Would more memory really make a difference?

I am running Premiere CS4 on a Windows Vista 64 bit machine with a quad core processor and 4 GB of memory. No matter what I do in CS4, from rendering effects in Premiere to converting a file in Media Encoder to transcoding video for a blu-ray disc in Encore, I see the same thing in the performance section of task manager - all four cores of my processor at 100% and a maximum of 3 GB of memory being used. Since my system never wants to use more than 3 GB of memory for any task, would there be any benefit to upgrading to 8 GB of memory?
J. D.

I had not planned on upgrading to CS5 because I can't afford the required graphics card to take advantage of the Mercury Playback engine (at least, not right now). But your answer has piqued my curiosity. If I upgraded to Premiere CS5, and added more memory to my system, but did not upgrade my graphics card, what sort of improvement in performance might I experience?
J. D.
(I did try out CS5 when it came out, but my 30 day trial has ended so I can't run my own test to answer this question)

Similar Messages

Does the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M with 4GB really make a difference

I just bought 27inch late 2012 imac. 3.4ghz i7 32gb ram NVIDIA 680MX 2gb and Im currious does the 780M 4gb really make a difference. I do not play any games. I do have 2 27 lightening bolt displays. I do alot of video editing and photograph. I have all Adobe Products and Apple software but i cannot find any where that the GTX 780m with 4gb will be any better. All I can find is if you play games then 4gb is good.
Any advice would be great!
Thank you in advance,

Certain applications such as Photoshop or Final Cut Pro will benefit from the higher video ram, however the GTX 680M is a very powerful card and the 2GB of ram that it comes with should be more than sufficient for most tasks.
Only extremely large files/projects will truly benefit from having the 4GB or ram that the GTX 780M supplies.
The 2013 iMac offers a performance boost over the 2012 version, however the increases in terms of CPU/GPU power are mostly modest.
The Haswell architecture was designed with mobile use as the primary focus and so areas such as energy usage were the priority.
The Nvidia 7XX graphics cards run on the same Kepler architecture as the 6XX cards, as with the Intel CPU the improvements are there but there is not a huge leap forward.

Does Mackeeper really make a difference on your mac

Hi, does mackeeper make a diffrence on your mac will it make it fast, protect from viruses, and protect your data. I really need to know, Thanks

Oh, it'll make a difference, but not in a good way. See below.
https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-3036
Stedman

Does a high end graphic card really make a difference ? or is the CPU more important ?

NVIDIA has the Quadro CX (very expensive)
http://www.nvidia.com/object/builtforadobepros.html
They mainly talk about h264 encoding.
Does it help as far as timeline editing ?
Im shooting in HDV but final project is SD MPEG2 for DVD
Or does a faster CPU work better. Multiple Cores.
Is it better to get a faster Quad Core Intel Core i7 Processor ?
Intel® Core i7-940 Processor (2.93GHz) (Quad-Core)
or a slower Processor speed but dual ?
WS DUAL XEON E5504 2.0GHz, 8MB cache, 800 MHz, 4.8 GT/s QPI (Quad-Core)
WS DUAL XEON E5520 2.26GHz, 8MB cache, 1066 MHz, 5.86 GT/s QPI (Quad-Core) [+$385 ]
What role is the graphics card really having.
I have read some places that as long as you have a good card you don't have to waste money on the top end ones.
Any thought would be helpful.
Thanks: Glenn

IMO a Quadro CX is a waste of money, unless your editing life consists of only encoding to H264 and even then it may be a waste of money.
You may be better off with more capable CPU's and a better disk setup.
Have a look at all three topics linked to here:
How to get the best from a PC? Some guides...
Do read them carefully, including the responses, since there is some info on the performance of dual Xeons versus i7 that may help you decide.

Does upgrading your ram to 2GB really make a difference?

okay, so the obvious answer to the question is yes.
but when i mentioned i was thinking of doing this upgrade to a close friend (who did ICT A level) he seemed a little skeptical, and said that there are many other factors involved.
im currently on 768MB of RAM, and i run logic pretty much all the time. but recently, while my sounds are getting a little more complex, the system performance bar is reaching the top (it goes yellow rather than orange)
so to put my question more accurately...
will i see a difference with 2GB of ram within logic ?
and what else can i do to keep that system performance bar down (hard ware wise)

Increasing RAM will always be of benefit.
Another issue maybe how much disk space you have left on your hard drive?
That version eMac shipped with either a 40 or 80 GB drive. If there is 15% or less left on the drive, this maybe an additional reason why Logic is working harder.
Also, if you haven't done any disk maintenance in a while, like using Tech Tool Pro/Disk Warrior to clean up disk directories and defragment your hard disk, then that would tend to make Logic work harder because it has to constantly, in real time, find all of the audio data bits scattered all over your hard drive. Defragmenting a hard drive would put data that should be contiguous ( located together on the drive as one continuous data stream) back together.
You need a lots of free disk space when working with large audio/video files.
Purchasing a larger external Fire Wire drive would be a benefit.
I use Logic Express 8 on a 1.25 Ghz G4 MDD with 2 GB of RAM.
I do all of my recording to a external FW drive with plenty of free space.
Works fairly well on a 6+ year old Power PC Mac. Haven't had too many issues or dropouts.
This version of Logic on my Mac is not completely trouble-free, but performs well most of the times I have done lots of audio tracks and end up with, somewhat, large audio files.
My issues are always with adding effects after recording audio as these are very processor intensive and need not only a really fast CPU, but lots O' RAM, too!
I end up using many of the effects processes very sparingly and/or only on recorded tracks I feel really need to have them. Can't use as many effects or on too many tracks as this has given playback some hiccups and issues.
It's an issue I can live with until I can, finally, afford a speedier Mac. That's not in the near future for me, though.
I absolutely love Logic! Great Apple audio program!

Does Cas Latency really make a difference?

I have a MSI K8N Neo2 setup (AMD64 3500) and I am inquiring if memory latency effects are really noticible or not during heavy gaming or creating home movies for DVD's. Currently, I have two sticks of Corsair Value Select 512MB DDR PC-3200 (VS512MB400). It has a Cas latency of 2.5. Is there any good noticible performance reason, I should trade up and buy some better performing memory. If so, does anyone have a tried and true favorite with the K8N Neo2? Any thoughts? I have never overclocked, I just run at stock speeds. Perhaps the performance gain is not worth the money?
I also have:
eVGA geforce 6800NU
2- 200 GB Seagate IDE barracuda
Sony DVD burner
Enermax 465 watt PS
Hauppauge PVR 250
Netgear WG311v2
4 case fans
1 GB PC-3200

