CS4 VERY NICE!

[dwdallam]

Very nice, that is a huge upgrade indeed.  

Let us know what you get after overclocking.

Sheldon, you got 8 seconds. What are your rig specs?

LOL--I find this type of analysis fun about once every three years for about a week or two, then back to normalcy.

I do have my system running stable and I've moved ALL of my work to it now. I'm very happy with it. It's faster than crap.

[jjj]

I just finished building my new system and got 11 seconds with the radial blur and 16 seconds on the Retouch Pro test. I did have things running in teh background though, like Anti-virus, etc., but that should not affect performance.

It can if it's scanning as it will affect your hard disc performance. AV software is a common slower of systems.
I believe when doing these tests, that everything should be turned off bar PS and PS set to certain preferences to measure as comparably as possible.
Then it will interesting to test machine with the usual stuff running, to see how much difference that makes - leaving PS the same as in previous test - which is not the same as you would normally have it.

[Sheldon N]

Sheldon, you got 8 seconds. What are your rig specs?

LOL--I find this type of analysis fun about once every three years for about a week or two, then back to normalcy.

I do have my system running stable and I've moved ALL of my work to it now. I'm very happy with it. It's faster than crap.

Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P motherboard
8 GB of 1066Mhz DDR2 RAM (4x2) running at roughly 1066Mhz after FSB overclock/multiplier adjustments
Q9550 Intel Quad Core Processor, overclocked to 3.6GHz (424Mhz front side bus x 8.5 multiplier)
150GB WD Velociraptor OS Drive
640GB WD Caviar Black x 2, one for scratch disk + music, one for image storage.

No stability or temperature issues at 3.6GHz, been running fine for several months now. I didn't disable anti-virus for my tests, but I use ESET NOD 32, which is not very intrusive or demanding on the system.

I would guess the primary reason for my faster radial blur test is the CPU clock speed. i7 is faster clock-for-clock, but 3.6GHz vs. 2.7GHz gives a slight advantage to the older quad core. I'd bet yours will be faster after you overclock it to a similar clock speed.

[dwdallam]

Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P motherboard
8 GB of 1066Mhz DDR2 RAM (4x2) running at roughly 1066Mhz after FSB overclock/multiplier adjustments
Q9550 Intel Quad Core Processor, overclocked to 3.6GHz (424Mhz front side bus x 8.5 multiplier)
150GB WD Velociraptor OS Drive
640GB WD Caviar Black x 2, one for scratch disk + music, one for image storage.

No stability or temperature issues at 3.6GHz, been running fine for several months now. I didn't disable anti-virus for my tests, but I use ESET NOD 32, which is not very intrusive or demanding on the system.

I would guess the primary reason for my faster radial blur test is the CPU clock speed. i7 is faster clock-for-clock, but 3.6GHz vs. 2.7GHz gives a slight advantage to the older quad core. I'd bet yours will be faster after you overclock it to a similar clock speed.

Yep. The i7's are suppose to get incredible gains from very conservative OCing. After you take them to 4Ghz, you gain nothing though because the bus is saturated, not to mention the RAM. That's pretty incredible. I CPU OCing past the Bus capability--on air. The i&'s can go to 100C too. Is that incredible? This is the CPU I was waiting for.