Which graphics card to use for Photoshop?
- Thread starter CTN
- Start date
- Status
i think changing the graphic card won't help much.
you could add more ram for one. or upgrade the motherboard and processor, keeping the same or upgrading the amount of ram.
run the photoshop speed test:
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=166965&highlight=photoshop+speed+test
and let us know your results.
you could add more ram for one. or upgrade the motherboard and processor, keeping the same or upgrading the amount of ram.
run the photoshop speed test:
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=166965&highlight=photoshop+speed+test
and let us know your results.
It is unlikely that changing the graphics card will improve the speed of Photoshop's operation. Photoshop does not do complex 3D graphics randering and would not need the power of the high end GPUs.CTN said:
What will definitely improve the speed of Photoshop's operation is additional RAM and additional hard drive space in seperate physical hard drives. I have 4GB of RAM in my computer and several hard drives. Photoshop is loaded on the system drive that holds Windows and all other applications, my photos are loaded on a second hard drive (this is a physical drive, not a partition) and Photoshop's scratch/temp files are on a third physical drive.
I find that with this configuration, Photoshop loads/processes/saves huge photos and applies complex filter effects in seconds. If the Photoshop application, its temp files and your photos are all located on the same physical drive, you will find that its performace is really poor and it matters little if your hard drive is partitioned and you have these three sets of files located on different partitions.
_
firestone said:Anyone read abt this?
Will having PS on separate drive as windows speed things up, or slow it down?
Assuming they're all same speed HDD. Will the below be optimum setup?
hdd 1:windows
hdd 2S
hdd 3:files
hdd 4:scratch disk
Having a dedicated drive assigned as the scratch disk is good enough. Don't have to go to the extent of having 4 HDDs. Besides space, you'll also have cooling problems for most casings.
Bluestrike
New Member
Well getting a Gfx card will help in your case. First, it free up your already little memory that is allocated to the Graphic substation. depending on how much you set in the Bios, it can return you, i guess 64-256MB of RAM.deadpixel said:
Next, what ever the gfx card you choose to use, it boil down to personal preferences.
I haven't tried it (I don't even have PS), but my guess would be that PS same drive or separate drive from Windows should not make a big difference.firestone said:Anyone read abt this?
Will having PS on separate drive as windows speed things up, or slow it down?
Assuming they're all same speed HDD. Will the below be optimum setup?
hdd 1:windows
hdd 2
hdd 3:files
hdd 4:scratch disk
Adding additional RAM though, would be a big boosting factor.
My 2c worth...
hayami.wai
Member
as said.. getting a real good GFX card wont help much as PS doesn't do 3D Object rendering. but getting a card with more RAM will help as it allows you to have a higher screen res (more working space) but of course, there's always a ceiling of how much RAM u need.
Placing PS on a separate HDD will help little, mayb marginal, as this only improves the loading time, after which, everything is dependant on the physical RAM, how fast the RAM is and how much RAM.
Placing PS on a separate HDD will help little, mayb marginal, as this only improves the loading time, after which, everything is dependant on the physical RAM, how fast the RAM is and how much RAM.
nottipiglet
New Member
I think having 3 HDD will speed things up, but it's not really necessary.
Photoshop is very memory and HDD intensive, so the important thing is to have enough (at least 1GB) of memory, and a very fast HDD.
I don't think there's any problem with keeping everything on 1 HDD, if it is fast enough. The only problem is that things get fragmented after a while if you have too many things going on, which slows down the disk. But that's easily solved. Just defrag more often when things get slow.
My recommendation would be to raise the speed of the HDD. If you have plenty of money, go for SCSI. Personally, I get the quickest HDD (non-SCSI) available. 7200rpm I think. Then I just use RAID0. That's when you stripe 2 HDD together. So, you have 2 drive heads working together to perform the same function. That speeds up the HDD by about 30%.
I am running on AthlonXP 2400+, 1GB of PC2400 memory, and 2x 80GB Seagate 7200rpm HDD in Raid0. Graphics card is an old nVidia card. But things work respectably. Wish it were faster... but hey... I don't have that much money.
Photoshop is very memory and HDD intensive, so the important thing is to have enough (at least 1GB) of memory, and a very fast HDD.
I don't think there's any problem with keeping everything on 1 HDD, if it is fast enough. The only problem is that things get fragmented after a while if you have too many things going on, which slows down the disk. But that's easily solved. Just defrag more often when things get slow.
My recommendation would be to raise the speed of the HDD. If you have plenty of money, go for SCSI. Personally, I get the quickest HDD (non-SCSI) available. 7200rpm I think. Then I just use RAID0. That's when you stripe 2 HDD together. So, you have 2 drive heads working together to perform the same function. That speeds up the HDD by about 30%.
