Photoshop Speed test.

<p>I just found this site (retouch artist speed test) <a href="http://clubofone.com/speedtest/">http://clubofone.com/speedtest/</a> and did the test, my result was 36.2 seconds but now that I have the number I can't find the place to compare this number with those of other users.<br>

Did any of you have done it? how lond did it take your system to perform the action?<br>

Can anyone gide me to where everyone post the results?<br>

Thanks<br>

Alex<br>

PS: I'm running CS5 on Win 7 32bit with intel core duo quad Q6600 2.4 ghz 6.00GB of ram</p>

<p>Looking at that site's format, display (including typos) and presentation it looks dodgy to me.</p>

<p>With due respect to John Nack... check out the comments and luke warm confirmation about that site's veracity, ownership or authenticity. ~<br>

<a href="http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/08/mac-photoshop-users-needed-for-benchmarking.html">http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/08/mac-photoshop-users-needed-for-benchmarking.html</a></p>

<p>I know what you'r saying, I saw it as well. I got this info from a book I got today (Adobe photoshop CS5 for photographer) by Martin Evening he makes note of this speed test on page 109 with a link to <a href="http://www.retouchartist.com">www.retouchartist.com</a></p>

<p>Also if you google (retouch artists speed test) there is a lot of articles about it.</p>

<p>There is a thread over on POTN that compared results...</p>

<p>http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=170063</p>

<p>I'd say that around 30 seconds is good for a normal new machine. Low 20's is pretty fast, and guys with overclocked i7 PC's and super fast builds are getting down close to 12 seconds. This is only a moderately taxing test, there are some other benchmarks that are more concerned with I/O and scratch disk speed. From personal experience with my OC'd 3.6 GHz quad core, I get around 17-18 seconds on the speed test, but most of my waiting for photoshop happens when you start working with really big files and the system needs to write to the scratch disk or on opening/saving files.</p>

<p>Although these tests can't plainly say 'this is a good PS system,' they're great for comparing systems and are often used by review sites for that reason.</p>

<p>On my i7 @ 3.2-3.36GHZ (turbo mode may have kicked in for this) system running 64 bit with 12GB RAM and four 10,000 RPM drives in RAID0 and two Radeon 5850's in Xfire (I use this system for a lot of other things), I get 14.5 seconds. I have no doubt it would be faster with an SSD.</p>

<p>It might be very helpful to post results here for those who are shopping for a new PC so they know what to expect.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>PS: I'm running CS5 on <strong>Win 7 32bit</strong> with intel core duo quad Q6600 2.4 ghz <strong>6.00GB of ram</strong></p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>32 bit OS and 6GB of RAM? hmm....something is wrong here. Windows 32 bit can't make use of 4GB or more (in fact less than that, just 3.25GB or so). So what's the meaning of having 6GB of RAM if you still use 32 bit OS? I guess you may want to get a copy of Windows 7 64 bit.<strong><br /></strong></p>

<p>RE "So what's the meaning of having 6GB of RAM if you still use 32 bit OS?"</p>

<p>In the USA we call this boobs on a boar (male) hog!</p>

<p>With 6GB of RAM and a Q6600 (which supports 64 bit) it is odd, maybe the OP needed 32 bit for driver compatibility with older hardware.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>So what's the meaning of having 6GB of RAM if you still use 32 bit OS?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>With W7 32-bit and Vista 32-bit, the OS will use excess ram over 3.2 gig as a scratch disk before going to a hard drive for scratch. Ram is faster than hdd's so the theory goes that 6 gig on 32-bit system will be faster than 4 gig on a 32-bit when you need scratch. This does not apply to XP 32-bit.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I just purchased a copy of win 7 with the 64 bit now I have to formate the hard drive and wive that a try.<br>

Thanks for the feed back<br>

Alex</p>

<p>I just purchased a copy of win 7 with the 64 bit now I have to formate the hard drive and wive that a try.<br>

Thanks for the feed back<br>

Alex</p>

<p>See, you're already going twice as fast.</p>

<p>Good one. Garrison K</p>

<p>The 32 bit copies of Win7 include a 64 bit install disk, are you sure you don't already have it? Perhaps it was pre-installed when a 32 bit processor was in the system?</p>

<p>I was running vista 64 prior to win7 the I got purchased win7 and my friend installed the 32 bit viersion of it.<br>

Last nigth I put the 64 bit and formated the C drive and everything is ok. the test was now 29 sec.<br>

Thanks<br>

Alex</p>

 

<p>Garrison RE :</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>So what's the meaning of having 6GB of RAM if you still use 32 bit OS?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>With W7 32-bit and Vista 32-bit, the OS will use excess ram over 3.2 gig as a scratch disk before going to a hard drive for scratch. Ram is faster than hdd's so the theory goes that 6 gig on 32-bit system will be faster than 4 gig on a 32-bit when you need scratch. This does not apply to XP 32-bit.</p>

<p>This thread here says otherwise:</p>

<p>http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7programs/thread/1f4f849d-4601-4d06-a2c6-7ec67720f141</p>

<p> With my old XP 64 bit machine; 8 gigs was better than 4 gigs with a 32bit CS2; with a 64 bit OS.<br>

With a 32 bit Vista box here and 32bit CS2; the performance is the same if the ram is at 3, 4, 6 or 8 gigs. If I rotate a giant file say 700megs that breaches the "rotate in ram"; it then pukes in to the HDA;and all that extra ram is like boobs on boar hog. If I rotate file that are 400, 700, 1000 megs 90 degrees; the ram above 3 gigs gives the same rotation time; ie it is not used.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>This thread here says otherwise:</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks for the correction Kelly. I was thinking 64-bit OS on 32-bit photoshop when the OS will use remaining ram from 3.2 gig to 8 gig</p>

<p>Hi, just ran that test on a Mac Pro, OS 10.6.4 with 8G RAM and a 2.93GHz Quad-Core and it was 17 sec which seems like a fair speed. I do usa a Serial RAID on three HDs for 117GB of scratch space. Still, i do a lot of work with panoramics that usually are 1.7-3 GBs in file size and that processes slow or so it seems although that is really a big file even for this heavy computer. I'm thinking of going to 12G of RAM to see if that'll speed it up a bit. Anyone with experience with those size files?</p>