Spread Spectrum Modulation was invented to reduce interferences of high order
harmonics of the bus frequency. The theory is that, because every wave form
generates higher order harmonic waves or Obertoene, accumulation of the latter
can result in interference with the original signal.
One way to avoid this problem is to subject the base frequency to a slow (ca 100,000 clock cycles) modulation,
meaning that the FSB varies between e.g. + and - 1% of the nominal value.
In older boards, usually two different settings were available,
either centered around the nominal value or set with the nominal frequency as the maximum (low modulation).
Most current boards employ the centered modulation.
This is, at least, the official version of Spread Spectrum Modulation.
In reality, there are different reasons for its implementation.
With increasing operating frequency, electronic components emit electromagnetic interference signals (EMI).
EMI, on the other hand can cause interferences with other devices and is,
therefore, subject to regulation by the FCC which limits the signal amplitude according to its guidelines.
Any device exceeding the maximum allowable signal strength will not gain
approval by the FCC and can, therefore, not be marketed.
In order to understand the reason for SSM, it is necessary to know how the FCC
tests EMI.
Basically, the testing device is a radio receiver and the testing is done by sweeping
its receiving frequency through the frequency range of interest and measuring the
interference with the video and audio signals. The bandwidth sensitivity of the
measuring device is in the order of about 1 MHz.
If the operating frequency is modulated to spread over a bandwidth of typically
4-5 MHz, the same will happen to the EMI spectrum and,
instead of showing a sharp peak, the spectrum will be spread to a more or less
Gaussian bell shape.
In this case, the amplitude will be, of course, substantially smaller, that is,
in the order of 1/3 - ¼ of the original peak.
The energy, however, will be the same. On the other hand,
the measuring instrument with its bandwidth limited to only 1/4 of the spread will,
consequently, only see 1/3 to ¼ of the EMI.
Therefore, the system will obtain FCC approval even if it exceeds the guidelines.
Recommended Settings
If running at stock setting, enabling Spread Spectrum Modulation (SSM)
may reduce EMI, and cause less interference with wireles communication devices.
Under all conditions, enabling SSM may cause a system to crash.
This is especially true for overclocking, simply because with the high multiplier values employed now, even a 0.5% modulation up and down can cause
differences up to as much as 10 MHz clock speed within one modulation cycle.
In other words, if the CPU is already operating at its limit, increasing the clock
speed by another 10 MHz may be fatal.
Therefore, for any overclocking, SSM should be turned off.
Another side effect of SSM is that it can interfere with the clock generator.
This means that, instead of merely initializing SSM, it is possible to enable FSB settings that were never supported by the manufacturer.
Examples are the Tyan Trinity 400 where disabling SSE results in an actual bus
speed of 90 MHz instead of the selected 117 MHz or the MSI 6309 where FSB settings of up to 200 MHz become available.
The reason is that activating SSM can cancel out the FSB setting since there
can be a pin address overlap on the clock generator chip.
(from lostcircuits.com)
Lets say your CPU is putting out EMI , its all concentrated on one "channel/frequency" on the spectrum.
What spread spectrum does is broaden that out to multiple channels/frequencies so it isn't as "potent" or interupting.
http://www.rojakpot.com/default.aspx?location=8&var1=0&var2=115
This is interesting.
Fsb spread spectrum enabled can cause internet dropouts.
http://www.asus.com.tw/support/faq/qanda.aspx?KB_ID=84823
If i can access it in bios i always have it disabled in any computer i'm maintaining.

GTK apps in Qt Environment -- Does it really make a difference?

Whenever I read around about running GTK apps in KDE, I get a lot of horror stories about how needing to load GTK libraries in the Qt environment will degrade my system performance and bog down my desktop experience. After spending a lot of time in two pretty popular GTK apps (Firefox & Gimp), and monitoring my desktop performance, I've certainly not found anything noticable (other than that they look ugly as sin). Furthermore, I keep a system monitoring widget on my desktop, and it doesn't seem to make a lick of difference on my system resources. Are all the warnings about running GTK in Qt simply horror stories? Has anyone actually noticed a difference from running GTK apps in Qt (or the other way around for that matter)?

axel668 wrote:no, I've always used GTK apps in KDE (Firefox, Thunderbird, LibreOffice, ...) and never had problems. And there's a great article in the wiki about theming: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Un … plications
That's a great little wiki page which I just visited, used, and now love. Thank you for sharing!

Would More Memory Help?

Mac BookPro
2.66 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
4 GB 1067 MHz DDR3
I have recently installed East West Platinum Plus Orchestral Library on a external drive. Though I am using Logic 9 as efficiently as I can, I still get system overload messages, Memory is low, and the CPU is maxed out when working with large projects.
Would I notice a substantial improvement if I increased the memory to 8 GB? If not, since I cannot afford a new computer, would there be other steps I could take to alleviate these issues? Thanks.
Sincerely,
Alexander Arntzen

System Overload is not always a RAM issue. In my experience it's usually not.
Running my (speedy) hard drives on a fat pipe/bandwidth has made everything I do faster and easier in Logic... and my MacBookPro has 2GB of ram in it.
eSata helped me. I wouldn't advise trying to do complex mixing from assets off a USB drive, that's just asking for trouble.
Regardless, playing back an entire orchestra and all the virtual chairs from samples is gonna stress a system no matter what you got. Consider freezing some tracks as you build.

What good would more RAM do?

I use Photoshop extensively. I also use Lightwave 3D extensively.
My understanding is that Photoshop can only use 4GB of RAM and Lightwave is primarily a processor intensive piece of software.
Assuming I'd be using both at once, would having more RAM make much of a difference in performance? Considering that Lightwave would be hogging my processors, Photoshop while being a bit choppy in performance, would still have all the RAM it needs. Am I wrong?
Would more than 4GB make a difference?
Thanks for any suggestions.
-Vincent

Barefeats made one observation recently... CS3 is the
perfect excuse for an 8-core Mac Pro!
That isn't quite right. CS3 is a perfect excuse for a Mac Pro, because all apps will benefit from the speedy Intel native code, but not all apps will benefit from the 8 cores.
BareFeats says said Photoshop is not a great excuse for an 8-core Mac Pro other than to get CS3 native Intel speed. "When we ran Photoshop CS3 and Aperture 1.5, Activity Monitor showed all 8-cores cranking (up to 796% usage) but the total time to complete the task was barely faster than with the 4-core Mac Pro."
After Effects fares much better on 8 cores: "As you know, we've been fishing for an application that, by itself, can justify the purchase of an 8-core Mac Pro. I think we have found it: Adobe After Effects CS3."
The difference? As Photoshop engineers have explained, in single-frame image processing there are too many operations that can't be parallelized or at least not without costing too much to make it worth it. You hit a point of diminishing returns with the cores and it happens before you get to core 8. With After Effects, you just have each core work on a different video frame, and you are flying.
I'm not saying someone shouldn't make up excuses for an 8-core Mac Pro, but the additional cost blows enough budgets that I wouldn't point someone to the 8-core if I suspect they're putting their money in the wrong place. For most people, more RAM is more important than more cores. I'd tell most people to get a quad 2.66 or quad 3 and put the extra money into RAM.

IPad Air gift. Exchange for one with more memory

I received an IPad Air as a gift at work. I would love to keep it but memory is too little.
Can I go yo store and exchange it for one with more memory and pay price difference?
Please advise.
Thanks.

Just want to be sure I understand. I can return an iPad Air Purchased as a gift for someone and exchange it for an iPad Mini Retina? Is there a time window, 14 days, 30 days?
Thank you!

How much difference will more memory make with Logic?

I'm running Logic 6 on an iBook G4 with 1.33 ghz and 768 meg of ram. I can max out at 1.5 gig of ram. What difference will this make? I'm also going to upgrade to Logic 7 soon. I'm going to wait a while before I get an INTEL Mac since most of my plugs have no updates available yet (Sampletank, Amplitube, and T-Racks mastering). I figure in a year, INTELS will be much more common.Please share thoughts. I run all the audio files from a 7200 Mercury Firewire drive. I figure before my iBook is outdated beyond use I can upgrade memory and eventually have a newer/faster HD installed (There's a few places that will install new HD, transfer data and have everything back to you in 24 hours).

