CH writes:
>>The access time of normal hard disk is very slow, in the range 5-10ms
(the
>>actual random seek time is much more than that). While the SSD can
handle
>>~100K IOPS, it is 0.01ms. Which is much faster than a HD. So I
expected
>>using a single SSD for both PS and Window would be ok.
I thought windoze 7 is pretty good at using RAM for cache anyway so am
skeptical a dedicated RAM
disk is worth the effort for PS to perhaps further speed it up over an
SSD. PS should scarf up available RAM anyway, no?
My system finally complained bitterly trying to render a 6min in 1080p
video in CS6. I had used several
modifications of the clips including filters which I presume had to be
applied to each frame. It took almost 40 min
but came out OK. The clips had to be converted to "smart objects" or
it is just applied to one frame--a bit sneaky.
I can't even imagine how long it would take to process 30 fps raw
files with the RAW video from Magic Lantern.
Better mostly stick to stills, Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|