RAM – how much for new computer to accomodate CS3, Vista?

DR
Posted By
Danny_Raphael
Jan 27, 2007
Views
417
Replies
14
Status
Closed
HAVE NOW
* Photoshop 7
* Win 2000
* 1.3 Mhz P4
* 1GB RAM

Seemed like an ocean of resourcees back in 2000. How times have changed…

Image/work characteristics
* Images in the 200MB-400MB range (lots of layers, 300ppi) * Do a lot of batch processing (100 or so 30MB images in a run) * Processor intensive manipulations. Plugins/filters can take 20-90 seconds to render a layer

FUTURE
* Upgrade to CS3
* New computer (XP or Vista, TBD)

QUESTIONS
1. With the right Windows XP tweaks Photoshop (CS2, anyway) can utilize up to 3GB RAM, correct?

2. Is 3GB the upper limit for PS CS3, too?

3. How much RAM would you get for your next Photoshop machine? (Assume CS3 and Vista)

4. What would go into your decision?

5. How would your decision change (or would it) if you stayed with XP?

6. While surfing one of the sites where one can "put together a dream machine" among the RAM options were 4GB, 8GB, 12GB, 16GB.

Would there be significant advantage performance-wise in getting, say, 4GB or even 8GB of RAM even if Photoshop could not use all of it = more room for Windows to do its thing?

———
FWIW I understand the conceptual differences between ‘real’ and virtual memory, how Windows paging / Photoshop scratch file reads/writes work and that in general less I/O is a good thing.

What I’m looking for is practical advice on how to decide how much RAM to get to accomodate short term needs (assume Vista and CS3), and any pearls of wisdom you might have for the future considerations.
———

What say you folks who are a lot more up to date tnan me on Photoshop and Windows hardware requirements? 🙂

TIA for your thoughts…

~Danny~
Related Tags
computer how memory new windows

How to Improve Photoshop Performance

Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!

RB
Robert_Barnett
Jan 27, 2007
The three things I would get the most of you can are…

1) Ram (up to 2GB, more than that and it won’t really help Photoshop. It will let you multi-task several large applications so if you do that then more RAM would be ok.

2) Fast processor, I would do with a dual core processor myself as fast as I could afford.

3) Hard drive space. Again as much as you can afford.

4) Now this depends more on what Vista interface you want to use. If you want the Aero interface then you need a good video card that has enough RAM and can support DirectX 10. I am having trouble finding any that does this that aren’t game oriented. I could careless about games. I keep waiting for Matrox to release something but so far nada.

I would also suggest a full size tower case outfitted with as many fans as possible. The larger case allows for better air circulation and the fans are going to help keep you system cooler which extends it life and keeps it more stable. This is going to be an ever more important consideration since many scientists feel that the world is going to keep getting hotter. Thanks to global warming.

Robert
AB
Arnor Baldvinsson
Jan 27, 2007
Hi Robert,

I would also suggest a full size tower case outfitted with as many fans as possible. The larger case allows for better air circulation and the fans are going to help keep you system cooler which extends it life and keeps it more stable. This is going to be an ever more important consideration since many

I understand that liquid cooled boxes run cooler and much quieter than fan cooled. A client on mine has one that he built himself and it is very quiet. Noise can get to annoying level with a lot of computers with lot of fans (I have 3 computers around my desk and the humming get’s annoying at times)

—
Arnor Baldvinsson
San Antonio, Texas
H
Ho
Jan 27, 2007
Ram (up to 2GB, more than that and it won’t really help Photoshop.

I disagree. Having an extra Gig available to PS is a help in my book.
B
Bruce
Jan 27, 2007
wrote in message
HAVE NOW
* Photoshop 7
* Win 2000
* 1.3 Mhz P4
* 1GB RAM

Seemed like an ocean of resourcees back in 2000. How times have changed…
Image/work characteristics
* Images in the 200MB-400MB range (lots of layers, 300ppi) * Do a lot of batch processing (100 or so 30MB images in a run) * Processor intensive manipulations. Plugins/filters can take 20-90 seconds to render a layer

FUTURE
* Upgrade to CS3
* New computer (XP or Vista, TBD)

QUESTIONS
1. With the right Windows XP tweaks Photoshop (CS2, anyway) can utilize up to 3GB RAM, correct?

2. Is 3GB the upper limit for PS CS3, too?

3. How much RAM would you get for your next Photoshop machine? (Assume CS3 and Vista)

4. What would go into your decision?

5. How would your decision change (or would it) if you stayed with XP?
6. While surfing one of the sites where one can "put together a dream machine" among the RAM options were 4GB, 8GB, 12GB, 16GB.
Would there be significant advantage performance-wise in getting, say, 4GB or even 8GB of RAM even if Photoshop could not use all of it = more room for Windows to do its thing?

———
FWIW I understand the conceptual differences between ‘real’ and virtual memory, how Windows paging / Photoshop scratch file reads/writes work and that in general less I/O is a good thing.

