Yup your right....I made a typo with the 16....should be 12 gigs of RAM.
First - I want to tell you just how much I hate you After reading your upgrade threads, I caught the bug. Oh well.
Anyway, I stumbled across something that may be of interest, especially if it's right (I'm not vouching for this statement - just something I found). Check out the "manufacturer's response" to the third post on this page. According to their reading of the Intel Core i7 specifications (here), the i7 memory controller does not do a good job of running with 6 memory modules (sticks). I tried to find it but couldn't - but that may just be me and one or more of my short-comings.
First - I want to tell you just how much I hate you After reading your upgrade threads, I caught the bug. Oh well.
Anyway, I stumbled across something that may be of interest, especially if it's right (I'm not vouching for this statement - just something I found). Check out the "manufacturer's response" to the third post on this page. According to their reading of the Intel Core i7 specifications (here), the i7 memory controller does not do a good job of running with 6 memory modules (sticks). I tried to find it but couldn't - but that may just be me and one or more of my short-comings.
It may in fact be more efficient with 3 modules rather than 6. I'd have to see that somewhere else, in other tests. But....when I had this (my current) machine built, 2 modules were more efficient (in dual channel mode) than 3 modules. However, my machine is currently handling modern day apps such as CS3 and LR much more stable with 3 modules. Maybe more bang for the buck with 3 modules, but the system can certainly put 3 more modules to use. I intend to fill the slots. A really good reason for that....for me...is because the cpu heatsink/fan I intend to use will require removal and reinstallation to add RAM into the slot nearest the cpu if it isn't filled in the initial build. The ASUS RampageII motherboard manual recommends leaving that slot empty if going with 3 modules.
I have done a lot of research on this....maybe not quite enough yet....but there are a LOT of folks running this processor with either 6g or 12 g of DDR3 1600 RAM. The Corsair Dominator series are the modules I plan to use.
First - I want to tell you just how much I hate you After reading your upgrade threads, I caught the bug. Oh well.
Anyway, I stumbled across something that may be of interest, especially if it's right (I'm not vouching for this statement - just something I found). Check out the "manufacturer's response" to the third post on this page. According to their reading of the Intel Core i7 specifications (here), the i7 memory controller does not do a good job of running with 6 memory modules (sticks). I tried to find it but couldn't - but that may just be me and one or more of my short-comings.
The statement "Doesn't do a good job" needs context. The response from G.SKILL is 100% correct. These guys know there RAM. But this is relevant only for those who are trying to squeeze every ounce of performance out of their machine by using over-spec'd RAM.
The Intel spec for Core i7 is only 1066MHz across all 3 channels. If you run two sticks per channel you're limited to that 1066MHz. By running only 1 stick per channel you can stretch things a little to 1600MHz or perhaps higher.
Does it make a huge difference? To bragging rights, definately! In the real world, maybe. It depends on the app.
First - I want to tell you just how much I hate you After reading your upgrade threads, I caught the bug. Oh well.
Anyway, I stumbled across something that may be of interest, especially if it's right (I'm not vouching for this statement - just something I found). Check out the "manufacturer's response" to the third post on this page. According to their reading of the Intel Core i7 specifications (here), the i7 memory controller does not do a good job of running with 6 memory modules (sticks). I tried to find it but couldn't - but that may just be me and one or more of my short-comings.
I realized....due to my lack of technical knowledge on the subject....that my initial response may not have explained things well. My old pc uses DDR400 RAM. It is most efficient in a dual channel configuration using two slots filled with a dual channel matching set. The Core i7 and the motherboards that support it....are "probably" similar in that they are most efficient with a matching set of 3 slots filled in the triple channel configuration. More efficient in that. 6 gigs of RAM in 3 slots (3 x 2g) would out perform 6 gigs in 6 slots (6 x 1g). BUT.....as you know....the machine can use that RAM regardless of whether you are relying on the dual (or triple) channel configuration or not. Maybe this makes more sense....maybe not....but perhaps this is what the RAM dealer was refering to?
In none of my research do I remember anyone listing Gskill RAM as a component of their machine. I do remember....Corsair, Crucial, Mushkin, and Patriot. I have used Mushkin and Geil in the past.....but will build this with the Corsair....which is also a reputable supplier of RAM memory.
I realized....due to my lack of technical knowledge on the subject....that my initial response may not have explained things well. My old pc uses DDR400 RAM. It is most efficient in a dual channel configuration using two slots filled with a dual channel matching set. The Core i7 and the motherboards that support it....are "probably" similar in that they are most efficient with a matching set of 3 slots filled in the triple channel configuration. More efficient in that. 6 gigs of RAM in 3 slots (3 x 2g) would out perform 6 gigs in 6 slots (6 x 1g). BUT.....as you know....the machine can use that RAM regardless of whether you are relying on the dual (or triple) channel configuration or not.
Yup - all my research/reading is consistant with this statement. As for dual channel with the i7 - I seem to recall reading that there are some MBOs that don't support that - they want the memeory in sets of three modules/sticks. I can't find that reference anymore ... I may be wrong, but I am certain I read that somewhere
In none of my research do I remember anyone listing Gskill RAM as a component of their machine. I do remember....Corsair, Crucial, Mushkin, and Patriot. I have used Mushkin and Geil in the past.....but will build this with the Corsair....which is also a reputable supplier of RAM memory.
Here's a recent and relevent (to you, they use an Asus Rampage II Extreme MBO for their testing) review of some high-end G.Skill memeory. Corsair memory .... It's in my current box and is working a real treat. All the reviews I've read indicate that this is a top-shelf memory manufacturer.
Edit:
My current box is an AMD 4800+ (I think, it's at home and I'm not) with 2GB of dual-channel 800 memory (Corsair). Been running a real treat until I tried to stuff a wedding's worth of 50D RAW files down it's throat. Took more than an hour to convert the CR2 to DGN and import the DNG into LR2 (latest version). And, when it takes more than 4 or 5 seconds to open up an image on the second monitor while going through the culling process .... well, it's time to upgrade. I don't know how you manage with your machine - it being older/slower (I read that somewhere and can't find it now).
Jeff - remember when I said "I hate you" - well ... parts are on their way. I'm salvaging my current case, video, HDD, DVD-R, etc and replacing the
CPU - Intel Core i7 920 (I'll be over-clocking this to about 3.2GHz or 3.6GHz)
Memory - OCZ Platinum 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3 1600 (also said to handle OC well). Can't imagine needing more, but if I do, there's room for 3 more memory sticks on that MBO and it supports 24GB
Heatsink/fan - Prolimatech Megahalems with 120mm fan (also reviewed well)
and power supply
Parts should get here on Tuesday. I already have a valid and unused WinXP-64, so I should be set. Really looking forward to Tuesday night!
So, do I read it correctly that you can only reliably overclock an i7 system if your have 3 DDR3 sticks, but not 6 or more?
NO - I've read lots of OC reviews where they had 12GB (6 sticks) of memory in the box and, with air cooling, were getting 3.8 or better. With water, some were were pushing up to and past the 4GHz mark. Of course, they were putting some major $$ into the memory and pushing the voltage on both the CPU and the memory to get there.
For me, that's just too much. I would like to walk away from the machine and not hear the whine of the fans in my ears for the next couple of hours.
NO - I've read lots of OC reviews where they had 12GB (6 sticks) of memory in the box and, with air cooling, were getting 3.8 or better. With water, some were were pushing up to and past the 4GHz mark. Of course, they were putting some major $$ into the memory and pushing the voltage on both the CPU and the memory to get there.
For me, that's just too much. I would like to walk away from the machine and not hear the whine of the fans in my ears for the next couple of hours.
I heard some nice things about Silent Knigth fans...
I really, really want 12 gig of RAM. One of the reasons: in 64 bit world all the apps are pretty much taking twice as much space (both on HDD and, most importantly, in RAM) as their 32-bit analogues. Modern programming uses flat memory model and tons of libraries, hence most of the code is just a method call after a method call... Which means using a lot of addresses, which are now 64 bit instead of 32...
