I am running a process and I want to track it's CPU usage and in the end I would like to have a graph of time vs CPU usage. Any app or script for that? I googled and I couldn't find any. And activity monitor does not give graph of over the time of the process.

Activity Monitor doesn't show the "Kind" column, and does not give me the option to enable it. It's not in the list of columns I can enable. My friend's M1 Mac has the Kind column in the list of columns he can enable. It's between Real Shared Memory and Sudden Termination. It's not there for mine. The light-colored screenshot is my Mac. The dark-colored screenshot is my friend's. You can see the Kind column is highlighted on his, and missing on mine. I've tried deleting Activity Monitor preferences to no avail, and of course I've resized the window and made sure it's not already showing off the edge of the window. It's like the column never existed.

Is there any easy way to get CPU usage on a per core basis at a certain interval throughout the day? (e.g. every 60 seconds) Notes - happy to use a script (e.g. ruby, python) and run it in the terminal - would be great if the output were a simple csv, but open to using more sophisticated tools/outputs if they exist and are easy to use - the ultimate goal is to take to plot a time series of per-core utilisation over the day (or week/month) (that is, a line chart with as many lines as cores) - The answer on https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/94900/get-cpu-usage-per-core-on-the-command-line/ can't be used in a loop Example output: A csv that resembles:

time, core_1, core_2, core_3, core_4 (etc)
"2020-07-18 15:45:00 UTC", 15%, 12%, 0%, 1%
"2020-07-18 15:46:00 UTC", 100%, 100%, 10%, 3%
"2020-07-18 15:47:00 UTC", 10%, 2%, 0%, 0%
etc etc

During its November 10, 2020 event, Apple has announced that [Adobe is bringing its major apps to Apple Silicon, starting with the Lightroom photography software](https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/11/10/adobe-bringing-lightroom-to-apple-silicon-in-december) . They also said that all current versions will continue to run, but the new ones will take advantage of Apple Silicon directly. How can it be the current versions will run on the new ARM processor, since they were compiled for x86 Intel processors?

What is this process and how can I get rid of it? I ran antivirus etc but without any success. Terminating it in the activity monitor won't change anything.

Sampling process 416 for 3 seconds with 1 millisecond of run time between samples
Sampling completed, processing symbols...
Analysis of sampling usernoted (pid 416) every 1 millisecond
Process:         usernoted 
Path:            /usr/sbin/usernoted
Load Address:    0x10ef1f000
Identifier:      usernoted
Version:         845.40.3
Code Type:       X86-64
Parent Process:  ??? 

Date/Time:       2020-11-02 14:29:16.852 +0100
Launch Time:     2020-11-02 14:24:15.500 +0100
OS Version:      Mac OS X 10.15.7 (19H2)
Report Version:  7
Analysis Tool:   /usr/bin/sample

