwy or the raid setup is totally broken. It's setup using the onboard LSI 2208 controller, which I though was pretty decent. I'm guessing since my disk is 92% full that really messes with performance:
ATTO gives clearer picture, with transfer sizes below 32KB being crippled to under 1MB/s:
But of course when I copy a single 40GB file from the RAID0 SSDs to the RAID5 HDDs I get this, which I'm totally ok with:
Anyway, the major issues is really that the CPU is really underutilised and only uses about 30%. It's over 80% on one of the NUMA Cores but only 25% on the others. Looks like this:
I suspect that Premiere Pro is only detecting 32 of the threads, not 64. In the Multiprocessing preferences in After Effects it only shows up as have 32 logical processors, not 64. Thinking I'm having the same issues as this guy (same mobo and processor): AnandTech | Trials of an Intel Quad Processor System: 4x E5-4650L from SuperMicro
Any help would be appreciated.

Similar Messages

How to find the current CPU and Memory (RAM) allocation for OMS and Reposit

Hi There,
How do I check the CPU and memory (RAM) allocation for the OMS and the Repository database? I'm following the "Oracle Enterprise Manager Grid Control Installation and Configuration Guide 10g Release 5 (10.2.0.5.0)" documentation and it says to ensure the following:
Table 3-1 CPU and Memory Allocation for Oracle Management Service
Deployment Size Host CPU/Host Physical Memory (RAM)/Host Total Recommended Space
Small (100 monitored targets) 1 1 (3 GHz) 2 GB 2 GB
***Table 3-2 CPU and Memory Allocation for Oracle Management Repository***
Deployment Size Host CPU/Host Physical Memory (RAM)/Host Total Recommended Space
Small (100 monitored targets) 1 1 (3 GHz) 2 GB 10 GB
Thanks,
J

Hi J,
This is the minimum requirement. However It will work fine.
Also read below article on "Oracle Enterprise Manager Grid Control Architecture for Very Large Sites"
http://www.oracle.com/technology/pub/articles/havewala-gridcontrol.html
For GRID HA solution implementation please read :
http://www.oracle.com/technology/deploy/availability/pdf/MAA_WP_10gR2_EnterpriseManagerBestPractices.pdf
Regards
Rajesh

Set me straight on RAM requirements for 8 core

I have been hearing you need 1gb ram for each core. Or at least that's what people are recommending. Isn't 8gb a little overkill?
I'm going to do HD editing. I would think 4gb ram would be pretty good. Of course, I realize more is always better, but is 8gb really necessary?
Feel free to chime in, but I suppose we will find out when the 8 core's are shipping and what Leapard/FCP will bring us in the next few months.

"Phil, do me a favor... PLEASE... check your page ins/outs and try running your machine a little harder and you tell me if you see a difference when you do get your RAM... "
Of course I'll see a difference. I EXPECT to see a difference, that's the point. But where you and I differ, is that you're expecting the upgrades to make your machine more stable. Mine is already stable - the only thing I'm expecting is increased performance. I'm sure page outs won't be completely eliminated, but they'll be much, much more reasonable that what they are now. I also use a G5 Quad with 8 gigs of RAM and rarely are the page outs "zero". However, even with them about 5-20%, the Quad doesn't skip a beat.
"Mr. Shockley only has 2 GB of memory, but I bet he can go to dinner and come back by the time his workflow has completed."
Well, not quite that long but sure - the limited RAM I now have is causing tasks to take longer than needed. (I've developed a serious hatred for the sounds of disk access!) But while they take longer, the tasks DO get completed. Keep in mind I use several apps in Rosetta, including Photoshop CS3.
"Uh oh, I ordered my Ram before I knew it used different chips."
It wouldn't hurt to call but I don't think I'd worry about it. The 8-core blurb probably just means the new part numbers reflect what Apple has tested. None of the third party RAM vendors/companies are showing a "specific" module for the 8-core. (Even before the 8-core machines, Apple would never publicly say third party RAM was "compatible".)
Apple also says the same thing in the blurb about hard drives. I can't imagine one SATA hard drive is compatible while another is not.
Their term, "qualified" means they've tested the part.
-phil

Plain Explain and s methods (tools) for to improve Performance

Hi
How can I do to use Plain Explain and others methods for to impove performance ?
Where can I to find tutorial about it ?
thank you in advance

Hi
How can I do to use Plain Explain and others
methods for to impove performance ?
Internally there are potentially several hundred 'procedures' that can be assembled in different ways to access data. For example, when getting one row from a table, you could use an index or a full table scan.
Explain Plan shows the [proposed] access path, or complete list of the procedures, in the order called, to do what the SQL statement is requesting.
The objective with Explain Plan is to review the proposed access path and determine whether alternates, through the use of hints or statistics or indexes or materialized views, might be 'better'.
You often use Wait analysis, through StatsPack, AWR/ADDM, TKProf, Trace, etc. to determine which SQL statement is likely causing a performance issue.
>
Where can I to find tutorial about it ?Ah ... the $64K question. If we only knew ...
There are so many variables involved, that most tutorials are nearly useless. The common approach therefore is to read - a lot. And build up your own 'interpretation' of the reading.
Personal suggestion is to read (in order)
1) Oracle's Database Concepts manual (described some of 'how' this is happening)
2) Oracle's Performance Tuning manual (describes more of 'how' as related to performance and also describes some of the approaches)
3) Tom Kyte's latest book (has a lot of demos and 'proofs' about how specific things work)
4) Don Burleson's Statspack book (shows how to set up and do some basic interpretation)
5) Jonathan's book (how the optimizer works - tough reading, though)
6_ any book by the Oak Table (http://oaktable.net)
Beyond that is any book that contains the words 'Oracle' and 'Performance' in the title or description. BUT ... when reading, use truck-loads, not just grains, of salt.
Verify everything. I have seen an incredible amount of mistakes ... make 'em mysellf all the time, so I tend to recognize them when I see them. Believe nothing unless you have proven it for yourself.. Even then, realize there are exceptions and boundary conditions and ibgs and patches and statistics and CPU and memory and disk speed issues that will change ehat you have proven.
It's not hopeless. But it is a lot of work and effort. And well rewarded, if you decide to get serious.

Problem with a new install: X, Radeon 4650, and xf86-video-ati

Hi guys,
I am trying to setup a new install here but am getting stuck at X (I have been following the beginners guide).
Everything is stock (kernel, not [testing], etc.).
I have a ATI Radeon HD 4650 and am using the xf86-video-ati driver. I want to use dual monitors with this card (one 1920x1080 and another 1680x1050), but as far as I can tell, this is not the root of the problem. KMS is enabled by default and works well (with the exception of some slight artifacts on the 1080p monitor). I have tried to disable KMS but to no avail. But here is the essence of my situtaion:
Note: Yes, hal & dbus are both running.
Running X as root without Xorg.conf: Mirrored at 1680x1050
Running X as root with Xorg.conf: Black screens
Running X as normal without Xorg.conf: Mirrored at 1680x1050
Running X as normal with Xorg.conf: Black screens
Note: The Xorg.conf is being taken from X -configure as well as taken from Xorg.0.log
My /var/log/Xorg.0.log can be found here: http://pastebin.ca/1877044 (after attempting to run X as a normal user without Xorg.conf)
Why can't I use a xorg.conf? How can I setup dual displays at their native resolutions?
Thanks, any help is greatly appreciated!

