login info join!
Forums > Photography Talk > Might build this PC... Thoughts? Search   Reply
12last
Photographer
Moon Pix Photography
Posts: 3,892
Syracuse, New York, US


I have been thinking of upgrading my current computer... I came across this "build your own system" in a magazine.  Would love to hear others thoughts (I would get someone else to build it since I am not great at this kind of stuff)

One thing they mentioned is you could get another Graphics card (think it was geared towards gaming).  I am wondering what others think of this system as is and also what they would upgrade first - more ram (from 16 to 34 = $100) or add another graphics card (VisionTek Radeon HD 7970 = $550).

Interested to hear if you would recommend a different component than the ones listed as well.

Thanks!

http://secure.newegg.com/Shopping/Shopp … ubmit=view

    

NZXT Phantom 410 CA-PH410-B2 Black Steel / Plastic ATX Mid Tower
$99.99
    

VisionTek 900491 Radeon HD 7970 3GB 384-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card
$579.99
   

CORSAIR Professional Series HX850 (CMPSU-850HX) 850W ATX12V 2.3 / EPS12V 2.91 80 PLUS SILVER Certified Modular Active PFC ...
$169.99
    

CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model CML16GX3M4A1600C9B
$94.99
    

ASUS Sabertooth X79 LGA 2011 Intel X79 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
$319.99
    

Intel Core i7-3820 Sandy Bridge-E 3.6GHz (3.8GHz Turbo Boost) LGA 2011 130W Quad-Core Desktop Processor BX80619i73820
$309.99
    

NZXT HAVIK-140 CPU Cooler w. Dual 140mm Fans
$59.99
    

OCZ Agility 3 AGT3-25SAT3-120G 2.5" 120GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)
$129.99


Subtotal:    $1,764.92


I already have enough HDD's.  I am wondering if I would need to buy Windows 7 again since I already have it on my present system?
Apr 10 12 12:33 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Brooklyn Bridge Images
Posts: 9,463
Brooklyn, New York, US


What are you using the box for ??
If its a PS editing machine the video card is big waste
Will not improve PS performance at all
I would put the savings to more RAM and another SSD as a temp working space for image files
If you have a full retail copy of Win 7 you can switch it to the new mach
OEM version only works on one system
Apr 10 12 12:54 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Moon Pix Photography
Posts: 3,892
Syracuse, New York, US


Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote:
What are you using the box for ??
If its a PS editing machine the video card is big waste
Will not improve PS performance at all
I would put the savings to more RAM and another SSD as a temp working space for image files
If you have a full retail copy of Win 7 you can switch it to the new mach
OEM version only works on one system

Oh really?  So the video card is overkill? I mostly work with LR... trying to improve speed when reviewing images (zoom in, zoom out, going from one photo to another quickly, etc..)
What do you think of this one?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6814102908

Apr 10 12 12:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
T Brown
Posts: 2,460
Traverse City, Michigan, US


The card isn't really overkill, maybe for PS but in general it would help boost the system since Windows offloads it Aero GDI to the GPU accelerated, which will imrove overall system performance and at that price its a no brainer.

Besides it will grow with you should you decide to use more than just PS.
Apr 10 12 01:03 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
fotograafdigi
Posts: 81
Apeldoorn, Gelderland, Netherlands


I'd recommend a thing often forgotten, a fan controller and a decent case with non stock but quiet fans and quiet CPU cooler.

Once you enjoyed a silent system you'll never go back, it works much more relaxed than the average 'vacuum cleaner'  PC.
Apr 10 12 01:07 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
curtis wood
Posts: 1,307
Logan, Utah, US


Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote:
What are you using the box for ??
If its a PS editing machine the video card is big waste
Will not improve PS performance at all
I would put the savings to more RAM and another SSD as a temp working space for image files
If you have a full retail copy of Win 7 you can switch it to the new mach
OEM version only works on one system

-what?

1. of course the video card matters. Maybe not to you, but you are paying for performance.

2. OEM COA numbers work just fine. As an integrator for the past 30+ years I can tell you that it is the exact same process to move a number if it is OEM or Retail from one machine to the other. You may have to call Microsoft's help line which is a free call, but other than that it is a very simple matter.