So, in many senses, unless you're talking plain data (not data processing - just allocating), 64-bit OS does need twice as much memory as a 32-bit one just to be "on the same page". Translation: 6Gb in 64-bit world is really more like 3Gb in 32-bit, maaaaybe 4Gb... - which, I must say, is not a lot when it gets to creating multiimage composites with frames coming from 15..20mp cameras
I heard some nice things about Silent Knigth fans...
I really, really want 12 gig of RAM. One of the reasons: in 64 bit world all the apps are pretty much taking twice as much space (both on HDD and, most importantly, in RAM) as their 32-bit analogues. Modern programming uses flat memory model and tons of libraries, hence most of the code is just a method call after a method call... Which means using a lot of addresses, which are now 64 bit instead of 32...
So, in many senses, unless you're talking plain data (not data processing - just allocating), 64-bit OS does need twice as much memory as a 32-bit one just to be "on the same page". Translation: 6Gb in 64-bit world is really more like 3Gb in 32-bit, maaaaybe 4Gb... - which, I must say, is not a lot when it gets to creating multiimage composites with frames coming from 15..20mp cameras
Just my thinking...
Another good reason for putting in 3 x 2GB to start with - at least for me. If I need more, I can add an additional 3 sticks and be sitting pretty. By then, maybe I can get 3 x 4GB for cheap.
Another good reason for putting in 3 x 2GB to start with - at least for me. If I need more, I can add an additional 3 sticks and be sitting pretty. By then, maybe I can get 3 x 4GB for cheap.
Good 4gb DDR3 sticks are pricey for now... But I think it would worth it...
ALL of what you guys are saying is in line with my research.
Scott,
For clarification whn I said dual channel mode I was referring to my current pc with Athlon 64-3200 processor. The new one will operate in triple channel mode if it is set up that way.
Your parts list looks great.
Mine reads...
-ASUS Rampage 2 Extreme motherboard
-Saphire Radeon HD 4870 X2 video card (2 GB memory....two processors on-board)
-i7 920 (probably will OC to 3.4 or so)
-Silverstone 1000w single rail power supply
-Corsair Dominator RAM 3x2 gig triple channel set....Im getting two of these for 12 gigs total
-WEstern Digital Caviar "black" 1TB hard drive
-Western Digital Velociraptor 300g hard drive
-Lite On 22x DVD burner
-Zalman 9900 CPU cooler...heatsink/fan. I may swao this for something else...still researching.(feel free to enlighten me here!)
-OS Vista 64
- Coolermaster Case. Its a full tower case with slide out tray...all aluminum with 4 120mm fans. Big fans, but run at lower RPM....hopefully sorta quiet!
I will probably add a third hard drive....something cheap...a 7200RPM SATA for a scratch disk.
It wont be cheap....but hopefully I can keep it under $3k. Id also like to get a monitor.....so anothr $600 or so there.....and Id like to find an ESATA card reader...or at least Firewire for faster unloads.
Im really anxious about this...but havent ordered anything yet. If it were all here I wouldn't have time to build it. I am still swimming in senior photos with new clients still calling. My current pc was okay with XTi files, but the 50D is killin it! An 8gig cards worth of files is a waiting game for sure. Ahck!!!
So...when the time comes...do we document the builds with photos and essay like in "journeys"? Im thinking I might.
Oh yeah....the RAM will require OC to run at 1600, but it's no biggy. The MB's support it....and all the i7 MBs seem to lean to the good for overclocking.
I wouldn't get built in disk burners now. Blue Ray is the way to go. They are still a bit pricey but they won't stay that way for long. I think at the moment external one is the right thing...
I will probably add a third hard drive....something cheap...a 7200RPM SATA for a scratch disk.
Good idea. For shadow ram/scratch... Maybe even go solidstate, since you won't need too much of it...
It wont be cheap....but hopefully I can keep it under $3k. Id also like to get a monitor.....so anothr $600 or so there.....and Id like to find an ESATA card reader...or at least Firewire for faster unloads.
When I "build" mine on cyverpowerpc.com it was under $3K
Also: most of the high end monitors have the readers built-in
My current pc was okay with XTi files, but the 50D is killin it! An 8gig cards worth of files is a waiting game for sure. Ahck!!!