What I’m looking for is practical advice on how to decide how much RAM to get to accomodate short term needs (assume Vista and CS3), and any pearls of wisdom you might have for the future considerations.
———

What say you folks who are a lot more up to date tnan me on Photoshop and Windows hardware requirements? 🙂

TIA for your thoughts…

~Danny~

From what I’ve read CS3 will be a 32 bit application. That means that it can only use up to 2 GB of RAM. However that doesn’t mean that more than 2 GB will not be helpful. If you boot up your PC and go to the Task Manager, you can see that a certain amount of RAM is already used (look at the performance tab and the Total commit charge counter. Also if you use other applications at the same time as PS then they too will consume memory. So extra RAM will allow you to accomodate the initial RAM usage at boot time and the extra applications and yet ensure that you have at least 2 GB free to allocate to PS.

Also the OS allocates RAM to things such as disk buffers that can also enhance performance.

So I would think that about 4 GB would be a good compromise. However your older machine may not support any more than 2 GB, most older machines have that limitation.
RL
roger_leale
Jan 27, 2007
Hi Danny,
Using Vista and the CS3 Beta I doubled my RAM from 1GB to 2GB and really didn’t notice much difference in speed. I then changed out my Athlon 64 3500+ for an Athlon 64 dual core 3800 and the processing times of filters like the smart sharpen etc. dropped by about 30%.
For the graphics card I had to economize and got a GeForce 7300GT with 256 MB of memory which runs Aero fine.

Roger
RP
Russell_Proulx
Jan 27, 2007
Robert,

I am having trouble finding any that does this that aren’t game oriented. I could careless about games. I keep waiting for Matrox to release something but so far nada.

I got a Sapphire Radeon x1300 PCIe card which works with Vista Aero just fine, has no fan so it’s quiet and will offer as good 2D on an LCD with a DVi connector as any other card. Seems that Matrox’s advantage was more with the older analog connections. Delivering aquality 2D via DVi appears to be a no-brainer for pretty well all video cards so I was attracted more by the Radeon’s reputation and the absence of a fan (Core 2 systems can run MUCH quieter than older processors).

see: <http://tinyurl.com/2j9ncf>

Russell
H
Ho
Jan 28, 2007
I doubled my RAM from 1GB to 2GB and really didn’t notice much difference in speed.

The value of the extra RAM is dependent on the size of the images you normally edit, as well as the number of those images open simultaneously. I often combine numerous 16 bit, 4000ppi scans, which eats up all the memory I have and leaves me wishing I had 8G instead of 4.
RB
Robert_Barnett
Jan 28, 2007
Thanks. I was trying to find a video card that would work with Vista Aero that didn’t cost $500 for a bunch of game junk I would never use. I think it is a shame that Matrox is now so far behind the video card game. They had great cards in their day, but now they have been left behind.

Robert

—
Do not assume that because I didn’t reply to your comments that you are correct or that I am wrong or that I am correct and your are wrong. You can assume that you bore me!
RR
Richard_Roussel
Jan 30, 2007
Tigerdirect.ca just sold me a GEforce 7600GT pci E for 114.00 Canadian.

So if you want it, i’ll sell you my brand new (1 month use) X1300 PCIe for 65$
I got futureShop’s invoice, bought 48 days ago for 128.00 + taxes.
GH
Geoffrey_Hervey
Feb 4, 2007
Danny,

I am wrestling with the same decisions. Let us know what you decide.

Is there a real advantage to the Intel Dual Core processors? Are they worth the extra money for CS2/CS3?
DM
dave_milbut
Feb 4, 2007
Is there a real advantage to the Intel Dual Core processors?

the only thing i can say about going from a 2.8ghz p4 (hyperthreaded) with one gig ram to a 2.4ghz core2duo 6600 with 2 gig ram is…

OH DEAR LORD THAT’S FAST!!!

seriously.
DR
Danny_Raphael
Feb 5, 2007
Geoffrey…

I don’t upgrade computers often (I have had my current one since 2000). So, I opted for a system with XP (to minimize OS migration hassles from W2K), 4GB RAM and twin Xeon dual core 3.73 GHz processors. Got a good price at Dell’s outlet site.

This will be on the overkill side for what I’m doing today with Photoshop, but probably won’t seem like it in a few years when I start getting into video editing.
DP
Daryl_Pritchard
Feb 5, 2007
LOL….Dave, I hear ya’. I went from an Athlon 3000 with 1.5GB RAM and had a similar reaction, even more so when I saw a 10 hour rendering task in Premiere take maybe an hour, tops.

Daryl
MD
Michael_D_Sullivan
Feb 5, 2007
And I went from a P3 733MHz box with 768MB to an AMD 64X2 4600+ (2.4GHz per core) with 4GB. What a difference!

MacBook Pro 16” Mockups 🔥

– in 4 materials (clay versions included)

– 12 scenes

– 48 MacBook Pro 16″ mockups

– 6000 x 4500 px

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections