Photoshop CS3 and use of dual CPU

Hi!

I don't know if someone already asked that question
or noticed this behaviour of PS CS3, but: on
my Intel Mac (Core Duo 2Ghz) Photoshop always
only uses one processor core, sometimes not even
100%. In the Prefs is no reference to CPU usage,
therefore I don't know if this willingly of Adobe
or a problem of my machine. Does anybody have
an idea?
Thanks!

--

I'm using an evaluation license of nemo since 32 days.
You should really try it!
http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

What happens when you run bridge at the same time - does it run in a seperate core?

In article <4733e3e8$> "Malcolm
Smith" wrote:

: What happens when you run bridge at the same time - does it run in a: seperate core?

When I apply a computing intense filter on a large
image in PS and at the same time open a folder
with some hundreds pics in Bridge, PS uses
up to 98% of one core and Bridge up to 80% of
the second core...if this is of help.
But PS alone never uses more than 100%, and
this is nonsense when working with large files
and some filters which really need all of the
CPUs power.

--

I'm using an evaluation license of nemo since 32 days.
You should really try it!
http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

The state of commercial software is such that few if any processes are multi-threaded.
The way software is structured most computational tasks cannot be subdivided and rejoined at the end.
Eventually this will change but it will not happen anytime in the near future. Multi-core processing is irrelevant to the majority of tasks most people use their computers for anyway.
Although some CS3 tasks are said to be multi-threaded I have never seen a list of what processes and it would be very interesting if someone could identify these.
It would also be interesting to know if there is a difference in the multi-threaded processes for the Windows and the Mac OS. Comparisons I have seen demonstrate that most, but not all, Photoshop procesess run faster under the Windows than Mac OS on the same hardware (and on the Apple side you are limited to the bottom end of the Intel line-up) with the version of PS native to that platform.
Multicore processors are faster because the OS can assign unrelated processes to different cores to run simultaneously.
The other reason they are faster is that the onboard memory on the CPU, the L3 Cache, is available to all the cores. With an Intel quad core this can be up to 8mbs of ram that is accessed by the CPU directly without having to go out over the system bus to system RAM. No matter how fast your system RAM it cannot be as rapidly accessible to the CPU as memory on the CPU itself. ..

In Vista, you can CTR-ALT-Delete to Task Manager, go to Processes, right-click Phtotshop.exe and go down to "set affinity".

I use CS3 Extended on a dual-core AMD 64 (32 bit OS), and it uses cpu 1 and cpu 2. That's without Bridge open...

Also, Vista will never report 4GB RAM. It will report, (by default),
3.1GB. My box reports 3.5. Windows uses the balance for mapping
purposes so it's never going to report the full 4GB unless you run a 64 bit OS.

I'm sorry if this is OT as your question concerns a Mac OS, but I thought it may help the Winblows users out there, as well.

If I knew Vista was going to suck so much for the first few months, (even now-I'm just trying to be happy with what I've got and the fixes that HAVE been made to Vista...), I woulda bought a G5 in a heartbeat. In fact, I'm still considering it.

On Thu, 8 Nov 2007 19:13:28 +0000 (UTC), Frederik Paul
wrote:

Hi!

I don't know if someone already asked that question
or noticed this behaviour of PS CS3, but: on
my Intel Mac (Core Duo 2Ghz) Photoshop always
only uses one processor core, sometimes not even
100%. In the Prefs is no reference to CPU usage,
therefore I don't know if this willingly of Adobe
or a problem of my machine. Does anybody have
an idea?
Thanks!

In article ,
Frederik Paul wrote:

In article <4733e3e8$> "Malcolm
Smith" wrote:

: What happens when you run bridge at the same time - does it run in a: seperate core?

When I apply a computing intense filter on a large
image in PS and at the same time open a folder
with some hundreds pics in Bridge, PS uses
up to 98% of one core and Bridge up to 80% of
the second core...if this is of help.
But PS alone never uses more than 100%, and
this is nonsense when working with large files
and some filters which really need all of the
CPUs power.

When an application is less than 100% it's either waiting for something before it can proceed, probably reading from disk, or the OS is timeslicing the CPU with other appliactions.

When the CPU is less than 100% it means that the disk(s) are not fast enough to keep the CPU 100% busy.

That's the 5 cent story.

Perfmon.exe comes with every windows system and can measure and graph just about everything that happens in the box.

I suspected this

When I apply a computing intense filter on a large
image in PS and at the same time open a folder
with some hundreds pics in Bridge, PS uses
up to 98% of one core and Bridge up to 80% of
the second core

I am looking at building a new photoshop PC and often bridge initial process about 500 raw images and want to use photoshop for editing at the same time - on my curren system this is quite slow. If photoshop and bridge can use two cores then another application can take this above 2. I am looking at a new system with a quad core Q6600 2.4GHz processor - any comments?

Malcolm

Frederik Paul wrote:

Hi!

I don't know if someone already asked that question
or noticed this behaviour of PS CS3, but: on
my Intel Mac (Core Duo 2Ghz) Photoshop always
only uses one processor core, sometimes not even
100%. In the Prefs is no reference to CPU usage,
therefore I don't know if this willingly of Adobe
or a problem of my machine. Does anybody have
an idea?
Thanks!

How can you tell if more than one core is being used? What are you looking at to see the cores in use?

In article <uD9Zi.1573$> BF wrote:

: Frederik Paul wrote:
:: Hi!
::
:: I don't know if someone already asked that question
:: or noticed this behaviour of PS CS3, but: on
:: my Intel Mac (Core Duo 2Ghz) Photoshop always
:: only uses one processor core, sometimes not even
:: 100%. In the Prefs is no reference to CPU usage,
:: therefore I don't know if this willingly of Adobe
:: or a problem of my machine. Does anybody have
:: an idea?
:: Thanks!
::

: How can you tell if more than one core is being used? What are you : looking at to see the cores in use?

Activity Monitor

--

I'm using an evaluation license of nemo since 34 days.
You should really try it!
http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

In article <fh2f53$kah$ (Al Dykes)
wrote:

: When an application is less than 100% it's either waiting for : something before it can proceed, probably reading from disk, or theOS: is timeslicing the CPU with other appliactions.
:
: When the CPU is less than 100% it means that the disk(s) are not fast : enough to keep the CPU 100% busy.

Can't be because many other apps use up to 170%
CPU, small shareware apps and comercial ones
like e.g. all RAW converters (Aperture, Lightroom,
Canon DPP etc.)

--

I'm using an evaluation license of nemo since 34 days.
You should really try it!
http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo

Frederik Paul wrote:

In article <uD9Zi.1573$> BF wrote:

Frederik Paul wrote:

Hi!

I don't know if someone already asked that question
or noticed this behaviour of PS CS3, but: on
my Intel Mac (Core Duo 2Ghz) Photoshop always
only uses one processor core, sometimes not even
100%. In the Prefs is no reference to CPU usage,
therefore I don't know if this willingly of Adobe
or a problem of my machine. Does anybody have
an idea?
Thanks!

How can you tell if more than one core is being used? What are you looking at to see the cores in use?

Activity Monitor

I find only a performance monitor and a reliability monitor (that shows only one cpu).

dvus

The Q6600 is an awesome processor and the easiest to be over-clocked. In fact, Intel made this an option with this chip, depending on your system's BIOS having low-level access enough to set the voltage, FSB speed and multiplier. WITHOUT over-clocking, (I've seen it OC'd to
3.0GHz), it's an awesome chip....

Anyway, I'm confused by what you mean when saying, "If photoshop and bridge can use two cores then another application can take this above
2."

If you're using a quad-core chip, Photoshop and Bridge will use all 4 cores. Just like a dual-core will show both cores being used, the load is leveled between the cores available.

One of the 'hidden' utilities in XP and Vista is the ability to set the number of cores, (CPU's), to be used with any process, (program). If you're using a multi-core box now, go to Task Manager, (CTRL-SHIFT-DELETE), go to the second tab, Processes and right-click on any executable. On the bottom of the right-click menu is "Set Affinity" Open this and you'll see CPU1 and CPU2 either checked or unchecked on any particular CPU. This is a way of telling Windows how much power you want used to process whatever. Another useful thing is the ability to set dual or quad CPU usage for programs that don't run properly in a multi-core environment without setting both or all CPU's to be used.

If you're using the box primarily for Photoshop or even heavy PS use, be sure to invest in INTEL processors. Instruction sets and code are written just for Intel/Adobe PS. Actions take sometimes twice as long using AMD chips. Ask me... I know. :(

On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 21:47:33 GMT, "Malcolm Smith" wrote:

I suspected this

When I apply a computing intense filter on a large
image in PS and at the same time open a folder
with some hundreds pics in Bridge, PS uses
up to 98% of one core and Bridge up to 80% of
the second core

I am looking at building a new photoshop PC and often bridge initial process about 500 raw images and want to use photoshop for editing at the same time - on my curren system this is quite slow. If photoshop and bridge can use two cores then another application can take this above 2. I am looking at a new system with a quad core Q6600 2.4GHz processor - any comments?
Malcolm