Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: System for Image Processing - Comments Please  (Read 2216 times)

trigeek

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 57
System for Image Processing - Comments Please
« on: November 22, 2006, 05:39:00 pm »

Hello all,
Was wondering of I could get some comments regarding a system that I am planning on putting together. I have been using my laptop for Photoshop processing, and while it is doing admirably well, I would certianly like better performance. I have selected a set of components that will (I believe) give me pretty good performance now, and allow me to upgrade to the Intel quad processors as they become available AND come down in price. My two biggest concerns have been 1) Quiet operation and 2) overclockability and upgradeability... with the emphasis on upgradeability. So far I am at $2K w/o monitor. I already have a case and Plextor DVD optical drives. Anything you see, considering that I am building this primarliy for image processing , that you would recommend doing differently? I, by the way, have been considering a Apple Mac Pro. My feeling is that this system would come close, and would be cheaper. Given the memory and # drives, I could add a quad processor and 2GB additional memory and still come in less than a comparably priced Mac Pro.

THANKS!


Component   MFG   Model   
Hard Drives   Samsung   500G Spinpoint HD501LJ - x2  Raid for images
                 Western Digital   150G Raptor WD1500ADFD - OS/Programs
                 Western Digital   74G Raptor WD740ADFD - Scratch/temp files
Video               XFX   PVT73PUDJ3 GeForce 7600GS 256MB - Fanless
Motherboard   Asus   P5N32-E  Can overclock easily
CPU              Intel   E6600 2.4 GHz Core Duo 2   Until Quads come down
CPU Fan            Zalman    Zalman CNPS9500 AT CPU Cooler Quiet
Memory            Kingston   HyperX 2GB - Overclocks easily
Power Supply   Nexus   NX-4090 Nexus 400 Watt 16.2 db Quiet Power Supply
O/S               Microsoft   Windows XP-Pro   Vista
« Last Edit: November 22, 2006, 07:39:57 pm by trigeek »
Logged

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6229
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
System for Image Processing - Comments Please
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2006, 08:47:21 pm »

In the grande scheme of things, if you plan to "over-clock" your computer, you may as well forget about stability and running Photoshop reliably. Tweaky gamer type machines are prone to problems and lead to a generally unreliable platform for serious work.

Photoshop is like a canary in a coal mine-if ANYTHING is wrong with your hardware or software, Photoshop will find it (but it's not always easy to narrow down and troubleshoot).

Photoshop as well as most other processing intensive apps are bottle-necked by:
CPU Speed (meaning processor cycles)
Memory
Drive I/O

In that order...

At the current lineup & price, the MacPros seem the best bang for the buck regardless of your fav OS unless you go totaly self built from the ground up. It's not at all clear when the Intel quad-core processors will be arriving in stock systems from ANY of the major manufacturers.

Right now is simply not a real good time to "look into the future" since most manufacturers are caught up in the X-Mas season and configing systems more based on price than performance (to attract all those bargin hunter gift givers).

If you can wait till after the X-Mas season, I suspect you'll be finding better deals for top line systems.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2006, 08:48:56 pm by Schewe »
Logged

tived

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 714
    • http://
System for Image Processing - Comments Please
« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2006, 10:17:26 pm »

Quote
In the grande scheme of things, if you plan to "over-clock" your computer, you may as well forget about stability and running Photoshop reliably. Tweaky gamer type machines are prone to problems and lead to a generally unreliable platform for serious work.

Photoshop is like a canary in a coal mine-if ANYTHING is wrong with your hardware or software, Photoshop will find it (but it's not always easy to narrow down and troubleshoot).

Photoshop as well as most other processing intensive apps are bottle-necked by:
CPU Speed (meaning processor cycles)
Memory
Drive I/O

In that order...

At the current lineup & price, the MacPros seem the best bang for the buck regardless of your fav OS unless you go totaly self built from the ground up. It's not at all clear when the Intel quad-core processors will be arriving in stock systems from ANY of the major manufacturers.

Right now is simply not a real good time to "look into the future" since most manufacturers are caught up in the X-Mas season and configing systems more based on price than performance (to attract all those bargin hunter gift givers).

If you can wait till after the X-Mas season, I suspect you'll be finding better deals for top line systems.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86649\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I would agree with Jeff on the overclocking - Don't do it!
if this is a production machine then, buy a faster processor, don't play russian roulette with yours nor your customers data!!!

As for price, the MacPro's are good up to 2gb of ram price wise, then after that it goes downhill and the equivilent PC will be less expensive. Unless you can get 3rd party ram modules.

Quad-core PC's are out ....just about now...and you can fill them with 8gb of ram if you can find (2Gb sticks DDR2 non ECC :-) )

I am personally going with AMD's Socket F 1207, which currently are dual core, but the same mainboard will accept the next Quad core CPU's ...TCO is therefore reduced over a period) the AMD will also scale better with more ram...8 - 16 Gb and above, obviously using a x64 bit OS, ofcourse you wont get the sofisticated operating system that is OSX :-)

Also if you are using workstation mainboards or systems build around them, you can add 32 to 64 Gb of ram. Windows Server 2003 x64 enterprise will give you better memory management then the stock XP ...but now you are paying more then a Mac


good luck

Henrik
Logged

trigeek

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 57
System for Image Processing - Comments Please
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2006, 07:52:20 am »

Thanks for the replies, they really help. The machine that I am considering, by the way,  is a home built, not a stock machine.  Sounds like I should stay with the 800MHz memory as stock. I did consider the 2.6 GHz CPU, but am really wondering if it is worth the 60% mark-up. Making the jump to the 2.4GHz also adds the 4MB L2 cache, so it should improve performance over the 2.2GHz (indepent of freq). I will make sure that the board can accept future quad or faster duals in the future... I can always roll the 2.4GHz to one of my other computers.

As for the Mac vs Windows decision... I am currently running an XP machine, but have had Mac's in the past. The main reason for switching back to Windows was software availability. It looks like Adobe has still not upgraded Photoshop to universal binary, so I would suspect some of the benefits of the faster Mac Pro are lost in the translation via Rosetta. Is this true? If so, then I do have a concern regarding Adobe's (and others) commitment to the mac platform. Not a slam regarding Adobe, since they truly make a great product, but nevertheless a concern when selecting a system for the long haul.  

One other question... regarding Tived's comment on selecting an AMD processor. Can I ask why you are selecting an AMD over the Core 2's. Personally, I try to build with AMD processors. However, when researching on the TomsHardware site, I see that the comparison of the AMD vs Intel when running photoshop conversions, places the Core2's in the lead. I would appreciate your comments.

Thanks again.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2006, 08:02:38 am by trigeek »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up