Photoshop pro needs help with PC upgrade...

[GratefullySaved]

Hey gang,

I'm a pro photographer working mostly on a couple of G4 Macs, but have just been clued in to how much faster a pc really can be. I'm wondering if it's possible to upgrade my current pc (Athlon 1Ghz/Abit KT7a/512 RAM/133 Mhz bus) to be significantly faster than a G4 667 for about two to three hundred dollars. My thoughts and questions are as follows: 1) buy an Nforce 2 board (Leadtek is $100 right now at one online store) 2) get an Athlon XP 2100+ for about $90 3) buy another 512 of PC133 RAM and run everything on a 266 MHz bus. Questions: 1) Is an Athlon XP 2100+ on a 266 MHz bus THAT much faster than my 1 Ghz Athlon on 133 Mhz bus? 2) Assuming both my mac and the "new upgraded" pc (with the 2100+ chip) have 1 GB of RAM each, how much faster would the pc be for PHotoshop work? PC will run Windows XP, mac is running OS 9.2.2.

I work on files that are anywhere from 20MB to 600MB, but my powerbook only goes to 1GB of RAM. I'm half thinking of upgrading my gaming pc (ha ha) to Windows XP (have free copy from dad), bumping the RAM maybe even to 2GB of RAM of all of $100, and using the PC for my "big file photoshop workstation" rather than my mac. I can't afford a P4 system, or better a dual P4 Xeon system, so I'm trying to play with the what I can do for under $300. All help is appreciated, especially from other PS experts or working pros...

Thanks to all,

GS

 

[Celstar]

You'd need to spend a hell of a lot more than 200-300 dollars for a professional grade computer system.

 

[everman]

If you are a professional graphic artist using mainly photoshop, and working with files around 500+mb I would highly reccomend a dual cpu system with win xp Pro. That is because Photoshop and XP pro along with dual processors would be great (photoshop can take advantage of dual cpus, or even a P4 with hyperthreading). 1gb + of ram would be a good idea, and possibly even a RAID0 array. You will need more money than that though, but that is the nature of the work you're doing.

 

[GratefullySaved]

Hey guys,

thanks for the replies, but I already know most of what you're saying, and "needing to spend a heck of a lot more on a pro system" just isn't true. I've done national advertising for Fortune 500 companies and others, as well as other high end client work, and alot of that has been on systems far less powerful than what I'm proposing. It's the artist, not the gear, but fast gear doesn't wear out the patience of the artist, eh? h aha

The question I want answered though is the one I asked... ahem ha ha... how much faster would the Nforce 2 with Athlon XP running WIN XP with maybe 1 or 2 GB or RAM be compared to a G4 667 with 1 GB RAM?

I've worked professionally on slow G3, 604e, PII and PIII systems, and there are always work-arounds when patience isn't the answer. But ideally, I have a "loose $300" to play with and am curious if it would be well spent into my "spare time" pc with the hopes of converting it to be a backup workhorse workstation, and maybe the go-to computer for the high-MB compositing work. (the 200-500MB files) Working on a mac with 768 RAM, (another G4) and churning out 600MB files is very doable even, but not having to wait a few minitues for certain filters would be nice to avoid. Most of the other work though on those big files is very immediate in it's response, with very little room for complaint. All of this is OS 9.2.2 I'm talking about.

Any help from real pros speaking from experience? I'd really appreciate your advice.

Thanks to all,

GS

 

[DaveSimmons]

Note that the nForce2 boards need DDR-SDRAM (pc2100 DDR) not PC133 RAM, so you'd need to spend around $120 for 512 MB and $240 for 1 GB.

I have no idea about the speed difference, I'd suggest trying Google "photoshop AMD benchmark" or similar.

 

[everman]

You only need to post in one forum, not three. 1 2

 

[tart666]

Originally posted by: GratefullySaved
Hey gang,

Questions: 1) Is an Athlon XP 2100+ on a 266 MHz bus THAT much faster than my 1 Ghz Athlon on 133 Mhz bus? 2) Assuming both my mac and the "new upgraded" pc (with the 2100+ chip) have 1 GB of RAM each, how much faster would the pc be for PHotoshop work? PC will run Windows XP, mac is running OS 9.2.2.

1) AXP2100 is 2.1 times faster than a 1GHz. Hence the 2100

2) Single CPU AXP2100 vs G4 667 ? I venture clock-for-clock comparisons are pretty accurate between AXP and G4, therefore, 3 times faster.

 

[Smaulz]

Not sure about the NForce board, but I can tell you that I run Photoshop on an XP2100 with 1GB of RAM all day long, and with files around the same size you're talking about. The only time there's any wait is while applying some of the more intensive filters or special effects. I regularly run InDesign 2.0, Illustrator 10, and Photoshop 7 all at the same time, large files open in each, and very rarely see any type of slowdown, so I don't think you need much more than the system you described.

 

[crabbyman]

I have personally worked with photoshop under different OS/machines. I can say that the difference between the Athlon XP's is a great asset to working in Photoshop. I worked with Photoshop in high school on Mac cuz my teacher swears by them. Then I went to college and used it on a PIII system. And now I have Photoshop 7 on my home brewed computer and it flies! I only have 256mb ...and I plan on getting more...but it is still like A LOT faster on my XP system.


