If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop CS4 hardware question
I'm planning on building a PC dedicated to Photoshop CS4 and the latest
Lightroom. I'm told that for a workflow that does not depend on continuous coffee breaks to allow the machine to crunch image data, a very powerful machine is requisite. I'm told that a 64 bit system with as much RAM as one can afford is what makes it possible to fiddle with multiple layers and do extensive comparison of effects, etc. I do know that a timely response from the machine is necessary to keep the creative juices from stagnating (shriveling on the vine, so to speak), so those requirements make some sense to me. OTOH, I'm told that CS4 runs just fine on much less powerful systems, that a 32 bit system is more than enough to handle anything that one might want to do with Photoshop. As I don't have access to the code of Photoshop, I can't evaluate it's ability to shine on such systems, but I'm not that sanguine about coding miracles from Adobe in any case. Some of these issues are addressed in an excerpt from "Real World Adobe Photoshop CS4 for Photographers" by Chavez and Blatner. Check out: http://www.peachpit.com/articles/pri...aspx?p=1247538 A local acquaintance has touted very expensive Apple systems, while others talk about laptops, saying that they are more than good enough. I really don't want to have to hock the house for a genuinely useful system, but if that is what it takes... nah, the house is safe, but other money pits that yawn nearby are surely not. On their behalf, therefore, a question in this regard is appropriate. So... What is the experience of CS4 users in these regards? What sort of system works best? What sort of system works well enough that using it is not an onerous task? What am I looking at here? And what is it that I don't understand; what question do I need to ask that I'm not asking? Another question: What is the experience with good LCD monitors? What is a "good" LCD monitor and why is it "good"? I've got a couple of good CRT monitors, but don't know that they can be replaced. The guy that talks up the Apple system claims to have one, but he says that it's very expensive (presumably it's an Apple monitor). What is the reality here? Anyone know? Thanks for reading. All useful responses will be duly appreciated. Longfellow |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop CS4 hardware question
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 14:38:57 -0600, Longfellow wrote:
I'm planning on building a PC dedicated to Photoshop CS4 and the latest Lightroom. I'm told that for a workflow that does not depend on continuous coffee breaks to allow the machine to crunch image data, a very powerful machine is requisite. I'm told that a 64 bit system with as much RAM as one can afford is what makes it possible to fiddle with multiple layers and do extensive comparison of effects, etc. I do know that a timely response from the machine is necessary to keep the creative juices from stagnating (shriveling on the vine, so to speak), so those requirements make some sense to me. Well, IF it is truly a dedicated PS CS4 machine and you are going to be using it hard and putting it up wet at times then I'd recommend that you build a nice quad core based machine. You will find that everyone here will have an opinion on what you need to spend or include or don't need. This is just what I would do from what you are describing. My quads are "toys" mounted on all onboard MB's that have GFX/sound/air cooling and fit in small cases. The box I've spec'd is a serious workstation that carries you wherever you may stray. OTOH, the new mac quads are really nifty. You don't have to have the fastest cores or most expensive. The intel Q6600 has become a favourite sweetspot 'bang for the buck' CPU choice. With this you can wait for more powerful models to arrive and get cheap. This is air cooled - plug in and leave. A good quality MB to host at least 8Gb of RAM while running Vista 64bit makes a good base for that CPU. An Asus P5K Pro will do nicely. Once you look at the features you will see that it will scale nicely. There are others as well. Follow that with something like OCZ OCZ2P10664GK PC2-8500 DDR2 1066MHz Platinum Edition 4GB Dual Channel Kit X28G and you have a work space that is uncluttered. For GFX, a Diamond 4870PE51G ATI Radeon HD 4870 PCI-Express 1GB GDDR5 Dual DVI Video Card will address your needs and possibly the next PS GPU enhancement upgrade. For a monitor, get two, the LG Flatron W2252TQ Widescreen LCD is nicely priced and two with your setup and GFX card will allow those creative juices to flow not dribble on such an expanse of screen real estate. The joy of this is that from this system recommendation you can slide up or down on your "workstation" cost. Scale down the MB/RAM/monitor/GFX card and you halve your system price. Your main cost here is PS CS4/Lightroom/Vista64bit and your time. Pick up the Photoshop CS4 WorkFlow guide as well. Setting yourself up with a dedicated system that has the ability to run hard and long is a joy. Listen hard and look around at what people are going to say then have fun. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop CS4 hardware question
If CS3 is anything to go by, CS4 should run quite well even on a modest, modern system. CS3 runs very easily on my 2-year old PC, 32-bit XP and 1Gb RAM. By contrast, PSE6 runs much slower and takes longer to start, so it seems Adobe have worked harder on PS performance than they have on PSE. No doubt that trend will continue. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop CS4 hardware question
Longfellow wrote:
Another question: What is the experience with good LCD monitors? What is a "good" LCD monitor and why is it "good"? LCD panel type is important: http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides...anel-types.php And here's a list of IPS monitors: http://www.pchardwarehelp.com/guides/s-ips-lcd-list.php Seeing any of these before buying them may be difficult. The Apple monitors might be the easiest to find due to Apple having actual stores. -- Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop CS4 hardware question
In article , Ray Fischer
says... Given that a 10MP image takes up 80MB, which is just 1/50 the RAM of a moderate 4GB PC, why would you think that vast amounts of memory are needed? Perhaps you need more memory for a 100MP image with 10 layers (which is what you may get when you work with panoramic images with multiple layers). -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0, E30 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop CS4 hardware question
Alfred Molon wrote:
Ray Fischer Given that a 10MP image takes up 80MB, which is just 1/50 the RAM of a moderate 4GB PC, why would you think that vast amounts of memory are needed? Perhaps you need more memory for a 100MP image with 10 layers (which is what you may get when you work with panoramic images with multiple layers). Well hell, if you're dealing with 1GP images then obviously 4GB of RAM won't be enough. But anybody who has to deal with 100MP images isn't likely to be asking simple questions here. -- Ray Fischer |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop CS4 hardware question
D.Mac wrote:
"Alfred Molon" wrote in message m... In article , Ray Fischer says... Given that a 10MP image takes up 80MB, which is just 1/50 the RAM of a moderate 4GB PC, why would you think that vast amounts of memory are needed? Perhaps you need more memory for a 100MP image with 10 layers (which is what you may get when you work with panoramic images with multiple layers). -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0, E30 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site I imagine after shelling out for the software, the glaring reality of CS4 will be painfully obvious... It needs an Open GL, 3D video card to function properly. The troll spews the usual bull****. -- Ray Fischer |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop CS4 hardware question
On Sun, 11 Jan 2009 16:49:27 -0600, pip22 wrote:
If CS3 is anything to go by, CS4 should run quite well even on a modest, modern system. CS3 runs very easily on my 2-year old PC, 32-bit XP and 1Gb RAM. By contrast, PSE6 runs much slower and takes longer to start, so it seems Adobe have worked harder on PS performance than they have on PSE. No doubt that trend will continue. GIMP seems to run quite nicely for me. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop CS4 hardware question
Ray Fischer wrote:
D.Mac wrote: "Alfred Molon" wrote in message ... In article , Ray Fischer says... Given that a 10MP image takes up 80MB, which is just 1/50 the RAM of a moderate 4GB PC, why would you think that vast amounts of memory are needed? Perhaps you need more memory for a 100MP image with 10 layers (which is what you may get when you work with panoramic images with multiple layers). -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0, E30 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site I imagine after shelling out for the software, the glaring reality of CS4 will be painfully obvious... It needs an Open GL, 3D video card to function properly. The troll spews the usual bull****. I didn't have any of those problems and I just got it a few weeks ago and am using it on an older computer and display. -- Sheila http://swdalton.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Photoshop CS4 hardware question
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 21:01:18 GMT, SteveG wrote:
Longfellow wrote: I'm planning on building a PC dedicated to Photoshop CS4 and the latest Lightroom. I'm told that for a workflow that does not depend on continuous coffee breaks to allow the machine to crunch image data, a [snip] Thanks for reading. All useful responses will be duly appreciated. Longfellow Windows PC requirements for Photoshop CS4 - from Adobe's web site: Just be aware that in general, vendor recommendations are for barely-running systems that do little more than boot up and look cute. Others have correctly pointed out the reasons for the big range in systems that appear to satisfy their owners. Without knowing your workflow and subject types, and image sizes, it's not possible to be too definitive. However, I think at a minimum, you should build a 64-bit system, even if you don't plan to run Vista 64 today. Windows XP 64 is/was a non-starter due to poor driver support. Even if it costs a bit more, I would get a motherboard based on one of the most recent Intel products, e.g. the i7. Such CPUs will only get cheaper and/or faster over time. By buying into a relatively new CPU and chipset, you allow yourself a mid-life CPU upgrade possibility. It's fascinating how people have focused on just one or two aspects of system performance. But don't forget that for _decent_ performance you will want a second hard drive for swap/scratch. For really big bucks you can go SAS (Serial Attached SCSI) with very high bandwidth and drives that spin at 15K. (they will also "spin" your wallet accordingly.) Also, considering the time-value of images, don't forget about backup. Father Kodak |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Photoshop CS4 hardware question | ray | Digital Photography | 0 | January 10th 09 11:10 PM |
Photoshop CS4 hardware question | nospam | Digital Photography | 0 | January 10th 09 09:53 PM |
Photoshop CS4 hardware question | SteveG | Digital Photography | 0 | January 10th 09 09:01 PM |
Canon Powershot A410: Hardware question / problem | sphealey | Digital Photography | 0 | December 27th 05 07:31 PM |