2D Graphics Editing Machine Config

[owensdj]

I need to build a new computer for someone who does a lot of work with Adobe graphics editing software, such as Photoshop and Illustrator. How does this config look?

Intel Pentium D 930 Dual Core 3.0GHz
Asus P5WD2-E Premium Motherboard
Kingston 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 Memory
Asus Radeon 1300PRO 256MB Graphics Card
Western Digital 250GB SE16 WD2500KS Hard Drive
NEC 16X DVD RW Burner ND-4570A
NEC 1.44 3.5" Floppy Drive
Antec Performance One P150 Case 430W
Microsoft Windows XP Professional

 

[Oyeve]

Looks good. As a photoshop and illustrator user myself I would reccomend a second HD to put the scratch volume on. You will get much better performance.

 

[ProviaFan]

I would choose AMD personally, but that build isn't bad. As a Photoshop power user (not compared to real graphic artists, but relative to most other people), I second the suggestion for a second hard disk to store the PS scratch file. Actually, an ideal system might have three hard disks (for example, a 72GB OS & programs disk, a 36GB scratch disk, and a large drive or array of some sort for storing data), but the improvement from two to three will be much less noticeable than the performance improvement that one would gain by using two disks instead of one.

 

[pkme2]

I recommend the Nvidia Quadro FX 1400 for your graphic rig.
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3214&page=3
It will definitely outperform the ATI card.

I just replaced my old Win 2000 workstation with my new build.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: pkme2
I recommend the Nvidia Quadro FX 1400 for your graphic rig.
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3214&page=3
It will definitely outperform the ATI card.

I just replaced my old Win 2000 workstation with my new build.

A Quadro for Photoshop and Illustrator?

 

[imported_rod]

Dual Core - Check!
2GB+ RAM - Check!
^^^ They're the important bits.

A second HDD wouldn't be a bad idea, but it depends how seriously your going to be doing this. Also, something like a Nvidia Quadro (i think it's a dedicated rendering card?) would be way overkill, unless you're wanting to spend serious money on this. Looks good as it is.

RoD

 

[pkme2]

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: pkme2
I recommend the Nvidia Quadro FX 1400 for your graphic rig.
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3214&page=3
It will definitely outperform the ATI card.

I just replaced my old Win 2000 workstation with my new build.

A Quadro for Photoshop and Illustrator?

I use a FireGL for my new graphic workstation, and the Quadro would be superior.
I used a Matrox in my old Graphic rig, but the FireGL excells in my new build.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: pkme2

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: pkme2
I recommend the Nvidia Quadro FX 1400 for your graphic rig.
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3214&page=3
It will definitely outperform the ATI card.

I just replaced my old Win 2000 workstation with my new build.

A Quadro for Photoshop and Illustrator?

I use a FireGL for my new graphic workstation, and the Quadro would be superior.
I used a Matrox in my old Graphic rig, but the FireGL excells in my new build.

I'm not doubting that they're excellent cards, but I thought Photoshop and Illustrator were CPU-intensive. Unless the pro video cards add some special functionality?

 

[pkme2]

My rig has a X2 4400+ and with a FireGL/Quadro definitely adds functionality. I do Truespace now, and maybe Maya later, I won't be limiting my options by not using FireGL/Quadro cards.

At the moment, one can get quadro system pull cards under $200.

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: Howard
I'm not doubting that they're excellent cards, but I thought Photoshop and Illustrator were CPU-intensive. Unless the pro video cards add some special functionality?

If this individual is never going to do any 3D modeling or gaming of any sort, then the FireGL and Quadro cards would not add any functionality. A high-end Quadro would cost a good bit more than the card proposed (not considering outdated Quadros pulled from elsewhere), and if the user ever does decide to move on to 3D work in a year or so, newer cards will be available then, or they could get a current Quadro at that time for less.

Edit: buying an old Quadro simply because it's a Quadro is a bad idea for other reasons. If this individual has any plans of upgrading to Vista, s/he should get something that will support at least DX9. If they do want a new Quadro for potential future 3D work, then fine, but it will offer absolutely no benefit whatsoever for the Adobe Creative Suite applications (note: the thread title clearly states that this is a 2D workstation that is being built).

 

[pkme2]

The Quadros are recent versions from Nvidia.
The Quadro FX 540 supports 2D display output to 1920x1200 (DVI) and 2048 x 1536 (analog HD15) plus a HDTV display via its video breakout box, giving this additional flexibility for use as a film or video studio environment. The Quadro FX 4500, 4400, 1400, FireGL V7100, and GeForce 7800GTX performed very closely with each other.
Why limit oneself to just one scope of endeavor. With the high cost of hardware, doesn't it make sense to have more flexible coverage in video cards? You be the judge.

 

[pkme2]

Just won a bid for new pull for Nvidia Quadro FX 1400 PCI-e on eBay, under $170.00 (Retail $799). Item number: 170000228426

Retail online
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications...H-1044&SRCCODE=GOOPROD&CMP=OTC-FROOGLE
http://www.dealtime.com/xPO-PNY_Quadro_...Expess_128MB_DDR_SLI_and_RGFSAA_Retail

Quadro FX540 128MB PCI-E

HIGH-LEVEL SHADER LANGUAGES
Optimized compilers for Cg, OpenGL shading language, and Microsoft HLSL
OpenGL 1.5 and DirectX 9.0 support
Open source compiler

 

[pkme2]

Compatibility report(s) for Nvidia Quadro FX 1400
http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/compatibility.php?sid=4cd63cadb5744b4b0c99032d921a57e1#

"Performance was smooth in both 2D and 3D.
I would like to have some more options in the 3D Window, to disable the central rectangle, to enable anti-aliasing and to enable realtime shadows and OpenGL shaders, so we can do nice realtime animation inside the ArchiCAD viewports. "

Just trying to dispell the rumor that Quadro cards can't do 2D and only 3D in its workstation cards.
Nvidia, methinks is too good of a company to limit the uses of its video cards.

 

[ProviaFan]

Good grief, what kind of nonsense is that? Let's slow down for a moment and make sure that there is comprehension of the critical points. Firstly, the OP asked about a "2D" workstation. Secondly, no one said that the Quadro cards would have a hard time drawing a 2D interface at full speed. Nonetheless, there is no reason to pay more than necessary for a card with 3D capabilities that would never be used; all of the cards in question will draw the 2D interface at roughly the same speed, so there is no reason to choose one over the other on that point alone.

We can all see that you're proud of your nice workstation that is optimized for 3D work. That's great. You've also given way more than enough advice if the OP were interested in a similar workstation. On the contrary, to this time, they haven't given any indication that they are.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: owensdj
I need to build a new computer for someone who does a lot of work with Adobe graphics editing software, such as Photoshop and Illustrator. How does this config look?

Intel Pentium D 930 Dual Core 3.0GHz
Asus P5WD2-E Premium Motherboard
Kingston 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 Memory
Asus Radeon 1300PRO 256MB Graphics Card
Western Digital 250GB SE16 WD2500KS Hard Drive
NEC 16X DVD RW Burner ND-4570A
NEC 1.44 3.5" Floppy Drive
Antec Performance One P150 Case 430W
Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Looks great. The Pentium 930 at $200 is awesome, and PS will run great with a dual core cpu.

As for prices, ZZF has the Pentium 930 for 200.70 shipped...
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80851

You may want to consider this Corsair memory, at $138.50 shipped, great deal...
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=85016-47

You may also want to consider this case/psu...
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=140119

BTW, may I ask why the expensive motherboard? OC'ing? If not, you could get a 945P motherboard for about a $100.

 

[rivan]

The one thing I might add is if your plan is to work on very large files, then consider raid if your budget permits.

Improved drive performance makes a noticeable impact when you're working with large images, both for scratch disk usage and open/save times. Then again, if you're doing primarily web stuff or smaller (tabloid or smaller) print stuff, what you've got will do great. If you'll do anything for billboards, vehicle wraps or anything else very large, I'd strongly recommend a raid setup.

 

[batmanuel]

Originally posted by: pkme2
The Quadros are recent versions from Nvidia.
The Quadro FX 540 supports 2D display output to 1920x1200 (DVI) and 2048 x 1536 (analog HD15) plus a HDTV display via its video breakout box, giving this additional flexibility for use as a film or video studio environment.

Do you have any idea how underwhelming those specs are? You can't run a 30" flat panel off of that Quadro, since you don't have dual link DVI capability on that card, whereas your run of the mill $100 X1600 Pro has dual link DVI standard. HDTV capable outputs are also fairly standard on all but the cheapest of modern graphics cards as well (such as the aforementioned X1600 Pro).

As has been mentioned before, there is no need for more than an X1600 if you are limiting yourself to photo and video editing. Even on the Mac platform, which has Core Image to allow you to accelerate some 2D work inside the graphics card, the X1600 Pro is all you need for Photoshop, Motion and FCP.

 

[pkme2]

Originally posted by: batmanuel

Originally posted by: pkme2
The Quadros are recent versions from Nvidia.
The Quadro FX 540 supports 2D display output to 1920x1200 (DVI) and 2048 x 1536 (analog HD15) plus a HDTV display via its video breakout box, giving this additional flexibility for use as a film or video studio environment.

Do you have any idea how underwhelming those specs are? You can't run a 30" flat panel off of that Quadro, since you don't have dual link DVI capability on that card, whereas your run of the mill $100 X1600 Pro has dual link DVI standard. HDTV capable outputs are also fairly standard on all but the cheapest of modern graphics cards as well (such as the aforementioned X1600 Pro).

As has been mentioned before, there is no need for more than an X1600 if you are limiting yourself to photo and video editing. Even on the Mac platform, which has Core Image to allow you to accelerate some 2D work inside the graphics card, the X1600 Pro is all you need for Photoshop, Motion and FCP.

You got dual DVI on FX 1400 which I show on my earlier thread (less than $170).
The FX 540 is entry level.
You want more, there the FX 4500.
Prices are super reasonable on eBay. Who pays retail? For sure, not me and a whole lot of other buyers on eBay.

 

[pkme2]

ProviaFan sez....
Edit: buying an old Quadro simply because it's a Quadro is a bad idea for other reasons. If this individual has any plans of upgrading to Vista, s/he should get something that will support at least DX9. If they do want a new Quadro for potential future 3D work, then fine, but it will offer absolutely no benefit whatsoever for the Adobe Creative Suite applications (note: the thread title clearly states that this is a 2D workstation that is being built).

First, Quadro is not old technology, It does support DX9
2nd, you implying that the Quadro can't do 2D, wrong in that respect. It can do 2D/3D. I believe that owensdj has choices and options on what is available. Keyholding him is an injustice from letting him make up his own mind. My opinion is just as good as yours. So are the other 90% on AT.
3rd, its your opinion that quadro has no benefit for CS2. I use it too and have not seen any degradation whatsoever in my work. So don't presume that Quadro doesn't work.
4th, if you have absolute proof that my facts are wrong, then I and Nvidia await your rebuttal.

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: pkme2
First, Quadro is not old technology, It does support DX9
2nd, you implying that the Quadro can't do 2D, wrong in that respect. It can do 2D/3D. I believe that owensdj has choices and options on what is available. Keyholding him is an injustice from letting him make up his own mind. My opinion is just as good as yours. So are the other 90% on AT.
3rd, its your opinion that quadro has no benefit for CS2. I use it too and have not seen any degradation whatsoever in my work. So don't presume that Quadro doesn't work.
4th, if you have absolute proof that my facts are wrong, then I and Nvidia await your rebuttal.

First, let's correct another reading comprehension problem: you say that some Quadro has dual DVI, which is true. However, this is not dual-link DVI, a technology that is required if the user wishes to use one of the new 30" LCDs.

Now, on to the real issue. You can't argue with my point, so you're making up stuff that I didn't say so you can keep this nonsense up. Please stop it. You've listed four points, only one of which is worth answering. I specifically said that the Quadro will provide no benefit in the Adobe Creative Suite. When you can show me (check Adobe's knowledge base) that one of the CS2 apps uses OpenGL or DirectX, then I will believe you. Since you can't do that, because they don't use OpenGL or DirectX, then please understand the meaning of "no benefit." It does NOT mean that a workstation-class card would function less well than the inexpensive (and better due to dual-link DVI support) Radeon - it simply means that the user would not gain anything from spending more money on an older card that does not support modern display interconnect standards (this is presuming that the user were to go with your suggestion of ebay, and not spend an insane amount of money on a Quadro that does have dual link DVI). If you still don't get it, please consider reviewing elementary English before responding further.

 

[batmanuel]

Originally posted by: pkme2

Originally posted by: batmanuel

Originally posted by: pkme2
The Quadros are recent versions from Nvidia.
The Quadro FX 540 supports 2D display output to 1920x1200 (DVI) and 2048 x 1536 (analog HD15) plus a HDTV display via its video breakout box, giving this additional flexibility for use as a film or video studio environment.

Do you have any idea how underwhelming those specs are? You can't run a 30" flat panel off of that Quadro, since you don't have dual link DVI capability on that card, whereas your run of the mill $100 X1600 Pro has dual link DVI standard. HDTV capable outputs are also fairly standard on all but the cheapest of modern graphics cards as well (such as the aforementioned X1600 Pro).

As has been mentioned before, there is no need for more than an X1600 if you are limiting yourself to photo and video editing. Even on the Mac platform, which has Core Image to allow you to accelerate some 2D work inside the graphics card, the X1600 Pro is all you need for Photoshop, Motion and FCP.

You got dual DVI on FX 1400 which I show on my earlier thread (less than $170).
The FX 540 is entry level.
You want more, there the FX 4500.
Prices are super reasonable on eBay. Who pays retail? For sure, not me and a whole lot of other buyers on eBay.

What does the extra money get you, though? If anything you lose the Avivo video encoder tech on the X1600. It just seems like a better idea to get a nice 2D card for under $100 now and buy a Quadro at a later date if you decide to drop a few grand for Maya or 3ds MAX. With the voltility of computer part pricing, it doesn't make sense to buy more machine than you need on a desktop (now a laptop is a different matter since it can't easily be upgraded).

 

[pkme2]

Originally posted by: ProviaFan

Originally posted by: pkme2
First, Quadro is not old technology, It does support DX9
2nd, you implying that the Quadro can't do 2D, wrong in that respect. It can do 2D/3D. I believe that owensdj has choices and options on what is available. Keyholding him is an injustice from letting him make up his own mind. My opinion is just as good as yours. So are the other 90% on AT.
3rd, its your opinion that quadro has no benefit for CS2. I use it too and have not seen any degradation whatsoever in my work. So don't presume that Quadro doesn't work.
4th, if you have absolute proof that my facts are wrong, then I and Nvidia await your rebuttal.

First, let's correct another reading comprehension problem: you say that some Quadro has dual DVI, which is true. However, this is not dual-link DVI, a technology that is required if the user wishes to use one of the new 30" LCDs.

Now, on to the real issue. You can't argue with my point, so you're making up stuff that I didn't say so you can keep this nonsense up. Please stop it. You've listed four points, only one of which is worth answering. I specifically said that the Quadro will provide no benefit in the Adobe Creative Suite. When you can show me (check Adobe's knowledge base) that one of the CS2 apps uses OpenGL or DirectX, then I will believe you. Since you can't do that, because they don't use OpenGL or DirectX, then please understand the meaning of "no benefit." It does NOT mean that a workstation-class card would function less well than the inexpensive (and better due to dual-link DVI support) Radeon - it simply means that the user would not gain anything from spending more money on an older card that does not support modern display interconnect standards (this is presuming that the user were to go with your suggestion of ebay, and not spend an insane amount of money on a Quadro that does have dual link DVI). If you still don't get it, please consider reviewing elementary English before responding further.

What confuses me is that you speak in terms that I find unusual. Are you talking from actual experience on using those cards like FireGL or Quadro, or opinion?
Since this thread is read by others, I thought to offer my opinion, not to get a flaming rebuff. I respect your opinion as much as you should mine.
What a person spends on a product is their concern, so jumping on the fact that I shouldn't recommend an expensive or obsolete product is simply ludicrous.
The dual DVI Quadro v1400 just sold for $161.01, which I'm happy to say, I got one.
My facts come from here:
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3321&page=3

If you wish to speak in generalities, then say so. My English speaks for itself.

 

[ProviaFan]

I've said enough already, but I'd still like to know how you manage to construe my claims of "no benefit" to mean that it actually harms performance! You keep repeating this ad nauseum, but you have yet to show how you reach this conclusion based on what I've actually said (not on things that I did not say and do not believe, but that you claim that I've said).

I'll repeat it for what seems like the millionth time: of course your Quadro will perform JUST AS WELL in Photoshop as the proposed Radeon. However, it will NOT perform BETTER in Photoshop than the Radeon. Their 2D performance is EQUAL; that is what I mean by "no benefit" - you don't get anything more for the cost.

Yes, it performs better in 3D modeling applications, but that isn't what the user asked about. If they had said that they were building a 3D workstation, then it would apply, but Photoshop is not such an application.

 

[ProviaFan]

One more question... "My facts come from here" - ok, that's a page full of benchmarks. Show me where the PHOTOSHOP benchmark is on that page, and I'll believe you.

 

[InlineFour]

what the hell is the argument? quadros/firegl cards excel in 3d, and they can also do 2d very well. the op specifically stated in his thread that this is going to be a 2d build. why spend more than you need to? a low to midrange graphic card is all the op needs. if you want a graphic card dedicated to 2d, look at some matrox cards.

pkme2, would you buy a 7900gtx sli for just web browsing? that's what i thought. the same concept applies to this thread.