Hardware requirements for Photoshop CS3

Your current machine will run CS3 fine.
The machine you propose specs out much faster but in real world usage the gains are less impressive. However I am all for new toys/tools. You only live once.
If you want to get a new machine you realize you will improve Windows and CS3 performance having at least 2 separate hard drives appropriately partitioned for swap/scratch files.
You may want to rethink motherboards. The future potential of the P35, a first generation chipset, may or may not be worthwhile for future upgrades. The P5k motherboard does not support dual video cards and if that is a concern hi end NVidia chipset motherboards, ASUS makes several, are a better choice.
4 gbs is a waste for a 32bit OS. XP/Vista 32 can only use 2 gbs no matter what you read. Its your money and DDR2 ram is amazingly cheap. However do not get Vista 64: driver and program incompatibilities make it the worst possible choice for running Photoshop. CS3 runs ok, little else does.
Get XP. You will regret any other decision. Microsoft makes noise about 64bit oses but their latest and greatest 32 bit OS, Vista, is utter junk and its 64 bit version even worse. Hence for the life of the computer you are contemplating the ability of the P5k motherboard to support large amounts of RAM will never be effectively utilized.
The new Radeon 2600s are a good buy for what they are but 512mbs of ram on that card is useless as the card is just not fast enough to utilize that much memory. If CS3 is your main concern, rather than games and HD-DVD, just make sure your video card can run your LCD panel, presuming you have one, at native resolution. As such 256 mbs is more than enough. For large panel LCDs you may need a card with dual DVI outputs. If you also want to play 3d games, not to bash ATI, but NVidia cards are faster and low end 8800s are available now in the under $300 range. A faster NVidia card would be a better match to your motherba

babaloo wrote:

Your current machine will run CS3 fine.

You’re right, it does run CS3 fine for most things, but it seems to lack memory bandwidth on large processing jobs like photomerges & hdr. CS3 ends up becoming unresponsive to input while other applications running at the same time continue working, which makes me think that the memory speed is the bottleneck.

The machine you propose specs out much faster but in real world usage the gains are less impressive. However I am all for new toys/tools. You only live once.

This machine is about 3 years old now and I tend to stay away from the bleeding edge of technology. However, quad core CPU’s are now available at sensible prices and it’s made me think about upgrading.

The downside about upgrading though is that being 2-3 generations of technology behind I have to upgrade more then just the processor to gain any decent speed advantages.

If you want to get a new machine you realize you will improve Windows and CS3 performance having at least 2 separate hard drives appropriately partitioned for swap/scratch files.

Yup, I realise that, as I said in my original email I have a 160GB SATA drive that’s spare at the moment because it can’t be used with the 2nd SATA chipset on the current mainboard when the chipset is configured for RAID mode.

You may want to rethink motherboards. The future potential of the P35, a first generation chipset, may or may not be worthwhile for future upgrades. The P5k motherboard does not support dual video cards and if that is a concern hi end NVidia chipset motherboards, ASUS makes several, are a better choice.

Not bothered about dual video card solutions as they won’t do anything for CS3. I use the machine for photography mainly, with email/surfing and the odd bit of online TV viewing.

What other Core2 Duo boards would you suggest looking at then?

4 gbs is a waste for a 32bit OS. XP/Vista 32 can only use 2 gbs no matter what you read. Its your money and DDR2 ram is amazingly cheap.

I’ve read reports with this mainboard that WinXP 32bit will use around
2.65GB of RAM, which is enough of a difference in my opinion to justify
4GB. I may also look at using Win XP 64bit, providing I can get decent drivers for my scanner, wacom tablet, printer etc.

However do not get Vista 64: driver and program incompatibilities make it the worst possible choice for running Photoshop. CS3 runs ok, little else does.

I’ve tried Vista already and hated it initially, driver support was shocking and I had a couple of USB devices that kept losing touch with the PC and then re-connecting (like I’d pulled the USB plug out and then re-inserted it straightaway). It irritated me enough to re-install XP back on the machine where I’ve had no such problems with the same devices. I may give Vista another try though when Service Pack 1 is officially released to see if any of the issues I experienced have been resolved.

Get XP. You will regret any other decision. Microsoft makes noise about 64bit oses but their latest and greatest 32 bit OS, Vista, is utter junk and its 64 bit version even worse. Hence for the life of the computer you are contemplating the ability of the P5k motherboard to support large amounts of RAM will never be effectively utilized.

The new Radeon 2600s are a good buy for what they are but 512mbs of ram on that card is useless as the card is just not fast enough to utilize that much memory.

Point taken about the video card, I have to admit though, I looked at the Radeon 2400 HD 256MB card and it was only about a £10 less expensive and slower to boot. I figured that if I was going to try Vista again in the future that the 2600 would be the better bet.

If CS3 is your main concern, rather than games and HD-DVD, just make sure your video card can run your LCD panel, presuming you have one, at native resolution. As such 256 mbs is more than enough. For large panel LCDs you may need a card with dual DVI outputs. If you also want to play 3d games, not to bash ATI, but NVidia cards are faster and low end 8800s are available now in the under $300 range. A faster NVidia card would be a better match to your motherba

I don’t play games on the PC, that’s what my Xbox 360 is for! The graphics card will be running with a Dell 2407 24" LCD screen using a DVI connection.

—
Regards,

JasonB

On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 18:29:46 GMT, JasonB wrote:

babaloo wrote:

Your current machine will run CS3 fine.

You’re right, it does run CS3 fine for most things, but it seems to lack memory bandwidth on large processing jobs like photomerges & hdr. CS3 ends up becoming unresponsive to input while other applications running at the same time continue working, which makes me think that the memory speed is the bottleneck.

Anything with Vista can go unresponsive. You just need to learn patience, and how to identify when Vista has been pushed past it’s limit vs, just Vista SOP. I can make any program go [not responding] just by touching it a 2nd or 3rd time. And really hang it by hitting a DO SOMETHING button twice.

If you know you’ve maxed out the memory and got the not responding, you can go make a cuppa coffee, and let Vista twiddle it’s thumbs, or just lose all and restart the program.
I’ve seen this problem on every program. Narrows the problem down to Vista. I’m using 2 gigs of matched ram. No reason for any memory problems. Then again you could always use the options recommended to speed things up like a flat basic color setup vs Aero. Turn off anything recommended in many optimizations.

No wall paper, no sidebar, IOW: Gut the machine.

The machine you propose specs out much faster but in real world usage the gains are less impressive. However I am all for new toys/tools. You only live once.

This machine is about 3 years old now and I tend to stay away from the bleeding edge of technology. However, quad core CPU’s are now available at sensible prices and it’s made me think about upgrading.
The downside about upgrading though is that being 2-3 generations of technology behind I have to upgrade more then just the processor to gain any decent speed advantages.

If you want to get a new machine you realize you will improve Windows and CS3 performance having at least 2 separate hard drives appropriately partitioned for swap/scratch files.

Yup, I realise that, as I said in my original email I have a 160GB SATA drive that’s spare at the moment because it can’t be used with the 2nd SATA chipset on the current mainboard when the chipset is configured for RAID mode.

You may want to rethink motherboards. The future potential of the P35, a first generation chipset, may or may not be worthwhile for future upgrades. The P5k motherboard does not support dual video cards and if that is a concern hi end NVidia chipset motherboards, ASUS makes several, are a better choice.

Not bothered about dual video card solutions as they won’t do anything for CS3. I use the machine for photography mainly, with email/surfing and the odd bit of online TV viewing.

What other Core2 Duo boards would you suggest looking at then?

4 gbs is a waste for a 32bit OS. XP/Vista 32 can only use 2 gbs no matter what you read. Its your money and DDR2 ram is amazingly cheap.

I’ve read reports with this mainboard that WinXP 32bit will use around
2.65GB of RAM, which is enough of a difference in my opinion to justify
4GB. I may also look at using Win XP 64bit, providing I can get decent drivers for my scanner, wacom tablet, printer etc.

However do not get Vista 64: driver and program incompatibilities make it the worst possible choice for running Photoshop. CS3 runs ok, little else does.

I’ve tried Vista already and hated it initially, driver support was shocking and I had a couple of USB devices that kept losing touch with the PC and then re-connecting (like I’d pulled the USB plug out and then re-inserted it straightaway). It irritated me enough to re-install XP back on the machine where I’ve had no such problems with the same devices. I may give Vista another try though when Service Pack 1 is officially released to see if any of the issues I experienced have been resolved.

Get XP. You will regret any other decision. Microsoft makes noise about 64bit oses but their latest and greatest 32 bit OS, Vista, is utter junk and its 64 bit version even worse. Hence for the life of the computer you are contemplating the ability of the P5k motherboard to support large amounts of RAM will never be effectively utilized.

The new Radeon 2600s are a good buy for what they are but 512mbs of ram on that card is useless as the card is just not fast enough to utilize that much memory.

Point taken about the video card, I have to admit though, I looked at the Radeon 2400 HD 256MB card and it was only about a £10 less expensive and slower to boot. I figured that if I was going to try Vista again in the future that the 2600 would be the better bet.

If CS3 is your main concern, rather than games and HD-DVD, just make sure your video card can run your LCD panel, presuming you have one, at native resolution. As such 256 mbs is more than enough. For large panel LCDs you may need a card with dual DVI outputs. If you also want to play 3d games, not to bash ATI, but NVidia cards are faster and low end 8800s are available now in the under $300 range. A faster NVidia card would be a better match to your motherba

I don’t play games on the PC, that’s what my Xbox 360 is for! The graphics card will be running with a Dell 2407 24" LCD screen using a DVI connection.

—
more pix @ http://members.toast.net/cbminfo/index.html

wrote:

On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 18:29:46 GMT, JasonB wrote:

babaloo wrote:

Your current machine will run CS3 fine.

You’re right, it does run CS3 fine for most things, but it seems to lack memory bandwidth on large processing jobs like photomerges & hdr. CS3 ends up becoming unresponsive to input while other applications running at the same time continue working, which makes me think that the memory speed is the bottleneck.

Anything with Vista can go unresponsive. You just need to learn patience, and how to identify when Vista has been pushed past it’s limit vs, just Vista SOP. I can make any program go [not responding] just by touching it a 2nd or 3rd time. And really hang it by hitting a DO SOMETHING button twice.

That’s fine, but I’m using Windows XP at the moment, Vista was just painful to use in it’s current incarnation.

<snip>

—
Regards,

JasonB