oh boy ...been in your exact situation before. I have a radeon 4890 HD. Very easy to get running the way you want it, once you know the steps to take of course.
btw, I've ALWAYS found it easier to run X with an xorg.conf file.
The way you go about setting up a dual head radeon card is actually very simple.
First, delete your /etc/X11/xorg.conf file if you have one.
Second, run "sudo aticonfig --initial=dual-head"
Third, make sure the fglrx module is mentioned in your rc.conf file under modules.
aticonfig will then create a new xorg.conf file for you that will work with your dual head.
A few tweaks to the xorg.conf file before you start x:
Decide whether you would like to run Xinerama or not. Xinerama may or may not have any benefits, but I've had much more success by keeping it off.
You do that by:
Section "ServerFlags"
Option "Xinerama" "off"
EndSection
Make sure 'Load "dri2"' and 'Load "dri"' are commented out under section 'module'
Lastly, specify your display size under Section "Screen" (you should have two screen sections)
Do this by adding Modes "1920x1080" under each SubSection "Display" .... or just take a shortcut and put it under the last subsection like I did.
Do it again for the your other screen section.
You are going to make a "virtual" screen, which would exist if your two physical screens were joined into one big one.
So put under your second "screen" section, Virtual 3360 3360 (I have two 1680x1050 monitors)
attatched is my xorg.conf for clarification:
Section "ServerLayout"
Identifier "X.org Configured"
Screen 0 "aticonfig-Screen[0]-0" 0 0
InputDevice "Mouse0" "CorePointer"
InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
EndSection
Section "Files"
ModulePath "/usr/lib/xorg/modules"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/100dpi:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/75dpi:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/TTF"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/Type1"
EndSection
Section "Module"
# Load "dri2"
# Load "dri"
Load "record"
Load "extmod"
Load "glx"
Load "dbe"
EndSection
Section "ServerFlags"
Option "Xinerama" "off"
EndSection
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Keyboard0"
Driver "kbd"
EndSection
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Mouse0"
Driver "mouse"
Option "Protocol" "auto"
Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5 6 7"
EndSection
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "Monitor0"
VendorName "Monitor Vendor"
ModelName "Monitor Model"
EndSection
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "aticonfig-Monitor[0]-0"
Option "VendorName" "ATI Proprietary Driver"
Option "ModelName" "Generic Autodetecting Monitor"
Option "DPMS" "true"
EndSection
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "0-DFP1"
Option "VendorName" "ATI Proprietary Driver"
Option "ModelName" "Generic Autodetecting Monitor"
Option "DPMS" "true"
Option "PreferredMode" "1680x1050"
Option "TargetRefresh" "60"
Option "Position" "1680 0"
Option "Rotate" "normal"
Option "Disable" "false"
EndSection
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "0-DFP2"
Option "VendorName" "ATI Proprietary Driver"
Option "ModelName" "Generic Autodetecting Monitor"
Option "DPMS" "true"
Option "PreferredMode" "1680x1050"
Option "TargetRefresh" "60"
Option "Position" "0 0"
Option "Rotate" "normal"
Option "Disable" "false"
EndSection
Section "Device"
### Available Driver options are:-
### Values: <i>: integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False",
### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz"
### [arg]: arg optional
#Option "NoAccel" # [<bool>]
#Option "AccelMethod" # [<str>]
#Option "offscreensize" # [<str>]
#Option "SWcursor" # [<bool>]
#Option "ignoreconnector" # [<str>]
#Option "forcereduced" # [<bool>]
#Option "forcedpi" # <i>
#Option "useconfiguredmonitor" # [<bool>]
#Option "HPD" # <str>
#Option "NoRandr" # [<bool>]
#Option "RROutputOrder" # [<str>]
#Option "DRI" # [<bool>]
#Option "TVMode" # [<str>]
#Option "ScaleType" # [<str>]
#Option "UseAtomBIOS" # [<bool>]
#Option "AtomBIOS" # [<str>]
#Option "UnverifiedFeatures" # [<bool>]
#Option "Audio" # [<bool>]
#Option "AudioStreamSilence" # [<str>]
#Option "HDMI" # [<str>]
#Option "COHERENT" # [<str>]
#Option "ForceLowPowerMode" # [<bool>]
#Option "LowPowerModeEngineClock" # <i>
Identifier "Card0"
Driver "radeonhd"
VendorName "ATI Technologies Inc"
BoardName "RV790 [Radeon HD 4800 Series]"
BusID "PCI:2:0:0"
EndSection
Section "Device"
Identifier "aticonfig-Device[0]-0"
Driver "fglrx"
Option "Monitor-DFP1" "0-DFP1"
Option "Monitor-DFP2" "0-DFP2"
BusID "PCI:2:0:0"
EndSection
Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen0"
Device "Card0"
Monitor "Monitor0"
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 1
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 4
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 8
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 15
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 16
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 24
Modes "1680x1050"
EndSubSection
EndSection
Section "Screen"
Identifier "aticonfig-Screen[0]-0"
Device "aticonfig-Device[0]-0"
DefaultDepth 24
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Virtual 3360 3360
Depth 24
Modes "1680x1050"
EndSubSection
EndSection