Physical footprint:         11.4M
Physical footprint (peak):  11.7M
----

Call graph:
    2702 Thread_4148   DispatchQueue_1: com.apple.main-thread  (serial)
    + 2702 start  (in libdyld.dylib) + 1  [0x7fff6eaa8cc9]
    +   2702 ???  (in usernoted)  load address 0x10ef1f000 + 0x2cd5  [0x10ef21cd5]
    +     2702 autoreleasepool(invoking:)  (in libswiftObjectiveC.dylib) + 46  [0x7fff6e75cd8e]
    +       2702 ???  (in usernoted)  load address 0x10ef1f000 + 0x3cce  [0x10ef22cce]
    +         2702 CFRunLoopRun  (in CoreFoundation) + 40  [0x7fff34c58489]
    +           2702 CFRunLoopRunSpecific  (in CoreFoundation) + 462  [0x7fff34bcfe3e]
    +             2702 __CFRunLoopRun  (in CoreFoundation) + 1319  [0x7fff34bd09c2]
    +               2702 __CFRunLoopServiceMachPort  (in CoreFoundation) + 247  [0x7fff34bd1ef5]
    +                 2702 mach_msg  (in libsystem_kernel.dylib) + 60  [0x7fff6ebea170]
    +                   2702 mach_msg_trap  (in libsystem_kernel.dylib) + 10  [0x7fff6ebe9dfa]
    2702 Thread_4198   DispatchQueue_20: usernoted_server  (serial)
    + 2592 start_wqthread  (in libsystem_pthread.dylib) + 15  [0x7fff6eca8b77]
    + ! 2592 _pthread_wqthread  (in libsystem_pthread.dylib) + 290  [0x7fff6eca9a3d]
    + !   2592 _dispatch_workloop_worker_thread  (in libdispatch.dylib) + 596  [0x7fff6ea5ec09]
    + !     2592 _dispatch_lane_invoke  (in libdispatch.dylib) + 363  [0x7fff6ea555d6]
    + !       2571 _dispatch_lane_serial_drain  (in libdispatch.dylib) + 597  [0x7fff6ea54c44]
    + !       : 2571 _dispatch_client_callout  (in libdispatch.dylib) + 8  [0x7fff6ea4f658]
    + !       :   2542 _dispatch_call_block_and_release  (in libdispatch.dylib) + 12  [0x7fff6ea4e6c4]
    + !       :   | 2534 ???  (in usernoted)  load address 0x10ef1f000 + 0x3829  [0x10ef22829]
    + !       :   | + 2532 ???  (in usernoted)  load address 0x10ef1f000 + 0xf6c5a  [0x10f015c5a]
    + !       :   | + ! 1427 ???  (in usernoted)  load address 0x10ef1f000 + 
Sample analysis of process 416 written to file /dev/stdout

Observing Activity Monitor, the per-process CPU is often *very* different to the total CPU. ### Example Here the sum of individual processes is > 50%, yet the total said to be (100 - 91.43) 8.57%. Why is this? And which is correct?

I have a late 2019 MacBook air with an Intel Core i5. I REALLY want to upgrade this processor to make the laptop just a bit better. Because I just bought it, I really don't want to get a whole new computer. I was wondering if it is possible to replace the possessor. I have heard that the processor is attached to the logic board so I am open to getting a new logic board. If anyone wants to help me out that would be greatly appreciated!

Three to four weeks ago I read an article which was talking about the project Folding@Home which helps researchers find a cure for the CoVid-19. Since then my Mac has been pretty noisy, although the idea was to run the software when I was not working on my Mac. Today I noticed that despite not having so much running on the Mac it is noisy and also kind of hot underneath. In the iStat, i found out that the FAHclient was taking the most of the CPU power (even when not running it). I uninstalled the software and its client is still running in the background. I also terminated the process related to it in the terminal: > ps aux | grep fah > > kill *the pid* How can I uninstall it completely as it's not letting me concentrate since a while.

Can the Mac Pro 2020 in the future be upgraded to replace/add these: - DDR4 -> DDR5 - Intel -> Arm - ... -> Apple Neural Engine Or are they not compatible with the current Mac Pro design? They are all technologies that could potentially be available for Mac products within a year or two.

Discussion in comments below [this answer](https://codereview.stackexchange.com/a/235222/145009) to *improving speed of this numpy-based diffraction calculator* suggest that the reason the script in the answer runs slow for me but fast for others (even on earlier versions of NumPy) might be that my late 2012 MacBook Air's processor L1 cache might be smaller than others. It could also be that I am running dangerously low on disk space (I was seeing 40 MB/sec reads and writes while running). I'm curious though, what is the size of the on-processor L1 cache for my late 2012 MacBook Air, and how does it compare to new MacBooks? MacBook Air: 13-inch, Mid 2012 Processor: 1.8 GHz Intel Core i5 Memory: 4 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 Hard Drive: 251 GB Flash Storage I'm not a developer, but I did a small test. Running the script below I see that multiplication of two NumPy arrays is fastest (a few nanoseconds per float multiply) when the array size is about 10^4. Each is about 8 bytes, **so I'm estimating that my L1 cache size is about 10^5 Bytes.** Is that close? **note:** I estimate time using both time.time() and time.process_time(). The former (blue, solid line, lower values) is "people time", how long I have to wait for something to finish. [](https://i.sstatic.net/RrN4F.png) import numpy as np import matplotlib.pyplot as plt import time Ns = np.logspace(1, 8, 15).astype(int) t1, t2 = [], [] for N in Ns: x = np.random.random(N) t1_start = time.time() t2_start = time.process_time() n = int(1E+06/N) for i in range(n): y = x*x t1.append((time.time() - t1_start)/(N*n)) t2.append((time.process_time() - t2_start)/(N*n)) if True: plt.figure() plt.plot(Ns, t1) plt.plot(Ns, t2, '--') plt.xscale('log') plt.yscale('log') plt.title('estimated time (sec) per float multiply vs array size', fontsize=14) plt.show()

I'm not sure what a CPU-specification like "3 GHz Intel Core i5" really means. Does it mean that there are five cores with 3 GHz each? Or are there 3 GHz distributed between the five cores? What would be the equivalent, if it would have only one single core? I mean: One can not say, that it is equal a single core with fifteen GHz, I guess ...

I own a Mac Pro 4,1 (single socket) with a Nehalem Quad-Core CPU. I'd like to upgrade it with a six-core Westmere processor. Now, what I have to do prior to installation of the Westmere processor? Is firmware upgrade to 5,1 really mandatory? Is there other stuff to upgrade?

I know very little about computer hardware so I thought I might as well ask. I have an Intel Core i7 in my MacBook Pro Late 2012. I am considering getting a 2018 MacBook Pro. I was wondering if it is possible to purchase an Intel Core i5 2018 model and then just take the 2012 Core i7 and put it in the 2018. I am wondering if this is realistically possible and also if its technically possible (like could the 2018 hardware accept a 2012 core i7 or would there be other hardware compatibility issues). I am also wondering how a 2012 Core i7 processor compares to a 2018 Core i5 (would it be worth it).

I just went to Apple's website (July 2019) to find the maximum processor spec of a 15-inch Macbook Pro to be: 2.4GHz 8‑core 9th‑generation Intel Core i9 processor, Turbo Boost up to 5.0GHz However, my Macbook Pro (15-inch, 2018) has a processor spec of 2.9 GHz Intel Core i9. *Update:* After reading the answer where **six** cores is important, I found the more official spec from Apple : 2.9GHz 6-core Intel Core i9, Turbo Boost up to 4.8GHz Why has the processor speed gone down? Does it have anything to do with the heat problems I heard about in 2018?

Some days ago Apple refreshed the MacBooks pro and I'm looking for either well sourced reviews of the hardware capabilities between the models or real world experience to help me value the increased cost of the i7 (3.0 GHz) over the i5 (2.6 GHz) on the new Macbook Pro 13" with retina display (ME662LL/A which presumably will be marketed as an early 2013 model) . I've done some research on [Intel's site](http://ark.intel.com/fr/compare/72056,71255) and, by my reckoning, the CPU release dates / frequencies imply Apple is using 2 possible CPU for the new 13 inch with Retina that ships with 256 GB of storage (which like the CPU can also be upgraded for additional cost). Can someone confirm/corroborate that the i5-3230M and i7-3540M are used so that I can rely on Intel's description of the chips or are there other factors at play with Apple hardware. It seems like the GPU of the i7 support higher frequency & the i7 has more virtualization features. As a regular user of virtualization, does this CPU upgrade offer benefits for VM performance past the incremental change in clock speeds (Intel's VT-d feature sounds good, but I don't understand if it helps existing Mac virtualization software run better or faster)? I realize no one can make buying decisions, but hoped to learn more about how the hardware works so we all can learn more about what goes on under the hood of this model Mac.

I have noticed that VDCAssistant was causing the computer to be extremely slow due to CPU usage in excess of 90%. Here is the path of VDCAssistant. > /System/Library/Frameworks/CoreMediaIO.framework/Versions/A/Resources/VDC.plugin/Contents/Resources/VDCAssistant When, I ran the following command: > lsof | grep -i "VDC" I get all sorts of stuff related to IOUSBFamily, AppleIntelHSWVA, GeForceVADriver, and some /dev/null entries. When I terminated the process of "/System/Library/Frameworks/CoreMediaIO.framework/Versions/A/Resources/VDC.plugin/Contents/Resources/VDCAssistant" everything seems to go back to normal. I know that this process will relaunch and cause further slow downs. Does anybody know what might be causing this and how I can fix it?

I have a Mac Pro "Eight Core" 2.26 (2009/Nehalem) that I was running with dual X5690 (3.46GHz/6-core/12MB/130W) processors for the last couple years (yes, I've got the 2010 firmware hack on it). Been running fantastic, but I needed to do swap some hardware around and so ended up needing to take these processors out and put some older processors (that were from another actual 2010 Mac Pro; 2.66 GHz 6 Core Xeon X5650 x2). After the transplant was completed I fired it up and immediately got a light on the right side of CPUA: I held the power button in and immediately turned it off. This light then lit ("OVTMP CPUA"): I figured something must be up with the heatsink as it seemed as though the screws for the 2009 heatsinks ratcheted down tightly and immediately instead of having some give that would indicate that it was in contact with the CPU (lidded CPU btw). Made me figure that perhaps the heatsink was not pressing down the CPUA processor enough. I also recalled that the previous processor that was in here may have been *SLIGHTLY* taller. I then took the heatsink back off and put about .5 to .75 mm of copper cut to size for the Xeon lid and used thermal paste again to make up for this possible spacing issue. I repeated this for CPUB. The heatsink seemed to ratchet down better this time as I could feel some pressure being applied and the torque didn't stop immediately as before and thus i could torque it down a bit. After doing this, I unfortunately found that the same error lights were emitted - no change. I also went ahead got some additional feedback from the DIAG LED button: I'm not really sure what to do at this point. Should I add thicker copper to make the heatsinks apply greater pressure to these Xeon processors? I believe Intel has pretty good heat protection for these processors, so I don't believe the processor would be "burned out" at this point, right? Further, would resetting the motherboard by removing the battery and / or pressing the reset button beside the battery (above the 1st PCIe slot / behind the GPU) help at all? Any other ideas aside from buying a new processor?

I have a MacBook from a few years back. When I use it write some code and browse the internet, the fans go very fast and the noise is horrible. But the temp shows only 70 C. So I used SMC to force the fans to 3000rpm. I really don't mind frying my MacBook as long as its quiet. Now instead of the temp rising to 90 C or more (what I want!), my MacBook decides to lower the cpu clock to 0.8 Ghz. And it becomes completely useless. I can't even use one program at a time. Even the mouse cursor lags. What can I do? Can I force the CPU clock? Model: A1286 i7 2.0 Ghz (High Sierra) Early 2011 edit: i don't even want a turbo boost or anything (would be nice). i just want to use the 2 Ghz and not only 0.8 Ghz.

In this comparison the main difference I see is in the processors. https://www.apple.com/in/mac/compare/results/?product1=imac-21&product2=mac-mini Irrespective of other feature differences this is what I'm mainly concerned about. On the iMac it is

.3GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor

On the Mac mini

.6GHz quad-core Intel Core i3

Can someone help me to identify which is better in terms of performance?

Is it possible to force more than 4 cores in the Dock, this looks like a feature apple does not want after checking out Mac OS X: Activity Monitor shows one CPU Usage graph on systems with more than four cores >On Macs with more than four cores, a single graph showing aggregate usage of all the CPU cores is shown in the main Activity Monitor window, in the CPU History window, and on the Dock icon when configured to show CPU Usage or CPU History. If I want to use Activity Monitor is my only option: >To see the CPU usage for each core individually on systems with more than four cores, use the CPU Usage window or Floating CPU Window. These windows can be viewed by selecting them from Activity Monitor's Window menu. > >Note: The CPU Usage window cannot be displayed if CPU Usage is being shown on the Dock. To stop showing CPU Usage on the Dock, choose View > Dock Icon, then select any choice besides "CPU Usage", such as "Application Icon". Is there any way around this? With aggregated CPU view it could be harder to detect when a process is hanging or hogging a CPU thread. Here is how my CPU history is displayed in the Dock: Here is how My CPU usage is displayed in the Dock: Here are my other windowed / Floating options that I have available in Activity Monitor: