wrote in message
Ok. Good advice. Ill stick to what i got.
Hope for 64bit in Photoshop CS3.5 or something.
I wouldn’t hold my breath. Someone from Adobe was on here awhile back and indicated that taking Photoshop from 32-bit to 64-bit would require a major overhaul and not just a few little changes here or there. I suspect that we are probably 3 to 5 years away from full 64-bit support across the PC platform.
Robert
I read an Intel doc that stated that the increase in performance between a 32 bit app and a 64 bit app on a 64 bit system was approximately 1%.
So…. Adobe makes solid 32bit apps so I am not concerned with them being ported to 64 bit at this time. I am sure that you will still have the same problems you experience on a 32bit OS. If you are having problems, it is most certainly, but not always, somewhere else in your system.
<disclaimer>This is not a paid announcement by Adobe, I am not a beta tester nor an employee of Adobe and I do not own stocks in the company. I am talking through my 17 years of experience.</disclaimer>
I think most people just want to be able to use more memory as easily and reliably as possible. While 64-bit Windows may allows this for 32-bit applications (I don’t quite buy this) there are other issues with using a 64-bit OS now. So as far as I am concerned we are 3 to 5 years away to real and common consumer use.
Robert
I agree. It all seems a bit "make do and mend" at the moment.
Twelve months ago I had a new system built around a 64 bit processor, thinking I’d soon be running a 64 bit OS.
….Still on XP32!
The only reason I am not on Vista64 is that Illustrator CS does not launch and there is no 64bit Acrobat printer for V7. I’ll have to wait until I update my software later this year.
There was one issue for lack of support for Type1 fonts, but I converted all my fonts to OpenType with CrossFont.
One thing that people forget is a 64bit app actually will take more memory, instructions are longer and memory pointers etc are bigger. While you can process large integers quicker (or several at a time) processors are so fast and on chip caches fill quicker that memory now becomes the bottle neck. Performance won’t greatly increase except where the extra memory space can be adequately utilised at the moment, in fact in many cases it will decrease in a 64 bit app compared to a 32 bit app.
When we get faster memory or you have a REAL need to do maths with huge ints/floats, then it might be worth the effort.
BRETT
SO…….
The advantage of running a 32 bit version of Photoshop on a 64 bit OS would be the extra memory above 4GB can be used by Photoshop instead of writing to a scratch disk.
That was enough for me to install XPx64 on a machine with two dual-core Opterons. Seems to me that that machine is VERY VERY fast, probably because of the fact that Windows allows Photoshop to use memory instead of writing to scratch disks. That alone is worth the fuss.
As to Vista, yes, it’s pretty. That’s nice.
sort of. a 32 bit app is still limited to the memory space it can use as the memory pointers are still 32bit, however the OS can be smart and translate these into a 64bit space OR allocate other programs/the OS to use the higher memory areas and leave as much as possible for the 32 bit app. or in other words all of the 4 gig it can access will be for photoshop.
BRETT
Hi Wesley
thanks for that link, I did´n know that doc, very interesting ! Saved to my disk for later use.
BTW I wonder how exactly MacOSX will handle this. Is there an according doc for OSX that you may know of ?
TIA
Stefan
With enough memory, the performance advantage of 64 bit Windows is substantial, even with 32 bit Photoshop. There are at least two main reasons for this. First, each process can get a full 4gb or so of memory. That means that Photoshop is not competing with Firefox, Outlook, or anything else you are running. Everything gets all the memory it needs at all times nothing pages to disk.
Second, your scratch disk and frequently accessed files will be cached in memory. When Photoshop writes to the scratch disk (assuming you have enough memory), it really just writes to memory. When is reads from the scratch disk, it reads the data back from memory. The disk is not involved so it’s much faster. The same is true if there are files that you read frequently. They will tend to live in RAM.
I’ve tested this with two identical four core machines, one with 4gb and XP and one with 16gb and XP 64. The performance difference is enormous. Even simple tasks like opening new explorer windows is much, much faster with more ram. I had a stick go bad and dropped back to 12gb and the machine slowed down a bit. In fact, I plan to jump to 32mb or more since I’m still paging quite a bit. The only thing holding me back is deciding whether to buy a new mobo.
A full 64 bit version of Photoshop would be even faster. It would bypass all the OS paging code and be even snappier to access large files. Please, please, please, Adobe, give us full 64 bit apps, espcially Photoshop, Bridge, and InDesign. All three choke under heavy load.
Overall this is my impression also. Ontop of Vista 64 CS3 seems to live up to a new level of performance. Simply because the application and the rest of the system do not get into the way of each other anymore. On multicore systems Vista scales the running threads so smoothly like I have never seen this before. DRam prices are dropping, so I will also get at least 8Gigs for my Mobo at my home system. More is better, but Boards holding more than 16 gigs are EXPENSIVE !
I am also totally curious on the new AMD K10…….
But to be honest I don´t see much delays in my Photoshop work right now. I tested this with 1,5 Gig files recently and even those did smoothly on my actual X2 6000 .
greetings from Munich
Stefan
Hello Stefan,
I have researching motherboard/cpu/ram configurations. And it seems that non-server mobos 4 slots which maxes out at 8GB RAM with 2GB RAM sticks, I am aware that there are no 4GB RAM sticks for non-server mobos. The server mobos have 8 slots that allow 32GB max with 4GB RAM sticks. Could you kindly let me know what motherboard and RAM type/brand are you running on? It would help me loads.
Best
Wesley
it seeems that here are the special experts for the highend 64bit machines 🙂 on several 64 systems I discovered a strange behaviour of diskperformance in comparison with 32bit. If there is a second proccess on the same drive like thumbs-building or network-copying while maybe opening images in photoshop – it slows down much more dramatic on 64bit than on 32bit systems. Did anybody observe the same thing or even found a solution.
greetings manfred
Manfred
I run Vista64 with an AMD 6000+ X2 with 4gig and on a raid0 1 TB array. (2x500gb) I can not, not even close tell, that there is any delay with anything……..(vista gives a performance rating of 59 for this)
I think it is very important to run Vista on appropriate Hardware. I remember when I testdrove Vista beta on an older machine I was shocked about the bad performance I had. No Aero,no snappiness and definitely no fun.
But now I can say this is a very impressive system – IF – you feed it well. BTW this machine did cost under 1100 complete with the OS!
Greetings from Munich
Stefan
Wes
sorry for the delay.
some infos: a very good source for such informations is
<
http://www.tomshardware.com>
AMD x2 CPU´s normally max out at 8GB Chipsets I normally preferre Asus so: Asus M2N-LR/SATA (2x G-LAN, SATA RAID)
Boards for the Dual Opterons go up to 32 GB – good one is e.g.: Asus KFN4-D16/SAS (VGA, 2x G-LAN, SATAII RAID, SAS)
but there are of course other mobos from various companies.
greetings from Munich
Stefan
hello, may you help me ? im suffering with photoshop cs3 with 64 bit windows vista home premium, and when i start the setup a message tells me close all of the internet explorer, well i did, and nothing happened,.. the installation didnt continue… may someone help me ??? thank you so much.
Judy
You may not see Internet Explorer running but it may still be shown in Task Manager > Processes tab.
If it is, kill it there.
thank you for your help John, but frankly I tried to setup the photoshop cs3 when i restarted my cpu and there were no opened programs or explorer.. its a little bit weird, but i will check the task manager, maybe there’s something inside 🙂 thank you again
I think if your haveing setup problems it is free when you call up Adobe.
wrote in message
hello, may you help me ? im suffering with photoshop cs3 with 64 bit windows vista home premium, and when i start the setup a message tells me close all of the internet explorer, well i did, and nothing happened,.. the installation didnt continue… may someone help me ??? thank you so much.
9/21/08 11:30 CST
I am just learning adobe photoshop. I have a new system running windows vista 64 bit. I was ready to buy photoshop cs3, when I started reading messages in this forum. Will CS3 run on my new 64 bit vista system ? I would appreciate any advice before I buy the program.
thanks,
joe barrera
when I started reading messages in this forum
You must have read only the headlines.
CS3 and Vista 64 is a match made in heaven, and everybody will tell you so.
And CS4 will be even better as it’s going to be available as a 64 bit application.
Bob
8/22/08 9:35am central
thanks for the prompt information response. only other question now, is how far away is cs4?
joe barrera
Your guess is as good as anyone else’s. Adobe hasn’t announce anything yet.
Bob
….I’ve read….and experienced an ordinary dual Core produce faster results for Photoshop than a quad Xeon. Not sure of the tech reason – something to do with the Xeon design architecture is designed for servers…
BTW…Vista64 and CS3 are very stable on my system and will only show signs of distress when I really pushing it’s boundaries … ( using brushes @ 1200+pixels ). I’m hoping a 64 bit cs4 will cope with this.
Not sure how true this is, Chris. I use a Quad Core Xeon X3210. It is based on Core 2 Quad technology, the same family as the Q6600 in fact.
Ian
I’ve run my 2.66mhz dual core system and my flatmates 2.66mhz Quad xeon simultaneously with the same file to test the speed when resizing, drawing with brushes( on the xeon, the brushes had a definite lag and took upto 8 secs to render ), create a 5 point gradient and add a Gaussian blur.
The systems are very similar except for the xeons, it’s motherboard and it was running XP, whereas I’m using vista64. My dual core whooped it’s a$$ in every aspect by massive margins…..I found that quite interesting as I was going to invest in a dual quad core Xeon workstation but now I will investigate other options as the price premium, in my experience, doesn’t relate to performance.
Cannot comment on the above test you conducted, Chris. However, as far as price s concerned, the socket 775 Xeons are often the same price or cheaper than their std Core 2 equivalents. My Xeon is from the same class of CPU as the Core 2 Quad 6600 (OK a little slower at 2.13Ghz rather than 2.4Ghz) and was cheaper at the time by nearly £50 or so.
Ian
9/21/08 11:30 CST
whoa! joe is posting from the future!!! 🙂
8/23/08
you are right, and what is amazing no one noticed till tonight. i cannot correct now, but will be more careful when dating my next post.
joe b
