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 |
#211
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On 2015-09-19 04:27:59 +0000, David Taylor
said: On 18/09/2015 23:40, PeterN wrote: [] Sorry Alan. On my laptop, the optimum memory for me is 12 GB. Given the price of memory, I plan to put in 32. Yes there is some loss with more, as the increase in memory requires more memory to manage it, at the current price, I can always take some out. No need to worry about needing "more memory to manage more memory". It's a /very/ small fractional increase, and more than compensated for by the increased ability of the OS to cache data in RAM. If the delta price between 16 GB and 32 GB isn't too great, go for it, although as Alan say, 16 GB is likely enough. I use MRTG to monitor memory usage, and here's what my 16 GB system shows: http://www.satsignal.eu/mrtg/performance_kiruna.php Even the 8 GB systems here feel comfortable (all running Win-10). On my Mac I have 16GB, of that I have 9.8GB allocated to PS, I currently have 4 layers of a 4288 x 2412 @360 tiff open. The memory usage is 4.53GB. There is still some headroom. In Lightroom I have left the RAW cache setting at 1GB, and LR is open and using a massive 450.3MB. I have also been experimenting with Affinity Photo, and that is open with a NEF and three layers, and it is using 806.9MB. The Creative Cloud is using 1.03GB (I don't know why) Adobe Desktop Services is using 977.9MB.(I don't know why) My web browser is using up 1.61GB. (I have lots of tabs open) My Mail app is using 241.2MB. This Usenet Client is using 167.4MB My Wacom driver is eating up 24.4MB The system refuses to give up the 2.24GB it is using. There is some other stuff running is using 1.8GB. So of the 16 GB installed, and with heavy multi-task, multi-app usage I am currently using 13.8GB. If I need to free up some of that RAM there are a few apps I can quit to give PS that 9.8GB I have assigned it. I could also go to 24GB or 32GB, but for now I am managing with 16GB. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#212
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On 19/09/2015 06:24, Savageduck wrote:
[] On my Mac I have 16GB, of that I have 9.8GB allocated to PS, I currently have 4 layers of a 4288 x 2412 @360 tiff open. The memory usage is 4.53GB. There is still some headroom. In Lightroom I have left the RAW cache setting at 1GB, and LR is open and using a massive 450.3MB. I have also been experimenting with Affinity Photo, and that is open with a NEF and three layers, and it is using 806.9MB. The Creative Cloud is using 1.03GB (I don't know why) Adobe Desktop Services is using 977.9MB.(I don't know why) My web browser is using up 1.61GB. (I have lots of tabs open) My Mail app is using 241.2MB. This Usenet Client is using 167.4MB My Wacom driver is eating up 24.4MB The system refuses to give up the 2.24GB it is using. There is some other stuff running is using 1.8GB. So of the 16 GB installed, and with heavy multi-task, multi-app usage I am currently using 13.8GB. If I need to free up some of that RAM there are a few apps I can quit to give PS that 9.8GB I have assigned it. I could also go to 24GB or 32GB, but for now I am managing with 16GB. Wow! I hadn't realised just how profligate with memory (as well as with money) those Adobe programs are! The Apple software too. Fortunately, I am spared those problems as much simpler (and lower cost) programs completely satisfy my photographic organisation and processing needs. It seems wrong to me that a program needs memory pre-allocated. On this 8 GB Windows PC, one of my own programs uses 526 MB (it does have a 124 MPix image and four 30 MPix images - all monochrome fortunately), Firefox uses 186 MB, Mail 90 MB and Thunderbird (news) 84 MB etc. etc. Oh, and there is a 700 MB (max) RAMdisk for the satellite reception buffering, but that sizes dynamically and isn't using a lot right now. Another difference is that I very rarely use RAW - perhaps reducing the memory requirements somewhat. I'm less seriously into post-processing than many in the group, preferring to get things right in the camera, and I rarely print, the display is my main output medium. -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu |
#213
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
In article , David Taylor
wrote: On my Mac I have 16GB, of that I have 9.8GB allocated to PS, I currently have 4 layers of a 4288 x 2412 @360 tiff open. The memory usage is 4.53GB. There is still some headroom. In Lightroom I have left the RAW cache setting at 1GB, and LR is open and using a massive 450.3MB. I have also been experimenting with Affinity Photo, and that is open with a NEF and three layers, and it is using 806.9MB. The Creative Cloud is using 1.03GB (I don't know why) Adobe Desktop Services is using 977.9MB.(I don't know why) My web browser is using up 1.61GB. (I have lots of tabs open) My Mail app is using 241.2MB. This Usenet Client is using 167.4MB My Wacom driver is eating up 24.4MB The system refuses to give up the 2.24GB it is using. There is some other stuff running is using 1.8GB. So of the 16 GB installed, and with heavy multi-task, multi-app usage I am currently using 13.8GB. If I need to free up some of that RAM there are a few apps I can quit to give PS that 9.8GB I have assigned it. I could also go to 24GB or 32GB, but for now I am managing with 16GB. Wow! I hadn't realised just how profligate with memory (as well as with money) those Adobe programs are! The Apple software too. Fortunately, I am spared those problems as much simpler (and lower cost) programs completely satisfy my photographic organisation and processing needs. It seems wrong to me that a program needs memory pre-allocated. only because you don't understand how photoshop works, and the memory is not preallocated anyway. |
#214
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: I suspect that SCSA (The Secure Content Storage Association), trading as Vidity will have a major impact on who does what with which in the near future. how would that affect apple transitioning to another cpu platform? I believe it will require a secure chipset. no We shall have to wait and see. yes |
#215
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On 19/09/2015 07:28, Tony Cooper wrote:
[] Just an added comment...people who talk about getting it right in camera seem to saying that if you do that you don't need to be adept in post. There are shots you can't get right enough in camera to not need some post work. Those of us who do work extensively in post are not failing to get it right in camera, and we only do work extensively in post when it was not possible to get it entirely right in camera. I take your point, Tony, but I find that for the great majority of shots I take, careful setting of the camera exposure produces a quite acceptable result, with very little need for exposure adjustment afterwards. Of, course other adjustments may be needed, but they don't require the greater dynamic range available from RAW. I'm not making large prints, and others may disagree with "great majority" and "quite acceptable". -- Cheers, David Web: http://www.satsignal.eu |
#216
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
In article , Pablo wrote:
Sandman: When you move the cursor from, say, 512,512 to 800,800, no CPU cycles are used to visually depict that movement. Unless anything is keeping track of where it is. Which is what happens in GUI software. All the ****ing time. Not true, plus - keeping track uses less CPU cycles than *managing* the mouse cursor, which was the topic. A software cursor means the OS handles mouse input, mouse position and cursor rendering, and then you have software tracking on *top* of those CPU cycles. Bored now. And as I so obviously have already forgotten more than you and spammy will ever know, I'm off to play another game. Haha, it's always amazing to see ignorant children find their way onto usenet and pretend to know things. -- Sandman |
#217
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
In article , Pablo wrote:
Pablo: Bored now. And as I so obviously have already forgotten more than you and spammy will ever know, I'm off to play another game. android: If you're not careful you might become one... I have to admit, I'm genuinely gobsmacked how stuff has moved on since my programming days ie; that the firmware on a graphics card can query a mouse without going through the processor! No it doesn't. You haven't learned a thing. Did you take English lessons from one of the resident rpd trolls? Mouse *movement* is rendered automatically in hardware by the GPU, put directly into the frame buffer without first being handled and rendered by any software and thus any CPU cycles. I've just looked around and I can't find any info on the interface. There is no "interface", it's automatic. For any software developer, the API to access cursor information is identical. I'm guessing there's a way the card queries the PCI bus for USB activity or whatever. Presumably the card's processor does port IO the same as an interrupt handler would do it. Sounds interesting. Does anyone know where I can read about this technology? Purely for interests sake - I don't intend doing any programming, as I'm obviously so long out of the loop that it would be impossible. Well, that's painfully obvious. -- Sandman |
#218
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
In article , nospam wrote:
nospam: cursor position information is maintained by the hardware controlling the cursor, not the cpu. Pablo: Now we have hardware controlling stuff. Magic dust anyone? Clue: hardware doesn't *do* anything. Incidentally, I've written *loads* of protected mode interrupt handlers. And even when a processor wants to get a byte from a port (which involves proc clocks) it does it in an interrupt, otherwise it would need a dedicated thread - read processor. You really know *nothing* about this. Did your trackball controllers run in their own little world away from the processor? Sandman: They do. Most modern graphics cards have support for hardware cursor, meaning that when you move your input device, the cursor is drawn on screen by the GPU, directly in the frame buffer, not something calculated and handled by the CPU. Software can poll and track the cursor position, but the actual displaying of the cursor on screen is handled by the GPU in hardware. the problem is that he's not using modern hardware and doesn't understand any of the advancements that have happened in the past couple of decades. all he knows is interrupt handlers. Yeah, hello 1995 -- Sandman |
#219
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
In article , Pablo
wrote: the mouse doesn't use cpu. No, as you say, the graphics card must communicate directly with the mouse to know what it's up to. That's very clever. I wonder how it works? maybe you should stop wondering and try learning something for a change. a lot has happened since interrupt driven mouses. |
#220
|
|||
|
|||
Two questions
On 2015-09-19 00:02, nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne wrote: I'm betting Apple abandon Intel within the next 5 years (possibly 3) and that they go all ARM (under the Apple Ax processor line) for OS X. Note that iOS has high source code commonality with OS X (kernel to just below the UI) low end macs will probably move to arm fairly soon to gain significant battery life improvements as well as reduce components cost. high end macs will likely remain intel for the foreseeable future. I'd bet that Apple would convert the entire line right up to the Mac Pro once they got things going. Maybe not as quick as the Intel transition, but PDQ. i doubt it, since intel wins in compute power. where arm shines is power efficiency, making it suitable for portable products. desktop products are not on a tight power budget so there's not a strong reason to make the switch there. Apple strive to simplify things. More cores is not an issue. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
After the Deletion of Google Answers U Got Questions Fills the Gap Answering and Asking the Tough Questions | Linux Flash Drives | Digital Photography | 0 | May 7th 07 06:38 PM |
Questions on Canon 300D and etc. questions regarding digital photography | David J Taylor | Digital Photography | 10 | March 24th 05 05:18 PM |
Questions on Canon 300D and etc. questions regarding digital photography | Progressiveabsolution | Digital Photography | 4 | March 24th 05 04:11 PM |
Questions on Canon 300D and etc. questions regarding digitalphotography | Matt Ion | Digital Photography | 3 | March 24th 05 02:57 PM |
First SLR questions | Rick | Digital Photography | 26 | August 8th 04 12:19 AM |