Apr 10 12 01:08 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
William Kious
Posts: 8,841
Delphos, Ohio, US


That video card is serious overkill for anything Photoshop or GUI related. Anyone telling you otherwise thinks you should swat flies with a Buick. Go for the extra RAM. You could buy a MUCH cheaper card to get the performance gain afforded by a tertiary video card.

By the way... those cards tend to be a driver nightmare.
Apr 10 12 01:11 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
sublime LightWorks
Posts: 6,061
Atlanta, Georgia, US


William Kious wrote:
That video card is serious overkill for anything Photoshop or GUI related. Anyone telling you otherwise thinks you should swat flies with a Buick. Go for the extra RAM. You could buy a MUCH cheaper card to get the performance gain afforded by a tertiary video card.

By the way... those cards tend to be a driver nightmare.

+1000

That card is overkill for LR and PS. Go for the RAM. And this is from someone who:

1) has built every system I've had since 1990
2) has a BSEE
3) is an IT director for a very large corporation

For your stated needs, go for the added RAM. PM me if you want the specs on the 5 systems I have in my network.

And as a poster above stated you can call MS to have them reset an OEM version of Win 7 so you can reuse it. It will no longer function on the original machine but you probably won't be using that one anyway. MS does not advertise this but they will do it.

Apr 10 12 01:48 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mark Anthony Photo
Posts: 199
Pottstown, Pennsylvania, US


I used to build machines. Just upgraded to a gigabyte board, I7 processor, new power supply,16 gigs of ram and a hdd for $800. I use LR and all programs load almost instantly. Even after putting Nik back on no bottlenecks. Still using only 6% processor and haven't even come close to tapping memory capabilities. Save the money for a new lens or a decent raid backup system. You'll use that more than a video card if you are mainly editing.

Just a thought
Apr 10 12 01:48 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Brooklyn Bridge Images
Posts: 9,463
Brooklyn, New York, US


Adobes recommend specs for video card are very modest
A basic 1GB card is more than double the rem spec
http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/tes … p-cs5.html
"The minimum amount of RAM supported on video cards for Photoshop CS5 is 128 MB. 256 MB of RAM is recommended."

http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/opt … ware_setup
$$$ spent on RAM will give far more performance
I would put the $500 on a faster CPU before wasting it on a video card
Apr 10 12 02:14 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Brooklyn Bridge Images
Posts: 9,463
Brooklyn, New York, US


TLBrown wrote:
The card isn't really overkill, maybe for PS but in general it would help boost the system since Windows offloads it Aero GDI to the GPU accelerated, which will imrove overall system performance and at that price its a no brainer.

Besides it will grow with you should you decide to use more than just PS.

Adobe suggests killing all the AERO crap to improve performance

Apr 10 12 02:17 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
ChanStudio - OtherSide
Posts: 5,331
Alpharetta, Georgia, US


Moon Pix Photography wrote:
I have been thinking of upgrading my current computer... I came across this "build your own system" in a magazine.  Would love to hear others thoughts (I would get someone else to build it since I am not great at this kind of stuff)

One thing they mentioned is you could get another Graphics card (think it was geared towards gaming).  I am wondering what others think of this system as is and also what they would upgrade first - more ram (from 16 to 34 = $100) or add another graphics card (VisionTek Radeon HD 7970 = $550).

Interested to hear if you would recommend a different component than the ones listed as well.

Thanks!

http://secure.newegg.com/Shopping/Shopp … ubmit=view

    

NZXT Phantom 410 CA-PH410-B2 Black Steel / Plastic ATX Mid Tower
$99.99
    

VisionTek 900491 Radeon HD 7970 3GB 384-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card
$579.99
   

CORSAIR Professional Series HX850 (CMPSU-850HX) 850W ATX12V 2.3 / EPS12V 2.91 80 PLUS SILVER Certified Modular Active PFC ...
$169.99
    

CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model CML16GX3M4A1600C9B
$94.99
    

ASUS Sabertooth X79 LGA 2011 Intel X79 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
$319.99
    

Intel Core i7-3820 Sandy Bridge-E 3.6GHz (3.8GHz Turbo Boost) LGA 2011 130W Quad-Core Desktop Processor BX80619i73820
$309.99
    

NZXT HAVIK-140 CPU Cooler w. Dual 140mm Fans
$59.99
    

OCZ Agility 3 AGT3-25SAT3-120G 2.5" 120GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)
$129.99


Subtotal:    $1,764.92


I already have enough HDD's.  I am wondering if I would need to buy Windows 7 again since I already have it on my present system?

