Two questions

"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article , PAS
wrote:

I think either an Intel or AMD would do fine for you. Look into
getting
a system that has a self-contained liquid cooling system, it keeps
things cool and quiet and they are not expensive at all. I put one
in
my system when I upgraded recently and I really am happ that I
decided
to go with it rather than a CPU fan.

oh god no. liquid cooling is just asking for trouble

Sure it is - not.

"PeterN" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/2015 3:04 PM, PAS wrote:
"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article , PAS
wrote:


if you replace your hard drive with an ssd, where exactly do you

think
the scratch file will go?

In a multiple drive system you choose where it goes.

the majority of computers have a single drive, but regardless, it's
trivial to choose.

again, an ssd is the easiest and often the cheapest performance
boost
one can make, which affects just about every single app.

Yes, there is a performance boost but if one's primary use of a
computer
is Photoshop, there's not much of a boost.

oh yes there is.

i can tell you first hand that changing a spinner to an ssd makes a
*huge* difference across the board, hands down, even on older
computers
where the bus is not as fast as in modern computers.

it's night and day, even on an older computer that's bottlenecked
by
slower sata or even pata, but the benefit will obviously be less.

do you have an ssd in any of your systems? i think not.

I have no need for one.

exactly as i thought.

you have no experience with ssd. you're talking out your ass.

I said I don't own one, that doesn't mean I've never used one or
perhaps
someone in my house has one on his laptop? Being all-knowing, I'm
surprised you didn't pick up on that.

I will have one eventually but at the moment my
HDDs work just fine for my needs. My 174hp Subaru gets me around
fine,
I don't need a 707hp Dodge Charger Hellcat to do that. It might be
nice
to have but not necessary for my needs.

in other words, you're happy with a substandard system.

Are you happy with your substandard car?


I think you should buy a Rolls to make nospam happy.

I had my heart set on a Bentley but he'd claim it's substandard because
it's not a Rolls.

if you spent just $100 for an ssd (256 gig) and moved the os and
apps
to it, you'd see a *huge* performance increase, for very little
money.

shop around and you can even find an ssd for $70-80ish, and that's a
name brand (crucial or samsung), not some noname crap.



--
PeterN

In article , PAS
wrote:

no, and stick with intel.

Why?

intel is better suited to multithreaded calculations because of memory
bandwidth limitations on amd.

In real-world scenarios, most users wouldn't notice much of a
difference.

most users don't need more than a netbook.

people who use photoshop will see better performance with intel.

intel also uses less power for an equivalent performance. you may have
heard the term 'mips per watt' or 'performance per watt'.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6396/51142.png

lower power consumption keeps the system cooler, reducing the need for
loud fans and also reducing overall operating costs.

No loud fans with a good liquid cooling system, and they are very
affordable. Heat is not an issue with a proper cooler.

reliability certainly is.

"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article , PAS
wrote:

no, and stick with intel.

Why?

intel is better suited to multithreaded calculations because of
memory
bandwidth limitations on amd.

In real-world scenarios, most users wouldn't notice much of a
difference.

most users don't need more than a netbook.

people who use photoshop will see better performance with intel.

They probably wouldn't notice the difference. We're not talking about
benchmark tests, it's real-world application and that is what a user
deals with.

intel also uses less power for an equivalent performance. you may
have
heard the term 'mips per watt' or 'performance per watt'.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6396/51142.png

lower power consumption keeps the system cooler, reducing the need
for
loud fans and also reducing overall operating costs.

No loud fans with a good liquid cooling system, and they are very
affordable. Heat is not an issue with a proper cooler.

reliability certainly is.

How so? I have never had a reliability issue with any AMD processor
I've used, ever. I know you're just arguing for argument's sake but I
do this for the entertainment value.

In article , PAS
wrote:

no, and stick with intel.

Why?

intel is better suited to multithreaded calculations because of
memory
bandwidth limitations on amd.

In real-world scenarios, most users wouldn't notice much of a
difference.

most users don't need more than a netbook.

people who use photoshop will see better performance with intel.

They probably wouldn't notice the difference. We're not talking about
benchmark tests, it's real-world application and that is what a user
deals with.

if they won't notice the difference then they can buy a more moderate
system that does't require liquid cooling.

intel also uses less power for an equivalent performance. you may
have
heard the term 'mips per watt' or 'performance per watt'.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6396/51142.png

lower power consumption keeps the system cooler, reducing the need
for
loud fans and also reducing overall operating costs.

No loud fans with a good liquid cooling system, and they are very
affordable. Heat is not an issue with a proper cooler.

reliability certainly is.

How so? I have never had a reliability issue with any AMD processor
I've used, ever. I know you're just arguing for argument's sake but I
do this for the entertainment value.

because liquid cooling systems can leak which can cause all sorts of
problems. plus, they're more expensive than a fan.

if a fan based system fails the cpu will shut down when it gets too
hot. if a liquid cooling system fails, you may need to replace the
logic board due to damage from the liquid.

a much better way is use a chip that doesn't get insanely hot, such as
intel, which only requires a small low power fan. quiet, inexpensive
and effective.

On 9/17/2015 3:52 PM, PAS wrote:
"PeterN" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/2015 3:04 PM, PAS wrote:
"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article , PAS
wrote:


if you replace your hard drive with an ssd, where exactly do you

think
the scratch file will go?

In a multiple drive system you choose where it goes.

the majority of computers have a single drive, but regardless, it's
trivial to choose.

again, an ssd is the easiest and often the cheapest performance
boost
one can make, which affects just about every single app.

Yes, there is a performance boost but if one's primary use of a
computer
is Photoshop, there's not much of a boost.

oh yes there is.

i can tell you first hand that changing a spinner to an ssd makes a
*huge* difference across the board, hands down, even on older computers
where the bus is not as fast as in modern computers.

it's night and day, even on an older computer that's bottlenecked
by
slower sata or even pata, but the benefit will obviously be less.

do you have an ssd in any of your systems? i think not.

I have no need for one.

exactly as i thought.

you have no experience with ssd. you're talking out your ass.

I said I don't own one, that doesn't mean I've never used one or perhaps
someone in my house has one on his laptop? Being all-knowing, I'm
surprised you didn't pick up on that.

I will have one eventually but at the moment my
HDDs work just fine for my needs. My 174hp Subaru gets me around
fine,
I don't need a 707hp Dodge Charger Hellcat to do that. It might be
nice
to have but not necessary for my needs.

in other words, you're happy with a substandard system.

Are you happy with your substandard car?


I think you should buy a Rolls to make nospam happy.

I had my heart set on a Bentley but he'd claim it's substandard because
it's not a Rolls.


Probably, even though they are essentially equal.


--
PeterN

"PeterN" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/2015 3:52 PM, PAS wrote:
"PeterN" wrote in message
...
On 9/17/2015 3:04 PM, PAS wrote:
"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article , PAS

wrote:


if you replace your hard drive with an ssd, where exactly do
you

think
the scratch file will go?

In a multiple drive system you choose where it goes.

the majority of computers have a single drive, but regardless,
it's
trivial to choose.

again, an ssd is the easiest and often the cheapest performance

boost
one can make, which affects just about every single app.

Yes, there is a performance boost but if one's primary use of a
computer
is Photoshop, there's not much of a boost.

oh yes there is.

i can tell you first hand that changing a spinner to an ssd makes
a
*huge* difference across the board, hands down, even on older
computers
where the bus is not as fast as in modern computers.

it's night and day, even on an older computer that's
bottlenecked
by
slower sata or even pata, but the benefit will obviously be
less.

do you have an ssd in any of your systems? i think not.

I have no need for one.

exactly as i thought.

you have no experience with ssd. you're talking out your ass.

I said I don't own one, that doesn't mean I've never used one or
perhaps
someone in my house has one on his laptop? Being all-knowing, I'm
surprised you didn't pick up on that.

I will have one eventually but at the moment my
HDDs work just fine for my needs. My 174hp Subaru gets me around
fine,
I don't need a 707hp Dodge Charger Hellcat to do that. It might
be
nice
to have but not necessary for my needs.

in other words, you're happy with a substandard system.

Are you happy with your substandard car?


I think you should buy a Rolls to make nospam happy.

I had my heart set on a Bentley but he'd claim it's substandard
because
it's not a Rolls.


Probably, even though they are essentially equal.

They used to be. Now Bentley is owned by VW and Rolls is owned by BMW.
When VW bought Bentley, they also thought they were getting Rolls but
didn't.

"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article , PAS
wrote:

no, and stick with intel.

Why?

intel is better suited to multithreaded calculations because of
memory
bandwidth limitations on amd.

In real-world scenarios, most users wouldn't notice much of a
difference.

most users don't need more than a netbook.

people who use photoshop will see better performance with intel.

They probably wouldn't notice the difference. We're not talking
about
benchmark tests, it's real-world application and that is what a user
deals with.

if they won't notice the difference then they can buy a more moderate
system that does't require liquid cooling.

intel also uses less power for an equivalent performance. you
may
have
heard the term 'mips per watt' or 'performance per watt'.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6396/51142.png

lower power consumption keeps the system cooler, reducing the
need
for
loud fans and also reducing overall operating costs.

No loud fans with a good liquid cooling system, and they are very
affordable. Heat is not an issue with a proper cooler.

reliability certainly is.

How so? I have never had a reliability issue with any AMD processor
I've used, ever. I know you're just arguing for argument's sake but
I
do this for the entertainment value.

because liquid cooling systems can leak which can cause all sorts of
problems. plus, they're more expensive than a fan.

if a fan based system fails the cpu will shut down when it gets too
hot. if a liquid cooling system fails, you may need to replace the
logic board due to damage from the liquid.

a much better way is use a chip that doesn't get insanely hot, such as
intel, which only requires a small low power fan. quiet, inexpensive
and effective.

Effective self-contained liquid cooling systems are less than $100.00.
They are quieter than the quietest cpu fan. Even before I used liquid
cooling, a cpu fan kept my AMD processors cool, no reliability issues
despite what you try to make anyone believe.

On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 14:48:54 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

I plan to make my purchase within the next week.
Would I be making any great mistake by getting an i7 quad core
processor, or its AMD equivalent, with at least 16g memory, and a video
card that would fully utilize a 4k ass monitor.

What would I tangibly lose if I got an 15 with a similar speed.
As you know my prime use is for Photoshop2015, with plugins & Corel Painter.

I'll throw in my opinion, even though it's the same as most others.
Although you don't need the highest CPU speed, you don't want to go
too far in trying to save money. I don't think anyone on this group is
the least bit concerned over a few hundred dollars, so think in terms
of future proofing as much as you can. The I7 should be fine, along
with 16 GB, but as others have said, and I believe this is critical,
make sure there are open slots, both for cards - video and others, and
for memory, and make sure that there are plenty of USB3 ports on the
outside. I would also stick with Intel, and the I7. Scrimping and
saving is for grandmothers who are going to do a little email. You
don't want to spend good money on something, only to find out in a
year that it won't work with something new that you want to do,
especially when you realize that if you had only spent a couple of
hundred more dollars, you'd be fine.

There is a new generation of Intel CPU's now, and they use a new
generation of memory. There is a substantial price jump to that stuff,
but that has also helped to bring down the prices of the previous
generation. If you really want to future proof, the new stuff is the
way to go, but I'd question whether it's actually worth it. That would
be entirely up to you.

On 9/17/2015 4:34 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 14:48:54 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

I plan to make my purchase within the next week.
Would I be making any great mistake by getting an i7 quad core
processor, or its AMD equivalent, with at least 16g memory, and a video
card that would fully utilize a 4k ass monitor.

What would I tangibly lose if I got an 15 with a similar speed.
As you know my prime use is for Photoshop2015, with plugins & Corel Painter.

I'll throw in my opinion, even though it's the same as most others.
Although you don't need the highest CPU speed, you don't want to go
too far in trying to save money. I don't think anyone on this group is
the least bit concerned over a few hundred dollars, so think in terms
of future proofing as much as you can. The I7 should be fine, along
with 16 GB, but as others have said, and I believe this is critical,
make sure there are open slots, both for cards - video and others, and
for memory, and make sure that there are plenty of USB3 ports on the
outside. I would also stick with Intel, and the I7. Scrimping and
saving is for grandmothers who are going to do a little email. You
don't want to spend good money on something, only to find out in a
year that it won't work with something new that you want to do,
especially when you realize that if you had only spent a couple of
hundred more dollars, you'd be fine.

There is a new generation of Intel CPU's now, and they use a new
generation of memory. There is a substantial price jump to that stuff,
but that has also helped to bring down the prices of the previous
generation. If you really want to future proof, the new stuff is the
way to go, but I'd question whether it's actually worth it. That would
be entirely up to you.


Thanks,
This may sound like a dumb question, but how can I tell which is the new
chip set. While I think most of the sales clerks are honest, in my
dealings I have found too many of them lack knowledge.



--
PeterN