New PC - which specs for Photoshop?

Skip wrote:
"David J Taylor"
wrote in
message ...
adminforto wrote:
[]
Get Hewlett Packard and You will not regret it.

.. providing you don't mind a dead slow memory card reader!

David

My HP transfers files from a full 2g card in less than a minute,
actually, both of them do.

You are lucky, then. A number of us observe USB 1.1 speeds on the
built-in readers in HP machines. That's 12Mb/s at best, so perhaps 1MB/s,
and hence 2000 seconds for a 2GB card. Half an hour!

David

"David J Taylor"
wrote in message k...
Skip wrote:
"David J Taylor"
wrote in
message ...
adminforto wrote:
[]
Get Hewlett Packard and You will not regret it.

.. providing you don't mind a dead slow memory card reader!

David

My HP transfers files from a full 2g card in less than a minute,
actually, both of them do.

You are lucky, then. A number of us observe USB 1.1 speeds on the
built-in readers in HP machines. That's 12Mb/s at best, so perhaps 1MB/s,
and hence 2000 seconds for a 2GB card. Half an hour!

David
Yep.

My Compaq (HP) transfers 1 GB very quickly, but only when reading from my
PLUGGED in USB 2 Card Card Reader.

The built in reader on this, less than a year old, machine is excrutiatingly
slow - 20 mins for 450Mb of pics. I have now gone into Control Panel and
"Disabled" it.

Remember this machine has 7 x USB 2 and 2 x Firewire Ports and SATA Hdds, so
who would expect a USB 1 Card Reader.

Roy G

Get Hewlett Packard and You will not regret it.

If I were at the same situation I'd never buy HP and Dell. 1 - the price is
usually higher without any reason, even if the standard parts from other
brands are used. 2 - the systems are mostly incompatible (can't be replaced
with others non-HP/Dell depending on what you bought) with the standard and
if you want to upgrade these systems in future you can be trapped with a
wrong wire pinning, etc., etc. And finally all these companies are using
some general parts selling them for higher money. Example? I wanted to buy
the server for my company from HP, called them, got the price, but you
probably already know me by this NG, I started asking what pats are
installed, like hard drive, etc. They answered that the hard drive was
XXXXX, ok, I asked why this HD is so expensive. The answer was - it's tested
by US! What's the difference? I know this brand and I can test it myself and
pay in 6 (six!) times less! Etc. Finally I bought the set of parts and
assembled a very nice machine, much more powerful and robust that all these
servers all together. We paid less for the better and faster machine and I
was happy that I know all parts inside, all them are compatible and can be
replaced any moment when required, etc.

This is one of the examples. Have fun!

http://www.quepublishing.com/article...?p=339053&rl=1

Just D.

In article , se says...

Finally I bought the set of parts and
assembled a very nice machine, much more powerful and robust that all these
servers all together. We paid less for the better and faster machine and I
was happy that I know all parts inside, all them are compatible and can be
replaced any moment when required, etc.

This is one of the examples. Have fun!

http://www.quepublishing.com/article...?p=339053&rl=1

Just D.


I always build my own PCs too. Probably costs me a little more than
buying one of Dell's monthly offers, but it's fun..

However, is quoting an article from 2001 really the best way of
supporting your case ? In PC terms that's ancient history.. I mean,
who in 2001 would ever have thought that Apple would one day switch to
Intel ?

T.
--
Do Binary Tripods have 11 legs ?

"C Wright"
That's really pretty simple:1 - a fast processor, 2 - plenty of memory

1 - True, always helps...) It should not be Celeron or something with
limited multitasking, frequency, cache, etc. Thats' obvious.

(maybe 3-4 Gig), 3 - a big hard drove (preferably 2 hard drives). The

2 - if this is not a server system than I'd assume that the physical limit
of this system is 4 GB RAM only. Keeping in mind that some programs are
using swap file which should be 1-2GB and simply die if the swap file is
disabled it's easy to understand that the real RAM in this case should be 2
GB, maximum 3, not more, otherwise it's worthless. If machine has more
memory than makes sense to start thinking about 64 bit OS or server like OS,
which is a different headache. I'd say for 2 GB RAM and over (with 32-bit OS
for now) the difference in the speed is not even noticable than for example
a faster hard drive or RAID array created from 4+ hard drives...) I have my
RAID working with 4 hard drives and it's able to read/write 100 MBytes/sec
without any problem. I'm using this machine for video rendering and it
easily does that in real time and even much faster showing me the results at
the same time. Also these hard drives should be 7200 or faster. Also these
hard drives should be of a good brand. For example I'm using only
IBM/HItachi, all others including Seagate, WD, etc, can relax.

graphics card does not matter a whole lot. Unless you have a game player
in

3. This is not correct. The slow video card can significantly slow the whole
computer down. That's because of the bus and the whole system will be
waiting for this slower device. I don't see any reason to explain that in
detail here in the photo NG.

the house you don't need the latest wiz bang 3D graphics card.

The faster video card is always better but it's not extremely significant
because it's not a video game or video rendering showing results at the same
time/speed. So 128/256 MBytes of video memory should not affect the system
too much. Yes, it will be faster if it has more video memory because more
often means faster, but if this is the same modification of the same video
card with the same video processor then it's ok to have less memory.

4. BUS should be fast, that's a must.

5. The memory speed should be as high as possible, but it should be working
on the selected motherboard and CPU, otherwise machine will never even start
working if all parts are incompatible. If you're going to buy this new PC in
parts then almost any manager in the computer store is able to get the
compatible set for you.

Just D.

On Feb 17, 6:23 am, "Lynn" wrote:
Hi, I am a photographer about to get a new PC and would love to have
some idea on what to look for to run CS2 as quickly and efficiently as
possible.
It's currently taking ages to even load my photos on my old PC and so
I am hoping to increase my speed and performance.
The only posts I can find about this tend to be 4 or 5 years old, so
I'm hoping someone can help me with what I should look for today for
optimum speed, graphics etc. so that I can go to Dell or similar and
order. Any and all help is really appreciated!

Thanks,

Lynnwww.herrick-photo.co.uk

You'll get the biggest boost in performance by getting a computer with
at least 2 very fast disks (7200 RPM or faster). Or even 3 disks. Then
you can have the application installed on one disk, your files on
another, and the Photoshop scratch disk on the 3rd. Then spend your
money on extra RAM. Processor speed is probably the least important
consideration.

-Gniewko

On Feb 17, 7:01 am, C Wright wrote:
On 2/17/07 8:23 AM, in article
. com, "Lynn"



wrote:
Hi, I am a photographer about to get a new PC and would love to have
some idea on what to look for to run CS2 as quickly and efficiently as
possible.
It's currently taking ages to even load my photos on my old PC and so
I am hoping to increase my speed and performance.
The only posts I can find about this tend to be 4 or 5 years old, so
I'm hoping someone can help me with what I should look for today for
optimum speed, graphics etc. so that I can go to Dell or similar and
order. Any and all help is really appreciated!

Thanks,

Lynn
www.herrick-photo.co.uk

That's really pretty simple: 1 - a fast processor, 2 - plenty of memory
(maybe 3-4 Gig), 3 - a big hard drove (preferably 2 hard drives). The
graphics card does not matter a whole lot. Unless you have a game player in
the house you don't need the latest wiz bang 3D graphics card.

Reverse the order of priorities and you're close to correct. Any
modern processor is fast enough. The bottlenecks for Photoshop are
disk access (so you need multiple fast disks) and memory. So I'd save
money by getting a slower processor and spend that on disks and RAM.

-Gniewko

"Tony Gartshore"

I always build my own PCs too. Probably costs me a little more than
buying one of Dell's monthly offers, but it's fun..

It's not only fun but the set of parts that you are sure are the best parts.
You can buy some cheap machine on the monthly sale for say 300 USD, but this
machine has... a long list of trash parts that the company is tired to sell
out. Instead you can buy very good parts that will be working for years.
Comparing to one that can die in a few months... Makes sense to think more
about these sales...) I have one friend, he always buys something and only
then asks me if it's god or not. His last machine from Dell lost the hard
drive with all his photos and documents (he didn't make any backup, naive
guy!) in ~5 months, and only then he asked me what hard drive is good to
replace the died one.

However, is quoting an article from 2001 really the best way of
supporting your case ? In PC terms that's ancient history.. I mean,

Not only that, but my own huge experience, I live with computers and that's
my real bread. This article is the one in the array of similar articles, I
just liked it more because it shows more details about wiring inside DELL
computer, nothing more or less. If DELL created their own standard which is
not compatible to the rest of the world, then you need to decide is you're
ready to stick with them to the rest of your life or at least to the
computer death and all further upgrades have to be done with their parts
only. If this is acceptable for you then you can buy PC for 300 USD and then
pay 2-3 times more for the upgrades of the motherboard, power supply, etc.
Also you have to buy the parts that THEY decided are the best for you, not
yourself.

who in 2001 would ever have thought that Apple would one day switch to
Intel ?

Did you see any word like Apple in this article? I didn't. The quick search
shows me the same.

Also I'd add to this list Compaq machines. HP and Compaq were popular for
years because it was very hard to find a part fitting their bodies and be
compatible at the same time.

Do Binary Tripods have 11 legs ?
According to the logic the number of legs should be N^2 Means: 0, 1, 2,
4, 8, 16, 32, ...

Just D.

David J Taylor wrote:
adminforto wrote:
[]

Get Hewlett Packard and You will not regret it.


.. providing you don't mind a dead slow memory card reader!

Or ever plan to upgrade. Last person I knew that bought an HP machine (only a
year or so ago), he wanted to upgrade the crappy onboard video, but the stupid
machine didn't have an AGP slot! It had the space on the board where it was
supposed to be, but no cardslot. Cheap ****!

C Wright wrote:
On 2/17/07 8:23 AM, in article
, "Lynn"
wrote:


Hi, I am a photographer about to get a new PC and would love to have
some idea on what to look for to run CS2 as quickly and efficiently as
possible.
It's currently taking ages to even load my photos on my old PC and so
I am hoping to increase my speed and performance.
The only posts I can find about this tend to be 4 or 5 years old, so
I'm hoping someone can help me with what I should look for today for
optimum speed, graphics etc. so that I can go to Dell or similar and
order. Any and all help is really appreciated!

Thanks,


Lynn
www.herrick-photo.co.uk


That's really pretty simple: 1 - a fast processor, 2 - plenty of memory
(maybe 3-4 Gig), 3 - a big hard drove (preferably 2 hard drives). The
graphics card does not matter a whole lot. Unless you have a game player in
the house you don't need the latest wiz bang 3D graphics card.

This is exactly the advice I would suggest. Memory is your biggest asset when
dealing with editing large image files.

In fact, look at getting an Athlon64 or Intel CoreDuo processor; run paired RAM
for a full 128-bit memory bus, and get a 64-bit version of Windows. They're not
that much more expensive, and Photoshop should be able to make good use of the
extra resources.