Yes I know that but models below the 246 and a certain rev use pc2700. Notice on the Tyan K8W, it defaults in the old bios to 600 instead of 800..
Regards,
Jose
Regards,
Jose
one thing I've said before and I'll say again - this is not the best board to be asking workstation-related questions. there are waaay too many kiddies & fanboys who don't understand the ins & outs of alot of these applications and seem to have some kind of mission to get you to buy what they bought so they can feel better about their purchase. Which most of them bought for games (not that there's anything wrong with games).
Problem is, the adobe related crowds are going to be biased towards a mac. most of the other pc-hardware sites are going to have the same problem as this one (gamer-centric)
the real trick is recognizing how everyone is biased, and weighing that into their advice. even mine:
you certainly need 2GB of ram or more.
on a budget for photoshop only, I'd get a p4 6xx and 4gb ram
wanna spend more? operons (lower speed -244 or 246) K8w or K8we, and 4gb ram
more? buy the mac.
Problem is, the adobe related crowds are going to be biased towards a mac. most of the other pc-hardware sites are going to have the same problem as this one (gamer-centric)
the real trick is recognizing how everyone is biased, and weighing that into their advice. even mine:
you certainly need 2GB of ram or more.
on a budget for photoshop only, I'd get a p4 6xx and 4gb ram
wanna spend more? operons (lower speed -244 or 246) K8w or K8we, and 4gb ram
more? buy the mac.
Originally posted by: ribbon13
Originally posted by: Ken90630
Hi, Lupin,
Whether or not the SMP optimizations for filters in Photoshop CS work the same way with Apple dual-processor rigs like the G5, or with dual Opterons, I'm not sure. I would think Adobe would have tweaked the software a bit to allow Apple or AMD Opteron users the same benefits that Intel HT users enjoy, but I simply don't know the answer. You might cruise Adobe's Web site a bit or give them a quick call if you really wanna know.
WTF??? Photoshop has been an SMP friendly application for a long long time, long before HyperThreading even existed.
How so? I'm not saying you're wrong, so no need to get hostile with another "WTF?" comment. I'd just like to know how it's been SMP friendly, like you say, so if you could provide a link or further info for me, that would be cool.
I was referring to this page on Intel's site in my earlier post. See the second paragraph. The way it's worded seems to indicate that Photoshop CS is the first version of Photoshop to make use of hyper-threading and, by extension, SMP. If I've made the wrong assumption, no prob -- I welcome the real scoop on this (just out of curiosity).
for the most part, your processor is fast enough. what you may benefit from is MUCH MORE RAM, and a faster HDD. you will benefit from a multiprocessor set up
how large are the images you are using?
how large are the images you are using?
The 244 is middle of the range (1.8Ghz), but its the best deal out right now. All Opterons have 1MB L2 cache. The highest out right now is the 252 ($870 each), not counting 8xx. Here is the list
I reccomend a PSU already, you do NOT want to even think about skimping on a PSU for such a system. The board is 12x13" so you need a case that takes EATX/SSI. I reccomended two already.
Reccomending a Mac over and Opteron for photoshop shows that you are right, and have no idea what you're talking about. Opterons readily devastate G5s in photoshop. Even more so now on a nForce pro chipset. And with DDR400 even more so. And with dual-core as an upgrade path.... yeah.. where's your G5s now... dollar per dollar comparison adds insult to injury. BTW, I don't have a gaming rig at all... and I have the bias of a professional graphics artist.
Originally posted by: Ken90630
How so? I'm not saying you're wrong, so no need to get hostile with another "WTF?" comment. I'd just like to know how it's been SMP friendly, like you say, so if you could provide a link or further info for me, that would be cool.
I was referring to this page on Intel's site in my earlier post. See the second paragraph. The way it's worded seems to indicate that Photoshop CS is the first version of Photoshop to make use of hyper-threading and, by extension, SMP. If I've made the wrong assumption, no prob -- I welcome the real scoop on this (just out of curiosity).
Intel's marketing hype trying to promote HT. Photoshop has been SMP friendly since at least 3.0.5(1996)
I suppose I should just stop responding to this kinda stuff, which is exactly what I'm talking about. but oh well.
