[filmscanners] Re: PC memory type for filmscanning (OT - slightly)
Yes, please - send me the test result logs. By the way, the astro pics are awesome! Thanks, Denise [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.311 / Virus Database: 172 - Release Date: 12/27/01 Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body
[filmscanners] Re: PC memory type for filmscanning (OT - slightly)
It is more expensive, but not that much more. I bought 512mb of RDRAM for $160. Tom - Is RDRAM a better choice for systems used for scanning and processing large 2d image files? The PC mags report recently (maybe Nov-Dec) that RDRAM is only a few percent faster than DDR. It's no surprise that Dell got off the RDRAM wagon. RDRAM is much, much more expensive than DDR. A gig of DDR will work wonders for your constitution. Does anyone have any suggestions for www sites that discuss this issue? Thanks and happy new year, JimD -- -- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body
[filmscanners] RE: PC memory type for filmscanning (OT - slightly)
You need to answer a few questions, too: 1. do you intend to keep your PC state of the art, by upgrading parts of it at 12-18 month intervals, or is this PC meant to last five years? 2. do you have any other interests that would be served by a powerful PC? (Games playing, video editing?) 3. will your budget comfortably accommodate a super-PC? or does it mean making compromises? e.g. you might be best off getting an 90%-performance PC with the remaining money spent on a 21 monitor running at 1600x1200, rather than sticking with a 15 monitor. A monitor running at very high resolution, with very high quality, will make your editing work in Photoshop much easier. PCs change at a still mind-boggling rate. I have come to the conclusion that I will upgrade my motherboard, CPU and RAM every 18 months (to keep up - I like to play games that eat all the computing power you can throw at them). This costs around £300 ($450) each time. My current motherboard was bought in May, Abit KT7A with Athlon 1.2GHz CPU and 512MB of RAM. I kept the rest of the PC the same (to use with a Nikon LS40 scanner). By the time I next upgrade, end of 2002, I'm expecting to put a 2.5-3GHz processor with 1GB+ of 350MHz+ DDR RAM (it may be more than double-rate memory by then, there's talk of quad-rate by the end of 2002). AMD or Intel? Dunno. Don't care. This is why I bought bits that weren't absolutely top of the range, back in May. The top of the range performance parts cost an extra 50% for 10-20% extra performance (if you're lucky), and usually nearly as much obsolescence. I upgraded from a 640MB PIII-500MHz. Photoshop performance (with 70MB scans) doubled. You can start your investigations at: www.tomshardware.com www.anandtech.com www.hardocp.com If you are careful, you can find system vendors that can sell you a complete PC made up with the combination of motherboard, cpu, memory, hard disk, video card etc that you specify. Otherwise, you risk buying something that's hobbled by individual bad components. How paranoid are you? I don't think a Pentium IV with RDRAM is worth buying, right now. It is too costly for the performance it offers. RDRAM shows very high bandwidth in benchmarks, including benchmarks that supposedly reflect the kind of usage that Photoshop makes (i.e. filters applied to very large images). For some reason, though, the performance benefits disappear in the mix when you use the thing for real. If you're feeling clever, then a dual-processor system will work quite nicely. Lots of options. http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1483p=15 - shows some Photoshop performance comparisons but it's a little out of date now... (Yes, that's right, a single Athlon MP 1.2GHz beats a Xeon (Pentium IV) at 1.7GHz) You have to factor-in how much fiddling you are prepared to take on. Are you prepared to build it yourself? Are you happy to overclock? Are you happy to upgrade BIOS and system drivers? A pre-built PC should in theory offer a system that's tested for stability before it gets to you. Building a system yourself does mean you'll have to do your own stability-tweaking! Jawed Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body
[filmscanners] Re: PC memory type for filmscanning (OT - slightly)
I have noticed this too, I briefly played with a customers Pentium IV 1600 and compared it to my Athlon 1000, mine with 512mb of PC133 vs. 512 of Rambus for the Pentium.. I manipulated large images (50-100mb tiffs), levels, unsharp mask etc.. I was shocked to find that the Athlon would consistantly perform faster even when it had a much slower processor. After further testing I found out that the Pentium had substantally faster memory throughput, but the athlon was about 40% faster in math operations (integer and floating point operations).. so overall photoshop performance is not fully dependant on memory performance.. and the funny part is that the Pentium IV system is a lot more expensive!.. If anybody is interested I can forward (to them) the test result logs for both systems. Jawed Ashraf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think a Pentium IV with RDRAM is worth buying, right now. It is too costly for the performance it offers. RDRAM shows very high bandwidth in benchmarks, including benchmarks that supposedly reflect the kind of usage that Photoshop makes (i.e. filters applied to very large images). For some reason, though, the performance benefits disappear in the mix when you use the thing for real. Herm Astropics http://home.att.net/~hermperez Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body
[filmscanners] Re: PC memory type for filmscanning (OT - slightly)
Jim, Honestly I think you'll find the overall performance of a P4 system or an Athlon system fairly comparable and the memory differences fairly small. The more the better. An area to not forget, that has significant impact, is disk performance. My current platform is a P4-1.8 with 1GB of RDRAM. I also added a Promise Raid 0 card and a pair of Western Digital 100GB drives. It works wonderfully. I'm very pleased. I suspect I'd be just as pleased with a P4 with DDR memory (for example, the Dell Dimension 4400 -- mine is a Dimension 8100) or an Athlon system. One key -- go with Windows 2000 or Windows XP. Don't bother with Windows Me. Any way you look at it, it will be fast. Tom I've been using a Polaroid SS4000 with a wintel platform that has 384 MB of ram. The platform is ~5 years old and I'm thinking of getting something new. I've found the 384 MB of ram to be useable (just) even when working with scans using 16 bits per channel. In looking at new systems a major difference is whether to go with a system using 1GB of RDRAM memory (400mb/sec front side bus) or one using 1GB of DDR memory (266mb/sec front side bus). From what I've been able to discern RDRAM memory will be faster with large ~100MB files. Is RDRAM a better choice for systems used for scanning and processing large 2d image files? Does anyone have any suggestions for www sites that discuss this issue? Thanks and happy new year, JimD Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body
[filmscanners] Re: PC memory type for filmscanning (OT - slightly)
--- Herm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After further testing I found out that the Pentium had substantally faster memory throughput, but the athlon was about 40% faster in math operations (integer and floating point operations).. so overall photoshop performance is not fully dependant on memory performance.. Actually, I believe the Athlon (XP) is slower when it comes to FP. For integer is supposed to be much faster, though. So I my conclusion is that PS uses mainly integer operations. Is this true or am I completely off here? Rob __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body
[filmscanners] Re: PC memory type for filmscanning (OT - slightly)
Is RDRAM a better choice for systems used for scanning and processing large 2d image files? The PC mags report recently (maybe Nov-Dec) that RDRAM is only a few percent faster than DDR. It's no surprise that Dell got off the RDRAM wagon. RDRAM is much, much more expensive than DDR. A gig of DDR will work wonders for your constitution. Does anyone have any suggestions for www sites that discuss this issue? Thanks and happy new year, JimD Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe' in the title or body
