Photoshop PC Build

[photodino]

Hi All,



I am retiring an 8 year old iMac and making the switch to a custom build PC. I'm using Photoshop to dust and color correct large 4x5 negative scan files (1.2GB 16bit files) for inkjet, digital-c print, and digital silver print output. I am also processing raw files (Sony A7r) using Camera Raw and Lightroom. Most of my files only have 3 - 5 adjustment layers but some can get to 10 or 12 layers if I am compositing or stitching files. I am not doing any 3D or video work.


My main concerns are speed when working with large files, longevity of use and (hopefully) long term compatibility with Adobe programs. I also use Indesign, Dreamweaver, Bridge, Office Suite Programs and do your average amount of work on the web.


This computer will not be used for gaming and will be used for some video streaming. I will run the system at default speeds. All parts will be purchased in the US. My budget runs up to $2800 although its always nice to save where you can.


I have a keyboard and mouse and already do all of my working file storage on a CRU DataPort RTX 2-Bay RAID (mirrored with regular disk rotation) using eSATA or Firewire 800. Also, I have a LianLi Case to hold it all in. I am also pretty set on my Monitor choice. This is more about what goes inside the case. Except for the monitor, I'm planning to purchase everything from Newegg.



Here is the build I am thinking about and would appreciate any comments, suggestions, or words of advice:



Intel Core i7-4930K Ivy Bridge-E 6-Core 3.4GHz LGA 2011 130W $579.99

ASUS P9X79 LE LGA 2011 Intel X79 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard with USB BIOS $219.79

EVGA 02G-P4-3751-KR GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2GB 128-Bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 Video Card $149.99

G.SKILL Trident X Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1866 (PC3 14900) Desktop Memory Model F3-1866C8Q-32GTX 349.99
SAMSUNG 850 Pro Series MZ-7KE256BW 2.5" 256GB SATA III Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) (PROGRAM DRIVE) $199.99

SAMSUNG 840 EVO MZ-7TE120BW 2.5" 120GB SATA III TLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) (SCRATCH DISK) 89.99

SeaSonic G Series SSR-550RM 550W ATX12V / EPS12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS GOLD Certified Modular Active PFC Power $149.99
Windows 8.1 OEM $99.99

Dell U3014 30" Widescreen LED Backlit LCD Monitor $1050.00 (From B&H)



Thanks guys!

 

[mikeymikec]

I would want to be certain that your Photoshop usage is going to make good use of that processor. I built a Sandy Bridge i7 system for a customer who is a pro photographer, and from what I saw, it hardly seems to touch the i7. In hindsight (and if there had been an SSD I trusted for the job at the time), I think I would have beefed up the storage more. I also found that he was running some third party filters in a significant portion of his work which I guess aren't heavily multi-threaded.

Are you planning on getting 8 years out of this computer? How has your iMac shaped up in terms of longevity?

I'm fairly sure that there's also a sticky thread regarding PC building on these forums advising users to answer several questions in order to make answering their concerns easier.

- edit - found it:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=80121

 

[photodino]

The iMac has done OK. I maxed it out when I purchased in 2006 and has handled each OS upgrade and Adobe upgrade in stride. It only really started choking 1.5 - 2 years ago. No crashing, just very slow with the large files and large saves. CC 2014 and the newest lightroom work well. But they both take quite a while to load and even do basic cropping or flattening calculations. Saves can take FOREVER (but I also know that this is at least partially due to running firewire 800 instead of eSATA)

I don't use 3rd party filters so most of what I do should be multi-threaded. It would definitely be nice to get another 6-8 years of solid use out of this build. I think maxing out the processor at this point might future-proof the machine enough to get it to at least 6 years if not 10 before I really notice a slowdown in processing of my files. Is that a good assumption to make?

Oh, and I forgot to mention capacity for my external RAID. Right now it's 3TB. I plan to swap in 6TB disks in the next 6 months. (I guess that's what happens when you have to make giant exhibition prints )

 

[Mouse McCoy]

Why an X79 chipset and Ivy Bridge Processor instead of the Z97 chipset and a Devil's Canyon processor?

I'd get the i7 4790K and an Asus or Gigabyte board in the $150-$200 range then overclock the processor. I'd also recommend a Noctua NH-D14 or NH-D15 and a cheaper power supply as $150 is a lot for 550 watt, check around for daily PSU deals and rebates on newegg.

 

[mikeymikec]

It would be useful to know that when it appears to choke, what the CPU/memory usage levels are at that point, probably disk I/O throughput as well (before choking and during I think).

"Should be multi-threaded" is not a bet that I would place ~$500 on. I'm sure that recent versions of PS are multi-threaded, but I've no idea how many threads they're designed to take advantage of. If PS activity causes the CPU usage to reach levels indicating a high enough percentage to utilise all cores of your current CPU, that's a start, but I would then make inquiries as to whether it'll use 6-12 threads, that's even assuming that your current workload would warrant 6-12 threads.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

Why an X79 chipset and Ivy Bridge Processor instead of the Z97 chipset and a Devil's Canyon processor?

I think this is the way to go. You'll get excellent single-thread performance, combined with more-then-adequate multi-threaded performance for stuff that can take advantage of it. 8 threads at 4GHz is nothing to scoff at. While you're at it, you may as well get a Z97 and some 2133/2400MHz memory, photo-editing is one of the few applications to really take advantage of faster memory.

I'd hazard a guess that you're likely most limited in single-thread performance with your older iMac, and the 4790K will minimize that concern for the foreseeable future.

I'd get the i7 4790K and an Asus or Gigabyte board in the $150-$200 range then overclock the processor. I'd also recommend a Noctua NH-D14 or NH-D15 and a cheaper power supply as $150 is a lot for 550 watt, check around for daily PSU deals and rebates on newegg.

While I agree on the cooling part, overclocking a PC used for serious work is a huge no-no. PSU wise anything above 400W with reasonable efficiency is more then enough.

 

[mikeymikec]

And save some money if possible by not getting a K processor if you don't intend to overclock.

 

[Ken g6]

And save some money if possible by not getting a K processor if you don't intend to overclock.

Actually, that doesn't work with the 4790K: The 4790 is 400MHz slower at stock.

What does work if you don't want to overclock is getting an H97 board instead of a Z97.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

What does work if you don't want to overclock is getting an H97 board instead of a Z97.

The Z97 will allow usage of faster then 1600MHz memory. Where photo-editing, as already stated, is one of the few cases faster memory provides a benefit. Also, the premium for a Z97 board is minuscule with the budget here.

 

[photodino]

Great. Thanks guys. This has given me a good deal to chew on. Gotta make some decisions now.

 

[mfenn]

The OP's choice of X79 might make sense, if only for the memory capacity. 1.2GB images are pretty big, I can see the OP going over 32GB if their workflow entails keeping multiple images open at the same time. If the work is more serial, then I agree that 32GB (i.e. LGA1150) should be plenty.

Some other comments:
- RAM: $350 is high for 32GB of DDR3 1866. A couple of these Corsair 16GB kits would come to $314.
- SSD : Since SSDs get faster as the capacity increases and get slower the fuller they are, splitting the cost over two drives doesn't make sense. The 850 Pro is also way overpriced for what it is. A single Crucial MX100 512GB has plenty of performance for both tasks, more overall capacity, and costs less at $212 AP.
- PSU: $150 is crazy expensive for that class of unit. Newegg has the same thing for $80

 

[Ken g6]

The Z97 will allow usage of faster then 1600MHz memory. Where photo-editing, as already stated, is one of the few cases faster memory provides a benefit. Also, the premium for a Z97 board is minuscule with the budget here.

[Citation Needed] That link doesn't show any significant benefit over 1600.

Of course, that wasn't dealing with 1.2GB images, but like Mfenn said, RAM space might be more important there.

 

[caden]

Hi Photodino,

My advice would be to stop trying to get 6-10 years out of a computer by spending a lot of money to front-load performance. For the first couple years or so, you have the fastest computer money can buy, followed by a couple years of average performance, followed by several years of crummy performance. What's been your productivity loss on the last couple years of staring at spinning beach balls? Spend less but upgrade more often levels out the performance roller coaster.

For that reason, I'd suggest going with the i7-4790K/Z97 setup as others have suggested.

Also, at least not counting extreme usage scenarios, the idea of a separate scratch disk in a world of SSDs is antiquated. Get a single larger 480GB+ SSD and don't bother with scratch partitions.

Again, you've been working with an eight year old computer, and here you're concentrating on that last 5% of performance on a new build, when even a slightly less ambitious build is going to be light-years faster than what you're using now.

Good luck with the new build!

 

[Insert_Nickname]

[Citation Needed] That link doesn't show any significant benefit over 1600.

Sorry can't provide one right now, will do once I can connect to xbitlabs.com again.

If you can connect look at their test of Haswell's memory controller. It showed a gain in Photoshop CS6(?) using 2400MHz memory.

 

[mikeymikec]

Hi Photodino,

My advice would be to stop trying to get 6-10 years out of a computer by spending a lot of money to front-load performance. For the first couple years or so, you have the fastest computer money can buy, followed by a couple years of average performance, followed by several years of crummy performance. What's been your productivity loss on the last couple years of staring at spinning beach balls? Spend less but upgrade more often levels out the performance roller coaster.

The only reason that perceived performance would decrease would be if the workload size/complexity is increasing. While some increase should probably be anticipated (e.g. due to upgraded photo capture equipment), I don't think you're making safe assumptions, especially since the OP said they won't be gaming or video processing.

You're also making assumptions regarding the OP's idea of good performance.

I agree with what you're saying up to a point - buying the highest end kit is considerably more expensive than buying kit that is at the upper end of the mainstream (e.g. Core i5), the question is, will it actually pay off in a way that the OP will appreciate.

 

[caden]

The only reason that perceived performance would decrease would be if the workload size/complexity is increasing. While some increase should probably be anticipated (e.g. due to upgraded photo capture equipment), I don't think you're making safe assumptions, especially since the OP said they won't be gaming or video processing...

Over time, the system requirements increase due to a number of factors of the world not standing still. Unless you're going to stick with the exact same workflow, and operate your computer in a vacuum where you stay on the same version of all your software and OS, system requirements will increase over time. Even if you were able to handle the same workload in year 6 as year 1, expectations for productivity and deliverables can increase over time.

The significant assumption I've made is that the OP kept the Mac for 8 years because of budget. I'm offering an alternative way at looking at computer purchases based on budget, user requirements, and expected system lifespan. Unless budget (both short and longterm) isn't an issue, my general recommendation is to spend less upfront and upgrade more often - this approach flattens out the performance ups and downs. That's my take, and it's a smart one, but it's obviously not the only way to look at it.

That doesn't mean I'm not very interested in whether Photoshop can make good use of the 6 core or faster RAM.

Cheers!