New computer


Don

Link Posted 02/12/2018 - 15:17
Algernon wrote:
Don wrote:
Quote:
Intresting. One salesperson stated that phot manipulation requires little processing power unlike video.
Yet this does not seem to be the case.

Regards

that guy's an idiot... buy somewhere else.

The salesman is actually spot on. Photoshop doesn't need a very expensive processor. Intel used to be the best, but AMD got their act together and just a quick scan of these benchmarks shows the 170 Ryzen 5 2600 (Amazon) is only 9% slower than the top 550 CPU stitching a large Pano. On general use and Premier it's about 50% slower but most normal editing doesn't take long anyway.

Video conversion is about 15% slower.

I didn't look at the price of the other CPU's so that might not be the best buy.

Mouseclick on the graph bar of each CPU to see percentages. The one you click is set at 100%.

https://uk.hardware.info/reviews/8267/3/amd-ryzen-5-2600-review-the-most-interes...


--

your point about the cost of the processor is valid, powerful doesn't need be expensive, but.. those amd multicore processors ARE POWERFUL... and that is what the software runs best on... Photoshop likes ram 32 gigs is the sweet spot, fast multicore (6 cores is the sweetspot) processors and for some effects and plug ins cuda cores on Nvidia graphics cards... hence my comment earlier about not really needing to spend on an upgraded amd graphics card unless you want to edit video.... a full version of photoshop is coming for the iPad Pro , which is touted as having a processor that rivals the Intels in the Macs on some benchmarks it's a powerhouse processor...
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.
Last Edited by Don on 02/12/2018 - 15:17

Algernon

Link Posted 02/12/2018 - 16:14
Most Photoshop stuff just uses a single core. A lot of the code is probably quite old plus the work can't be split up. I don't do video, but if I did, I'd look up what is needed to offload some of the processing to the GPU it's supposed to save some time. I think Intel do something.

For any PC a RAM-DISK is a big boost and last time I looked I found a free one that was OK for up to 4GB. You have to buy it for over that.... only $22 so quite cheap.

The free version now seems to be just max of 1GB still plenty for one off edits, zips etc.
http://memory.dataram.com/products-and-services/software/ramdisk
--
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi
Last Edited by Algernon on 02/12/2018 - 16:16

Tyr

Link Posted 02/12/2018 - 19:36
Don wrote:
The new iPad Pro looks promising..
as far as photoshop is concerned any new Mac will do the job. but...
the real issue is workflow....
you have external monitor, if you also have external raid hard drive and an external ssd drive then what you want to look for is any Mac with a thunderbolt 3 port.
in your shoes based on what your original post said, I'd opt for the following setup...

buy the mid tier Mac mini, pay for the upgraded processor, do not pay for ram upgrade, buy that separately and upgrade it yourself or pay a friend/shop to install the ram.. at least 16 gigs of ram, 32 is better.

then... plug in ONE Usb3 gen 2 or thunderbolt 3 ssd drive of at least 1 TB capacity and set it up as your scratch disk.

add a usb-c external raid enclosure with a raid 0 setup and at least 2 2-4tb drives.

add a usb3 backup drive with enough capacity to back up ALL your drives.

run photoshop off your computers internal drive BUT use the ssd for a scratch disc and use external storage for your photo library, and to quote Chris Farley "For the love of GOD!!!" make regular backups.

lastly..

look at a thunderbolt 3 egpu (HP omen is the cheapest, razor core is good so are sonnet and akidio) and amd radon 580 or better graphics card... if you want to speed things up a bit for gaming or video editing at some point in the future.
link

I can't argue with that advice. It is expensive but all correct.

I can't afford Apple products but they are beautifully designed bits of kit.
Regards,
Dan

https://www.flickr.com/photos/honourabletyr/

Tyr

Link Posted 02/12/2018 - 19:40
Algernon wrote:
Most Photoshop stuff just uses a single core. A lot of the code is probably quite old plus the work can't be split up. I don't do video, but if I did, I'd look up what is needed to offload some of the processing to the GPU it's supposed to save some time. I think Intel do something.

For any PC a RAM-DISK is a big boost and last time I looked I found a free one that was OK for up to 4GB. You have to buy it for over that.... only $22 so quite cheap.

The free version now seems to be just max of 1GB still plenty for one off edits, zips etc.
http://memory.dataram.com/products-and-services/software/ramdisk
--

Since SSDs can be had 'cheap' for very good performance RAMdisks are now a poor choice. When an entry level M.2 SSD does 1800MB/s read and write and a SATAii SSD does 550MB/s read and write with power loss protection and not needing a battery. If a RAMdisk loses power it is wiped.
Regards,
Dan

https://www.flickr.com/photos/honourabletyr/
Last Edited by Tyr on 02/12/2018 - 19:40

barkin

Link Posted 02/12/2018 - 20:01
pschlute wrote:
theonenadeem wrote:
Intresting. One salesperson stated that phot manipulation requires little processing power unlike video.
Yet this does not seem to be the case.

Regards

Depends entirely what software you are using and the file sizes you are working with.

This is it!

All of my photo processing is done on an i3 CPU with 4GB RAM

I'm not naive enough to suggest that would be a suitable platform for everybody, any more than I'd suggest that everybody needs 32GB, the latest multi-core processor and whizz bang GPU, and RAID storage.

Algernon

Link Posted 02/12/2018 - 20:35
Tyr wrote:
Algernon wrote:
Most Photoshop stuff just uses a single core. A lot of the code is probably quite old plus the work can't be split up. I don't do video, but if I did, I'd look up what is needed to offload some of the processing to the GPU it's supposed to save some time. I think Intel do something.

For any PC a RAM-DISK is a big boost and last time I looked I found a free one that was OK for up to 4GB. You have to buy it for over that.... only $22 so quite cheap.

The free version now seems to be just max of 1GB still plenty for one off edits, zips etc.
http://memory.dataram.com/products-and-services/software/ramdisk
--

Since SSDs can be had 'cheap' for very good performance RAMdisks are now a poor choice. When an entry level M.2 SSD does 1800MB/s read and write and a SATAii SSD does 550MB/s read and write with power loss protection and not needing a battery. If a RAMdisk loses power it is wiped.

Where do you get these FREE SSD's.

RAMDisks are used for temporary work and because they get wiped clean when you shutdown there's no cleaning up/housework to do and on re-boot it's nice to have a completely clear disk to say dump a load of files to. Examples look through the contents of ZIP/RAR files or if you have a K-5 dump a load of JPG's extracted straight from the M-JPEG video file that the K-5 produces. Then pick out only the JPG's you want and copy to HDD. Doing this on any other drive would quicly wear it out.

I also use mine if I want to post a screen grab to the web. I have a Grab program that copies the grab to RAMDisk and all I have to do then is send it as an attachment. Hard to get it wrong because it will be one file on a blank disk.

You can set the RAMDisk to save itself and reload on the next boot if you want to.

--
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.