• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Storage Specs for a Photoshop & Premiere Workstation - Whaddya think?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Davidh373 said:
I do Photoshop, Premiere, and 3D work professionally. $200 dollars is $200 dollars. You could buy a lot with that and believe it or not even though we do get $10k jobs and so on we may only get 2 or 3 a year, so that's just a little over minimum wage. Not to say he's in the same boat but a lot of people's wages get overestimated in this field.
Click to expand...

And the guys that do it professionally and don't make *good* money don't shop out custom rigs. They buy a boxed box or they know someone that can help them out on a built rig.

It's just like when a friend came to me and said he wanted a particular camera and nice lenses (he's a hobbiest). I found him all the stuff he wanted at a savings of $900 from reputable companies. I know how to find these deals, I'm not into cameras at all.
 
Davidh373 said:
Not a good decision... just because it's SATA III does not mean it's faster than a SATA II drive. The OCZ Vertex II/ Agility II, Corsair Force, and GSkill Pro are all faster drives for a lower price. That is why not.
Click to expand...
It's by far not that clearcut.

The Crucial has 11.6% worse random write performance but 44% better random read.
Sequential read: 28.7% better
Sequential write: 10.1% worse

Wouldn't want to use the drive without 4kb alignment and TRIM (i.e. modern Linux kernels or win7), but with it, the performance is great.
 
For Photoshop you want great read before write (so you're part right). Read is Opening files, but write is saving and such. If you have 500MB files to create that can be a problem. Finding a balanced Read/ Write is best.
 
Davidh373 said:
24GB RAM is still where the overkill lies. I can't imagine him running more than 4 apps with massive projects at once... which at most would only require 12GB... Now if he has a really great 4k camera, it might get a little choppy with multiple layers and multiple files open. Another way to check for this is if he is capping off his memory now, and how much more beyond simply adding a buffer he wants to do.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback - I really appreciate it. My understanding, and it is just that as I do not do many graphic workstation builds (80% of my builds are SMB servers and simulation rigs for scientific researchers), is that Photoshop and Premiere can never have too much memory. What I was lead to believe by other graphic professionals I spoke with was that Adobe's software always run better when one maxes out the memory as the chance that work gets paged to scratch is kept at a minimum.

With this build in particular, the buyer is essentially a prosumer, not a full professional, but he has a generous budget and essentially asked for the most bad-ass rig he could get under a specific pricepoint. Everytime I gave him an estimate he would always ask, can we make it bigger or faster still. Short of a dual socket Gulftown (really would only benefit Premiere which accounts for 30% of his work right now), an all RAID setup, or an all SSD system, I am not sure where else I can squeeze more performance out of Photoshop or Premiere. He essentially wants his wait times, if they exist, to be as short as possible. That was my logic behind 24GB. But seriously, if I scaled him back to 12GB, you really think that would be adequate? He is then going to want to take that $450 saved and pour it into something else to make it as fast as 'effing possible - ugh.
 
JPS said:
Thanks for the feedback - I really appreciate it. My understanding, and it is just that as I do not do many graphic workstation builds (80% of my builds are SMB servers and simulation rigs for scientific researchers), is that Photoshop and Premiere can never have too much memory. What I was lead to believe by other graphic professionals I spoke with was that Adobe's software always run better when one maxes out the memory as the chance that work gets paged to scratch is kept at a minimum.
Click to expand...

It only appears to use the memory. One can set photoshop to "Use" a certain portion of memory, the memory is reserved by Photoshop and then it decides when it needs up to a portion of reserved RAM. The amount of RAM actually being used is much more minimal.

JPS said:
With this build in particular, the buyer is essentially a prosumer, not a full professional, but he has a generous budget and essentially asked for the most bad-ass rig he could get under a specific pricepoint. Everytime I gave him an estimate he would always ask, can we make it bigger or faster still. Short of a dual socket Gulftown (really would only benefit Premiere which accounts for 30% of his work right now), an all RAID setup, or an all SSD system, I am not sure where else I can squeeze more performance out of Photoshop or Premiere. He essentially wants his wait times, if they exist, to be as short as possible. That was my logic behind 24GB. But seriously, if I scaled him back to 12GB, you really think that would be adequate? He is then going to want to take that $450 saved and pour it into something else to make it as fast as 'effing possible - ugh.
Click to expand...


Well man, tell him it won't go any faster. Really as much as it seems, you won't get %5 out of $1000 past a $2000 system. RAID 0/ 5, RAM. It only goes so far. He'll get more out of the first $2000 then he will out of the next $5000. That's just the way it is. You could probably build him two systems to do the whole render farm thing and have it be FASTER than a single build at 3. Not to say you'd want to do that, but you could.
 
