CPU for photo processing - 512k or 1MB cache??

[Guy Gadbois]

I'm currently running an XP 1600+ with 1.25Gb ram (PC2700 if I recall) on WinXP. I would like to upgrade to a socket 939 board and get an Athlon64 CPU. My primary use for this computer will be to process my digital SLR RAW photos (I will be using Phase One's C1-Pro software and Photoshop CS), with photo file sizes up to around 25 MB. I've look at the 3200+ and 3500+ CPUs, but then noticed the 3700+ with 1MB of cache was about $50-$70 more expensive than the 3200+ or 3500+. I'm not going to be gaming on this machine at all. Would I truely see a benefit from the extra cache of the 3700+? Or should I just get the 3200+ or 3500+ CPU?

I've been looking at the -- Asus A8V Deluxe (v. 2.0) K8T800 Pro -- as far as motherboards... any opinions on it? I'm just looking to make sure the MB has SATA RAID USB 2.0, and Firewire onboard.

I've always used AMD CPU's (ever since my first AMD DX4-100 way back in the day), but have heard in more than one place, that Intel might be better at my type of work (that AMD is better suited for gamers?). I have not researched any Intel CPU's, but should I?

 

[stockriderman]

I am a photographer(not pro though) and do a lot of photoshop stuff. get a dual core processor. The cheapest you can afford. IF AMD 3800 x2 is all you can get-GET IT. I have a 4200 x2 and it blows by all of single core processors. The difference is like 15 seconds vs 50 seconds(that's be 3500+ or so). Photoshop can really utilize 100% of all cores makeing it so easy to work with. My old barton 2500+(ocd 2800) was at least 8 times slower in photoshop. 8 times!!!

 

[blackllotus]

Originally posted by: Guy Gadbois
I'm currently running an XP 1600+ with 1.25Gb ram (PC2700 if I recall) on WinXP. I would like to upgrade to a socket 939 board and get an Athlon64 CPU. My primary use for this computer will be to process my digital SLR RAW photos (I will be using Phase One's C1-Pro software and Photoshop CS), with photo file sizes up to around 25 MB. I've look at the 3200+ and 3500+ CPUs, but then noticed the 3700+ with 1MB of cache was about $50-$70 more expensive than the 3200+ or 3500+. I'm not going to be gaming on this machine at all. Would I truely see a benefit from the extra cache of the 3700+? Or should I just get the 3200+ or 3500+ CPU?

I've been looking at the -- Asus A8V Deluxe (v. 2.0) K8T800 Pro -- as far as motherboards... any opinions on it? I'm just looking to make sure the MB has SATA RAID USB 2.0, and Firewire onboard.

I've always used AMD CPU's (ever since my first AMD DX4-100 way back in the day), but have heard in more than one place, that Intel might be better at my type of work (that AMD is better suited for gamers?). I have not researched any Intel CPU's, but should I?

Well Intel did have an advantage before the X2 came out. Now twith the X2 out the Pentium D just gets stomped at almost everything (btw, you want dual core for Photoshop, since it shows a huge performance gain over single core).

 

[Bona Fide]

3800+ X2 + good heatsink FTW. 🙂

If you want to delve into overclocking, you can take that thing up to 2.4GHz without a hitch 😉 4600+ capabilities for half the price.

// And to answer your question, the difference in cache size makes a real-world difference of about 3-5%. Not worth it.

 

[Guy Gadbois]

So, does a program have to be written for dual processors in order to see a difference with the x2 CPU? I ask this because I cannot see anything on Phase One's website about C1 Pro being 'optimized' or anything like that for dual processors. This is the program that I am spending the most time in mainly after I have done all of my tweaks to the RAW images (usually 100-250 images at a time) then having the program batch process them into TIFF files (yields about 18 MB TIFF files).

Oh, and Bona Fide, what did you mean by "FTW"? I can't figure that out (or its just too early for me to think straight!) Is the stock heatsink decent?

 

[monster64]

Well, if that software is worth $300+, then its probably multithreaded. I doubt you'll find anything about dual core on their site. Try emailing them or look in the faqs.

 

[Duvie]

If you are going to run single core processors I think the P4 with HT will do a better job for you....Otherwise as suggested an X2 dual core wil do wonders....I have tried a few photo processing apps and they both were extremely optimised for dual core...

 

[Bona Fide]

Originally posted by: Guy Gadbois
So, does a program have to be written for dual processors in order to see a difference with the x2 CPU? I ask this because I cannot see anything on Phase One's website about C1 Pro being 'optimized' or anything like that for dual processors. This is the program that I am spending the most time in mainly after I have done all of my tweaks to the RAW images (usually 100-250 images at a time) then having the program batch process them into TIFF files (yields about 18 MB TIFF files).

