Redux:
Ok, so I have ordered a new MB and 16GB ram(MB supports up to 32GB) for my
desktop machine and am waiting for it to arrive. However, I don't currently
have a processor, and would like to get an idea of which would be better,
specifically for GIMP's use:
More Cores, Slower clock spee
Hi,
jfrazie...@nc.rr.com (2011-11-16 at 1144.40 -0500):
> 4) Other?
You forgot: reduce tile cache (so you have free RAM) and use zram
(Linux 2.6.37 or newer) to create a compressed memory based block
device, to be used as partition where gimp writes own cache. The
problem is the partition will b
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:44 AM, wrote:
> 2) Solid State Drive internal(likely not a cost effective solution to replace
> my 500GB internal HD)
I could be wrong - but this one you'd likely add in addition to your
main drive and mount/use it as a RAM filesystem. Basically a faster
swap drive,
> Hm...,
> this is going to be tough!
> So much layers, especially with masks and with that resolution is way
> beyond the specs of even a new mid-level desktop computer, as far as I
> can tell.
>
> In any case I will suggest that you utilize the full RAM capacity of
> your motherboard. Then th
How about installing an SSD?
Best regards
Chris
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Hi,
mik...@staldal.nu (2011-11-15 at 2032.43 +0100):
> On 2011-11-15 17:43, GSR - FR wrote:
> >Yes, look in preferences, you can configure where you want the files
> >to be written; so point to a RAM based FS there. Another trick would
> >be using symlinks to redirect the directory structure (usefu
On 2011-11-15 17:43, GSR - FR wrote:
Yes, look in preferences, you can configure where you want the files
to be written; so point to a RAM based FS there. Another trick would
be using symlinks to redirect the directory structure (useful for apps
that do not allow configuration). Linux tmpfs is ba
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 8:21 AM, wrote:
> The image will be a map(as in fantasy world map) I want to print(will scale
> down for web version to .jpeg), 36x24 inches @300 DPI, so 10800x7200
> resolution(ie, poster print size).
Another thought - if you can divide the image up into quadrants for
Hi,
rob.antonis...@gmail.com (2011-11-15 at 1105.59 -0500):
> > I think USB2 will be horribly slow, so no point of adding such drive. And,
> > I hope that somebody will correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think that
> > GIMP uses /tmp that much if at all. What you really need is more RAM and a
>
On 11/15/2011 06:05 PM, Rob Antonishen wrote:
I think USB2 will be horribly slow, so no point of adding such
drive. And, I hope that somebody will correct me if I am wrong, but
I don't think that GIMP uses /tmp that much if at all. What you
really need is more RAM and a fast driv
> I think USB2 will be horribly slow, so no point of adding such drive. And,
> I hope that somebody will correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think that
> GIMP uses /tmp that much if at all. What you really need is more RAM and a
> fast drive for the swap partition.
>
Throwing out another thought
On 11/15/2011 04:21 PM, jfrazie...@nc.rr.com wrote:
Ok.. so I am working on a large image and want to see if I can increase
performance speed any. I knew things would be slow, but was hoping I could get
a bit better than what I currently have. The image will be a map(as in fantasy
world map)
Ok.. so I am working on a large image and want to see if I can increase
performance speed any. I knew things would be slow, but was hoping I could get
a bit better than what I currently have. The image will be a map(as in fantasy
world map) I want to print(will scale down for web version to .j
13 matches
Mail list logo