Now think of 5D2's 21mp ones:-)
Oh yeah....the RAM will require OC to run at 1600, but it's no biggy. The MB's support it....and all the i7 MBs seem to lean to the good for overclocking.
AFAIK, only single sticks can be OC-ed, duals stay at 1066Mhz :-(
I wouldn't get built in disk burners now. Blue Ray is the way to go. They are still a bit pricey but they won't stay that way for long. I think at the moment external one is the right thing...
Well Nik...I agree
The Blur Ray is a tad pricey still, but including a stardard....non- Blue Ray DVD burner will cost less than $30. I could use an older one that I already have, but mine is only an 8x write speed.....and I have doubts as driver availability for current OS's. I prefer a machine with two CD DVD drives....Ill add a Blue Ray when they are more affordable. Til then, Ill be able to handle whatever disk burning I have to do.
The Blur Ray is a tad pricey still, but including a stardard....non- Blue Ray DVD burner will cost less than $30. I could use an older one that I already have, but mine is only an 8x write speed.....and I have doubts as driver availability for current OS's. I prefer a machine with two CD DVD drives....Ill add a Blue Ray when they are more affordable. Til then, Ill be able to handle whatever disk burning I have to do.
True too... Although fast dvd media can get expensive fast.. I have old x8 or x16 and it works just fine....
-ASUS Rampage 2 Extreme motherboard
-Saphire Radeon HD 4870 X2 video card (2 GB memory....two processors on-board)
-i7 920 (probably will OC to 3.4 or so)
-Silverstone 1000w single rail power supply
-Corsair Dominator RAM 3x2 gig triple channel set....Im getting two of these for 12 gigs total
-WEstern Digital Caviar "black" 1TB hard drive
-Western Digital Velociraptor 300g hard drive
-Lite On 22x DVD burner
-Zalman 9900 CPU cooler...heatsink/fan. I may swao this for something else...still researching.(feel free to enlighten me here!)
-OS Vista 64
- Coolermaster Case. Its a full tower case with slide out tray...all aluminum with 4 120mm fans. Big fans, but run at lower RPM....hopefully sorta quiet!
If you don't like noisy machines, I think you might be little disappointed with your choice of heatsink. The fan on that is a 92mm and has to spin a bit faster than larger fans to push the same air. Check out this review as a starting point. This review shows the Zalman to be pretty much not up to the task of cooling the i7 - it's engineered and sized for the LGA 775 chips.
Im really anxious about this...but havent ordered anything yet. If it were all here I wouldn't have time to build it. I am still swimming in senior photos with new clients still calling. My current pc was okay with XTi files, but the 50D is killin it! An 8gig cards worth of files is a waiting game for sure. Ahck!!!
Oh yeah....the RAM will require OC to run at 1600, but it's no biggy. The MB's support it....and all the i7 MBs seem to lean to the good for overclocking.
Yup, everything I've read says that doing the OC thing with the 920 is a goodness.
Discussion WinXP vs Win7 (both 64-bit)
The following is something I wrote (in response to a question)on another, Win7 centric, forum. As the first part of this thread revolved around discussions of WinXP vs Win7, I thought it might be of interest here:
All the comparisons below are between WinXP x64 and Win7 x64 Build 7229 (it's not yet made it to RTM, that's currently scheduled for 22 Jun 2009). The reference to installing Win7 on the Toshiba ... that was x86 version of the RC (Build 7100).
There's more than a few reasons to look at Win7:
Better memory management. I actually got it to install and run on an 8 year old Toshiba S3000 Satellite with only 800MHz proc, 20GB HDD, and 512MB memory. Didn't run real swift, but it ran and didn't crash. Oh, and didn't eat all the memory in the box. With IE 8 running, there was still some 200MB available.
Eye-candy - OK, obviously not your thing, but it might be for some.
Drivers ...
Video driver on the Toshiba, not so good
On my desktop (see system specs), everything was supported right off the DVD once I had refreshed the MBO BIOS. Video and network drivers where updateable from the H/W vendor. Nvidia works a treat. The NIC, from Asrock ... no issues.
On my Acer lappie - The only thing I have yet to get a driver for is the integrated video camera. I never used it before and I doubt I'll ever use it in the future. So not a big deal for me.
