Hardware Questions

What is the best Windows-based hardware for Photoshop CS? Our files are large – 500MB +. We have been using a single processor Macintosh 867MHz G4 that has recently been equipped with OS X Panther, but find it incredibly slow and would like to move to Windows for consistency with our CAD workstations.

I’ve read tests indicating Intel P4 CPUs are better at most Photoshop tasks than AMD Operton because of Intel’s Hyperthreading and higher clock speed.
Given that a P4 chip with Hyperthreading shows up as 2 processors in the system BIOS and will take advantage of Photoshop’s multi-threaded characteristics, will a dual Xeon machine provide much speed improvement? The Xeon chip seems slower with 533MHz FSB and 512K or 1MB L3 cache compared to the P4 Extreme’s 800MHz FSB and 2MB L3 cache. I’m thinking that a single P4 Extreme with Hyperthreading may be as fast as a dual Xeon box.

Intel’s lead seems to evaporate in the 3D world, apparently, as AMD Operton (installed in Tyan Thunder dual CPU motherboard with no memory sharing, for example) seems to provide better performance in programs like SolidWorks.

What is the right graphics card to use? In 3D where OpenGL dominates, cards like PNY Nvidia Quadro FX 4000 lead the pack. What graphics engine does Photoshop use? What is a suitable graphics card? I assume 2D performance is more important than 3D?

The Xeon chip seems slower with 533MHz FSB and 512K or 1MB L3 cache compared to the P4 Extreme’s 800MHz FSB and 2MB L3 cache. I’m thinking that a single P4 Extreme with
Hyperthreading may be as fast as a dual Xeon box.

What is the right graphics card to use? In 3D where OpenGL dominates, cards like PNY Nvidia Quadro FX 4000 lead the pack. What graphics engine does Photoshop use? What is a suitable graphics card? I assume 2D performance is more important than 3D?

What is the best Windows-based hardware for Photoshop CS? Our files are large – 500MB +.

We have been using a single processor Macintosh 867MHz G4 that has recently been equipped with OS X Panther, but find it incredibly slow and would like to move to Windows for consistency with our CAD workstations.

On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 09:57:49 -0400, "Jeff" wrote:

What is the best Windows-based hardware for Photoshop CS? Our files are large – 500MB +. We have been using a single processor Macintosh 867MHz G4 that has recently been equipped with OS X Panther, but find it incredibly slow and would like to move to Windows for consistency with our CAD workstations.

I’ve read tests indicating Intel P4 CPUs are better at most Photoshop tasks than AMD Operton because of Intel’s Hyperthreading and higher clock speed.
Given that a P4 chip with Hyperthreading shows up as 2 processors in the system BIOS and will take advantage of Photoshop’s multi-threaded characteristics, will a dual Xeon machine provide much speed improvement? The Xeon chip seems slower with 533MHz FSB and 512K or 1MB L3 cache compared to the P4 Extreme’s 800MHz FSB and 2MB L3 cache. I’m thinking that a single P4 Extreme with Hyperthreading may be as fast as a dual Xeon box.

You use huge files, so go for any system that you can stuff with 4 GB of RAM. Even if windows’ process model doesn’t allow for more than 2GB per process, there will be enough room for PS plus the OS plus several other processes running.

Processor speed is interesting but not really the bottleneck once your workspace goes beyond available RAM.

Never go for the fastest processor. Check the performance/price ratio then decide. Reducing the GHz by 10% sets much money free to spend on separate disks for scratch area, a more silent cooling fan…
The processor’s data cache is irrelevant: when using operations that work on raster image data, data volume is too big in relation to the cache size. The instruction cache is more interesting but still not too important.

Dual or multi processor boards are of limited relevance to PS as it does not thread very well but on a two processor board you will find one processor devoted to PS and the other doing all the surrounding system tasks. This beneficial effect is less strong with hyperthreading.

Intel’s lead seems to evaporate in the 3D world, apparently, as AMD Operton (installed in Tyan Thunder dual CPU motherboard with no memory sharing, for example) seems to provide better performance in programs like SolidWorks.

What is the right graphics card to use? In 3D where OpenGL dominates, cards like PNY Nvidia Quadro FX 4000 lead the pack. What graphics engine does Photoshop use? What is a suitable graphics card? I assume 2D performance is more important than 3D?

If you design the system for PS alone, even the good old Matrox Millenium II with 8 MB memory would do. PS is strictly 2D graphics.
If any other application needs 3D power buy what you need for it – and check whether the quality of non moving images at high resolutions is till good.

Michael

Right now, the best Photoshop platform, hands-down, is the G5. In addition to being fast, it also offers higher productivity; if your goal is maximum profit from your investment, it’s easily the way to go.

For you, disk I/O speed is everything. IMHO you want a SCSI-based system (at least for the adobe workfiles and your working images) because of the reduced CPU cycles required to read and write the PSD files.

I’d base the system on a mobo that had built-in SCSI+raid. Get two 36GB 10k rpm SCSI disks ($130 each.) Set them up a a stripe set and put the OS+swap+PS temp files+applications and your active PSD files this disk array. NTFS, of course. You can add one or more huge IDE/SATA disks for your photo collection, but the work-in-progress can store on the SCSI file system.

Is disk I/O important here because the file size approaches RAM limitations and the scratch disk will get used frequently?

You’re on the right track with the hardware. A Quadro-based video card is the best choice for a CAD workstation, and will provide excellent 2D image quality. An alternative for best 2D quality is Matrox.

I’d also go with Intel form compatability reasons. I’ve seen too many AMD based systems that don’t run Photoshop (or other applications) right.

You’re on the right track with the hardware. A Quadro-based video card is the best choice for a CAD workstation, and will provide excellent 2D image quality. An alternative for best 2D quality is Matrox.

I’d also go with Intel form compatability reasons. I’ve seen too many AMD based systems that don’t run Photoshop (or other applications) right.

For you, disk I/O speed is everything. IMHO you want a SCSI-based system (at least for the adobe workfiles and your working images) because of the reduced CPU cycles required to read and write the PSD files.

Is disk I/O important here because the file size approaches RAM limitations and the scratch disk will get used frequently?

If you install the OS and Photoshop application on the striped drives, where does the scratch disk go? Do you create a partition on the array for scratch? Does Photoshop treat this as a "separate" drive?

What is the best Windows-based hardware for Photoshop CS? Our files are large – 500MB +. We have been using a single processor Macintosh 867MHz G4 that has recently been equipped with OS X Panther, but find it incredibly slow and would like to move to Windows for consistency with our CAD workstations.

I’ve read tests indicating Intel P4 CPUs are better at most Photoshop tasks than AMD Operton because of Intel’s Hyperthreading and higher clock speed.

Given that a P4 chip with Hyperthreading shows up as 2 processors in the system BIOS and will take advantage of Photoshop’s multi-threaded characteristics, will a dual Xeon machine provide much speed improvement? The Xeon chip seems slower with 533MHz FSB and 512K or 1MB L3 cache compared to the P4 Extreme’s 800MHz FSB and 2MB L3 cache. I’m thinking that a single P4 Extreme with Hyperthreading may be as fast as a dual Xeon box.

Intel’s lead seems to evaporate in the 3D world, apparently, as AMD Operton (installed in Tyan Thunder dual CPU motherboard with no memory sharing, for example) seems to provide better performance in programs like SolidWorks.
What is the right graphics card to use? In 3D where OpenGL dominates, cards like PNY Nvidia Quadro FX 4000 lead the pack. What graphics engine does Photoshop use? What is a suitable graphics card? I assume 2D performance is more important than 3D?

What is the best Windows-based hardware for Photoshop CS? Our files are large – 500MB +. We have been using a single processor Macintosh 867MHz G4 that has recently been equipped with OS X Panther, but find it incredibly slow and would like to move to Windows for consistency with our CAD workstations.

I’ve read tests indicating Intel P4 CPUs are better at most Photoshop tasks than AMD Operton because of Intel’s Hyperthreading and higher clock speed.
Given that a P4 chip with Hyperthreading shows up as 2 processors in the system BIOS and will take advantage of Photoshop’s multi-threaded characteristics, will a dual Xeon machine provide much speed improvement? The Xeon chip seems slower with 533MHz FSB and 512K or 1MB L3 cache compared to the P4 Extreme’s 800MHz FSB and 2MB L3 cache. I’m thinking that a single P4 Extreme with Hyperthreading may be as fast as a dual Xeon box.
Intel’s lead seems to evaporate in the 3D world, apparently, as AMD Operton (installed in Tyan Thunder dual CPU motherboard with no memory sharing, for example) seems to provide better performance in programs like SolidWorks.
What is the right graphics card to use? In 3D where OpenGL dominates, cards like PNY Nvidia Quadro FX 4000 lead the pack. What graphics engine does Photoshop use? What is a suitable graphics card? I assume 2D performance is more important than 3D?

I’d also go with Intel form compatibility reasons. I’ve seen too

based systems that don’t run Photoshop (or other applications) right.

Your statement is about 10 years out of date

and most of the time work better.

Your statement is about 10 years out of date

Agree 100%.

and most of the time work better.

So you’re saying that "most of the time" Intel chips perform in an inferior manner to AMD? I think you need to back that up with some evidence to support this claim.