That looks expensive to me..

Apr 10 12 02:22 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
curiosa des yeux
Posts: 1,458
Seattle, Washington, US


If you plan to do any video editing, the video card can be very crucial. However, every video editing software is different and while some will work well with brand "a", others will work better with brand "b". If you don't plan to edit video, or play video games or other graphics intensive tasks, just get the best card you can find for around $100-$150. It will be more than enough.
Apr 10 12 02:25 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Brooklyn Bridge Images
Posts: 9,463
Brooklyn, New York, US


Moon Pix Photography wrote:

Oh really?  So the video card is overkill? I mostly work with LR... trying to improve speed when reviewing images (zoom in, zoom out, going from one photo to another quickly, etc..)
What do you think of this one?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6814102908

Thats fine
I myself would look for a sub $100 card that has same amt of GPU ram

Apr 10 12 02:27 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
curiosa des yeux
Posts: 1,458
Seattle, Washington, US


ChanStudio - OtherSide wrote:

That looks expensive to me..

Nothing on the list looks over-priced to me. I just built a similar system in January and spent closer to $2300 with a couple extra SSD's.

Apr 10 12 02:27 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,770
London, England, United Kingdom


Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote:
What are you using the box for ??
If its a PS editing machine the video card is big waste
Will not improve PS performance at all
I would put the savings to more RAM and another SSD as a temp working space for image files
If you have a full retail copy of Win 7 you can switch it to the new mach
OEM version only works on one system

This:-

Any videocard is overkill for PS work, even the most basic desktops with an onboard shared video set-up is perfect for PS.

Graphics cards only come into their own if you're into serious gaming!

Why waste so much money, get yourself a $400.00 HP!

Apr 10 12 02:31 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
T Brown
Posts: 2,460
Traverse City, Michigan, US


According to this from the Adobe website CS6 and previous versions( limited) uses GPU acceleration for some intensive tasks.

I don't use CS6 so I am only taking this at face value

http://forums.adobe.com/message/4289204
Apr 10 12 02:33 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Leighthenubian
Posts: 2,849
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote:
What are you using the box for ??
If its a PS editing machine the video card is big waste
Will not improve PS performance at all
I would put the savings to more RAM and another SSD as a temp working space for image files
If you have a full retail copy of Win 7 you can switch it to the new mach
OEM version only works on one system

+1

Those specs are a for a gamer machine..mid range.

Photo and Video editing need lot's of fast swap space, RAM and a video card that supports mercury playback acceleration for hardware speed (nVidia). 8 to 16GB in RAM is sufficient.

Apr 10 12 02:34 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Erick Prince
Posts: 3,457
Austin, Texas, US


London Fog wrote:

This:-

Any videocard is overkill for PS work, even the most basic desktops with an onboard shared video set-up is perfect for PS.

Graphics cards only come into their own if you're into serious gaming!

Why waste so much money, get yourself a $400.00 HP!

I was thinking something similar. I also have always built my systems and the one I have now I built in 2009 and STILL is a beast. PS and LR don't even begin to scratch the surface of what systems can do now. PS seriously isn't a RAM or Graphics heavy program. The Barracuda and Raptor drives I upgraded gave me more of a boost in terms of my photography work. 32gbs of RAM is unnecessary for someone who doesn't know if they need it. That much RAM is high level video and 3D work. I'm at 16 for my Adobe Premiere work and I think it's still overkill.  If you don't know then you don't need it. Hell 8gbs would do him fine if it's paired with a decent card and processor setup. Add in a fast HD and he's set.

The price is a bit much in my opinion. I'm a big fan of eBay. Slash about $400 off that price.

Apr 10 12 02:40 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Select Models
Posts: 35,869
Upland, California, US


Moon Pix Photography wrote:
I have been thinking of upgrading my current computer... I came across this "build your own system" in a magazine.

Dude... that video card you listed... along with the SSD... and all that ram... that setup is for SERIOUS GAMERS!... and MAJOR overkill for photo editing work... but HEY... go ahead and use it as a tax writeoff for your photography business... cause we all know what you'll REALLY be using it for.  I'll seeya over on 'Battlefield 3'... lol

Apr 10 12 02:51 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
nwprophoto
Posts: 13,914
Kalibo, Western Visayas, Philippines


Adobe supports CUDA GPU's in Premiere.
If they do plan on offering more GPU acceleration
it will probably be on the CUDA platform.
Apr 10 12 02:55 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Faulty Focus
Posts: 696
Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada


I feel like the poor cousin here.  I am using  pentium 4 32. ghz with 3 gb of ram that I bought used from the local university for $150.00.  I did add a $75 video card and 2 more drives.

I do know when I have looked at building a new unit the info I found suggested that a monster video card would not be worth the cost, but that having 3 drives is a good idea. I was thinking of building with 2 ssd's and  two large sata. The first ssd would be for the op system and programs, the second for the scratch disk and the Sata's for data.
Apr 10 12 02:56 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Brooklyn Bridge Images
Posts: 9,463
Brooklyn, New York, US


Erick Prince wrote:
PS seriously isn't a RAM or Graphics heavy program.

Adobe says PS is a RAM hungry program
'Max out RAM''
http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/opt … out_on_RAM

Sorry I but I have to disagree with most of your points
I just built a new basic system re using my Raptor drive
Performance is night and day from old  spec

Retouchers PS speed test
Photoshop CS5

Intel Pentium G620 2.60Mhz Dual Core
Win 7 64bit Home Premium
RAM 8GB
Time:25.83
PS Settings Default



Intel Pentium G620 2.60Mhz Dual Core
Win 7 32bit Ultimate
RAM 4GB
Time:1:21.45
PS Settings Default



AMD Phenom 9600 Quad 2.3Mhz
Win 7 32bit Ultimate
RAM 1.5GB
TIME:4:11.55
PS Settings Default

Note:Same 512MB video card  and Raptor HD were used in all tests

Apr 10 12 02:57 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
T Brown
Posts: 2,460
Traverse City, Michigan, US


Anyway all I was saying is thats not a huge price for a video card even if its more than you'll use today there is always the possibility you'll put it to better use in the near future if not sooner.

But if like others are saying its a headache for drivers then I'd look for something similar.

I would spend the cash but then again its not my money, I hope you get a system that you enjoy using. smile
Apr 10 12 02:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Frozen Instant Imagery
Posts: 3,711
Dublin, Dublin, Ireland


The 7970 is the fastest Radeon video card available today (the GTX 680 is faster for many things). Great for playing games. Expensive, though. Massive overkill for a PS/LR machine.

Something like a 6770 video card would be far cheaper, and more than enough for Aero (if you want to run it).

Buying the top-of-the-line gaming video card for a PS/LR machine is a poor choice. Much better ways to spend the money. Lots of RAM is one way. Multiple SSDs is another.

If you do want to spend a lot on a video card, then maybe you should look at one of the pro cards, like a NVidia Quadro or AMD FirePro. Probably not justifiable, though.
Apr 10 12 03:01 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,770
London, England, United Kingdom


My lowly AMD 64x2 with 4GB RAM, 500GB HD and ATI 4550 500MB DDR3 is starting to look a little old now.

So, I was looking at a Core i7, 8GB RAM, 2TB HD, ATI 6970 or whatever, but then the thought came to me...

...will spending $1500.00 on a machine such as this really be worth that extra 5 seconds to open a PS file?