I am running on AthlonXP 2400+, 1GB of PC2400 memory, and 2x 80GB Seagate 7200rpm HDD in Raid0. Graphics card is an old nVidia card. But things work respectably. Wish it were faster... but hey... I don't have that much money.
Pablo
Senior Member
Hi,
Probably having 2 hard drives (serial preferably) and as much RAM as your computer can eat would be best.
A graphics card also so that graphics is not sharing RAM.... but a 256meg graphics card will be fine.
Just a thought as I use similar and it is fast enough for me.
Cheers
Probably having 2 hard drives (serial preferably) and as much RAM as your computer can eat would be best.
A graphics card also so that graphics is not sharing RAM.... but a 256meg graphics card will be fine.
Just a thought as I use similar and it is fast enough for me.
Cheers
hayami.wai
Member
is ur scratch refering to pagefile? normally, will put the fastest HDD to store the OS & programs, to have fast loading of OS n programs. Data on a fast HDD is not so critically unless you are having multiple applications accessing data from the same HDD.firestone said:
Well to answer your questions,
Processor
========
If possible, get a Dual Core system
Ram
====
PhotoShop eats this for breakfast. 2x1gb should be sufficient ( unless u intend to do large format printing
Storage
======
2x74gb Western Digital Raptors should do the trick. Set them up in Raid0 configuration ( $305 each )
1x36gb Western Digital Raptor for your Operating System ( $186 )
3Ware 2 Port SATA ( $275 ) or some Cheapo SATA card ( $39 ). Forget onboard Raid. They tend to disappear under heavy or hot usage. I recommend the 3Ware model
Housing
======
450W PSU = $105
If your casing is a cheapo $50, throw it away and MAKE SURE there is at least an 80mm or 120mm fan blowing at the hard disks. Else, go and buy a 2 bay into 3 bay HDD Expansion bracket. = $100+ or $45
Graphics Card
==========
Usually, a Matrox P650 128mb@ $479. Alternatively, you can make do with a ATI Radeon X1600Pro 512mb for $239
The above should suffice nicely, and you will feel the speed. Using only consumer components.
This is usually my recommendation for PS usage.
However, if your work is extremely important, I highly recommend you consider a Raid5 subsystem.
Raid 0 = Lose 1, Lose all. But fast speed.
Processor
========
If possible, get a Dual Core system
Ram
====
PhotoShop eats this for breakfast. 2x1gb should be sufficient ( unless u intend to do large format printing
Storage
======
2x74gb Western Digital Raptors should do the trick. Set them up in Raid0 configuration ( $305 each )
1x36gb Western Digital Raptor for your Operating System ( $186 )
3Ware 2 Port SATA ( $275 ) or some Cheapo SATA card ( $39 ). Forget onboard Raid. They tend to disappear under heavy or hot usage. I recommend the 3Ware model
Housing
======
450W PSU = $105
If your casing is a cheapo $50, throw it away and MAKE SURE there is at least an 80mm or 120mm fan blowing at the hard disks. Else, go and buy a 2 bay into 3 bay HDD Expansion bracket. = $100+ or $45
Graphics Card
==========
Usually, a Matrox P650 128mb@ $479. Alternatively, you can make do with a ATI Radeon X1600Pro 512mb for $239
The above should suffice nicely, and you will feel the speed. Using only consumer components.
This is usually my recommendation for PS usage.
However, if your work is extremely important, I highly recommend you consider a Raid5 subsystem.
Raid 0 = Lose 1, Lose all. But fast speed.
tmfwy said:Well to answer your questions,
Processor
========
If possible, get a Dual Core system
Ram
====
PhotoShop eats this for breakfast. 2x1gb should be sufficient ( unless u intend to do large format printing
Storage
======
2x74gb Western Digital Raptors should do the trick. Set them up in Raid0 configuration ( $305 each )
1x36gb Western Digital Raptor for your Operating System ( $186 )
3Ware 2 Port SATA ( $275 ) or some Cheapo SATA card ( $39 ). Forget onboard Raid. They tend to disappear under heavy or hot usage. I recommend the 3Ware model
Housing
======
450W PSU = $105
If your casing is a cheapo $50, throw it away and MAKE SURE there is at least an 80mm or 120mm fan blowing at the hard disks. Else, go and buy a 2 bay into 3 bay HDD Expansion bracket. = $100+ or $45
Graphics Card
==========
Usually, a Matrox P650 128mb@ $479. Alternatively, you can make do with a ATI Radeon X1600Pro 512mb for $239
The above should suffice nicely, and you will feel the speed. Using only consumer components.
This is usually my recommendation for PS usage.
However, if your work is extremely important, I highly recommend you consider a Raid5 subsystem.
Raid 0 = Lose 1, Lose all. But fast speed.
That setup (particularly the X1600Pro 512MB) is soooo familiar... :bsmilie:
- Status
Similar threads