Last edited:
I have 12Gb in my system. I use a 3D program to make animations, and occasionally use Photoshop to put together parts of the backdrop. I have, on occasion maxed out my memory with only Photoshop. When that happens, my system becomes unresponsive, once for about half an hour, before I could get some layers deleted.

With the 3D program, I can only load 7 to 10 figures into a scene before I run out of memory.

24Gb is not too much for a graphics production machine. I would, however, consider the G.Skill I mentioned earlier. But I'm not a memory expert, and I'm not absolutely positive it is equal to the Kingston.
 
FishAk said:
24Gb is not too much for a graphics production machine. I would, however, consider the G.Skill I mentioned earlier. But I'm not a memory expert, and I'm not absolutely positive it is equal to the Kingston.
Click to expand...

The G.Skill is slightly cheaper no doubt, but the Kingston, at least in 3 x 4GB sets is on the approved memory list for this particular motherboard. The only ripJaw G.Skill that I could find approved were their 2x1GB sets. I am not saying it would not work, but for a client build, I hate taking chances...

Davidh373 said:
It only appears to use the memory. One can set photoshop to "Use" a certain portion of memory, the memory is reserved by Photoshop and then it decides when it needs up to a portion of reserved RAM. The amount of RAM actually being used is much more minimal.

Well man, tell him it won't go any faster. Really as much as it seems, you won't get %5 out of $1000 past a $2000 system. RAID 0/ 5, RAM. It only goes so far. He'll get more out of the first $2000 then he will out of the next $5000. That's just the way it is. You could probably build him two systems to do the whole render farm thing and have it be FASTER than a single build at 3. Not to say you'd want to do that, but you could.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. His budget is $6500 we are close to it, but still have some wiggle room. Bear in mind that built into that is a nice dual-monitor setup and good sound setup. Even if I shaved the RAM in half, he would only save $450.00 or so. Then again, money is realy not the issue here - performance is. For the sake of argument, say I shelved the C300 SSD, would performance be better with a Corsair P256 Corsair Force or OCZ Vertex 2?
 
Last edited:
I would recommend against the p256. The small file operations (an SSD's bread and butter) are very bad. I think both the C300, and the Vertex 2 are good drives.

Only 2 monitors?
 
FishAk said:
I would recommend against the p256. The small file operations (an SSD's bread and butter) are very bad. I think both the C300, and the Vertex 2 are good drives.

Only 2 monitors?
Click to expand...

That is all he wants for now - his office/workspace is somewhat limited as well. Using Dell Ultrasharps.
 
JPS said:
Hmmm. His budget is $6500 we are close to it, but still have some wiggle room. Bear in mind that built into that is a nice dual-monitor setup and good sound setup. Even if I shaved the RAM in half, he would only save $450.00 or so. Then again, money is realy not the issue here - performance is. For the sake of argument, say I shelved the C300 SSD, would performance be better with a Corsair P256 Corsair Force or OCZ Vertex 2?
Click to expand...

Vertex or Agility 2 would be good. It is true that the Crucial's have better read, so you'll have to ask the client where he want's to prioritize performance.

JPS said:
The G.Skill is slightly cheaper no doubt, but the Kingston, at least in 3 x 4GB sets is on the approved memory list for this particular motherboard. The only ripJaw G.Skill that I could find approved were their 2x1GB sets. I am not saying it would not work, but for a client build, I hate taking chances...
Click to expand...

lol, "approved memory"... That won't really matter. What will matter more is having less sticks for lower power consumption and the ability to put more ram in later. Get the 4GB sticks. They are also lower voltage.

I think all and all you can shave off quite a bit. If "Prosumer" means what I think it means he is a student who does an occasional job to make some money. Where I would put my money for this kind of build would be totally different.

1. 12GB DDR3 ($260)

2. 2 470s from Gigabyte (on sale til' the 30th on newegg) ($580)

3. OCZ 60GB for OS/ Apps ($150)

4. 3 1TB Samsung F3s (same as Black drives without premium cost) ($225)

5. 3 23" IPS monitors (~$900)

6. 1 23" TN Monitor (to test what everyday Joe would see) (~ $200)

6. i7 870 ($290)

7. nice SLI 1156 mobo ($200)

8. Corsair 650TX PSU

9. Antec 300

Total would be around $2200 for Tower + APPS

Total for Monitors + Keyboard + Mouse would be $1500

Total for Sorround Sound would be around $500? (Don't really know...)