I think you know the answer to that one?
Apr 10 12 03:11 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Moon Pix Photography
Posts: 3,892
Syracuse, New York, US


Thanks everyone.. I think I will put my money towards other things than the video card as it seems to be overkill...... Perhaps an SSD for Lightroom previews and catalogs... or should I just use the extra SSD for my LR and PS cache?
Apr 10 12 03:11 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Moon Pix Photography
Posts: 3,892
Syracuse, New York, US


Thanks everyone.. I think I will put my money towards other things than the video card as it seems to be overkill...... Perhaps an SSD for Lightroom previews and catalogs... or would you just use the extra SSD for LR and PS cache? Would 120 or so GB's be sufficient?
Apr 10 12 03:13 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
William Kious
Posts: 8,841
Delphos, Ohio, US


curiosa des yeux wrote:
If you plan to do any video editing, the video card can be very crucial. However, every video editing software is different and while some will work well with brand "a", others will work better with brand "b". If you don't plan to edit video, or play video games or other graphics intensive tasks, just get the best card you can find for around $100-$150. It will be more than enough.

While this is relatively sound advice, those crossfire cards are designed for gaming. You won't see an appreciable performance boost using crossfire for video editing. It comes down to RAM, RAM and more RAM.

OP, you listed a Sandy Bridge i7 as your choice of processor. If you go for the added RAM, you will have sufficient video memory for your needs (if you won't be video editing.) An external card just won't be necessary.

Apr 10 12 03:15 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
nwprophoto
Posts: 13,914
Kalibo, Western Visayas, Philippines


Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote:
Adobe says PS is a RAM hungry program
'Max out RAM''
http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/opt … out_on_RAM

It also says PS has a max file size of 2 gigs for PSD
and 4 gigs for TIFF so that seems kinda lame.

Apr 10 12 03:27 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Frozen Instant Imagery
Posts: 3,711
Dublin, Dublin, Ireland


London Fog wrote:
My lowly AMD 64x2 with 4GB RAM, 500GB HD and ATI 4550 500MB DDR3 is starting to look a little old now.

So, I was looking at a Core i7, 8GB RAM, 2TB HD, ATI 6970 or whatever, but then the thought came to me...

...will spending $1500.00 on a machine such as this really be worth that extra 5 seconds to open a PS file?

I think you know the answer to that one?

5 seconds to open one file? No, probably not worth it. However, I shoot more than one file, and I process more than one shoot. Saving 5 seconds per file, especially when working through two or three hundred images, trying to find the ones I want to process, yeah, that adds up. 300 x 5 seconds is almost half an hour. Per shoot.

Apr 10 12 03:36 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,770
London, England, United Kingdom


Moon Pix Photography wrote:
Thanks everyone.. I think I will put my money towards other things than the video card as it seems to be overkill...... Perhaps an SSD for Lightroom previews and catalogs... or would you just use the extra SSD for LR and PS cache? Would 120 or so GB's be sufficient?

Try and get a 256GB SSD, Windows 7 needs a lot of room, plus you can store your images on external drives, thus keeping the SSD free to load the OS like lightning fast, we're talking Windows 7 up time in around 10 seconds!

Apr 10 12 03:36 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,770
London, England, United Kingdom


Frozen Instant Imagery wrote:

5 seconds to open one file? No, probably not worth it. However, I shoot more than one file, and I process more than one shoot. Saving 5 seconds per file, especially when working through two or three hundred images, trying to find the ones I want to process, yeah, that adds up. 300 x 5 seconds is almost half an hour. Per shoot.

Still not worth it.

On average from around 500 images taken per shoot (more if out on location) I whittle the best images down to around 25 or less (doing one right now!) of which the model get's a small selection, and I post 2-3 of the best.

So for me, I really am not going to sit around for weeks on end processing hundreds of images that will never be used.

Apr 10 12 03:41 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
sublime LightWorks
Posts: 6,061
Atlanta, Georgia, US


nwprophoto wrote:

It also says PS has a max file size of 2 gigs for PSD
and 4 gigs for TIFF so that seems kinda lame.

File size does NOT equal internal RAM needs. Don't go by that file size info.

Apr 10 12 04:54 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
sublime LightWorks
Posts: 6,061
Atlanta, Georgia, US


Sent the OP a PM reply but will share some direct experience on different configurations from ones I have built.

1) RAM is king. You can get a 32GB GSkill kit (4 pieces) 1333 DDR3 for $210.  Got an X79 motherboard?  You can go 64GB if you really want to be crazy.

2) Got an old SSD like a 32 GB sitting around after an upgrade?  Make that the PS scratch disk. Use it just for this. Very nice improvement in performance. Nothing to maintain.

3) RAID 0. Use it for storage not OS but make sure you back it up. Simple fact is more spindles equals faster read/write. I have a pair of WD 450GB Raptors in RAID 0 for storage only. Blazing fast.

Simple fact, any video card with a GPU like a 4850 and 1GB ram will run PS filters just fine. Remember PS is not running all those stream processors or rendering units, etc.  It's running OpenGL. A Radon 6770 will not run PS significantly faster than a Radon 4850. Just make sure you have 1GB ram.

Please note the above comment refers to Photoshop not Premeire.

Oh, and if you are using a rig to tether with LR and you have 16GB, setup a 1GB ram drive to grab the initial file capture. You'll eliminate one full read/write latency set to your hard drive or SSD. Can cut 1-2 seconds off your capture.
Apr 10 12 05:14 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
nwprophoto
Posts: 13,914
Kalibo, Western Visayas, Philippines


sublime LightWorks wrote:
File size does NOT equal internal RAM needs. Don't go by that file size info.

PS, Bridge and the OS typically use less than 1.5 gigs of RAM on my computer.
Still lots of room for a PSD file or two.

Apr 10 12 06:06 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
eos3_300
Posts: 1,462
Brooklyn, New York, US


London Fog wrote:
...will spending $1500.00 on a machine such as this really be worth that extra 5 seconds to open a PS file?

I think you know the answer to that one?

It can be a lot more than a few seconds

DNG Test
62 5DMKII Raws convert to DNG
My 12 yr old box
Appox 40+mins

Phenom Quad
9 min 11 Sec

SandyBridge Dual Core
2 min 49 sec

Apr 10 12 06:28 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
LANMAN
Posts: 1,016
New York, New York, US


There's a lot of overkill in this build but it really depends how you work.

There's no need for 16GB of RAM (but it's cheap so keep it) unless you:
- have a lot of layers in one image
- open a lot of images at once
- have multiple things running on your computer at once

I would actually add more RAM to setup a RAMdrive instead of using an SSD for PS scratch space.

There's no need for that video card unless you game or work with some video.

There's no need for an X79 motherboard and CPU unless you are going 6 core CPU. The latest Ivy Bridge motherboards are out and those CPUs are right around the corner. I would go 6 core CPU if I do a lot of image rendering from lightroom.
Apr 10 12 07:41 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Erick Prince
Posts: 3,457
Austin, Texas, US


eos3_300 wrote:

It can be a lot more than a few seconds

DNG Test
62 5DMKII Raws convert to DNG
My 12 yr old box
Appox 40+mins

Phenom Quad
9 min 11 Sec

SandyBridge Dual Core
2 min 49 sec

well yeah if its a 12 year old box. lol

Apr 10 12 07:49 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
sublime LightWorks
Posts: 6,061
Atlanta, Georgia, US


nwprophoto wrote:
PS, Bridge and the OS typically use less than 1.5 gigs of RAM on my computer.
Still lots of room for a PSD file or two.

If that were true, then the performance tests would show 4 GB is fine. But they don't now do they? 

Facts are 8GB and 16GB show marked improvements in performance.  That's reality.

And FYI a PSD file in memory is not the size it is on your hard drive. It's bigger, in many cases a lot bigger. Your noted memory use can also be affected by your RAM allocation settings in Photoshop preferences.

Btw, one other benefit of the amount of RAM you have?  Turn off the OS paging file. With 32GB or even 16GB you can stop Windows from paging and see a pretty big bump in performance.

All these affects are well documented.

Apr 11 12 03:42 am  Link  Quote 
12last   Search   Reply