I would go for the additional memory sooner rather than later. As for the video card, I can recommend the one I bought — it’s an Asus nVidia-based 7600GT Silencer, which has a massive heatsink/heatpipe setup instead of a fan, so it’s silent. Here’s the newegg.com page describing it. <
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E168141210 16>
You might also consider getting a WD Raptor SE16 drive (10000 rpm), particularly for your scratch disk and/or pagefile.
Michael,
Thanks for your quick response. I actually thought of the 7600GT or even the 7600GS but was wondering if they were overkill considering they are meant as "gaming" cards. I wish that Adobe would make some clear recommendations as to what is needed.
As for the Raptor – I initially had that has my main drive but after reading many reviews I was turned away because of both the heat generated and the noise that people have complained about. I doubt I would notice that much of a difference in speed.
Thanks again…any other suggestions?
Tim
They would be overkill for XP, but since you’re thinking about Vista, 256 megs is what’s recommended if you want all the eye candy.
Bob
Bob,
I guess that is part of the concern for me and the reason I am waiting until Vista is released before I start the build. My initial thought was a Nvida card:
– GIGABYTE GV-NX76T256D-RH GeForce 7600GT 256MB GDDR3 Silent Pipe II, $140 or – GIGABYTE GV-NX76G256D-RH GeForce 7600GS 256MB GDDR2 Silent Pipe, $95
I contacted Nvidia and they recommended a Quadro card that sells for $834…way beyond my budget. I looked at the PNY VCQFX560-PCIE-PB-V Quadro FX560 128MB GDDR3 but didn’t think this was the best for me.
If you think one of the above cards (7600 GT or GS) is fine I would be OK with that. Thanks for everyones help,
Tim
Hi Tim,
I am running Vista RC1, CS3 Beta, and Lightroom beta on a nVidia GeForce 7300 GT which runs well in Vista. Vista reports the performance level of the card as 5.3, up from 2.9 with my previous card. It has a fan but is absolutely silent.
Roger
Hi, I’m thinking of a similar set up and had the 7600GT card recommended – was going to go with a Matrox Parhelia card but I heard there are issues with Directx 9 which might render it incomptabile with Vista. Any thoughts ref Ati graphics cards such as the 1600 or 1950? I’m also wondering whether to go for broke with 4gb ram or stick with 2gb initially. Decisions, decisions….
Marty
Roger / Marty,
Thanks for your input. I am now leaning towards either the GE 7600GT or the 7600GS model. I received a response back from Nvidia in regards to the Quadro card and the recommended the NVS285 which I believe to be less than I want for the same price.
I also contact Crucial in regards to their ATI cards and they were of little help as well. The response was less than I had hoped for and will probably not get it.
I am probably leaning toward the Gigabyte GV-NX76G256D-RH with 256MB or the GV-NX76G512P-RH with 512MB. They are $105 and $127 respectively and will probably run Visa and CS3 well.
Any thoughts on Gigabyte cards?
Thanks again, Tim
Using 2 monitors, I found that my Nvidia based PNY 6600 card didn’t have separate look up tables. So although I could generate a profile for each monitor, only one was active at a time.
I next purchased a Matrox P650. Great, two LUT’s, works fine for PS. Unfortunately, it doesn’t support Call of Duty.
After a few phone calls, it appeared that Nvidia doesn’t have any boards with dual LUT’s. ATI had several recommendations and based on that, I purchased a Radeon X1600 Pro. I’ll know in a day or two if that really fills the bill. It does promise two LUT’s.
Joe
I contacted Nvidia and they recommended a Quadro card that sells for $834.
Yeah, right!
I would assess the Vista requirements if that’s the way you want to go and leave it at that. Otherwise. any decent video card at or beyond 64 M works fine. I think I paid $47 for mine and no problems.
Dual monitors take additional considerations, however.
All comes down to do you want a tool or a toy?
Joe, Interested in learning how your Radeon 1600 performs over two monitors – that is an imperative for me as I see no point in having dual outputs if you can’t spread your workspace over two monitors – do I read your post correctly that this is a limitation with nVidia cards? Thanks, Marty
Many nVidia cards support multiple monitors and the extended desktop. However, their cards generally only have a single LUT, so you can’t use multiple profiles to calibrate both monitors.
Michael,
their cards generally only have a single LUT, so you can’t use multiple profiles to calibrate both monitors
You can if you use MS Color Applet to load profiles. I just recently replaced my dual card setup (Matrox P650 AGP plus Nvidia cheap force PCI) with Nvidia GeForce 7600 GT AGP, which is definitely a single chip card.
Here is what you have to do:
Assign monitor profiles from Control Panel> Color
<
http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1aHlzd0ppuW10PpXGP w5zEmSl3YqK0>
Make a Shortcut to "WinColor.exe" located in
Program Files\Pro Imaging Powertoys\Microsoft Color Control Panel Applet for Windows XP\WinColor.exe
Move that Shortcut into your Startup folder and remove any other profile loader shortcuts from there to avoid conflict. Go to Shortcut’s properties and edit "Target" field by adding " /L"
<
http://www.pixentral.com/show.php?picture=1QtmwtiIzDi1XOYWTe ex48ntSaE0Y1>
Display Properties>
> Color Management Tab will still show one and the same profile for both monitors but you can ignore that
just make sure it’s your Primary display profile because that’s what Photoshop is using in Color Settings. Correct profiles will be loaded for each display.
That does associate the two profiles with two monitors, which causes Windows to perform separate color corrections, but it does not get around the fact that the gamma correction in the two profiles (which Windows ignores) is not being sent by AdobeGammaLoader.exe or the gamma loader for your profiling software is not being loaded into two lookup tables in the video card. If your video card only has one lookup table, only the primary monitor’s profile’s gamma correction is loaded and the other is ignored. If the two monitors are identical models of the same age and have similar profiles, this may not be not a big deal. If you are using different monitors, it means that only one will be correctly profiled for both color and gamma.
Some applications use only the color correction part of the icc profile. MS claims that IE is color managed, but it clearly is not managed in the same way as Photoshop: it does not use the gamma correction part of the profile, which is why the same sRGB picture can look different in Photoshop and in IE. The same thing would happen if you opened the same picture from Photoshop and viewed it on two monitors, separately profiled as you suggest, but with a video card that has only one LUT.
Pictures look identical on both monitors (color and gamma), very different monitors
Try and see or just ignore my post
It works for me just as it did with two cards.
I’ve spent too much time debating theories
I see what I see. Your mileage may vary.
If I had two monitors, I’d try it.
This is strange. When I first clicked the D/L, I got this: WGAPPlugininstal.exe
That’s not it, and I don’t know WTF I did install! Next try got the WincolorSetup. Same MS page, same download button.
Sigh.
WGAPPlugininstal.exe installs the Windows Genuine Advantage browser plugin for those using a browser other than IE. After installing that you can (if it passes the WGA test for not being run on pirated Windows) download the WinColor app. All this is done for your protection and rich user experience, of course.
But of course.
For a single monitor user, I see no advantage to their color app. But maybe when I decide to hook up another monitor and get a card as well.
I’m uncertain about Andrew’s workaround. I’m not into denying his experience, but I can tell you that it may not work for others. I am currently working a contract job doing silicon validation, and it’s amazing how Windows can be so obstinate with workarounds!
I’m uncertain about Andrew’s workaround
There is only one way to become certain isn’t there? <g>
Yep. Test, test, test!:D
The Popper principle applies here; you can have thousands of yeses, but only one no shoots it down.
Using 2 monitors, I found that my Nvidia based PNY 6600 card didn’t
have separate look up tables. So although I could generate a profile for each monitor, only one was active at a time.
ColorVision Spyder has an app called ProfileChooser. Adding it to the Startup folder will bring up a selection box on each monitor allowing you to choose separate profiles. It’s not automatic, but at least gets the right profiles loaded. Of course you need ColorVIsion…
I too have used the Windows Color control panel applet with success at loading two separate profiles for a nVidia-based dual-monitor setup. But, not knowing of how it could be set up in the start menu to load via the /L switch, I switched over to using the DisplayProfile utility from GretagMacBeth, since it was a bit quicker to use after any reboot of my system. Now I’m going to start using the Windows Color utility again, following Andrew’s approach.
