----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
> On 6/7/2013 10:44 AM, Tina Manley wrote:
>> I really can't do this myself. Here are the components
>> suggested by the Australian site:
>>
>> Intel i7-3930K Core i7 CPU, Six Core 3.20 GHz
>>
>> Motherboard: ASUS X79/8 X DDR 3/4 X PCI-E3.0 X 16/4 X SATA 3/8 X USB
>> 3.0/2
>> X GBLAN/RAID/WIFI/ATXX P9X79-DELUXE
>
> This will all change shortly. Intel has released their next generation of
> processors. They use a different socket. So
> those who recommend the latest, most powerful, bestest, will be changing
> their recommendations.
>
I was also waiting for the Haswell but just can't wait, video editing is
slow for a dual core system. The preview of the Haswell seems only a few
percent faster than Ivy bridge although it said the final version will be
10-15% faster. The cost of new chips will be certainly more expensive at the
beginning. I'm now very happy with the E3-1230V2 8G RAM.
> I'm not at all sure six cores will add anything noticeable to PS use. As
> you do not seem to be someone who is likely to
> play with overclocking, the 'k' suffix processors may be just more money
> for nothing.
>
Agreed, unless someone is going to stitch a huge file otherwise a quad core
i7 should be fine.
>
> I'm beginning to think this is likely unnecessary, and less than ideal. As
> CH has pointed out, RAM is much faster than
> an SSD. 32 GB of RAM, with 8 GB used as a RAM scratch disk, and the rest
> available as direct memory to PS is likely faster.
>
Yes, go for Ramdisk, set to 16GB if you are running an image file over
400MB.
>> Video Card: ATI PCIe FirePro V4800 1024MB - support for two monitors
>
> This is interesting. The gamers, in particular, and most hardware nerds,
> most of whom are also gamers, get all worked up
> about video cards. The just current Intel processors with integrated video
> are approved by Adobe for GPU use in PS. The
> new ones just released have improved GPU from that.
> I'm thinking of going with an i7-4770 (perhaps the 'k' version for me)
> with 32 GB of RAM and no additional video card.
> PS just doesn't need gaming speed, just competent 3D scrolling, and such,
> which it appears the Intels have.
>
The on board GPU is never as fast as a mid-range video card but I doubt it
help much for PS editing.
> Depends in part on what motherboards cost. As CH pointed out, there are
> very capable motherboards for the last
> generation available for around $100. As with video cards, the features
> the premium mother boards add are mostly
> irrelevant to the PS user. I think an i7-3770k with AS Rock board will
> scream running PS with SSDs.
>
Yeah, the mid-range motherboards are good enough for photo applications,
unless you consider a serious overclock or need 3 graphic cards for heavy
gaming.
> As above, all this is overkill for any use but gaming. The new processors
> use less power than the old, SSDs use less
> power than HDs. 500W with a large, quiet, ball bearing fan is mucho
> plenty.
>
My system is running at 150W max (60W for light applications) without
pushing the video card, I believe if I run some demanding game the max power
will be around 220W. My power supply is 380W, at max power it should reach
the sweet point for efficiency. 500W is more than enough for photo
applications.
C.H.Ling
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|