I cannot get GPS Only to work on my ipad3 (4g version, but not on an active cell plan, and wifi off). Is there some new requirement in 7.1 or 7.1.1 to have cell and/or wifi enabled for GPS to work? I am testing with MotionX

It seems like I cannot get GPS only to work on my ipad3 (4g version, but not on an active cell plan, and wifi off). Is there some new requirement in 7.1 or 7.1.1 to have cell and/or wifi enabled for GPS to work? I am testing with MotionX, garmin blueChart mobile, and a GPS monitoring tool. All show no signal. If I turn on cell and wifi, it says I get gps signal, but can't tell if that is from the GPS chip, or just from cell and wifi only (maybe with some gps mixed in)? Any ideas on how to get iPad working with GPS only??

Roger that. Thanks for your time.
System:
Windows 7 64bit
Processor: AMD phenom IIX4 965
RAM: Gskill Ripsaw F3-12800CL7D-4GBRM (2-2GB sticks)
GPU:EVGA Classified Nvidia GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 core
PSU: Kingwin 1000W laser gold (LZG-1000)
Yes. tried the one ram stick, no go. I have been trying to boot off/install the windows 7 disk but am unable to get to the point where windows starts installing after its gathering information portion of the install. I can get to the disk selection screen of the install with the WD HD on SATA port 2 but then get the "cant install messages" when I try to select the Vertex 3. Yes I can see the Vertex 3 Drive as well as the WD drive at this point. some times I have to hit "scan" a couple of times.

Early 2013 Macbook Pro Retina 2.7 i7 512GB SSD and 16gb Ram with Serious Cuda Problems! Trying to teach Apple their Macbook Pro Retina isn't a Pro Jan. 11. 2015.

Apple replaced the logic board, wiped the computer, did a fresh instal of the OS, and also a fresh instal of all the programs during the beginning of 2015. The GeekBench scores are the highest of any of the similar computers (at least on the day of my testing). But here's what's happening. The Macbook Pro Retina has a GeForce GT 650m with Cuda Technology and it can't handle editing in Premiere Pro with Cuda Acceleration turned on. Open CL, a second form of graphic acceleration on the Macbook Pro, appears to be functioning properly.
At the Apple Store on 1-10-2015, I was told that since the logic board and the graphic cards have been replaced that there is nothing they can do and they recommend contacting Corporate. This comes after they told me to buy a new logic board and that that would solve the problem. This comes after Apple did not listen, for over a month, about the possibility that they didn't properly build a professional notebook computer.
The computer displays a black program monitor screen, at random times, when the user edits footage with Cuda Acceleration enabled. It used to lead to an entire system crash and/or a Premiere Pro crash before the operating system was completely re-installed. My solution, since I bought the computer, was to edit in Open CL... However, I've come to learn that there is a major difference in performance between Open CL and Cuda Acceleration.
For the Macbook Pro Retina, Adobe Media Encoder render times are about 20% faster with Cuda Acceleration than Open CL. The 2013 Macbook Pro Retina appears to be able to handle Cuda Acceleration in Media Encoder, but I have had a number of issues leading to program crashes on every project before the new logic board and operating system were installed. For over a year and a half, I actually never used Cuda Acceleration. Having sent every crash report and user data to Apple over that time, I truly expected an update of some sorts and it never came.
FYI: The latest Macbook Pro Retina uses the GeForce GT 750m... This is essentially the same graphic card that performs about 10 - 20% faster due to a new "boost mode." More importantly, it actually has the exact same number of Cuda cores. Having the same number of Cuda Cores means that the Cuda Acceleration is essentially the same when exporting or viewing video. To prove a point to Apple that their 2013 Macbook Pro Retina isn't functioning properly, I bought the latest computer with the 2.5 i7, 16gb Ram, 512gb SSD and I can honestly say that the 2014 model works perfectly fine with Cuda Acceleration turned on while editing in Premiere. I can also say that a proper render test proved the 2013 and 2014 model to be the exact same.
I'm new to this whole pay $2700 for a computer that your manufacturer didn't / can't test properly, so I will be contacting Apple and speaking with Senior Advisors, their Customer Support division, and will soon speak with their Corporate branch. I'm confident that the Early 2013 Macbook Pro Retina with a 2.7 i7 16gb Ram and a 512 SSD is nearly the same at rendering video and editing video, provided the Cuda Acceleration works, as their latest 2014 Macbook Pro Retina with the 2.5 i7 processor 16gb Ram, and a 512 SSD. It's truly a great computer and a great build, minus their current inability to properly test / diagnose their computer.
Knowing that the latest graphic card in the Macbook Pro lineup is essentially the same model, I feel that Apple is not directly looking into the viability and life span of their current Macbook Pro Retina product line. They can't test for performance issues relating to their graphic cards, so why consider buying from them when the end user is actually in a position to experience up to a 20% decrease in certain professional programs.
For future reference, I'd strongly urge other individuals to avoid purchasing Apple products if they offer Cuda Technology. In my opinion, Apple is an Open CL organization, at best, who is not responsibly manufacturing / producing computers that fit their organization's strengths. For a fact, they can't test their Cuda Technology and won't even attempt to address Cuda Acceleration errors for Apple owners (01-11-2015). I say this having walked out of the Apple Store on 1-10-2015 with virtually no support other than to contact Corporate.

Looks like a RAM issue.
Memory Module: BANK 0/DIMM0, 8 GB, DDR3, 1600 MHz, 0x02FE, 0x000000000000000000000000000000000000
Memory Module: BANK 1/DIMM0, 8 GB, DDR3, 1600 MHz, 0x02FE, 0x000000000000000000000000000000000000

Hard Drive and RAM upgrades for latest 15" MBP

I'm minutes from ordering a new MBP. Only concerns are whether I get hte Apple upgrades or shop around.
I like this Hard Drive...
http://www.compu2000.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=6433
And this RAM upgrade...
http://www.a-power.com/product-10937-311-4
If these are equivalent to the apple options I can save hundreds and get a 320 GB drive, which will make a great portable.
So, does my plan hold water?

You're on your own for support when you do your own upgrades like this, but generally speaking, it works fine.
Note that HDD is less risky than RAM. With RAM you run the risk of unstable behavior that is tougher to diagnose. That said, a quality RAM upgrade and some initial testing with any of many available tools is as good as a factory build.
HDD upgrades are less risky, and I've upgraded (well, replaced after HDD death) ones in my MBPs many many times. I crunch my hard drives more than normal and have to generally replace them about every year. Some of the MBPs don't make this easy, and prepare to get all sorts of cozy with little 0 and 1 sized Phillips screwdrivers and some T6 as well, but it is doable (just not quite for the truly faint of heart).
Again, you're on your own for support once you do this, so weigh that in your decision.

13" MacBook Pro with Retina 256gb SSD and 16gb ram?

So I have decided to go with a 13" MacBook Pro with Retina.
I am now deciding on how to customize it...
My uses are:
Primary -> Writing. I am an aspiring writer/ future published author, and this unit will serve as a primary storage unit for on-the-go writing. The SSD will help in this capacity, tremendously, as well as battery life, as inspiration to write can happen anywhere. I found he typability to be easier on the MacBook Pro as well, rather than the Air.
Secondary -> Music, videos, gaming.
Basically, I am aware that the crispness of the rPro is apparent. I am not worried so much by the music, or videos, or even browsing part, as I'm sure its quite speedy.
What I am thinking is the might of the 4gb ram, 128gb SSD storage.
Would it be more worthwhile, since I plan to use this for 5+ years, to go for the little bit extra and get the 8gb ram, 256gb SSD storage unit, for only $200 extra. This seems a minor fee considering the length at which I plan to use and keep this.
That being said, I still play some older games and whatnot, with the possibility of playing World of Warcraft in the future... That being said, and knowing that Macs are not gaming powerhouses (unless you wish to go 15"+), would it be worthwhile to splurge another $200 for the 16GB ram? What major differences would doubling the 8 to 16 do for me and the performance of this MacBook?
Thanks in advance!
Nick

Since it is not possible to upgrade the RAM after purchase (it is soldered to the logicboard), I would definitely opt for 8GB. The same goes for the SSD- I would opt for double the storage. Though it is possible to upgrade your drive in the future, it comes at the cost of installing it yourself and potentially voiding any Apple warranty.
It would not be worthwhile to spend another 200$ on 16gb of RAM, IMO for your purposes. The lack of a discrete GPU and a duel core processor is what will limit gaming performance. 8GB of RAM is enough, in itself.
Rather than spending an additional $400 dollars, either spend the extra $200 for the 8gb 256GB model, or consider the 15'' entry level model for $700 extra dollars-which would be plently powerful enough for your purposes.

Cinebench Test Shows Low Scores and I need Help Explaining it?

I ran the Cinebench test to check on the performance of my video card. I have a MAC PRO 12 core with 16 Gigs of ram. 1.5Gig Nividia Quadro FX 4800 Video Card, 5TB Hard Drive Space. KONA LHI VIdeo I/O card, SATA CArd connected to external Panasonic P2 Card Reader, and a SCSI Controller connected to an external Drive Array.Running Adobe CS5, MAC OS 10.6.8. Everything has been updated including all drivers. When I ran the test surprisingly I got the results below. I spent a little over $10,000 on this machine in order to be able to use after effects faster. I have not noticed a large increase in the realtime performance for video.
When I watch the training videos for templates that I use from digital Juice there sytems seems to run the videos fairly fast and fluid. My system on the other hand with the same product runs extremely slow even when the aftereffects timeline is set to 1/4 resolution.
I have posted this question on multiple forums trying to get an answer. I am thinking it is a conflict within the hardware that I am using. Hopefully someone else is having this same issue and can help me out.
One final thing. I am pretty certain that the video card is working because the exporting of MPEG 2 files which the CUDA processor was designed for is very fast. In this image you can see the FX 5800 which is only one step above and its benchmarks are much higher, They should atleast be somewhat close to each other.
Any thoughts are appreciated.

There are better tests and CINEBENCH really does not, it stresses cpu.
There was a good discussion on MacRumors on why that program is not useful and what others you might want to run, from Heaven to PRIME95. And see what Barefeats for instance used to test GTX and others recently.

Which Macbook Pro should I purchase? I'm thinking the non-Retina 13" with 2.9GHZ and 128GB SSD...

I am looking to purchase a new laptop in the near future but I am not sure which configurations--specifically relating to speed and memory--I should choose. As of now I am thinking about this:
13" non Retina Macbook Pro
2.9GHz Dual-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM — 2x4GB
128GB Solid State Drive
SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Backlit Keyboard (English) & User's Guide
the total cost for this package is $1,599 which is just about my total budget-- it don't want to go over $1,800.
At this point, I have sort of ruled out the Retina display because I'm not really sure if it is worth it. Instead, I would like to buy a Macbook Pro that is very fast, durable, and spacious (in terms of memory).
In the past, I have opted for the standard specs but I have learned the hard way that configurations matter.
I plan to use this laptop for my last two years of college in hopes that it will last me at least 3 years after that (My current Macbook is in its 5th year but has seen two different hard drives....). I have a large music collection (100 gigs or so) stored on a variety of different drives as well as some movies that I would love to (for the first time since I downloaded Napster) have on the same device without losing computing power or processing speed. Also I am a beginner/intermediate programmer who likes to spend very extended time periods jumping between programs and just messing around on the Internet (but honestly, who doesn't? haha).
One thing I'm not entirely sure about is the eminent release of Mountain Lion OS X. Should I be waiting for this to be the standard on all laptops or does it not matter all the much?
If anyone has any suggestions, I'm all ears...

Hey Mitch,
i've had the same decission, the same budget and the Mac was for the same purposes (a little bit of coding and the rest just for normal work at university). So what do you think i ordered yesterday? Exactly the same configuration you posted above! Why? The Retina Macbook Pro was too expensive, the other 15'' models haven't got SSDs and when you choose the buy to order option with SSD you can just go and buy the Retina Macbook. So there's only the 13'' MacBook Pro left (if you want a Macbook Pro - i wanted one because the configuration of an MB Air with the 1,8GHz Prozessor and 8GB of Ram is more expansive than the Macbook pro Configuration you posted above, plus u have less of processor power. And i don't mind carrying around 800g more, for mobile working i have an iPad). Then i had to go with the i7 MBP because on the long runs you will definetly need his power. And in a few years you would regret if you chose less power.... and SSD is a must have just like 8GB of ram.
And when you think about the future you always have the possibilty to upgrade your Mac to 16gb of ram or to an 512 gb ssd (when they are cheaper :P) cause the "thick" macbooks have those parts not directly on the mainboard so that they can be changed by yourself in just a few minutes. And if your missing a dedicated graphic card the future will bring thunderbold graphic cards.
For OSX Mountain Lion you don't have to wait. If you buy your mac now the upgrade is free so it is does not matter that much. You can always wait for better times but waiting for ever shouldn't be the goal.
I hope i could help you,
greetings from Europe

Early 2008 iMac and Kingmax ram?

Dear everyone from apple discussions, Hi!
When I install new ram in both slots, imac is not booting,
when I install old ram in one slot, and new in second, it boots, apparently recognising 3gb of ram.
Can anyone tell me where am I mistaking!
*quote from a user manual of ram compatible with my iMac:*
"Your iMac comes with at least 1 gigabyte (GB) of Double Data Rate 2 (DDR2) Synchronous Dynamic Random Access (SDRAM) memory installed. You can add 1 GB or 2 GB memory modules for a maximum of 4 GB of memory. Memory modules must meet the following specifications:
- Small Outline Dual Inline Memory Module (SO-DIMM) format
- 800 MHz, PC2-6400, DDR2 compliant (also referred to as DDR2 800)
- Unbuffered and unregistered"
*RAM I bought:*
2x Kingmax 2GB, SO DIMM DDRII 800 non-ECC
http://www.kingmax.com/en03_productcontent.asp?sn=22
Regards, martin

Even if Kingmax has system specific bandwidth PC2-6400 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM modules for exchange, there is still no guarantee they will work until you test them in your iMac.
To avoid testing ram yourself and going thru all the hassle of returning ram, I suggest ordering from one of the following suppliers.
OWC > http://eshop.macsales.com/MyOWC/
Crucial > http://www.crucial.com/mac/index.aspx
MemoryStory.com > http://www.memorystore.com/config_system.asp?cboMFG=26

Free RAM - a dif in iBook performance between 25M and 1G?

Hi...I keep several programs running on my iBook 1.33 with 768 onboard. Activity Monitor shows that at its lowest, my free RAM dips to around 25 or so megs when I'm streaming video from a news site.
My question is whether or not there is a difference in the Book's performance when I have 25 megs of free RAM....or 500 megs? Or being "in the green" means that there is simply enough...being "greener" won't make a difference...
I know that more is always better, but I'd like to know if more is necessary.
The answer will determine whether or not I switch out the 512 for a 1G.
I'd appreciate any feedback...Thanx!

In those instances where chip RAM is needed (and not in a video-intensive
situation where you can't upgrade VRAM, and regular RAM is not shared)
the chip RAM is faster and more readily is available to priority applications
and the OS X system itself. And Virtual Memory (VM) is slower, due to
the fact that is derived by the computer having to read-write to/from the
internal hard disk drive, and that is a slower and less-direct process.
Another way to speed up a limited upgrade option computer would be to
pay to have (or be brave and suffer any consequences, and DIY) the
internal hard disk drive replaced with a faster spin-rate new drive which
also has a larger buffer - and - more free space. This and the chip RAM
could make the computer act more like a faster model computer. At
least until the hard disk drive gets fragmented and or more than 3/4 full.
There are more than a few things one can do to enhance the performance
of the hard to upgrade iBook G4 (or iMac G4) since you can't change the
CPU or make the system bus work any faster. Bottlenecks aside, a few
items that can be upgraded, along with a regimen of routine maintenance
can help almost any computer not pushed beyond its limits, to work better.
Even with a hard disk drive only 75% full, it can be more sluggish and
waste processing and swap-file cycles (moving data bits as VM to/from
the hard disk drive when taxing the limited resources of the computer)
if the hard disk drive has never seen much maintenance. If you use an
external FireWire enclosed hard disk drive, and learn how to clone the
whole iBook's drive contents over, then be sure the clone-copy can boot
the computer, before proceeding; you could use the disk utility to wipe
the drive and use the zero-overwrite option, totally erasing and then to
reformat the drive again, to clear any low-level issues and defragment
the drive, (plus pull any seldom used saved items off the computer,
to free-up hard disk drive space, for the system to use as swap & VM)
you could also reclaim some of the original illusions of speed now lost.
{As the computer's OS gets more and more parts, updates and also
any application and associated files to sort through, it will run slower;
VM also this adds into the mix, with a fuller and older hard disk drive.}
In reference to: ' replacing an iBook G4's hard disk drive? ' you may wish to
read links here: http://www.applelinks.com/index.php/forums/viewthread/142/
In reference to bootable clones of OS X systems:
http://www.bombich.com/software/ccc.html
Minor to major background maintenance, preventative, can be helped
through the use of this utility interface tool; it can help the OS X and
your computer generally run a bit better. I use OnyX's 'automation'
selection and also have this utility's preferences set for it to restart
by itself after it runs all of the checkboxed items in this set. For this,
see: Titanium Software - OnyX: http://www.titanium.free.fr/pgs/english.html
Also, About Disk Utility's Repair Disk Permissions (& 'repair disk' from
the booted installer's version of Disk Utility; research this further.)
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1452
Sometimes, even just repairing those disk permissions can help; and
the OnyX tool can run that, as part of the Automation sequence; but
it should be run more often from D.U. than you'd need to use OnyX.
Troubleshooting permissions issues in OS X (and using Disk Utility)
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=106712
There is a relationship between RAM, free HDD space as Virtual Memory,
system maintenance, disk drive health, and other interrelated details.
Good luck & happy computing!
edited 2x to add links.

Testing in billing, invoice and delivery

Hi,
I need some examples or details about testing in billing , invoice and delivery.

Hi Meenakshi,
VBRK and VBRP for billing document.
RSEG and RBKP for invoice.
KONV and KONP for delivery.
Thanks,
ANil

Safari won't open pictures on imgur. To test used another browser and it showed them

Safari won't open pictures on imgur. To test used another browser and it showed them
Here is the page was trying to surf http://imgur.com/gallery/n9Bjm

From the Safari menu bar, select
Safari ▹ Preferences... ▹ Extensions
Turn all extensions OFF and test. If the problem is resolved, turn extensions back ON and then disable them one or a few at a time until you find the culprit.

Testing 4x E5-4650s and 128GB RAM - tweaks for 32-core performance?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for