computer advice
ladytx
Registered Users Posts: 814 Major grins
Am looking at this computer for photography/video. Would like some feedback and advice as to whether this computer would do all the tasks involved quickly. Are the components any good. Any other thoughts or recommendations. Buy a pre-made computer or have one built?
Processor - Intel Core i7
Processor Speed 3.4 GHZ with turbo boost
Cache Memory - 8 mg
RAM - 8 gb (would add 2 gb memory)
Type of RAM - DDR3 SDRAM
Hard Drive Type - SATA (7200 rpm)
Graphics Card - ATI Radeio HD 5770
Video Memory - 1 gb
Windows 7
Processor - Intel Core i7
Processor Speed 3.4 GHZ with turbo boost
Cache Memory - 8 mg
RAM - 8 gb (would add 2 gb memory)
Type of RAM - DDR3 SDRAM
Hard Drive Type - SATA (7200 rpm)
Graphics Card - ATI Radeio HD 5770
Video Memory - 1 gb
Windows 7
LadyTX
0
Comments
Here's a list of benchmarks for all the various processors. Note the sub models within the Core i7 series. Some are significantly faster than others. More expensive too. I don't know how valid these benchmarks are but I used them as a guide in choosing my new computer last month.
I hope this helps a little.
www.socalimages.com
Artistically & Creatively Challenged
Two things:
1) get an SSD if you can. Even if it's only a small one used for Windows and applications, and you keep your data on a HDD
2) don't upgrade to 10GB of RAM. Either go up to 12 or leave it at 8.
Add Windows 7 if you really need it; you can even make it a 100% Windows machine if you like.
ciao!
Nick.
Nick.
my equipment: Canon 5D2, 7D, full list here
my Smugmug site: here
You can partition the drive if you like - that will help if your installation of Windows gets corrupted somehow. But it's not going to help if the drive simply fails. Better would be to purchase a small SSD (64GB or so) and have Windows and the programs installed on it, while keeping your data on the 1.5GB HDD (hard disk drive).
Yes, get an iMac. Less RAM, slower processor, and no ability to add an extra (internal) HDD or SSD. But other than that it would be a great investment.
+1
with my recent desktop I got 120Gb SSD specifically for this purpose (system + apps), no regrets about that.
12Gb should be enough if you don't plan on multitasking too much. 6/8/9gb is also OK, although you may expect *some* sluggishness on large composites/panos.
Looks like you might want to rethink that... you could order an iMac with:
- i7 quad core w/ turbo boost @ 2.93 GHz
- 16 GByte RAM
- 2 TB HDD + 256 GB SSD
So explain to me how that would be less RAM when it is in fact DOUBLE RAM and having a HDD + SSD is pretty much what everybody advices and opposite of what you state... Sure, the CPU is a little slower but with 16 GB RAM and SSD I think it's a better choice than the OP's proposed config.
ciao!
Nick.
Nick.
my equipment: Canon 5D2, 7D, full list here
my Smugmug site: here
You Mac guys drive me nuts. You're not comparing a standard iMac configuration here, you've added every possible upgrade. And you might want to read the thread again if you thought I suggested not getting an SSD.
You know what it costs for the iMac you just spec'd for us? (Yes, you do, but you chose not to post it.) It's $3,699. That's three-thousand, six-hundred, and ninety-nine dollars.
Would the OP care to chime in on the price for the computer she originally inquired about?
Now for the op's situation... if you already have a good monitor, it probably doesn't make sense to buy a second one that's built into an iMac. Since the iMac display is also glass, and highly reflective, I'm not sure if you can get the same color accuracy from it as other displays.
I also don't see a need to upgrade to 16GB of ram (I have 8GB, and am very happy with that), especially if you have an SSD handling your virtual memory.
And if you want to be able to easily upgrade your machine, an iMac might also not be a great idea for that reason. (I have a Mac Pro that I bought and configured with the intention of being able to last me 6 years. It was expensive, but I think it'll do quite a good job at lasting, with fairly minimal upgrades along the way).
I will be multitasking. One of the main reasons I am getting a new machine, other than mine is 6 years old. I import my photos into Lightroom while working in Photoshop while a video is rendering in Pinnacle. My computer now will run Lightroom and photoshop, slowly, but I can't add much else. It is 1.2 ghz with 2 gigs of RAM! I am looking for a BIG improvement on that!
LR, PS and Pinnacle living all together happily in 4Gb of RAM? Not gonna happen, sorry
Obviously this wouldn't be true of all things (some parts of a photo editing workflow will be CPU-bound, for sure, and that would be much more true for video editing), but it's worth keeping in mind.
On the upside, it looks like one of those $134 SSDs on newegg (Crucial's RealSSD C300) far outperforms my own SSD, which I got for more than $600, over a year ago. It's a rapidly improving market.
---
As a side note, an iMac that is configured to be similar to the op's originally mentioned configuration is $2,399.00. That's for the fastest i7 available to an iMac, which is only available on the 27", 8GB RAM, and those are the only 2 upgrades from the baseline. An identical display sells for $999, so roughly $1400.00 is left for the component cost, which doesn't compare all that badly against $1100.
I'm not saying to buy an iMac (it makes no sense given that you don't need a new expensive display, and the difficulty in upgrades), I just hope you realize Macs aren't ridiculously overpriced (though obviously they can get quite expensive if you max out the configuration as was done above).
Yep, mee too! But as soon as we start multi-tasking, that RAM or lack of it really, really comes into play.
Processor - Intel Core i7
Processor Speed 3.4 GHZ with turbo boost
Cache Memory - 8 mg
RAM - 8 gb (would add 2 gb memory)
Type of RAM - DDR3 SDRAM
Hard Drive Type - SATA (7200 rpm)
Graphics Card - ATI Radeio HD 5770
Video Memory - 1 gb
Windows 7
Not to worry, with this gear, you'll be much improved over your old system.
That said, You will bog down once you begin multi-tasking, and there are several reasons for it. Ram is one reason, so is limited HDD's. In the scenario you listed above, LR+Ps+Pi, I'd say boggy unless you got into the 24GB of RAM area. And yes, they do sell 24GB RAM kits, and Yes, it is recommended to buy RAM in matched Kit form.
Win7 will take up about 40-43GB on a SSD/HDD. So you'll have a bit of room to spare there depending on which you choose. I think you need more HDD space and separate drives at that, due to having/needing scratch disks and the like.
I like the system you have laid out, and I'd be willing to bet there are tons of folks out here with similar systems.
You might find it interesting to ask folks what they use and how theirs works.
I doubt I've been much help here. Reading and asking is the best way to go about it, and you're doing that.
It does all remind me of that adage from my racing days:
Speed cost money; How fast can you afford to go?
Get one of the new Z68 chipset motherboards (coming in one week)
Add a 20gig intel SSD (will launch at same time); also a 2 TB 7200k hard drive
The new boards and small SSD serve to greatly increase your effective hard drive throughput and are the best 'bang for the buck' out there
You should do fine with an i5 process but make sure it is the new Sandy Bridge one (2500k) - saves you $100 vs the i7 and, for your purposes, should be more than powerful enough
Agree about at least 8 gigs ram
If you don't have a monitor, make sure you get one with an IPS screen (the technology of how accurately it displays colors)
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos
This, and the performance factor, revolves around a possible lack of available memory for applications and data. The OS will counter this using what is called a swap file.
The memory manager component of the OS keeps tab on which part of memory is used how often and when for the last time; when a request for more memory comes but there isn't any free, the memory manager can decide to "swap" some to disk: part of the memory contents is written to disk and the memory is made available for the request. The memory manager keeps tab on this too, so that it can quickly retrieve the data written to the swap file when it is needed again.
The OS is using a virtual memory space which is much bigger than the physical amount of memory.
Now, the memory I wrote about above is the RAM. Optimally you would want so much of it that the OS NEVER uses the swap file. But in case it does, you want the swap file to be on a very fast disk, hence the SSD.
Logic dictates that a machine that has more RAM will swap less. But if one wants to multi-task 2 applications but lack, say, 4 GByte RAM for that, it doesn't help to add 2 GB RAM as the OS still needs to swap. This is why some do not see an improvement when adding RAM while they see an improvement when adding a faster SSD. It doesn't mean the SSD is more important... it just means THE RESULTS GOT YOU FOOLED into that conclusion. If you had bought 4 GB extra RAM instead of 2 GB, you would have seen an improvement that is a multiple of the SSD improvement.... because you would have prevented swapping!!
In short: buy more RAM but make sure to have a SSD too. Every OS does allow you to check how often/much swap is used and how much free RAM is available (run "top" in terminal window on Linux or MacOS). Check it!
I hope this clears up some of the confusion and that I didn't go too technical on this
ciao!
Nick.
Nick.
my equipment: Canon 5D2, 7D, full list here
my Smugmug site: here
Exactly. The $300/25% extra cost of the iMac is, imo, well worth it when considering that the build quality is higher. With configurations like these, just the RAM price range alone is significant and cheaper isn't always better.
I agree that the screen wasn't asked for... but I had this hunch that a nice 27" big screen might also be welcomed :-) I just think it's important that people get reminded that Macs run Windows too and have a quality level that isn't matched by many other PC manufacturers and certainly not by self-assembled systems using components on the cheap end of the range.
cheers,
Nick.
Nick.
my equipment: Canon 5D2, 7D, full list here
my Smugmug site: here
Yet again, speaking of multitasking specifically for photot/video it's
RAM -> CPU -> GPU -> SSD/HDD,
in this order.
As I have mentioned in my older post, I run 24Gb of DDR3x1600MHz RAM, i7 CPU overclocked at 3.84Ghz, a decent video card and an SSD as a system drive. This system seems adequate for what I do, with all the compoinents working nicely together and non holding others back.
Yet I can attest that when I run a complex job while multitasking it can easily get to using 20..22Gb of RAM. Meaning: if I got any less than 24 it'd start swapping and I would start experiencing inevitable delays.
Basically, you need to get a good idea of what you intend to do and then build your machine to match those tasks. And while I understand the concept of the "budget constraints" I also understand that if I only have enough funds to get an entry level economy car I would not get a pulling power of F-350 truck, a speed of Mazerati speedster and a comfort of Lexus sedan.
But yes, a sufficiently fast CPU and sufficient RAM come first.
I don't deny SSD value. As I said, I'm using one in my desktop.
However, OP was rather specific about LR (read: huge database) and video processing (meaning: huge files), which are both totally not the case of the "relatively small files".
So, speaking from the OP's perspective and budget limitations, I continue to think that SSD should be OP's last priority, as the other features (RAM, CPU, GPU) would have a much greater influence on the overall system performance (again, given the tasks at hand).
Do this test:
1. (re)boot your computer, disconnect any network/Internet links and let it idle for 5 minutes so that you are 100% sure it's finished booting and not doing some hidden downloading etc.
2. watch the time and start an application like Lightroom or Photoshop. Time how long it takes before it is loaded and running.
3. close the application and let the computer idle for 5 minutes again.
4. repeat step 2.
If you have enough RAM, you will find that the 2nd start of the program is much faster than the first. This is yet another function of RAM : the disk cache. Basically, the 2nd time around, the OS pulls the program from the RAM cache instead of loading it from disk.
The same thing happens with small files. The OS will not only cache them but also do delayed writes for any changes made to them... meaning that you don't have to wait for that disk-write to finish.
cheers,
Nick.
Nick.
my equipment: Canon 5D2, 7D, full list here
my Smugmug site: here
I needed a place to start in purchasing a new computer. The machine I originally layed out, according to the salesman, would do my work wonderfully but I definitely trust the opinions and experience here more.
It seems from the information here that 16g of memory would be best for the minimum. SSD drives, or at least one for the op system, would be best. 64g on that should be minimum, maybe. I can upgrade this machine to 16g of RAM. I can purchase and install an SSD drive for op system. In that case is the intel Cor i7 3.4 ghz a good choice? Is the ATI Radeon HD 5770 video card a good choice? Is it worth upgrading this machine?
Or should I have a computer built? Which makes me have to ask what to put in it?????
I would like to keep the cost of the machine at 1,500.00 or under if possible but can go higher if the compromise is too much.
I am aware of all of that, believe me. And trust me when I say that whenever I use a machine without an SSD, no matter how much RAM it has, I get aggravated with it very quickly, because no matter how much gets cached, it still needs to load everything the first time, especially when I start loading large batches of images
Those both seem like good choices to me.
$1,705 http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/saved/1D77PN
CoolerMaster Thermal Fusion 400 Extreme Performance CPU - Thermal Compound Optimized for Thermal Dissipation [+10]
Professional Wiring for All WIRING Inside The System Chassis - Minimize Cable Exposure, Maximize Airflow in Your System [+19]
My site | Non-MHD Landscapes |Google+ | Twitter | Facebook | Smugmug photos