1) I don't own a mac. And I didn't recomend one universally. I said if he had money to burn, buy the mac. here's why:
2) Photoshop benchmarks are unbelieveably easy to fudge. apple does it all the time for their stuff. so does intel and just about everybody else. Net workstation benchmarks are almost useless, and 20 sec vs 23 sec is pretty much meaningless because:
3) G5, opteron, intel. You can have a stunning, amazingly capable photoshop machine with any of them. look around, examine your budget, buy one and get tons of ram. Nitpicking much beyond that is pretty much a waste of time you should have spent working. Building a computer could also be considered valuable time you should have spent working. Given how much you post, ribbon, you've got the most lax pro graphics job I've ever seen. Must be nice...
4) (this is the big one) for adobe only people, if you collaborate with others (print shops, other designers) regularly, running a mac simply because everyone else does can save you some hassels. Though this is much improved in recent years, I still see some issues.
5) You may not have a gaming rig, ribbon, but you certainly can brag, derride, and inflate your own self worth with the best of the fanboys. Get off it, sonny, it ain't helping anybody.
hopefully you've recognized why I put my points across how I have. Get it yet?
Edit: and I also like how you posted an old benchmark, rather than the newer one on the same site that showed the 3.4 xeon beating the 252 AND the G5 in smp actions.
link
way to be unbiased:disgust:
bob4432
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2003
- 11,727
- 46
- 91
drubb,
in all fairness, ribbon does know what he/she is talking about, just look over the other threads he/she has posted. and he is a professional graphics artist, so he/she knows their stuff when it comes to this. also, when you say that what is the difference between 20-23 seconds, in a work enviorment it adds up quickly.
also you point about using adobe with certain print shops and all using macs is not a real point, any shop should have access to either or have the ability to import whatever.
His own words spoke volumes about his character which is why I wasn't going to even acknowledge it but ok, I'll bite...
1. Money to burn? Money is always an issue... and wasting it is never wise.
2. This was a 3rd party running the exact same process to the exact same file. How do you fudge that? Also that 3 seconds might add up to 2 hours running a batch process on 2000 textures... here, my typical work schedule proofing
(864 minutes / 23 )* 20 == 751
112 lost minutes * .46c == $51.52 a day
6 days * 51 weeks * 51.52 dollars = $15765.12 a year
That's an extreme potential, but even if it was a mere 10th of that, try to explain that loss to your boss...
3. At least with an Opteron you can have a non-proprietary vendor... oh and a 2+ button mouse! (Sorry, that's just classic peeve) And bringing my post count into this while chiding me for the way you perceive my attitude? Never thought I might have been burnt out working 14.4hours a day year in year out? Might make it so I can retire early? Or freelance just to occupy myself? It's called crunch time, and I took enough inhuman deadlines in my life, I don't have to take crap from you.
4. Welcome to 2005, where Adobe files are crossplatform. Oh wait... try the 90s
5. I reserve the right to do that to people who speak from thier hindquarters.
6. New benchmark... 2 out of 12 aint bad... Mention the noise of the excessive HSF needed for the Xeons? Increased power bill? And loss of dual-core CPU upgrade path... Try again. Nothing like the Opteron 280 to nullify any possible benefit to Xeons.
*slams head on desk*
Take another look at this part of my post:
I guess I'll spell it out for you. I structured my post along the lines of ribbon's to illustrate that bravado and derision don't help, and that it's easy to over emphasize what makes your view look right and downplay/ignore what makes it look wrong. Standard fanboy crap. Which is what I did, which is all ribbon does. I'm not saying he hasn't provided useful information - I'm saying I find his attitude unhelpful and his opinions biased.
let's do it again.
1) Correct, wasting money is never wise. I never said waste it. I said if you have alot to spend, there are reasons to get a mac. Heck, if you have alot to spend, there are reasons to get a mac and a PC.
2) Bios/os tweaking or lack thereof, selection of which process will favor what you want. If fudging wasn't rampant, why is apple always able to come out with demos that make them look good, and so is intel, and why does every hardware site seem to come to different conclusions? maybe it's not fudging, maybe the testing that sites do usually lacks the depth to show useful information.
as for your math...
if that's the case, you're probably more than justified in purchasing several, cheap computers and PS licenses for grunt work. Actually, you'd have dozens of extra computers lying around because you'd be upgrading every 6 weeks regardless of platform (hey, if every second is so valuable...) Additonally, do you sit and watch it process for hours and hours? Generally I set it and come back the next day. I do other things while it crunches. Also see 6)
3) who cares if it's proprietary if it just works? plug 2+ buttom mouse into mac. done. (note both ribbon's and my typical fanboy crap)
I don't know you and I don't know your past. Note again that I said what I did (am) and how I did(am) to demostrate my distaste for your fanboy tactics. If you did what you say, good for you, you're now free to think/do whatever you want. However I'm equally free to think you're being a braggart and not as helpful as you could be.
you're welcome to disagree with me and counter my points without being an ahole about it. I'd really rather that.
4) I wasn't refering to adobe files. I was refering to the variety of things I've seen that probably shouldn't happen (or seem like they would be easy to get around) but wind up getting in the way anyway.
ex: idot brings in his firewire HD that's formatted to HFS+
"what do you mean you can't read it? we have to have this tomorrow!"
or a similar scenario - the NTFS formatted drive somebody wants to write to from a mac (however I'm told this one may be fixed shortly - on the mac end, of course)
again, things that shouldn't happen but cause problems anyway. I know of no one who hasn't run into mac/PC or pc/mac issues at one time or another. The adobe centric world is mainly mac, and I can't imagine anyone not taking that into consideration. But again, that's been my experience, it may be different than yours, and I'd be happy for you to say so. But I'd really rather it not be in kiddie insult-speak. Maybe I'm alone on that one.
5) see the latter parts of #s 3 and 4.
6) like I said, over emphasize what makes your opinion look right, ignore/derride what doesn't. Completely forget that there are 3.6/2mb xeons out now that will likely increase the xeon lead (oh yeah, don't forget to speculate!). Forget your past point about every second being sooo valuable. Forget that completely passive heasinks are available for xeons. mention dual core upgrade path (which is a good point if you upgrade often or want to consider waiting a bit) but leave out the part where he's looking for performance now, and if he isn't going to be upgrading for 2 years, skt 940 has reached the end of it's life as well and he'll want a whole new system anyway.
sigh
Sorry if I come across as a fanboy to you. I don't care as long as my info is solid. ^^
With multiple cheaper computers, your total value depriciates that much quicker. You also can't spread linear image work on multiple computers very easily. Ahh... and example of why I dislike Mac fanboys who don't bother formatting thier external drive FAT32. Every external in a workplace should. I could have easily dealt with that problem as we still used a cluster of G5s for rendering, and I could have access the files over the network through it. While the Adobe-centric crowd used to be Apple-centric, that's not quite as true anymore, though its still present for sure.
As for the Xeons, they do wonders for SQL, but the 2MB cache isn't that useful for photoshop. And please... I'd like to see a passive heatsink for a chip that puts out 130w of heat. Also is that an implication that said HS doesn't have an Opteron equivalent, given how much less heat they put out... As for two years from now, quite the contrary... in 2 years he'll be able to pick up two Opteron 280s are a reasonable price and have a quad-cpu machine.
With multiple cheaper computers, your total value depriciates that much quicker. You also can't spread linear image work on multiple computers very easily. Ahh... and example of why I dislike Mac fanboys who don't bother formatting thier external drive FAT32. Every external in a workplace should. I could have easily dealt with that problem as we still used a cluster of G5s for rendering, and I could have access the files over the network through it. While the Adobe-centric crowd used to be Apple-centric, that's not quite as true anymore, though its still present for sure.
As for the Xeons, they do wonders for SQL, but the 2MB cache isn't that useful for photoshop. And please... I'd like to see a passive heatsink for a chip that puts out 130w of heat. Also is that an implication that said HS doesn't have an Opteron equivalent, given how much less heat they put out... As for two years from now, quite the contrary... in 2 years he'll be able to pick up two Opteron 280s are a reasonable price and have a quad-cpu machine.
Ok, thank you. Good start.
my counters:
I don't think it's usually an issue of mac fanboys...I think many just don't know any better.
I was mainly refering to the extra 2 Ghz in the 3.6 xeon - I'm assuming the 3.4 they tested was a 1M chip, and a 3.6 would do slightly better.
the 3.6/1m xeon puts out ~103w from what I've seen around the net. The 252 puts out ~93w. Couldn't find any info on th g5 (maybe intentional?)
I recall the intel dual core smithfield was said to be setting TDP records at around 125w.
Passive nocona HShere
And yep, there's a version of that exact HS for A64s and opterons, Though I'd hesitate about running those (on intel or AMD) without a fan on them unless I had a very well ventilated case. But you could do it.
In two years...might be a good option, but there might be something new he'll find useful, might want new mobo features...too far away to tell really. Personally I wouldn't be buying a rig now with the plan of upgrading that far down the road, I'd be looking for what's best for me at the moment.
Extra 2Ghz? you mean 200Mhz?
Also, Intel's own heat ratings are mean, while AMD's are maximum.
What new features? In addition to the Dual Opteron, that board has USB2, IEEE1394, SATAII, two independant PCI-X busses, dual gigabit (w/hardware TCP/IP stack), and an integrated dual U320 option. Unless you know of some upcoming technology that I don't... Maybe SAS? That's covered with the PCI-X.
Also, Intel's own heat ratings are mean, while AMD's are maximum.
What new features? In addition to the Dual Opteron, that board has USB2, IEEE1394, SATAII, two independant PCI-X busses, dual gigabit (w/hardware TCP/IP stack), and an integrated dual U320 option. Unless you know of some upcoming technology that I don't... Maybe SAS? That's covered with the PCI-X.
oops. supposed to be a >.< in front of the the 2. extra .2 Ghz.
I know about the heat ratings...I took 103w as a rough approximation of what several review sites were guessing at. Looked alittle more and that might be a tad low.
here's a review running prestionias at 3.4 GHz with those sinks
http://www.ctechnet.com/hardware/Cooler...r/Cooler/coolermaster_e3w-nptxs-04.htm
56 deg C @ full load aint bad for totally passive.
Features... I don't know. 2 years is a quite a bit of time in PC terms. maybe integrated Fw800? maybe the next nforce chip will have something spiffy or just plain be fast enough to be worth some extra cash. maybe by then 4x or 8x pci-e add in cards will be more standard and he'll want a couple of those slots.
I know about the heat ratings...I took 103w as a rough approximation of what several review sites were guessing at. Looked alittle more and that might be a tad low.
here's a review running prestionias at 3.4 GHz with those sinks
http://www.ctechnet.com/hardware/Cooler...r/Cooler/coolermaster_e3w-nptxs-04.htm
56 deg C @ full load aint bad for totally passive.
Features... I don't know. 2 years is a quite a bit of time in PC terms. maybe integrated Fw800? maybe the next nforce chip will have something spiffy or just plain be fast enough to be worth some extra cash. maybe by then 4x or 8x pci-e add in cards will be more standard and he'll want a couple of those slots.
As for integrated IEEE1394b, don't hold your breath... and if he really needs it. Also he'd have two x16 PCIe to play with. ^^ The only board on the market with two true x16 by the way.
I can tell you that most anything useful for a workstation/server is still going to have a PCI-X flavor in a couple of years.
I can tell you that most anything useful for a workstation/server is still going to have a PCI-X flavor in a couple of years.
you recommended the 244 opteron for $233.
when the dual core comes out, do you have a guess on the pricetag? $400?
I am thinking if it would make more economic sense to just get the 244 opteron now, and upgrade to dual cores maybe 1-2 years from now, when their prices have stabilized, as opposed to getting it right when they're out. On the other hand, I can just get more memory now, since memory price is much more stable than CPU.
like several years ago, when they just broke the 1GHz barrier, those processors were damn expensive, price to performance, they're not really much faster to the much cheaper 700Mhz processors.
Also, how much faster really is a dual opteron to a single opteron set up on Photoshop? 20%, 30%?
when the dual core comes out, do you have a guess on the pricetag? $400?
I am thinking if it would make more economic sense to just get the 244 opteron now, and upgrade to dual cores maybe 1-2 years from now, when their prices have stabilized, as opposed to getting it right when they're out. On the other hand, I can just get more memory now, since memory price is much more stable than CPU.
like several years ago, when they just broke the 1GHz barrier, those processors were damn expensive, price to performance, they're not really much faster to the much cheaper 700Mhz processors.
Also, how much faster really is a dual opteron to a single opteron set up on Photoshop? 20%, 30%?
I have no idea what they'll cost. But you can bet they'll drive down the cose of the single cores ^^
That's what I was suggesting. In 18-24 months dual-core should be at a reasonable level.
As for photoshop speed -> Try 70-90%
That's what I was suggesting. In 18-24 months dual-core should be at a reasonable level.
As for photoshop speed -> Try 70-90%
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter