I did have but on this occasion I don't know where it is! Shooting RAW takes longer to process because of the amount of data, much of the data from a jpeg is dumped in processing.
Please look, because that statement makes no sense to me. You seem to be saying jpg processing is faster because data are discarded during processing, but that would mean bits are tossed without being processed, e.g. take every other pixel and just ignore it. It can't work that way - the data have to be analyzed during processing, before elimination. Write would be faster, with less data to write. Processing would be the same. It's write speed and quantity of data that determine overall throughput - I don't think the processor is a significant bottleneck. That's why frame rate and buffer capacity take a bit hit going from JPG to RAW, and another small hit from RAW to RAW+JPG. There's no difference in the processing required for those three modes - all involve processing the full sensor RAW image to a JPG, including applying the in-camera settings (Picture Style, ALO, PIC, etc.), the only difference is the amount of data that need to be written to the card.
I agree with neuro... RAW files have to be processed first then converted to jpg (which is done even if you shoot in RAW only because a small jpg is needed to display the image on the LCD). If you shoot in jpg only then after processing only the jpg is written back to the buffer saving a lot
of space and reducing the write time to the memory card.
Edit: Actually, even in jpg only mode, the processed RAW file also may be written back to the buffer first and then deleted if the user selected JPG only. Discarding the RAW file is not likely built in to the processor as that would be an unnecessary function since it can be done after the fact.