Best CPU for Photoshop/RAW

<p>

Hi,

</p>

<p>

I'm about to embark on building a new computer and I'm a bit out of touch. Last

computer I built is my current AMD xp2800 based system.

</p>

<p>

I've done bit of research and decided Intel is the better way to go this time.

Motherboard will be either a Gigabyte or Abit using P35 chip-set with either 4Gb

or 8Gb of RAM (I here Photoshop will only use 3Gb, so wondering if 8Gb will add

much of a boost), and 2 Western digital SATA2 drives in RAID0.

</p>

<p>

Thing I'm really stuck on is the CPU.

</p>

<p>

It's between three really, either Q6600, E8400 or Q9450.

</p>

<p>

I'm on a limited budget but could stretch to Q9450, but only if it's going to

give a decent performance boost.

</p>

<p>

So I suppose the real question is <b><i>"What dose Photoshop prefer? Quad cores,

lots of GHzs, or lots of cache and a faster FSB?".</i></b>

</p>

<p>

(and before anyone pipes in with "Get a MAC", no thanks, nothing against them,

each to their own. But they're not what I'm after ;).

</p>

i'd go q6600 and hope that the next version of CS does more multi-threading tasks. I'd don't think the price jump to the q9450 would warrant a performance notice.

 

ram depends on what OS you're using and what you will use in the future? the world is going 64-bit. CS4 will have a 64 bit windows option. Adobe already has a 64 bit beta Lightroom version out. Not only will 64 bit allow you to run a bit quicker than 32 bit, but you'll be able to address more than 3 gigs of ram that currently limits windows 32-bit. for the time being, no matter what OS (32 or 64) you load, there's no point going over 4 gig imo. Save your money for a year or two and if you wish to jump into the 64 bit realm, then buy 8 or 16 gig of the fastest ram when you can use it.

 

"What dose Photoshop prefer? Quad cores, lots of GHzs, or lots of cache and a faster FSB?".

 

Photoshop loves a few things. Fast hard drives for OS and a separate fast drive for scratch. A fast cpu and fast ram. Multi-cores aren't much of a benefit yet, only a couple filters utilize multi-core abilities unfortunately. But I'd still build around a quad just in case CS4 has some great surprises in store for us.

 

I'd get a third fast drive for your scratch disk.

You can run a 32 bit app under a 64bit OS, but not the other way around. You have to be running Vista64 or XP64 to run the 64 bit version of LR or the next version of CS. Applications don't run faster just because they are 64 bit. In some instances they run slower because of the need to pass addresses that are twice as big. 64 bit apps/OS's have an advantage if what you're doing can use more than 2 gig of memory (the amount of memory that Windows allocates to an application; forget the 3 gig switch).

 

Whether a program runs faster on a 2 or 4 core processor depends on how the application was coded and if the task lends itself to being separated into more than two threads. Some tasks lens themselves to this and others don't. If they do, speed will scale with the number of cores, otherwise not much help.

 

For the current 32bit versions of LR and PS, CPU speed and amount of RAM trumps all else. At stock speeds an E8400 is faster than a Q9450, let alone a Q6600. Right now I'm running a E8400 at 3.6 Ghz (trivial to do on a P35 board) with 4 gig of RAM (Windows sees 3.5 gig). Lightroom converts 1660 NEF files from a D200, with all sorts of setting applied, in an hour.

Brilliant, that's the information I needed.

 

Considering I won't upgrading my new computer or my current software for a good few years yet, I think this is what I'll go for:

 

XPx64,<p>

P35 based motherboard,<p>

E8400 - (I've come to the conclusion the extra two cores or a Quad won't be any advantage at the moment and this proc. has a faster FSB and more cache/core than the Q6600).<p>

4Gb fast, good quality RAM,<p>

2x WD 160GB HDDs in RAID0 (as my main system disk, this may seem on the small side by present standards, but I keep all my archives on separate disks in case Windows screws up),<p>

1x WD 36GB Raptor (as a scratch disk (brought using the money saved on buying the extra 4GB of RAM).<p>

 

Using my current reusable components this will come in @ ?620 from Scan.co.uk, and I think this'll give the best performance for this amount of cash.

<p>

Bruce - I'd be interested to know what motherboard your using, I'm still undecided on this.

"1x WD 36GB Raptor (as a scratch disk (brought using the money saved on buying the extra 4GB of RAM)."

 

Those aren't available any longer. if you do happen to find them, make sure they are not the older 8meg cache ones. May as go for the newer 74's and they are 16meg cache.

 

"Bruce - I'd be interested to know what motherboard your using, I'm still undecided on this."

 

Me too.

 

Don't cheap out on your power supply :) And a couple extra of the $15 sythe fluid bearing fans help tremendously too.

I'm using the Gigabyte GA-EP35-DS3R. This MB has the ICH9R South Bridge so it can be configured for various RAID arrays. It also comes with a bracket with SATA & power ports and cables so you can plug in a bare drive without opening the case. I use this to plug in a SATA drive and back my main drive up and then put the drive away in a drawer (stored in a zip lock, padded ESD bag).

 

Unless you are going to go to an OC that forces the RAM to go above 800MHz, there is no need for fast memory. The Memory Controller is not in the CPU, but in the North Bridge chip. This limits the memory bandwidth, so Intel uses a very large L3 cashe. This results in measured speed differences in the memory bandwidth, depending on RAM speed, but very little speed difference when running applications (1%-2% in PS). Good memory yes, fast memory: not so much.

All Photoshop features are faster on a multiprocessor system, although some can take

greater advantage of the multiprocessor system's capabilities than others.

 

With a 64bit processor and 64bit Windows operating system, Photoshop CS3 can access

up to 6 gigs of ram. The following link explains how Photoshop CS3 utilizes hardware on

Windows machines:

 

http://www.adobe.com/go/kb401088

 

Jerry

"With a 64bit processor and 64bit Windows operating system, Photoshop CS3 can access up to 6 gigs of ram."

 

I don't think that is correct, Gerald. That's a great link for new users to CS3, btw. But to copy/paste from that link...

 

"When you run Photoshop CS3 on a computer with a 64-bit processor (such as a, Intel Xeon processor with EM64T, AMD Athlon 64, or Opteron processor) running a 64-bit version of the operating system (Windows XP Professional x64 Edition or Windows Vista 64-bit) and with 4 GB or more of RAM, Photoshop will use 3 GB for it's image data. You can see the actual amount of RAM Photoshop can use in the Let Photoshop Use number when you set the Let Photoshop Use slider in the Performance preference to 100%. The RAM above the 100% used by Photoshop, which is from approximately 3 GB to 3.7 GB, can be used directly by Photoshop plug-ins (some plug-ins need large chunks of contiguous RAM), filters, or actions. If you have more than 4 GB (to 6 GB), then the RAM above 4 GB is used by the operating system as a cache for the Photoshop scratch disk data. Data that previously was written directly to the hard disk by Photoshop is now cached in this high RAM before being written to the hard disk by the operating system. If you are working with files large enough to take advantage of these extra 2 GB of RAM, the RAM cache can speed performance of Photoshop. Additionally, in Windows Vista 64-bit, processing very large images is much faster if your computer has large amounts of RAM (6-8 GB)."

 

I'm not aware of any OS that can use more than 3.5 gig of ram in CS3?

 

Cheers,

 

G

Garrison,

Did you read the article before posting the quote?

I'm sure the Adobe engineers that wrote the tech note know their jobs.

 

With XP Pro 64bit or Vista 64 bit, ram above 3.7 gigs that is used by Photoshop directly is

then used for plug-ins, with RAM from 4-6 gigs used as scratch disk before accessing the

hard drive.

 

Photoshop CS3 and OSX on a Mac Pro can access up to 8 gigs of ram in a similar manner

before accessing hard drive scratch disk.

 

Jerry

Of course I read it. One of us in confused. It clearly states;

 

"If you have more than 4 GB (to 6 GB), then the RAM above 4 GB is used by the operating system as a cache for the Photoshop scratch disk data."

 

That's alot different than your statement of;

 

"With a 64bit processor and 64bit Windows operating system, Photoshop CS3 can access up to 6 gigs of ram."

 

Photoshop using ram and the OS using Ram are two entirely different things. Adobe states it in your link;

 

"The RAM above the 100% used by Photoshop, which is from approximately 3 GB to 3.7 GB,"

 

To paraphrase, CS3 can not use above 3.7 gigs of ram before diving into sctrach disk.

"I'm not aware of any OS that can use more than 3.5 gig of ram in CS3?"

 

I've done my job........ consider yourself "aware"!

 

Jerry

You haven't done any job except enter misinformation.

Here with 64bit XP on box has 8 gigs of ram; and has PS 7; CS2 and CS3. Photoshop is still a 32 bit prrogam; it cannot access directly 4 gigs. Thats how the play dough is guys. What the 64 bit os allows is that one can move the slider more towards 100 percent; still one doesn have 4 gigs. The extra ram from 4 to 8 gigs on our boxes acts like a faster cache area when one runs out of ram; before puking to the slow hdas. with ps7 the slider at 100 percent goes to 1766Megs; with CS2; it goes to about 2800 megs.

"...still one doesn't have 4 gigs. "

 

thank you, Kelly.

The RAM above 3.7 gigs to 4 gigs is being used for Photoshop filters and memory above 4

gigs (to 6gigs on Windows and 8 gigs on OSX) is being used as scratch disk memory, so

YES Kelly it is being utilized by Photoshop.

 

Just read the Adobe Tech note, there is a separate Tech Note for OSX.

 

To find out how to optimize Photoshop performance in Windows, including allocating RAM,

read this Tech Note: http://www.adobe.com/go/kb401088. To find out how to optimize

performance on a Mac, read this article: http://www.adobe.com/go/kb401089.

"The RAM above 3.7 gigs to 4 gigs is being used for Photoshop filters and memory above 4 gigs (to 6gigs on Windows and 8 gigs on OSX) is being used as scratch disk memory, so YES Kelly it is being utilized by Photoshop."

 

Please Jerry, it's not being utilized by photoshop at all. The os is using it because of photoshops demands. Please re-read the link you keep citing. Anything over 3.5 gig (it's actually 3.25) is used as a scratch by the os. Entirely different things.

I'm very familiar with the link I provided to shed some light on this much debated subject.

My purpose was to quell the misconceptions that have been spread around this forum by

provided direct quotes from Adobe.

 

"The RAM above the 100% used by Photoshop, which is from approximately 3 GB to 3.7

GB, can be used directly by Photoshop plug-ins (some plug-ins need large chunks of

contiguous RAM), filters, or actions. If you have more than 4 GB (to 6 GB), then the RAM

above 4 GB is used by the operating system as a cache for the Photoshop scratch disk

data."

 

Note the phrase: "PHOTOSHOP SCRATCH DISK data"

 

I think it is very clear, take some time to familiarize yourself with the article.

 

Jerry

what part of the article "the RAM above 4 GB is used by the operating system" don't you understand? scratch disk duties belongs to the os, not photoshop. Photoshop runs out of ram and passes the mess onto the os. The os has to go through the available ram over 4 gig before it writes the data to sctrach. When photoshop wants the data back, if it happnes to be available in the extra 4-6 gig of ram, then it has access to it quicker than if one was only running 4 gig of ram and wait for it from scratch. I don't know how much more elementary I can put it. Whether you chose and are open to be corrected, is another matter.

 

This isn't just a photoshop issue. you need to familiarize yourself in general with 32 bit apps on 64 bit os's. Video render's, muscians, cad drawers, gamers, all go through this. tons of info out there if you'd look beyond a ten year old adobe doc as your source for expertise.

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000811.html

Back in the 640k era there was this weird problem where on could have bit more ram in the pre VGA era when one used a ega or a cga card; but the upgrade actually to VGA dropped the usable ram; and some dos apps would not run.

In the early pentium era some computers would run slower when over 64megs were added; due to the way windows loaded. Thus with our old dream machine that cost 3 grand; it came with 16 megs; and could hold 128megs; loading above 64megs made the box slower.

http://blogs.adobe.com/scottbyer/psworldperformancepresentation_export.pdf

 

http://homepage.mac.com/boots911/.Public/PhotoshopAccelerationBasics2.4W.pdf

More processors and ram are definetely helpful as you will do more than just using CS3. I always use LR2, CS3 and many other IE windowns at the same time, so that the system I am building now is this:

-----------------------------

Case - $600

http://www.koolance.com/water-cooling/p ... uct_id=304

 

Power: Thermaltake Toughpower 1200W - $360

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6817153054

 

Motherboard - Supermicro X7DWA-N $460

http://www.amazon.com/LGA771-MAX-64GB-2 ... 601&sr=8-1

 

Intel 5450 3.0 GHz x 2 -$1700

http://www.memorylabs.net/in54senew.html

 

32GB 800MHz DDR2 memory - $700

http://www.amazon.com/OCZ-OCZ2VU80016GQ ... 489&sr=1-5

 

Working hard drive: WD 300GB Volociraptor -$300

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001AQWLTQ/?ta ... 3k2kfwid_b

 

System hard: WD 300GB Volociraptor -$300

http://www.westerndigital.com/en/produc ... riveid=499

 

Scratch hard drive: WD 300GB Volociraptor -$300

 

Storage hard drive: 1T x 2 - $400

 

Blue-ray drive - $240

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... k=GGW-H20L