System for Photo Editing!

[viky49]

Hi,

I'm basically a hobbyist photographer and till now have been using my 3 year old MSI S270 Notebook (Mobile Athlon 64 3000+, 2GB DDR 400, ATI X300 chipset, 120GB 5400rpm, 12.1" Wide Screen)for editing my photos...

I primarily shoot 12mp images in RAW and then edit/convert them into JPG/TIFF using Adobe Photoshop CS3 and Corel Paint Shop Pro.

Off late, as my workload has increased, I'm finding that the poor MSI is really struggling and takes ages for the processing and conversions, so I've finally decided to get myself a new desktop.

This is what i basically have in mind:

For Processor, Its either the Q6600 Quad (2.40Ghz) Overclocked to 3.00Ghz (333x9.0)or the newer 45nm E7200 C2D (2.53Ghz) overclocked to 3.16Ghz (333x9.5). Which of these would be a wiser choice? Will four cores make a difference for my target applications? Also, I would like to be able to achieve these overclocks with stock coolers. Is this even possible?

Now, for Motherboards, many have suggested the MSI P6NGM-L (nvidia MCP73P), but I've also heard great things about the MSI P35 Neo - F (Intel P35 Express). Both can support 1333fsb and quad cores, so CPU choice should not make a difference here. Now, keeping in mind that I would be overclocking, which of these would you suggest? Also, the former has nVidia Geforce 6100 Graphics on board, so I wouldn't have to spend on a separate video card. However, In case I go for the P35, I have thought of the ATI Radeon 2400Pro 512MB as the video card. Is this good enough or should I get one with more grunt? Do video cards even make a difference in my kind of work which is solely based on still photo editing? I heard they are a must for video editing though. (P.S. I'll be using a 22" LCD 1680x1080, however, I won't be playing any games at all)

As for Ram, I'm thinking for either Corsair or Transcend DDR2 800 2GB x2 for a total of 4GB. I would be working on my Windows XP Professional 32bit, so will the OS support 4Gb even?

As for the Hard Drive, I'll probably get two of the WD 500GB Sata 32MB Cache version. Or will it be better to get a single 1TB drive?

I have budget around USD 600 for all this.

Thanks for taking the time to read this

Best regards,

Viky

P.S. Do i really need a high capacity PSU for the above config or will a 500W be enough?

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: viky49
I'm basically a hobbyist photographer

I primarily shoot 12mp images in RAW and then edit/convert them into JPG/TIFF using Adobe Photoshop CS3 and Corel Paint Shop Pro.

Do video cards even make a difference in my kind of work which is solely based on still photo editing?

As for the Hard Drive, I'll probably get two of the WD 500GB Sata 32MB Cache version. Or will it be better to get a single 1TB drive?

Yes, to a point.
Get twin 640GB WD SE16's if anything.

 

[viky49]

Originally posted by: Blain

Originally posted by: viky49
I'm basically a hobbyist photographer

I primarily shoot 12mp images in RAW and then edit/convert them into JPG/TIFF using Adobe Photoshop CS3 and Corel Paint Shop Pro.

Do video cards even make a difference in my kind of work which is solely based on still photo editing?

As for the Hard Drive, I'll probably get two of the WD 500GB Sata 32MB Cache version. Or will it be better to get a single 1TB drive?

Yes, to a point.
Get twin 640GB WD SE16's if anything.

Thanks for the input Blain

However, this only answers a part of my questions

I'd really appreciate if the Gurus here could provide some insight and guidance here:roll:

rgds,

Viky

 

[DSF]

I don't know enough about the video card's impact on what you do to make an informed suggestion, although I can say pretty confidently that you don't need something midrange or upper-midrange like an 8800GT or HD4850.

XP 32 bit won't see all 4GB, but it won't hurt anything, and you may as well grab it while RAM is cheap. Go for RAM rated to run at 1.8V.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Hmm, I see you have cross-posted this topic. Here's my suggestion:

1. You should grab a the Intel Q6600. I don't know if Photoshop will benefit from all 4 cores, but even if it doesn't you could take advantage of quad cores by simply multitasking - running more programs at the same time. The stock cooler will be perfectly fine for the overclock you're looking for.

2. 4GB of RAM will be fine under 32-bit Windows. The operating system will not take advantage of all of it, but RAM is fairly cheap so this isn't much of an issue. Any DDR2-800 sticks should work fine, so just grab the most affordable ones.

3. Personally, I would definitely spend the extra money on a motherboard like the MSI P35 Neo-F. Other options you should consider are the Gigabyte EP35-DS3L or S3G, Asus P35 P5K SE, BIOSTAR TForce TP43D2A7, MSI P43 Neo3-F, or ASRock P43Twins1600. The ASRock is only $75 at newegg.com, so I think it would be the best deal for you.

4. Since I recommended different motherboards in #3, that obviously means I think you should buy a dedicated video card. A dedicated card will come with its own VRAM instead of using system memory, so that's a plus. The Radeon HD 2400 would be a good buy, but you only need a card with 256MB of onboard video RAM. 512MB is completely unnecessary for budget cards. Specifically, I think you should get this $30 Radeon HD 2600XT.

5. You don't need to grab a hard drive with 32MB cache. Since you can grab a pair of 500GB hard drives for less than a 1TB hard drive, I think you should do this. Or you could spend about the same and grab a pair of the Western Digital 640MB drives.

6. As far as the power supply goes, you really don't even need a 500W one. A quality unit rated for about 400W would be more than enough. I think the best deals are the Antec EarthWatts 380W and 430W models, which you can find for about $30-$40.

So let's see what the price should be: $180 for Q6600, about $75 for RAM, $75 for motherboard, $40 for PSU, $30 for video card, and $150 for hard drives. That's about $550. Expect to pay about $10 for shipping and under $25 for an optical drive, and you can certainly find a case under $40. So in total you would be spending less than $630 for my recommendations. If you don't have a Microcenter near you, you'll be spending a little bit more for a Q6600. If you feel this puts the price too far out of budget, then you would certainly have to settle for the Intel E7200 instead or maybe just get one hard drive for now. Either way, you'll still get a very nice system.

 

[QuixoticOne]

I agree with the generalities of what cusideabelincoln said.

Photoshop CS3 or previously itself doesn't make significant use of four cores in most workflow situations, but there
are things like 3rd party plug ins and helper programs and so on that will make better use of multi-core.

Also it sounds like you're heavily invested in this kinds of graphic arts work, so I'd suspect that if there were compelling
advantages you'd probably eventually upgrade to CS4 or CS5 or whatever reaches your value threshold over the next
2-3 years. I find it difficult to conceive that future versions won't take MUCH better advantage of technologies like
GPGPU, 64 bit Vista or 64 bit XP, > 4GB RAM, quad core, et. al.

Also if you start doing more processing like higher resolution inputs/outputs, more advanced color management,
more advanced RIPing, or whatever you'd naturally get better use out of a quad-core CPU than a comparable dual
core one. For $180 the Q6600 seemed the best value to me, at the worst it seemed only slightly slower than
a comparably priced dual core CPU when running single threaded workloads, whereas at the best with threaded
software it can be literally TWICE the speed of a dual core CPU. Frankly I'd rather have the serious crunching that
OCCASIONALLY needs doing be 200% faster and live with the minor things being 20% slower when they're probably
things that happen basically instantly anyway so in reality the PC sits waiting for *me* most of the time.

As for GPU, in your low target resolution most any well supported card should be fine. I've used the built in NVIDIA
chip and it it pretty low end but I guess it gets the job done. The 2400 series ATIs would be similar.
At some point in future versions it isn't inconceivable that GPGPU type hardware acceleration will be added to more
applications like Photoshop / Lightroom / printer drivers; after all even Adobe Acrobat *Reader* uses GPU performance
to speed up its *text* rendering (granted a good quad core CPU can do a lot all by itself, so it'll be by no means slow
even with the lowest GPU). But the point is, if you got something like an 8800GT or HD3850 at least it'd be modern
enough to handle the higher resolutions and do some GPU processing in the off chance that'd be helpful in the future.
For $30 I'd buy a cheaper GPU card and consider a future upgrade if/when that makes sense. I wouldn't pay more
than that for a low end GPU though since for $99 or less you can get a MUCH more powerful one, and that price will
likely drop significantly in the weeks to come.

RAM? As much as possible is a bargain these days. I'm running Vista 64 with 8GB (4x 2GB DDRs sticks) and it
works great for even the heaviest workloads. For under $100 / 8GB of PC2-6400 DDR2 RAM it is kind of hard to
pass up since it'll likely not be that inexpensive as DDR3 for quite some time to come. Photoshop CS3 itself isn't
a 64 bit application so it doesn't DIRECTLY use the all that memory, but by the time you add in a photo browser
with lots of thumbnails and photos in the database (like lightroom or (yuck) bridge or whatever), printing tasks,
various other things running in the background, disk cache memory so the recently used file(s) will access instantly,
et. al. you can make good use of either 4GB or 8GB.

PSU? A good 500W unit is more than adequate for anything we're talking about here. Usually they are around the
best price/performance simply because that size is popular for the DIY enthusiast market and hence is often on sale
for a relatively higher quality unit at a comparable price than you might find if you shopped specifically for a 430-450-480
type unit. The 500W supplies may be more likely to be 80PLUS certified efficient designs, and offer quiet running models.
It isn't a big deal.. if you find a good quality 450 for a better price, do it, or if you find a good quality 650 on sale for the
same cost as a 450/500, great. Something made by Seasonic or Corsair or so might be good, I'm not up on all the
best deals for the lower wattage models, check the independent reviews and "Hot Deals" forums and so on.
I see the Antec Earthwatts 500 on sale now and then and although there are certainly better quality supplies,
and there are certainly less expensive supplies, I'd feel comfortable with using it for my system whereas there are
plenty of less expensive units that I wouldn't use even if they were free. So that's about my entry level suggestion
from which you can improve. Well I got an Antec BASIQ-500 for $10 after rebate on sale, and some of those
DYNEX Case + 500W Power supply deals for $20 on sale, but those are probably exceptional deals and also somewhat
lower quality PSUs than I'd really want to put into my best machine as a rule.

Storage... Whatever you do, have a 2nd external or independent disk as a backup if you have no other / better
backup plan. Running 1TB single or 1x750GB or 1x640GB or 2x500GB in a RAID would be fine, but in any case
you need a good backup on USB or eSATA connection or something. Frankly for $99 to $130 you might as well just
get a 1TB disk of good quality like the Spinpoint model or Seagate or EcoGreen models that everyone seems to like,
they perform quite well AFAIK. Having only one turned on at a time will just save noise / energy over 2x500.
If you actually wanted any useful redundancy AND more than 500GB USABLE storage you'd need to buy 3x500s
for a RAID5 which isn't very cost effective or quiet or power conserving in your stated case, so a single big disc
with an external backup unit is probably the right plan.

To OC the Q6600 I'd pick up a ThermalRight Ultra 120 Extreme from wherever,
and a D12SL low speed yate loon fan from JabTech. The intel retail heatsink would make you run pretty hot at 3GHz
especially if the room is warm in the summer.

P35 motherboards are great choices for the Q6600, I use them exclusively. I have used P5K-E, P5K-Deluxe (ASUS),
and the IP35-E from ABIT, they all work OK with the kind of system I'm describing for you, it's just a good idea to
update the BIOS to the latest stable one if you get a particularly old revision by default. The better ASUS and Gigabyte
boards I'd tend to usually trust, the better ABIT ones to a lesser degree, and some of the lower end vendors like
ECS or Foxconn or whatever I'd stay away from personally.

To save money on parts I'd look on the AT and Fatwallet hot deals forums and see what you can get for case / PSU or
CPU or RAM deals, motherboards, hard drives too... Check frys, buy.com, newegg, mwave, zipzoomfly, et. al. for
any day to day promotions. Friday and Sunday are usually big days for new sales to start.

IIRC someone had a $29 case and power supply deal lately.. I forget the details; maybe it is still going.
I think there was one on the Antec 900 too but that didn't seem like such a good bargain to me at the time.

 

[0roo0roo]

more important than video card is quality of monitor and use of a color calibration device

 

[QuixoticOne]

I'll agree with the benefit of monitor quality, color calibration is mainly useful for the printer if you're mainly interested
in printing your photos with fidelity corresponding to the original image. Color calibrating a monitor is helpful for previews,
but the corrected gamut of the monitor is never going to be quite the same as your high end printer anyway and
if you're not doing much "on screen" manual color adjustment "by eye" of your photos, the calibration of the monitor
is really just a nicety for viewing rather than anything that's going to affect the final print output.

Unfortunately color calibrating a fairly high end printer can be an expensive and difficult proposition, especially when
you're using multiple kinds of papers.