Faster/slower then XP? My experience is that every application is running at least as fast on Win7 as it ever did on XP.
Better power consumption. Under XP, I never did figure out how to get the i7 920 to "throttle down" when the system was idle - the CPU was always cranking away at 2.6GHz (+/-). I'm not talking about CPU usage as reported by the Task Manager - that, as expected, would always drop to near zero. Under Win7, it's like the various cores go to sleep until they are needed - presumably lowering power consumption and heat generation.
Vista drivers? There's only one piece of hardware I have for which Win7 doesn't have a driver - a monitor color calibration device. However, the vendor website has software designed for x64 OS. This software runs on WinXP, Vista 64, and on Win7 x64.
Does it use more memory, when idle, than WinXP. Ummmm .... yes, but so what. The memory management is sooo much better that when/if you run an app that needs more memory, Win7 seems pretty compliant about releasing some of the memory it's using so the app can get to it. Win7 seems to use what it needs (makes it run faster as it's not always going to disk for stuff) until such time that some application needs it. On my lappie (with only 2GB), I've never run into a situation where there wasn't enough memory to fit just one more thing in ... and that without a lot of page swapping. On the old Toshiba ... that's another question entirely
Stability? When first released, WinXP was not a shining example. It got better with SP2, but really didn't come into it's own until SP3. Win7 seems to have avoided much of those problems and nearly all of the problems encountered by early adopters of Vista. The various Win7 builds have been getting better and better. The RC (7100) was solid, but 7229 is so much more so and some who have it say that 7232 is better yet.
... that is to say, slow and piggish. I installed a new virtual machine with Windows 7 and I was pretty eager to see improvements, but, sadly, it's no better than Vista IMO - which is to say, it's clunky, bloated and slow. When I have to use Windows (I have Macs in my office, home & studio) - I use Win XP which I can deal with quite fine.
... that is to say, slow and piggish. I installed a new virtual machine with Windows 7 and I was pretty eager to see improvements, but, sadly, it's no better than Vista IMO - which is to say, it's clunky, bloated and slow. When I have to use Windows (I have Macs in my office, home & studio) - I use Win XP which I can deal with quite fine.
You're right - Vista (prior to SP2) was all you have indicated. Since SP2, it's much improved but still not as well done as any of the Win7 builds from Build 7100 (the official RC) onward.
Win7 - I've installed it on an 8 year-old lappie with 512M memory. It runs in less then 300M on that machine. I've installed it on a 2GB machine running an old AMD 2800+ processor. Not so bad and better than XP ever was on that machine.
I can't respond to your experiences and I truely believe this falls into a YMMV category. My experience is that, while Win7 does have a larger disk footprint than does WinXP, it can run as fast or faster in a smaller memory footprint than can WinXP. My limited testing shows me that, in terms of speed of task accomplishment, Win7 and WinXP are pretty much in a dead heat. Where Win7 really pulls ahead (again, this is my experience with about 8 different leaked builds, both X64 and x86) is in the memory management arena. If the memory is there, Win7 will grab what it needs/wants. When an application needs some of that, it's released to the application without hitting the pagefile (indeed, I don't run a pagefile).
... that is to say, slow and piggish. I installed a new virtual machine with Windows 7 and I was pretty eager to see improvements, but, sadly, it's no better than Vista IMO - which is to say, it's clunky, bloated and slow. When I have to use Windows (I have Macs in my office, home & studio) - I use Win XP which I can deal with quite fine.
I really struggle with experiences like this. I don't doubt your experience but mine has been the total opposite which is, in one sense, frustrating.
My Macbook Air ran Vista and Windows 7 much, much faster than it ran OSX. I bought a new 13" Macbook Pro and, while I have never run Windows on it, am rather disappointed with the OSX performance. I get this spinning beach ball for 10-15 seconds at a time every few minutes. I run Vista on 1 computer, Windows 7 on one computer, and OSX on the other. The time I spend with Vista and 7 is much more enjoyable than my time with OSX. I don't understand why the experience of "Mac people" is so different from my own.
Also, I'm not sure that you should entirely judge an OS based upon how a pre-release version runs in a virtual machine.
At this point me and both my daughters switched to Windows7 RC (two copies of x64 and one x86). I hated Vista with my guts, but I seem to like Windows7 a lot. Smooth, responsive, works with memory hogging apps great...
At Scott's urging, I have pre-ordered W7 (I ordered the "pro" version) to replace Vista 64 Ultimate upon it's release.
I am looking forward to seeing how it runs on the core i7 with 12 GB of RAM. I am hoping to be able to switch to a solid state hard drive when I make the switch.
Put Win7 RC on an old P4 laptop, a 1.8ghz Core2duo laptop and I'd say it runs more efficiently than XP (which I have never had any real issues with).
I use it all the time to run aerial cameras with an embedded video window on a Dell 2.8ghz Core2-duo laptop. My camera triggering/operating software had only run under XP (never on Vista), it interfaces with a GPS system, runs a detailed moving map, shows live video and captures live video stills on the fly, and more. In XP it was very good but under Win 7 everything is absolutely perfect and smooth - plus it seems to like running more apps concurrently than XP did.
So far it has been easy to deal with, quick and easy install, with zero issues afterwards. Already pre-ordered for my main camera-operating machine, desktop, and two back-up laptops.
To the extent that one trusts what one reads on the internet, this article may be of interest to those wondering about the Pros/Cons of WinXP/WinVista/Win7.
Comments
Blue spandex? Well then . . . guess I'll order a copy!
Chooka chooka hoo la ley
Looka looka koo la ley
Anyway, I stumbled across something that may be of interest, especially if it's right (I'm not vouching for this statement - just something I found). Check out the "manufacturer's response" to the third post on this page. According to their reading of the Intel Core i7 specifications (here), the i7 memory controller does not do a good job of running with 6 memory modules (sticks). I tried to find it but couldn't - but that may just be me and one or more of my short-comings.
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
That is in conflict with this article...
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/exclusive_retail_core_i7_cpus_more_powerful_originally_reported
It may in fact be more efficient with 3 modules rather than 6. I'd have to see that somewhere else, in other tests. But....when I had this (my current) machine built, 2 modules were more efficient (in dual channel mode) than 3 modules. However, my machine is currently handling modern day apps such as CS3 and LR much more stable with 3 modules. Maybe more bang for the buck with 3 modules, but the system can certainly put 3 more modules to use. I intend to fill the slots. A really good reason for that....for me...is because the cpu heatsink/fan I intend to use will require removal and reinstallation to add RAM into the slot nearest the cpu if it isn't filled in the initial build. The ASUS RampageII motherboard manual recommends leaving that slot empty if going with 3 modules.
I have done a lot of research on this....maybe not quite enough yet....but there are a LOT of folks running this processor with either 6g or 12 g of DDR3 1600 RAM. The Corsair Dominator series are the modules I plan to use.
Jeff
-Need help with Dgrin?; Wedding Photography Resources
-My Website - Blog - Tips for Senior Portraiture
The statement "Doesn't do a good job" needs context. The response from G.SKILL is 100% correct. These guys know there RAM. But this is relevant only for those who are trying to squeeze every ounce of performance out of their machine by using over-spec'd RAM.
The Intel spec for Core i7 is only 1066MHz across all 3 channels. If you run two sticks per channel you're limited to that 1066MHz. By running only 1 stick per channel you can stretch things a little to 1600MHz or perhaps higher.
Does it make a huge difference? To bragging rights, definately! In the real world, maybe. It depends on the app.
I realized....due to my lack of technical knowledge on the subject....that my initial response may not have explained things well. My old pc uses DDR400 RAM. It is most efficient in a dual channel configuration using two slots filled with a dual channel matching set. The Core i7 and the motherboards that support it....are "probably" similar in that they are most efficient with a matching set of 3 slots filled in the triple channel configuration. More efficient in that. 6 gigs of RAM in 3 slots (3 x 2g) would out perform 6 gigs in 6 slots (6 x 1g). BUT.....as you know....the machine can use that RAM regardless of whether you are relying on the dual (or triple) channel configuration or not. Maybe this makes more sense....maybe not....but perhaps this is what the RAM dealer was refering to?
In none of my research do I remember anyone listing Gskill RAM as a component of their machine. I do remember....Corsair, Crucial, Mushkin, and Patriot. I have used Mushkin and Geil in the past.....but will build this with the Corsair....which is also a reputable supplier of RAM memory.
Jeff
-Need help with Dgrin?; Wedding Photography Resources
-My Website - Blog - Tips for Senior Portraiture
Edit:
My current box is an AMD 4800+ (I think, it's at home and I'm not) with 2GB of dual-channel 800 memory (Corsair). Been running a real treat until I tried to stuff a wedding's worth of 50D RAW files down it's throat. Took more than an hour to convert the CR2 to DGN and import the DNG into LR2 (latest version). And, when it takes more than 4 or 5 seconds to open up an image on the second monitor while going through the culling process .... well, it's time to upgrade. I don't know how you manage with your machine - it being older/slower (I read that somewhere and can't find it now).
Jeff - remember when I said "I hate you" - well ... parts are on their way. I'm salvaging my current case, video, HDD, DVD-R, etc and replacing the
- CPU - Intel Core i7 920 (I'll be over-clocking this to about 3.2GHz or 3.6GHz)
- MBO - ASRock X58 Deluxe (reviews nice, OCs easily)
- Memory - OCZ Platinum 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3 1600 (also said to handle OC well). Can't imagine needing more, but if I do, there's room for 3 more memory sticks on that MBO and it supports 24GB
- Heatsink/fan - Prolimatech Megahalems with 120mm fan (also reviewed well)
- and power supply
Parts should get here on Tuesday. I already have a valid and unused WinXP-64, so I should be set. Really looking forward to Tuesday night!My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
For me, that's just too much. I would like to walk away from the machine and not hear the whine of the fans in my ears for the next couple of hours.
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
I heard some nice things about Silent Knigth fans...
I really, really want 12 gig of RAM. One of the reasons: in 64 bit world all the apps are pretty much taking twice as much space (both on HDD and, most importantly, in RAM) as their 32-bit analogues. Modern programming uses flat memory model and tons of libraries, hence most of the code is just a method call after a method call... Which means using a lot of addresses, which are now 64 bit instead of 32...
So, in many senses, unless you're talking plain data (not data processing - just allocating), 64-bit OS does need twice as much memory as a 32-bit one just to be "on the same page". Translation: 6Gb in 64-bit world is really more like 3Gb in 32-bit, maaaaybe 4Gb... - which, I must say, is not a lot when it gets to creating multiimage composites with frames coming from 15..20mp cameras
Just my thinking...
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
Scott,
For clarification whn I said dual channel mode I was referring to my current pc with Athlon 64-3200 processor. The new one will operate in triple channel mode if it is set up that way.
Your parts list looks great.
Mine reads...
-ASUS Rampage 2 Extreme motherboard
-Saphire Radeon HD 4870 X2 video card (2 GB memory....two processors on-board)
-i7 920 (probably will OC to 3.4 or so)
-Silverstone 1000w single rail power supply
-Corsair Dominator RAM 3x2 gig triple channel set....Im getting two of these for 12 gigs total
-WEstern Digital Caviar "black" 1TB hard drive
-Western Digital Velociraptor 300g hard drive
-Lite On 22x DVD burner
-Zalman 9900 CPU cooler...heatsink/fan. I may swao this for something else...still researching.(feel free to enlighten me here!)
-OS Vista 64
- Coolermaster Case. Its a full tower case with slide out tray...all aluminum with 4 120mm fans. Big fans, but run at lower RPM....hopefully sorta quiet!
I will probably add a third hard drive....something cheap...a 7200RPM SATA for a scratch disk.
It wont be cheap....but hopefully I can keep it under $3k. Id also like to get a monitor.....so anothr $600 or so there.....and Id like to find an ESATA card reader...or at least Firewire for faster unloads.
Im really anxious about this...but havent ordered anything yet. If it were all here I wouldn't have time to build it. I am still swimming in senior photos with new clients still calling. My current pc was okay with XTi files, but the 50D is killin it! An 8gig cards worth of files is a waiting game for sure. Ahck!!!