...any more questions just ask!!

 

[mrzed]

Originally posted by: tart666

1) AXP2100 is 2.1 times faster than a 1GHz. Hence the 2100

2) Single CPU AXP2100 vs G4 667 ? I venture clock-for-clock comparisons are pretty accurate between AXP and G4, therefore, 3 times faster.

Actually, the XP PR ratings are Versus PIV processors that have longer pipelines and do fewer instructions per cycle. An XP processor is a bit faster than an equivalent clock of the older athlons, but definitely slower per cycle than a power pc processor. Not sure what the ratios are, but Mac's doing more per Mhz is not just marketing hype, even if the degree that is suggested is.

That said, the XP2100+ would be a very noticeable speed jump from a power pc 667.

 

[kadajawi]

I'd also suggest you to get a good vid card. If you don't need 3D, you can get good ones cheap (Matrox G400 to G550). I think eBay would be the right place to start looking.

As for the RAM... try to get branded CL2 one. Shouldn't be too much more, but higher RAM performance is never bad I guess

 

[Mingon]

Actually, the XP PR ratings are Versus PIV processors that have longer pipelines .

No originally it was xp vs thundebird, it has since been changed

 

[ProviaFan]

How come nobody's mentioned the hard drive yet? Since you already have a decent amount of RAM (though you could upgrade it and see some speed increases), and your processor isn't too slow, your hard drive may very well be limiting you, especially if you have an old 5400RPM model in that computer. Consider one of the Western Digital "Special Edition" drives.

 

[tart666]

How come nobody's mentioned the hard drive yet?

True dat, true dat. WD SE 8MB. And make sure you do go with a DDR platform.

Hell, looks like you need a whole new PC: mobo, CPU, DDR, new HD. Asus nforce A7N266-VM / XP2100 seems like the best way, since you can live with onboard GF2MX, 5.1 sound and eth.

Or, a cheapo $500 Dell 4550 2.4GHz/533 with DDR333 and 7200rpm should fit the bill, too. See, in PC world, getting a whole new PC is not as prohibitive as with Apples ($1,700 cheapest one)

 

[kadajawi]

Isn't that a nForce 1 board? Maybe nForce 2 without on board vid would be better, and get a cheap Matrox. I think good image quality is worth something for image editing stuff.

 

[JackBurton]

No originally it was xp vs thundebird, it has since been changed

No, the PR rating was ALWAYS for comparison to the P4.

 

[kadajawi]

maybe it was for the P4, but officially it was for comparing T-Bird Athlons with XPs IIRC.

 

[GratefullySaved]

Thanks guys,

It looks like I'm going to hold off until I go the whole nine yards and get a new "system" of cutting edge components for my current box. My KT7a won't take the XP chip (which if it would have would have changed my whole plan - spending $200 - $300 would've made for some nice upgrades), so I'm just going to wait another few months for Nforce 2 boards and XP 2400+ 2600+ chips to come down, maybe even wait for Hammer or Opteron (same thing?) and have more money saved for the "fun budget" by then.

For now I just got another 256MB of RAM for free (dad), an external 40 Gig HD 1394/USB2 with Oxford 911 for $40 brand new (surprise blessing), a $20 48xblahxblah CDRW, and will probably just buy a new video card for my gaming. I can live with the Athlon until the end of the year, and who knows, maybe God will lead me to finding a used DP Mac for cheap, and I'll need my money for that system. Sometimes waiting is good when you're waiting on the Lord... He's never disappointed me I can say that for sure...

Thanks for all your help!

GS

 

[kadajawi]

k... but $20 for a CD-RW??? :Q What the "§($ ?

 

[Mingon]

No, the PR rating was ALWAYS for comparison to the P4.

Nope it was the tbird to start of with and then changed to P4 when amd finally realised it was sillly.

edit

These "Model Numbers" are supposed to correspond to the real world performance of the Athlon XP CPUs when compared to higher clocked competitors. While AMD will argue that the Model Numbers are used to compare the Athlon XP to an equivalently clocked Thunderbird, it's clear that the ratings are used to somehow bridge the clock speed gap between the Athlon and the Pentium 4. In the eyes of the end user that isn't well informed, the rating system may serve this purpose.

from here

 

[fatbaby]

Originally posted by: kadajawi
k... but $20 for a CD-RW??? :Q What the "§($ ?

you can get a 48x liteon rebadge from staples/office depot for that amount

 

[kadajawi]

wow, I wouldn't even get a cheapo cd-rom drive for that money. Holy... damn, I think I know where I want to live

 

[DaveSimmons]

If you're still reading this, you might want to check out this comparison of P4 vs G4 from the PC vs Mac thread: photoshop compare

It looks like you really want 1 GB of RAM (or more) for large objects, and that a fast P4 will beat down even a dual 1.25 GHz Mac for a lot less money. I wonder if the numbers would be even better with 1.5 - 2 GB of RAM?

 

[tart666]

Wow, even a P4 1.8/400 with 512MB beat the $4k Dual1.25 on half of the tests. Even with only half the RAM.