Oh, and Bona Fide, what did you mean by "FTW"? I can't figure that out (or its just too early for me to think straight!) Is the stock heatsink decent?

I meant "for the win". 🙂

The X2 3800's can overclock amazingly well on air. So get yourself a Zalman or Thermalright heatsink if you want to try it for yourself 😉

 

[fatty4ksu]

Originally posted by: Duvie
If you are going to run single core processors I think the P4 with HT will do a better job for you....Otherwise as suggested an X2 dual core wil do wonders....I have tried a few photo processing apps and they both were extremely optimised for dual core...

Duvs nails it!

😉

 

[imported_Kensai]

4400+ and overclock.

 

[stockriderman]

Originally posted by: Bona Fide


// And to answer your question, the difference in cache size makes a real-world difference of about 3-5%. Not worth it.

there's 0(that's zero) difference in performance between 4200 x2 and 4400 x2. cache does nothing in most applications and photoshop is one of them.

 

[Guy Gadbois]

Thanks for the input everyone. I did find out that Phase One's C1 Pro software ($499) is multithreaded, so I guess it will take advantage of the dual core. Now, I'm still a little unclear on the dual core functionality. So I think I understand correctly that if I'm in C1 Pro and having it do batch conversions to TIFF files, the dual core would also allow me to do other things within the program at the same time. But if I'm just telling the program to do a batch convert to TIFFS of about 100 files and I let it do its thing, does it utilize both cores to speed that conversion up or not?

Also, from the Windows XP Pro side of things. Does dual core equate to dual processors in the OS view of things? Will my 'regular' XP Pro OS work fine or is there a "multiple processor" version of Windows I would need to get? I was thinking, at least in the past, there were single and multi processor versions of the Windows OS.

 

[Guy Gadbois]

OK... update.. I ran down to Fry's and they do have the x2 3800+ for $379, which doesn't seem to be a bad price. But of course as I'm talking to the 'expert' over there about mother boards, he keeps trying to upsell me to get a motherboard with a PCI express graphics interface instead of AGP, telling me that I need to get that for photo processing (price difference being about $75-$90, plus a new video card). Maybe I'm wrong, but that doesn't sound correct to me, so I wanted to bounce that off you you guys here.

I was thinking that the majority of my speed needed to come from my CPU and large amount of memory, not necessarily the graphics card. SO you know, I have an 8x AGP 128MB GeForce FX 5200 (which I can already do dual monitors, if needed) card I was planning on using. I would think that would be plenty for 2D photos?!?! Again I'm not gaming so I would think this card (or even another AGP card with more memory down the line) would be all I need for my work. I'm not trying to make 3d polygons or what-have-you. Am I wrong in my thinking?

 

[Duvie]

That guy is a fvcking moron like 95% of the ppl who work at fryes....PCI-e has neglible pefromance gain over AGP now and it is only going to matter in 3d gaming perfromance....NO processing that I am aware of is going to be offloaded to the vid card.

What he should have said is that the best "offficial support" for dual cores comes from NF4 mobos and not NF3U mobo which you would have to be running with an AGP card....

3 biggest factors for you are

1) CPU
2) ram (amount and speed)
3) HDD performance

 

[Bona Fide]

Originally posted by: Duvie
That guy is a fvcking moron like 95% of the ppl who work at fryes....PCI-e has neglible pefromance gain over AGP now and it is only going to matter in 3d gaming perfromance....NO processing that I am aware of is going to be offloaded to the vid card.

What he should have said is that the best "offficial support" for dual cores comes from NF4 mobos and not NF3U mobo which you would have to be running with an AGP card....

3 biggest factors for you are

1) CPU
2) ram (amount and speed)
3) HDD performance

QFT. He's just trying to make you buy more. Probably gets paid on a per-sale basis. Not his fault. Not entirely 😉

Onboard video is usually good enough, but a decent AGP card is great. 😀

 

[Guy Gadbois]

Thanks ya'll... I was 99% sure he was full of crap. I know to take Fry's "Experts" info with a grain of salt. It just didn't make sense. I'm sure it was partially for the commission bump as well.

Well, as it stands now, I think I've settled on the x2 3800+ and an Asus A8V Deluxe (v. 2.0) K8T800 Pro. Should run me just under $500.

I'll transplant that into my current system, keeping the 1.25GB of ram (although it is PC2700, perhaps an upgrade later) and 8x AGP card. I currently have one SATA 160GB drive and one IDE 120 GB drive for storage. I will probably, a month or so after this upgrade, grab another SATA 160GB drive and RAID them together to get a little faster HD access as well.

I do appreciated all the advice!