For a game lover who also loves mac operating system may find him or herself in a condition that is completely contradictory. Mac os is said as the most difficult operating system to which so many games can not be supportive for it. Meanwhile, the mac os is also a precious system to which people who look for prestige usually turn to it. Well, finding game soft wares supportive for the mac os is not that hard for today. Some application developers have always been innovating in providing the best features for completing the availability and support for the mac os.

You can find you favorite games for your mac os in the mac games and more. Rome curse of the necklace for mac is also available right now. It is surprising because many people have been talking about it. It means that the service of providing mac games is very dedicative. Moreover, you will also get an offer of the mac hidden objects games. It is a game to which you can hide unwanted objects. Still, there are many choices of the latest games for mac. All you need to do to get them is jus by download mac games and the games will be right in your mac.

Print digital photo with helpful printer can not separate from toner cartridges. Toner cartridges offer various of color choice, such as cartridges with black ink, cartridges with three combination basic color  like red, blue and yellow, etc. for my digital photo store, I usually use printer cartridges from colour save. Colour save sell all of kind of compatible printer cartridges that guarantee quality because they have ISO 9001 license that guarantee their compatible ink cartridges, compatible toner cartridges work well as an original equipment manufacturer printer cartridge.

Valuable printer cartridges to do a job able to minimize left the worse color lines when printing process in progress because if it happen, their costumer will disappointed. Costumers always want their unforgettable moment can represent in photo shape that able called their memories when the images has been captured. They don’t want their photo printing result not appropriate with their wish because it must they share to lovely people that have been captured in that photo.

This article has been written after another tests of the AMD Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition, the late flagship from this company. We’d already reviewed this processor according to our standard test procedure here and had benchmarked it in the overclocked mode in modern games here.

Additional tests were necessary to compare different CPU coolers, to try the new version of AMD Overdrive 3.0.2 and AMD Fusion For Gaming, as well as to run a number of popular benchmarks from the largest database of overclocked components — HwBot.org.

Besides, out of curiosity and in order to get higher results, we also overclocked the AMD RADEON 4890 graphics card (within safe limits). We’ll describe the experience below.

Testbeds:

* Motherboard: Gigabyte MA-790GP-DS4H
* AMD processor: Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition
* Memory: Corsair DDR2 667 MHz (5-5-5-15-2T) 2×1024 MB
* HDD: Seagate 160 GB SATA2
* Power supply unit: Corsair HX520 520 W
* Operating system: Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 32-bit

We also wanted to see how our power supply unit would hold in these difficult conditions. Marketing departments have recently managed to impress in users’ minds that a powerful computer, especially when overclocked, cannot use a power supply unit below 750 W or even below 1000 W. Let’s try to find out whether it’s true.

As you may remember, AMD Black Edition processors are implied to allow modifying the multiplier. So any motherboard would do for CPU overclocking in this case. It doesn’t have to raise chipset voltage and endure very high clock rates.

A nice feature of a motherboard in our testbed was an option to specify a CPU multiplier at 0.5 steps, not just at integer steps. It facilitates the overclocking procedure, leaving to an overclocker only final tweaking within 100 MHz.

Unluckily, memory for the testbed turned out to be the weakest link. So our tests won’t break any overclocking records. However, we can still evaluate performance gains versus the nominal clock rates — and that’s what we are primarily interested in.

Our graphics card is a test sample from AMD, so it has a reference design. We didn’t improve or replace the native cooling system for our overclocking tests.

All tests were run in an open testbed with the environment temperature of 24°C. We used LinX 0.5.9 for stability tests — it’s a simple and convenient GUI for the Linpack benchmark from Intel (popular among overclockers). We registered a reached frequency as stable after completing 25 test runs applying 1024 MB of memory.

The coming tests were applied for all CPU clock rates:

* WinRAR
* 7zip
* 3DMark Vantage
* PCMark Vantage
* x264 HD Benchmark Ver. 2.0

At the upper limit stable frequency we also started the following tests:

* 3DMark 2006
* Hexus Pifast
* SuperPi
* Wprime

We used CPU-Z 1.51 to read information about CPU clock rates and HW Monitor 1.14 to monitor voltages and temperatures. All power saving technologies were disabled during our tests, CPU fan speed was maximized.
Overclocking, boxed cooler

We got our processor with a full package, so it would have been a real waste not to test this small cooler with a copper base, two heat pipes, aluminum fin-stack, and a 70-mm fan.

First of all we ran all our tests at the nominal frequency of 3000 MHz and 1.35 V. Test results are published in the table:

AMD Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition 3000 MHz
WinRAR 3.71, s     64
7-Zip 4.57, s     147
x264 v0.59.819M, fps (1pass/2pass)     66.00 / 17.46
3DMark Vantage, 3DMark Score (CPU Score)     P9842 (10011)
PCMark Vantage, PCMarks     5561

Our Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition managed 3400 MHz without expanded voltage. However, Linpack crashed at the end of the test. We managed to solve the problem only by raising the voltage to 1.425 V.

The next step required even more concessions — to conquer 3600 MHz, we had to raise voltage by another 0.075 V. The boxed cooler coped with such a task only because the testbed was open. All the tests were stable. However, according to the processor sensors, its temperature got close to 70°C.
AMD Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition 3600 MHz
WinRAR 3.71, s     55
7-Zip 4.57, s     142
x264 v0.59.819M, fps (1pass/2pass)     75.99 / 20.69
3DMark Vantage, 3DMark Score (CPU Score)     P10276 (11938)
PCMark Vantage, PCMarks     5647

This mode is only partially fit for everyday usage. There was no point to continue our tests with the boxed cooler, and it was even getting dangerous. Nevertheless, it demonstrated decent results. Overclockers have worked out a stereotype for all the years boxed coolers existed that such cooling systems are not fit for overclocking at all (which was true until recently).

We’ve seen the benchmarks. We’ve heard from the techno-geeks. According to Apple, Snow Leopard should result in some impressive speed gains, and hefty hard drive space recapture. But does this speed bump actually result in tangible benefits for the average user?

Do you really get back a functional amount of hard drive space? I undertook an intentionally low-tech approach to find out, looking at the space on the drive, and using my iPhone’s stopwatch function to time various functions before and after upgrade. I took measurements on two computers: a low-end, bare bones white MacBook used lightly as a secondary computer, and a higher-end MacBook Pro used heavily as a primary computer. The white MacBook was generally speedy and efficient before the upgrade, due to the fact that it had very little installed on it. However, the MacBook Pro was bloated and slow due to lots of programs, with problems magnified by years of hard drive image flashes over various computer upgrades, typical of the non-technical business user.

All start up times are true start up times. In other words, I didn’t deem the computer to have “started up” until I had full, no-lag control of a fully-propagated desktop. Same went for the programs whose start up times I tested — none were deemed started up until the program was responding to input and usable. I picked some common programs that I felt reflected typical use. I turned on auto-login to the primary account on both computers to gain timing accuracy. Not all the results are comparable between computers; certain programs were on one computer but not the other. But, in general, the task was instructive.

2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo MacBook (white), with 2 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM

Leopard:

Start up chime to true, usable desktop: 35 seconds
Firefox start up: 11 seconds
Safari start up: 4 seconds
iPhoto start up to edit window on 1 GB photo library: 11 seconds
Microsoft Word 2004 start up to blinking cursor: 25 seconds

Snow Leopard:

Start up chime to true, usable desktop: 32 seconds
Firefox start up: 9.5 seconds
Safari start up: 1.5 seconds
iPhoto start up to edit window on 1 GB photo library: 9 seconds
Microsoft Word 2004 start up to blinking cursor: 26 seconds (after Rosetta install)

Upgrade time: 44 minutes
Hard drive recapture: 15 GB (see update below)

2.2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro with 2 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM

Leopard:

Start up chime to true, usable desktop: 153 seconds (ouch!)
Firefox start up to loaded homepage: 13 seconds
Safari start up to loaded homepage: 4 seconds
iPhoto start up to edit window on 9.45 GB photo library: 24 seconds
Microsoft Word 2008 start up to blinking cursor: 29 seconds
Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Standard start up: 120 seconds

Snow Leopard:

Start up chime to true, usable desktop: 57 seconds (ooh!)
Firefox start up to loaded homepage: 10 seconds
Safari start up to loaded homepage: 3 seconds
iPhoto start up to edit window: 12 seconds
Microsoft Word 2008 start up to blinking cursor: 25 seconds
Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Standard start up: 57 seconds (after Rosetta install)

Upgrade time: 66 minutes
Hard drive recapture: 10.5 GB (see update below)

My overall impression? The speed-improvement claims are fairly well-substantiated. Both computers are operating speedier than before, with the greatest overall speed gains in the power-user computer. The bare bones machine, while faster, is not really that much practically faster. For this computer, the 15 GB of extra space was the most dramatic improvement. As for the MacBook Pro, it achieved some stunning start up time improvements: start up time is now consistently forty percent of what it used to be. Even waking up from sleep (an event I did not time) both computers are now noticeably faster, locking on to a previously-used Wi-Fi network almost immediately.

In all, both computers were at least somewhat functionally enhanced from the upgrade, and I am glad to see an operating system upgrade that truly gave the user some real speed and space benefits rather than concentrating strictly on adding features.

UPDATE: As our commenters have noted (and Megan posted about last week) part of my space savings is due to the reworking of how Snow Leopard measures gigabytes.

UPDATE 2: Fellow blogger Joachim Bean has some of his own speed tests to share:

2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Mac mini with 1GB 1066 MHz DDR3 SDRAM (GeForce 9400M)

Leopard

Startup chime to true, usable desktop: 57 seconds
Shutdown: 8 seconds
Safari startup: 7 seconds
Microsoft Word 2008 startup: 17 seconds
Mail startup: 11 seconds
Xcode (3.1.4): 10 seconds
iPhone Simulator startup: 20 seconds

Snow Leopard:

Startup chime to true, usable desktop: 49 seconds
Shutdown: 5 seconds
Safari startup: 2 seconds
Microsoft Word 2008 startup: 17 seconds
Mail startup: 7 seconds
Xcode (3.2): 16 seconds
iPhone Simulator startup: 20 seconds

Upgrade time: 1 hour, 20 minutes
Hard drive recapture: 12GB (see update)