All together would be around $4200

I'd then put $600 into a Wacom large Intuos4 Tablet (total at $4800)
 
Last edited:
Davidh373

Not quite - client is a professor who is heavy in A/V work to document his research and travels. Not doing production work for hire so what average Joe sees is moot. Biggest question is why 2 x 470 GTX? As for everything else, what you spec'ed out is essentially where we started. We then gravitated to a 6-core Gulftown which changed up the motherboard and required triple-channel RAM. Agreed that 'certified' RAM is essentially bunk, but for client builds I hate taking chances. The tablet is coming later. Nothing wrong with the build you speced at all - as I said, that is essentially where we started.
 
I think the ultrasharps are 60Hz. Did toy see this AT review of the 120Hz 3D monitor? I see 120Hz monitors from about $300 for a 23', to $850 for 47". (there are crazy priced ones too.)
 
There is no need for 3D or 120Hz for a workstation, especially since it's TN. What exactly does he need a beefy rig for then? Is he going to need the renders quickly for anything? Does he do multiple days of research every week to justify needing the documentation edit rendered within a day? Technically the only great reason to go with a 9xx series motherboard is to get a 6 core since the 9xx series is beat in Photoshop/ Premiere in rendering times.

The 2 G-Cards would be for 4 monitors, otherwise 1 will do. Does he really need TNs if all he's doing is editing research videos? I would think if the footage was being played back on the same station it was rendered on Color correctness wouldn't matter, only brightness/ contrast..
 
alaricljs said:
What's that going to get someone that doesn't play games?
Click to expand...

From the ST review:

"The ASUS VG236H was my first exposure to 120Hz refresh displays that aren’t CRTs, and the difference is about as subtle as a dump truck driving through your living room. I spent the first half hour seriously just dragging windows back and forth across the desktop - from a 120Hz display to a 60Hz, stunned at how smooth and different 120Hz was. Yeah, it’s that different.
... the completely unparalleled level of smoothness on a 120 Hz display has made me hyper attuned to just how flickery 60Hz looks on all the other LCDs I’ve got."

For me, it's not about gaming. I don't remember the last time I played. But being able to read while I scroll is something I would value. I think a 120Hz screen would allow that.

Edit:
Maybe I misunderstood, and you don't know why 3D is needed. I didn't mean to emphisize the 3D feature- it's just part of the particular monitor that was reviewed. What I like is the 120Hz.
 
Last edited:
Davidh373 said:
There is no need for 3D or 120Hz for a workstation, especially since it's TN. What exactly does he need a beefy rig for then? Is he going to need the renders quickly for anything? Does he do multiple days of research every week to justify needing the documentation edit rendered within a day? Technically the only great reason to go with a 9xx series motherboard is to get a 6 core since the 9xx series is beat in Photoshop/ Premiere in rendering times.

The 2 G-Cards would be for 4 monitors, otherwise 1 will do. Does he really need TNs if all he's doing is editing research videos? I would think if the footage was being played back on the same station it was rendered on Color correctness wouldn't matter, only brightness/ contrast..
Click to expand...

The client just wants speed and is willing to pay for it - bottom line. Plus I think he would like to be able to brag to everyone on his floor about how "bad-ass" his system is. Visual correct representation is important to him, despite what the final product will be used for, he simply wants what he sees on screen to be as close to real world as possible. Everything I have read says that a single socket 6-core CPU, at least for Premier, is the way to go right now. Sucks that there is a such premium for them versus the quad-core 3.0GHz i7 series, but again, he has the budget and is willing to spend.
 
alright, well I think as long as he is happy wee all are happy right?

With all honesty though the two things he WILL NOT notice a difference in is the 12GB GSkill vs. 24GB Corsair and Samsung F3 1TB and WD Caviar Black 1TB. Especially if he has no past in Pro video editing.

700th post!
 
Last edited:
Davidh373 said:
lol! Well I don't know. I'd say you can charge your normal rate or whatever if you're being serious.

One more thing you'll want to do before you hand it off is make sure it runs Mercury Playback in CS5 to give him a nice speed boost editing.

http://www.studio1productions.com/Articles/PremiereCS5.htm
Click to expand...

Already got that noted and thanks for the feedback and suggestions all along. I owe you one. Maybe I should get a copy of CS5 and play so that I understand it better should I get any more contracts for graphics/video workstations. The workstations I build for scientific simulations are such different beasts!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top