Regardless, for anyone interested in the DiplayProfile utility, here is a link for it: <
http://www.gretagmacbeth.com/downloads/displayprofile-en.zip>
One thing that was peculiar when I’ve used Windows Color in the past, with an Iiyama CRT and Samsmung 930B LCD monitor, was that the LCD would occasionally display strange pink horizontal lines on the screen. Most often, they seemed to arise whenever I opened a browser and they were usually in the areas where there was more gray, such as the toolbar rows. If I opened Windows Color and simply reselected the LCD monitor’s profile and applied it, the lines would clear out. So, I treated that as some kind of quirk with how Windows Color was loading the two separate gammas. It’s been a while since I’ve used that setup, but I don’t recall having the same problems when using the DisplayProfile utility. Or, if I did, again that utility was just quick enough to use that I could easily fix the problem and continue what I was doing. I will be watching for similar problems to arise on my new PC, with the same Iiyama monitor but a BenQ LCD and different graphics card (nVidia vs. the other having an ATI card).
Regards,
Daryl
Tim,
If you are still following this thread I’d be interested in knowing what you finally decided on. Like you, I was waiting for Vista before configuring a new machine and now its here am about to do so.
Cheers,
Marty
For whatever it might be worth to the masses here who have far more PS experience than I, I needed to get moving – simple ads for a few magazines – nothing special but actually pretty good looking (the ads!). I just had to purchase a new machine due to a complete NO START, no fans operation of my 7+ yr old machine (ME up’d to XP). I bought a basic dual-core, AMD-based machine with 1GB and XP-MCE. So far it works fine (maybe I am not stressing it enough).
Vista Prof (or is it Premium) is offered as a NC upgrade. Since this is a first out of the chute issue of Vista, still wondering if I should hold off. Will be watching, looking forward to your feedback.
Wayne
wrote in message
Tim,
If you are still following this thread I’d be interested in knowing what you finally decided on. Like you, I was waiting for Vista before configuring a new machine and now its here am about to do so. Cheers,
Marty
Marty,
Still following the thread…however…as of now I am waiting to build my new computer probably around April / May. My main reason is to assure myself that Vista drivers are compatible with all of the software / hardware that I will need.
In regards to the planned equipment…it will be the Gigabyte DQ6 motherboard and the video card currently planned is also a Gigabyte…the GV-NX76G512P-RH GeForce 7600GS 512MB. The card does not use a fan and I would prefer to keep the computer as quite as possible.
Another reason is that Intel is expected to significantly drop their prices on the chips in the 2nd quarter. I hope my computer holds out that long.
One other item I thought of that may help you. Newegg.com is selling the OEM version of Vista (Premium is $119 and Ultimate is $199.) This is probably better for me than an upgrade as it is cheaper. The only down side is that the copy of Vista is then "married" to the hardware in the computer. This wasn’t really a problem for me with my current four year old system…only replaced and added hard drives.
What have you decided to do?
Tim
Tim,
After much deliberation I have finally placed an order with a PC builder here in the UK. They offer a comprehensive set of options to choose from and the cost is about the same as buying and building myself but without the obvious risks.
I have gone for an Asus P5W DH Deluxe MB, Core 2 Duo E6600, 2GB 800Mhz DDR2, Nvidia 7600GT 256MB, 2 SATA2 HDD’s (160GB for OS & progs, 400GB for data), Vista Ultimate (GBP119 here – ouch) but much better than buying retail version. I could have upgraded my old system, just to get it working again for next to nothing but I don’t want to wait any longer! Time for a fresh new build anyway.
I’ll likely add another 2GB of RAM later depending on performance.
Will write a post when I have the new machine in a week or two.
Good luck with yours.
Cheers,
Marty
Marty,
Good lucl…please keep me posted.
Tim
Martin,
Hi…sounds like you’ve got a nice system coming your way. I built a similarly configured PC ( <
http://ambress.com/pc> if you’re curious) around the same motherboard but opted for 1066MHz DDR2 RAM and the Core 2 Extreme. From all I’ve read since then, I could’ve saved quite a bit of money by going with a lower-spec Core 2 Duo and then overclocked it easily to a performance level possibly surpassing my Core 2 Extreme. I’m not complaining though, as my system performs well at 3.5GHz vs the 2.93GHz normal clock. I just could have done the same for less.
I installed Vista 32 Ultimate yesterday, only to find that Epson doesn’t have drivers out yet for the R1800 inkjet printer and may not be providing drivers for the Perfection 2450 scanner, which is crazy since it isn’t THAT old. I went the same route with my old Epson GT-9000 scanner when it lost support after Windows 2000. I wasn’t too surprised that my old Wacom Art Pad II finally lost driver support with Windows Vista, but that is one more reason to stick to WinXP for me. I may try Vista 64 someday, but better spend my time being more productive for now.
Daryl