Adding memory will only make a truly big difference if you're currently low enough that the system resorts to using virtual memory paging. Load up a typical song in Logic, then start Activity Monitor. On the System Memory display, observe the number for 'page outs'. If it rarely or never increases while you're running Logic, adding memory won't make a huge difference. If 'page outs' is constantly growing, more memory will be dramatically improve the overall behavior of the system.
Ignore 'page ins', it's not relevant.
Note: those places that do 24 hour turnaround (via express shipping) for a drive replacement charge quite a premium for the service. I'd say you're better off doing as little as possible to the current system, and saving the money for the next one. Just my opinion, of course.
Quad G5 2.5Ghz 4.5GB 2x250G, PB 15" 1.5Ghz,80G,1.5G Mac OS X (10.4.4)

Will more memory make Day of Defeat source playable under boot camp?

i have a 2.0ghz macbook with 1 gig of memory. if i upgraded to 1.5 gigs, do you think it would make a difference in gaming? in day of defeat source, i get 40fps on a simple custom made map. if i play any other maps, i get 9fps steady and my latency gets real high. im thinking this is maybe due to a low amount of memory. i dont want to waste my money upgrading for nothing. would it make day of defeat atleast playable?

well its not really os x performance im worried about, its day of defeat. if i recall correctly, the system recommendations for the game recommend 1gig for memory. since the intel gma 950 is integrated, its using up that memory. especially when it can use up to 200mb in games under windows. i really am thinking more ram will help, but i just dont want to waste my money and find out it didnt do anything. i used to have a gaming pc before i sold it and a ram upgrade made all the difference in the world. but since i am dealing with integrated graphics, im wondering it just cant handle it. the thing is though, i have put in so many graphics tweaks in the game, it should run. i mean it looks like the old counter-strike which i run perfectly.

Will I make my 2009 Mac desktop any more memory efficient by running current files, (not applications such as Indesign, Photoshop), from a portable solid-state drive? Is it worth the trouble? Thanks

I have a slightly old Mac desktop and it is starting to slow down a lot now that I am using Adobe CS6 software. It is my final year of a 5 year architecture course and I can't afford to buy a new Mac.
Some of my fellow students are having similar problems with laptops and are running applications and files from portable drives - they wiped their entire Macbooks clean. I don't want to wipe my computer and start again as I may lose some of my oldest software which I have lost CDs for. Will it make any difference to run just my active files, or even move my most memory intensive software programs, to an external drive?
My desktop has maximum RAM installed.
Any advice much appreciated.

1. OWC or Crucial are recommended sources for memory. You can usually find a 5% off and free shipping code for Crucial on retailmenot.com. On crucial just key in your system information in their memory selector.
2. Your system likely supports SATA II speeds, so the SSD OWC pointed to would work. I installed one in our 2010 mac mini and it's working well. I originally installed their 6G drive however it ran at SATA I speeds. Turns out the 3G which is specd for SATA II is what was needed and works fine.
3. The OWC package they recommended includes a case to put your existing hard drive in. That helps to be able to transfer your data back to the SSD then you can use it as a backup drive or as an external storage device.

Would like to understand WHY changing the IP address seems to make a difference.

I have had significant difficulty getting my WRT54G v5 to pass to the internet multiple pcs connected by cable and/or wireless. Default settings seemed to work fine to log into the LAN, but only 1 connection would go to the internet. I called Linksys tech support and they successfully got me over at least the initial hurdle so that my 2 main pcs can now function, and a 3rd seems to also get through. I've seen in this forum a BUNCH of similar posts, including some which say that success only lasts for brief periods of time.
What changed to get mine to work???.......192.168.1.1 was changed to 192.168.2.1. What I'd like to understand is.......why does that make a difference?
I am not a networking technical guru by any means, but am I a novice to technical discussion. Simply changing the address to go from not working to working does not make sense to me, and I'd like it to make sense so I can support this thing without spending hours every weekend.
Linksys, can you please explain?

The address pool of the DHCP server are just the IP addresses which the DHCP server uses to assign them to devices which ask for an IP address via DHCP (e.g. computers which are set to obtain their IP address automatically). The DHCP server automatically supplies those devices with an IP address and assigns the correct subnet mask, gateway address, and dns servers.
This has nothing to do which IP address actually have internet access or not. After the device got its IP configuration from the DHCP server this configuration works just like any other configuration you may statically configure on some other devices.
The router connects all IP addresses inside your LAN to the internet as long as the devices use the router IP address as default gateway.
If you router has an LAN IP address 192.168.1.1 and a subnet mask 255.255.255.0 these two numbers together define that all addresses 192.168.1.* are part of the LAN. 192.168.1.0 is a special purpose address. 192.168.1.255 is the broadcast address of this LAN. Everything from 192.168.1.1-254 are normal IP addresses inside your LAN (with .1 obviously allocated by your router). Operating as gateway between the LAN and the internet the router accepts traffic from any of the LAN addresses and forwards it into the internet and receives the responses and sends them back into your LAN.
For the routing/gateway part of the router it is irrelevant where the device got its IP address from. This part does not know about the DHCP server. All that matters here is that the IP address is valid and inside the LAN subnet. If the device has a static IP address or DHCP assigned IP address does not matter.
It does not matter which IP address range the DHCP server assigns. Linksys uses 100-149 as default. Some other routers assign 2-100. Some others assign 2-254. Assign whatever you like. Orderly people split their subnet into various parts, e.g. assigning 10-19 to NAS devices with static IP, 20-29 for printers with static IP, 30-39 for VOIP phones with static IP, 50-99 for DHCP, 240-249 for other networking gear. Or in any other way.
The only important thing is not to assign a static IP address inside the DHCP server address pool. The DHCP server checks whether an IP address is used before it assigns it. If, however, the device with the static IP address inside the DHCP address pool is temporarily down, the DHCP server does not know that the IP address is used otherwise and thus may assign this address to another device. Now, once the device with the static IP address comes up again you have an IP address conflict. Therefore, never assign a static IP address inside the DHCP server address pool.

How Can i clean my memory and make my imac more faster ?

I am new user in mac i have imac 4 g ram and need a way to clean the memory and make my imac more faster ...

You can't "clean" RAM. If the "storage" space on your hard drive isn't enough then put in a larger hard drive or delete any of your data you no longer need or can store on an external drive. Beyond this I cannot say because you have not provided enough information such as the amount of installed RAM, Capacity of your hard drive and the amount of available space on the hard drive, the specific iMac model you have.
You can try reinstalling Lion:
Reinstalling Lion Without the Installer
Boot to the Recovery HD: Restart the computer and after the chime press and hold down the COMMAND and R keys until the menu screen appears. Alterhatively, restart the computer and after the chime press and hold down the OPTION key until the boot manager screen appears. Select the Recovery HD and click on the downward pointing arrow button.
Repair the Hard Drive and Permissions: Upon startup select Disk Utility from the main menu. Repair the Hard Drive and Permissions as follows.
When the recovery menu appears select Disk Utility. After DU loads select your hard drive entry (mfgr.'s ID and drive size) from the the left side list. In the DU status area you will see an entry for the S.M.A.R.T. status of the hard drive. If it does not say "Verified" then the hard drive is failing or failed. (SMART status is not reported on external Firewire or USB drives.) If the drive is "Verified" then select your OS X volume from the list on the left (sub-entry below the drive entry,) click on the First Aid tab, then click on the Repair Disk button. If DU reports any errors that have been fixed, then re-run Repair Disk until no errors are reported. If no errors are reported click on the Repair Permissions button. Wait until the operation completes, then quit DU and return to the main menu.
Reinstall Lion: Select Reinstall Lion and click on the Continue button.
Note: You can also re-download the Lion installer by opening the App Store application. Hold down the OPTION key and click on the Purchases icon in the toolbar. You should now see an active Install button to the right of your Lion purchase entry. There are situations in which this will not work. For example, if you are already booted into the Lion you originally purchased with your Apple ID or if an instance of the Lion installer is located anywhere on your computer.
However, if your computer doesn't have enough RAM or your hard drive is full, then reinstalling won't help.

Would more memory really make a difference?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for