So...when the time comes...do we document the builds with photos and essay like in "journeys"? Im thinking I might.
Oh yeah....the RAM will require OC to run at 1600, but it's no biggy. The MB's support it....and all the i7 MBs seem to lean to the good for overclocking.
Jeff
-Need help with Dgrin?; Wedding Photography Resources
-My Website - Blog - Tips for Senior Portraiture
When I "build" mine on cyverpowerpc.com it was under $3K
Also: most of the high end monitors have the readers built-in
Now think of 5D2's 21mp ones:-)
AFAIK, only single sticks can be OC-ed, duals stay at 1066Mhz :-(
Well Nik...I agree
The Blur Ray is a tad pricey still, but including a stardard....non- Blue Ray DVD burner will cost less than $30. I could use an older one that I already have, but mine is only an 8x write speed.....and I have doubts as driver availability for current OS's. I prefer a machine with two CD DVD drives....Ill add a Blue Ray when they are more affordable. Til then, Ill be able to handle whatever disk burning I have to do.
Jeff
-Need help with Dgrin?; Wedding Photography Resources
-My Website - Blog - Tips for Senior Portraiture
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
The following is something I wrote (in response to a question)on another, Win7 centric, forum. As the first part of this thread revolved around discussions of WinXP vs Win7, I thought it might be of interest here:
All the comparisons below are between WinXP x64 and Win7 x64 Build 7229 (it's not yet made it to RTM, that's currently scheduled for 22 Jun 2009). The reference to installing Win7 on the Toshiba ... that was x86 version of the RC (Build 7100).
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
... that is to say, slow and piggish.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Win7 - I've installed it on an 8 year-old lappie with 512M memory. It runs in less then 300M on that machine. I've installed it on a 2GB machine running an old AMD 2800+ processor. Not so bad and better than XP ever was on that machine.
I can't respond to your experiences and I truely believe this falls into a YMMV category. My experience is that, while Win7 does have a larger disk footprint than does WinXP, it can run as fast or faster in a smaller memory footprint than can WinXP. My limited testing shows me that, in terms of speed of task accomplishment, Win7 and WinXP are pretty much in a dead heat. Where Win7 really pulls ahead (again, this is my experience with about 8 different leaked builds, both X64 and x86) is in the memory management arena. If the memory is there, Win7 will grab what it needs/wants. When an application needs some of that, it's released to the application without hitting the pagefile (indeed, I don't run a pagefile).
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
I really struggle with experiences like this. I don't doubt your experience but mine has been the total opposite which is, in one sense, frustrating.
My Macbook Air ran Vista and Windows 7 much, much faster than it ran OSX. I bought a new 13" Macbook Pro and, while I have never run Windows on it, am rather disappointed with the OSX performance. I get this spinning beach ball for 10-15 seconds at a time every few minutes. I run Vista on 1 computer, Windows 7 on one computer, and OSX on the other. The time I spend with Vista and 7 is much more enjoyable than my time with OSX. I don't understand why the experience of "Mac people" is so different from my own.
Also, I'm not sure that you should entirely judge an OS based upon how a pre-release version runs in a virtual machine.
I am looking forward to seeing how it runs on the core i7 with 12 GB of RAM. I am hoping to be able to switch to a solid state hard drive when I make the switch.
I can't wait.
Jeff
-Need help with Dgrin?; Wedding Photography Resources
-My Website - Blog - Tips for Senior Portraiture
I use it all the time to run aerial cameras with an embedded video window on a Dell 2.8ghz Core2-duo laptop. My camera triggering/operating software had only run under XP (never on Vista), it interfaces with a GPS system, runs a detailed moving map, shows live video and captures live video stills on the fly, and more. In XP it was very good but under Win 7 everything is absolutely perfect and smooth - plus it seems to like running more apps concurrently than XP did.
So far it has been easy to deal with, quick and easy install, with zero issues afterwards. Already pre-ordered for my main camera-operating machine, desktop, and two back-up laptops.
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
PC Mag..........
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
Reading PC mag is like going to CNET for unbiased reviews.
BTW if you don't have a dog of a machine....Vista 64 bit screams.....at least for me it does.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter