Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Best CPU for photoshop

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 26, 2012 2:41:11 AM

I am looking to build a computer with the aim of running photoshop CS5, and possibly in the future CS6. No games. No overclocking. What CPU would be best?
Price is a big factor. I am prepared to shell out up to $350, but for that money, it had better be a lot faster than the lower priced competition.

More about : cpu photoshop

a c 184 à CPUs
July 26, 2012 2:47:50 AM

i7-2600K and a higher end Nvidia GPU.
July 26, 2012 3:49:22 AM

amuffin said:
i7-2600K and a higher end Nvidia GPU.


Why?
Related resources
a c 184 à CPUs
July 26, 2012 3:52:21 AM

Photoshop can take advantage of the hyperthreading, so this makes the i7 a superior processor over a different processor like the i5.

As for the GPU, Photoshop and all Adobe programs can take advantage of GPU Acceleration.
July 26, 2012 5:06:50 AM

qwerty_31 said:
I am looking to build a computer with the aim of running photoshop CS5, and possibly in the future CS6. No games. No overclocking. What CPU would be best?
Price is a big factor. I am prepared to shell out up to $350, but for that money, it had better be a lot faster than the lower priced competition.


you will always do better in adobe products with more threads and higher speed. i7-3960x 6-core for desktop. if you can maintain the liquid cooling every 3 months and afford the machine, get a 3DBOXX workstation from http://boxxtech.com those are overclocked and are the fastest workstations in the world. they have mobile versions as well. you probably don't need more than 1 GPU for ps, and you can use either a quadro 3800, 4800, 5800, or gtx 680.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

you WILL want all the RAM you can stuff in the machine though. ps uses it ALL when working with gigapixel panoramas, layers, content-aware-fill (eliminating telephone lines and telephone poles), and there are more operations which use up RAM. I haven't seen scratch disk used for hardly anything. maybe it's because I like editing panos. 4GB will not do it. try about 64GB. if you can manage, stuff the box with RAM. Adobe will use it. have 2 processors in your workstation, it will only make your work faster.

if you can't afford a workstation, purchase a custom i7-3960x box (you can only have 1 proc). I suggest the asus p9x79 deluxe motherboard,maybe the p9x79 ws motherboard. that proc and mobo combo will take 64GB of ram using ddr3-1600 8GB sticks. the ram alone will cost about $400-500.
no need to overclock. but I do recommend one of 2 coolers:
zalman cnps12x

ThermalRight True Spirit 140 http://thermalright.com/products/index.php?act=data&cat...
this looks very easily maintainable with a removable fan retaining latch.

maintainability is key, you clean the cpu cooler every 6 mo to 1 year.
with those systems you are looking at $3800-$4800.

for $350 you will have an ultra-low-end machine equivalent to a 2004-era single-core pentium 4.

if you start looking at used desktops on http://craigslist.org good luck if it gets a virus (don't get an xp machine, can't get recovery media for it).
the lowest end new acer desktop costs about $299 I think (not including shipping). laptop is $350 minimum new on http://newegg.com

do you need a monitor? ps/2 keyboard? mouse? mousepad? power strip? antivirus software? wireless card? network cable? think about your purchase and budget some more.
July 26, 2012 5:17:27 AM

by the way, I am using a pentium 4 HT to do ps work. it's 1-core 2-thread so it looks to windows like 2 cpus because of hyperhthreading. even an old 32-bit box like this can do ps cs5, but it has some limits with editing panos.

so if you can find such a box, and you are really in a crunch,this or a dual-core may work for you as a minimum. you can get such a box from a computer recycler in your town for $80 or so (they might argue it's dual-core, but it's not, it just looks like it to windows).

be sure to ask the computer recycler if the machine has an OS. it might not. you can probably buy windows 7 Pro http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116717&Tpk=windows%207 to put on it and if it's a 64-bit box,(try to get one that is!) you will be set and won't have memory problems if you have a big enough Hard Disk.

July 26, 2012 5:37:17 AM

jmichae3 said:
oops, forgot something. best cpu for photoshop is undoubtedly this one:
http://ark.intel.com/products/53577/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E7-8867L--(30M-Cache-2_13-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI)
nice proc.


For that price, I would think it would be the best! But look, it might be the best for photoshop, but it is not the best for my wallet! I was hopeing for somthing a little bit cheaper than four grand . . .

I am also in to editing huge panoramas! And makeing huge focus stacks as well. My little 6yo laptop with its 1gb of RAM and a dual core 1.66GHz processor just crashes when I start to do larger stitches and stacks.
a c 108 à CPUs
July 26, 2012 6:08:42 AM

Some points:
- Beyond the i5-3570K, the actual real-world performance gains by more expensive CPU's rapidly dwindles and the performance-to-price gets significantly higher

- RAM is also a factor. You'll probably want 16GB. If you need more than that then you'll have to buy Windows PRO version, not the Premium and also ensure the MOTHERBOARD supports enough RAM.

- GRAPHICS support is quite minor even in CS6. Only a few features are accelerated. CS7 (not out for a couple years) will have a huge jump in OpenCL and CS8 will have a LOT of support for it.

SSD:
It probably isn't that important. If you have enough RAM all the work should be done there once the file is initially loaded. I do recommend putting Windows and your apps on an SSD though and use a Hard Drive if you need it for other files, backups etc.

The Samsung 830 128GB is my recommend currently for hard drives. 60GB is not enough, FYI.

SUMMARY:
- i5-3570K or i7-3770K depending on budget
- 16GB of DDR3 1600MHz probably
- 32GB probably overkill. Need both a motherboard and Windows PRO to support that.
a b à CPUs
July 26, 2012 10:22:43 AM

As Adobe software makes use of hyperthreading, there are advantages in the use of i7, in terms of speed with complex editing processes. i5, however, is perfectly adequate for still work. If you can afford it, in the first place, I would say, go with the fastest Ivybridge option, in either.

Provided you use a reasonable graphics card, I don't think exactly which makes much difference for stills. If you want, however, to do high quality HD video work, the choice of both CPU and GPU becomes more critical. All this assumes, as you say, you don't want to overclock, or game.
July 26, 2012 5:57:00 PM

I would say the i7 3770k is the right proc for you. At around $339 on newegg it is a good price and gives you overall good performance.
a c 283 à CPUs
July 26, 2012 6:08:41 PM

Quote:
A 2500k paired with a GTX 560 is more than enough for PS....

Man, some people make me laugh.
You will want to get more ram.


+1 My 2500K with a 560 and 8GB of RAM does quite well with Photoshop, actually (not that I use Photoshop often, nor am I working on large projects).
a b à CPUs
July 26, 2012 6:34:35 PM

first, Nvidia throttles their compute performance on desktop cards. AMD is the one working with Adobe on CS6 for openCL support.

Since your budget is $350, let the flame war begin

a b à CPUs
July 26, 2012 6:42:54 PM

what? you have someone requesting the best option with a $350 budget and people are suggesting a $1000 cpu or $350 on the cpu alone. Just saying he can get nearly an entire system for $350 and be better off on his one specific use.
a b à CPUs
July 26, 2012 6:47:26 PM

you know its going to happen because someone suggested AMD of all things. EVERYONE hates AMD, even WHEN the specific program in question runs better.

watch and see, I won't even have to post anything else.

For photoshop, the 8150 is the better option, and only $190
a c 283 à CPUs
July 26, 2012 6:55:35 PM

The thing is, unless working with Photoshop is your job and time means money, ANY current CPU with a decent Nvidia OR AMD GPU would do the job.

We're not talking about Premiere or anything here, and even if we were, any good quad core would suffice.
July 26, 2012 7:29:16 PM

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-benchmar...

The 8150 handles photoshop better than the 3770k. If you are simply building the computer for JUST photoshop and nothing more, then the cheapest and best option is the FX8150.

If you want it for more things like Premiere, or After Effects or something else, that's when the roles switch and you find yourself looking for a better option.

And from what I gathered in your original post, you said $350 tops for the CPU right?
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 26, 2012 8:25:20 PM

if you need a whole system i am sorry but i cannot find it for under $450 and this is a bare minimum suggestion:
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: Intel Core i3-2120 3.3GHz Dual-Core Processor ($117.99 @ NCIX US)
Motherboard: Biostar H61MLC Micro ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($49.98 @ Outlet PC)
Memory: G.Skill Ares Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1333 Memory ($42.99 @ Newegg)
Hard Drive: Western Digital RE2 500GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($57.75 @ Compuvest)
Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon HD 7750 1GB Video Card ($94.98 @ Newegg)
Case: Cooler Master Elite 370 ATX Mid Tower Case ($29.98 @ NCIX US)
Power Supply: Corsair 430W ATX12V Power Supply ($34.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer ($16.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $445.65
(Prices include shipping and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2012-07-26 16:24 EDT-0400)

it will scream compared to your lap top but i do hope your $350 budget is just the cpu, motherboard and RAM.
July 26, 2012 11:03:34 PM

beethree said:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-benchmar...

The 8150 handles photoshop better than the 3770k. If you are simply building the computer for JUST photoshop and nothing more, then the cheapest and best option is the FX8150.

If you want it for more things like Premiere, or After Effects or something else, that's when the roles switch and you find yourself looking for a better option.

And from what I gathered in your original post, you said $350 tops for the CPU right?



That is correct. The $350 is just for the CPU. But like I said before, if I am going to pay $350, it had better be a tangible amount faster than the $200 AMD alternative. The whole system will probably cost somthing close to $1000.

Yes I am building this computer for JUST photoshop. No premiere.

I like to shoot really huge panoramas with wide angle lenses, so lots of distortion. Photoshop takes a very long time to put them together.
I also like to shoot 60 and 80 shot focus stacks. They can take a while as well.
July 27, 2012 12:23:16 AM

DJDeCiBeL said:
+1 My 2500K with a 560 and 8GB of RAM does quite well with Photoshop, actually (not that I use Photoshop often, nor am I working on large projects).


just calculated my biggest image, I do work on images close to 100MP (may get bigger if I have the time & battery power), have been limited to 3G-4GB RAM, and have read on adobe forums where most said that 8-12GB would do for most work, but this one guy (who I can side with) is saying that 64GB with ps is more like what he wants.

"As someone who is contemplating 64GB or ram in my workstation coming from 8GB, I would hope that this investment will see me better off."
this is only 1 person. probably a person who is using the machine like it's meant to be used and is bumping into limitations like memory errors in ps...

http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/09/how-to-set-up-a-great-photoshop-machine.html

http://forums.adobe.com/message/3303455#3303455

if you want to just do web graphics or people's photos, then 8-12GB should be enough for you. but if you want to work with ginornmous original nasa/hubble photos, or you are working with near-GP panos, then you need more RAM. adobe ONLY works off of RAM,the scratch disk feature is totally ignored. I am not even sure why adobe has it.

I also suggest that if you are doing panos that you shop around for a different pano program.
this one looks pretty good with its algorithms and such.
http://www.autopano.net/en/

I hope the blog article clears up a lot for you.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 27, 2012 12:39:23 AM

after doing a little research and from my personal experience:
the i7-3770K is the best, cost effective choice for your budget.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/build-your-own-ultim...
http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2012/06/photosho...
http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/software/35677-cpu-pho...
getting a sandy bridge-E setup would be better but out of your price range.

as far as any intel vs. AMD; intel had the luxury of a partnership with adobe and any optimizations would be for an intel processor; even adobe recommends intel specifically.
Optimize performance | Photoshop CS4, CS5, CS6
Quote:
The speed of the computer’s central processing unit, or CPU, limits the processing speed of Photoshop. Photoshop CS4 requires a PowerPC G5 or multicore Intel processor (Mac OS) or a 1.8 GHz or faster processor (Windows). Photoshop CS5 and CS6 require a multicore Intel processor (Mac OS) or a 2 GHz or faster processor (Windows).


i would like to suggest that last link as the best resource to use for building the rest of your rig.
July 27, 2012 1:24:25 AM

Anonymous said:
after doing a little research and from my personal experience:
the i7-3770K is the best, cost effective choice for your budget.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/build-your-own-ultim...
http://blogs.adobe.com/photoshopdotcom/2012/06/photosho...
http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/software/35677-cpu-pho...
getting a sandy bridge-E setup would be better but out of your price range.

as far as any intel vs. AMD; intel had the luxury of a partnership with adobe and any optimizations would be for an intel processor; even adobe recommends intel specifically.
Optimize performance | Photoshop CS4, CS5, CS6
Quote:
The speed of the computer’s central processing unit, or CPU, limits the processing speed of Photoshop. Photoshop CS4 requires a PowerPC G5 or multicore Intel processor (Mac OS) or a 1.8 GHz or faster processor (Windows). Photoshop CS5 and CS6 require a multicore Intel processor (Mac OS) or a 2 GHz or faster processor (Windows).


i would like to suggest that last link as the best resource to use for building the rest of your rig.



That adobe page that recomends intel doesn't seem to be saying that photoshop runs better on intel. It only says that you need an intel if you are using a mac OS, it says if you are using windoes, you only need a 2GHz or faster processor, no brand specified.

As far as I can make out, it is nothing to do with photoshop running faster on intel, but to do with apple OS not running on AMD processors.

http://www.macbreaker.com/2012/01/look-at-state-of-amd-...

There are no macintoshes that run on AMD processor, although there are a few "hackintoshes" that do.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 27, 2012 1:40:40 AM

qwerty_31 said:
That adobe page that recomends intel doesn't seem to be saying that photoshop runs better on intel. It only says that you need an intel if you are using a mac OS, it says if you are using windoes, you only need a 2GHz or faster processor, no brand specified.

As far as I can make out, it is nothing to do with photoshop running faster on intel, but to do with apple OS not running on AMD processors.

http://www.macbreaker.com/2012/01/look-at-state-of-amd-...

There are no macintoshes that run on AMD processor, although there are a few "hackintoshes" that do.

i understand what you are saying. again intel had a partnership with adobe. any multi core AMD that can come close to an intel chip is the FX8150 because of having 8 "cores" (which relies on developer optimizations) and if you do further research you will see that adobe does not benefit past 6 cores.
it can get sliced and diced in a dozen different ways but the most consistent fact is the best processor for photoshop is an i7.

of course you don't need to take my word for it, just cruise the PS forums and see what is the most common chip . .
http://forums.adobe.com/community/photoshop/
July 28, 2012 3:46:09 AM

qwerty_31 said:
For that price, I would think it would be the best! But look, it might be the best for photoshop, but it is not the best for my wallet! I was hopeing for somthing a little bit cheaper than four grand . . .

I am also in to editing huge panoramas! And makeing huge focus stacks as well. My little 6yo laptop with its 1gb of RAM and a dual core 1.66GHz processor just crashes when I start to do larger stitches and stacks.


just how huge? I just wrote this set of Linear Projections up. I was hoping to try to remember to test with no virtual memory on a real x64 box later to actually put some push-to-the-limit PS test results in the document.

http://jesusnjim.com/using-computers/photoshop-memory-h...
July 28, 2012 7:46:51 AM

jmichae3 said:
just how huge? I just wrote this set of Linear Projections up. I was hoping to try to remember to test with no virtual memory on a real x64 box later to actually put some push-to-the-limit PS test results in the document.

http://jesusnjim.com/using-computers/photoshop-memory-h...



For the actual stitches, the finished product is rarely more than 100mp in size, but some of them, due to heavy overlap necessitated by conditions, I am looking at more like nearly 1000mp of data to process.
Some of my stacks are up and over the 1000mp of data mark. The finished products aren't that big, but there is a lot of data to be processed.
I am also looking at a proper pano head so I won't have to use such heavy overlap when shooting panos . . .
July 28, 2012 1:04:44 PM

2600k or 8150,Either one will be very good for that sort of stuff.
July 30, 2012 5:38:02 AM

So having looked at all these tests, I conclude that
a) the i5-2500K is almost as good as the i7s, and a lot cheaper
b) the FX-8150 is roughly the same as the i5-2500K
c) the i7s aren't very much better than these two, some tests actually have them worse than these two.

The i5 and the fx cost roughly the same. I will probably end up with one of these.

I have looked at the tests, and I don't think that the extra performance you get from an i7 is worth $100 - $150. Given the number of people who told me I needed lots of RAM, and that this is a thread about CPUs, I really think an extra $100-150 would be better spent on RAM.

Which one should I go with?
a b à CPUs
July 30, 2012 5:47:29 AM

price the motherboards out and go with the one with the features you need. buy the cpu accordingly. There is usually quite a big difference between AMD and Intel motherboards.
July 30, 2012 6:00:16 AM

noob2222 said:
price the motherboards out and go with the one with the features you need. buy the cpu accordingly. There is usually quite a big difference between AMD and Intel motherboards.


So are motherboards made for one brand cheaper? What are the differences? Which one is better value?
a b à CPUs
July 30, 2012 11:05:24 AM

you will have to compare features. Number of pci-e slots, Sata ports, usb ports, ect.

For AMD id recommend this

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

$69.99
its the 970 chipset, ie the newer one. This is a basic but high end board, 2 pci-e graphics card slots, 2 pci-e x1 (network, io card), and 2 pci. 5 sata 6gb ports and 2 usb3.0. (along with 4 usb 2.0)

Cheapest semi-comparable motherboard from intel,
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

$89.99
one pci-e 3.0, or 2 pci-e 2.0 (run at x1 & x4), 1 pci-e x1, 0 - pci, 4 sata 6gb, same usb setup. Note that pci-e 3.0 is only with ivy bridge cpus (they don't really specify that on the motherboard)

Most of the AMD boards sata ports on the 900 boards are all 6gb, the 800s are 3gb ports, Intels are usually mixed with 6 and 3gb.

Avoid the cheap 760 AMD boards, some of them don't support the 8150, even though they are $50.
July 30, 2012 11:51:09 AM

For so much low budget and for photoshop using I would recommend you to buy :

CPU : AMD FX-8120 for ony 160$
http://www.amazon.com/AMD-FX-8120-8-Core-Edition-Proces...

RAM : Corsair Veagence 8 GB (4 GB x 2) @ 1600 MHz for 45$
http://www.amazon.com/Corsair-Vengeance-PC3-12800-1600m...

Graphics Card : Zotac Nvidia GT440 1GB DDR5 for 54 $
http://www.amazon.com/GeForce-Express-Displayport-Graph...

MOBO : Gigabyte AM3+ Geforce/nforce for 54$
http://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-GeForce-Chipset-Motherbo...

Case with PSU : Ark technology PA-08 for 35$
http://www.amazon.com/Ark-Technology-PA-08-Computer-Sup...

All these cost 348$ but without the HDD. If dont have one its very hard not to exeed your budget. Furtheremore if you dont have a monitor and keyboard + mouse there is NO WAY to build a goog PC with 350$.

Best solution

July 30, 2012 1:25:49 PM
Share

qwerty_31 said:
I am looking to build a computer with the aim of running photoshop CS5, and possibly in the future CS6. No games. No overclocking. What CPU would be best?
Price is a big factor. I am prepared to shell out up to $350, but for that money, it had better be a lot faster than the lower priced competition.


I would say for the performance would be Intel Xeon but since the budget is $350 i would go for the AMD FX-8150. I know i'll probably get a bunch of bad remarks for saying that. The AMD processor is extremely underrated because of benchmark testing. The fact of the matter is that a benchmark test is flawed because a benchmark is naturally fixed from real world use. I have personally used both chips for game development projects and the Xeon is by far the ultimate chip for the job. So i'm not picking sides. For actual use and not theoretical use. I have had minimal problems with AMD FX-8150. Especially using it for rendering tasks while needing to use Photoshop, Maya, and the Unity Engine to work out texturing for my High-Poly Models. This is quite a load on the RAM, GPU, and CPU. Both the Intel and AMD system ran very similar Graphic Cards and Ram type. While using both CPU's, the outcome became so similar that at most delay would be 2-3 seconds. This difference doesn't justify the crazy price for the "BEST CHIP". The fact of the matter is that when you encounter these two chip companies, Intel smokes AMD. Also the reality is that the difference is great but that doesn't mean the tested statistics will impact as hard on actual use. Remember most benchmarking is a fixed test that targets specific functions of the chips, but it doesn't mean that is the only way that function may be accessed.

Long story short, Get the most cores and higher clock for the price. Currently the AMD FX-8150 is about $200 in the market, and on newegg I've seen it $170 a while back. This is by far the best value per core and clock you'll find of any chip currently.

-EDIT-
Without any forced OC, and just automated OCing i got 3.9-4.0ghz out of the box and not touching anything in the BIOS. I have CPU-Z Validations to prove it. The clock speed was very efficient comparing it's voltage and bus clock in stock settings of 5200mt/s(2600Mhz FSB). On a CPU, a high FSB is what matters most to get the most optimal performance out of programs like Photoshop or any Adobe CS Collection.
July 30, 2012 9:56:02 PM

taseas said:
For so much low budget and for photoshop using I would recommend you to buy :

CPU : AMD FX-8120 for ony 160$
http://www.amazon.com/AMD-FX-8120-8-Core-Edition-Proces...

RAM : Corsair Veagence 8 GB (4 GB x 2) @ 1600 MHz for 45$
http://www.amazon.com/Corsair-Vengeance-PC3-12800-1600m...

Graphics Card : Zotac Nvidia GT440 1GB DDR5 for 54 $
http://www.amazon.com/GeForce-Express-Displayport-Graph...

MOBO : Gigabyte AM3+ Geforce/nforce for 54$
http://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-GeForce-Chipset-Motherbo...

Case with PSU : Ark technology PA-08 for 35$
http://www.amazon.com/Ark-Technology-PA-08-Computer-Sup...

All these cost 348$ but without the HDD. If dont have one its very hard not to exeed your budget. Furtheremore if you dont have a monitor and keyboard + mouse there is NO WAY to build a goog PC with 350$.


$350 was not the price for the whole PC, but the maximum I was prepared to pay for a CPU in any circumstance
July 30, 2012 11:02:30 PM

Quote:
The 7970 is there as a place holder, you may want to game in the future, but i don't know...


I very much doubt that I will ever want to do gaming that this computer is not going to do. I am not really into gaming.
a b à CPUs
July 31, 2012 10:04:37 AM

taseas said:
For so much low budget and for photoshop using I would recommend you to buy :

CPU : AMD FX-8120 for ony 160$
http://www.amazon.com/AMD-FX-8120-8-Core-Edition-Proces...

:::: CUT ::::

All these cost 348$ but without the HDD. If dont have one its very hard not to exeed your budget. Furtheremore if you dont have a monitor and keyboard + mouse there is NO WAY to build a goog PC with 350$.

The problem with some of these suggestions, they don't check to see if it will even work.

http://www.gigabyte.com/support-downloads/cpu-support-p...

Falls in the same category as the 760 boards, doesn't support the 8150 and only the 95W version of the 8120. The 8120 is normally a 125W part, I think there was initially going to be a 95W revision, but it never happened. just like the 8100 and 8140, it didn't happen.
July 31, 2012 11:27:44 AM

Hey, if you want to build a PC with 350$ only for the CPU could you tell us how much money are you planing to spend for the whole PC ?
July 31, 2012 11:47:02 AM

taseas said:
Hey, if you want to build a PC with 350$ only for the CPU could you tell us how much money are you planing to spend for the whole PC ?


It will probably end up around $1000.
I was thinking
processor - fx8150 or i5 - $200
32gb of RAM
half decent graphics card (remember I am not doing games)
win 7 pro
USB 3.0
120gb SSD
1tb HDD
DVD burner

Is 32gb of RAM an overkill for photoshop?
July 31, 2012 12:02:56 PM

taseas said:
Hey, if you want to build a PC with 350$ only for the CPU could you tell us how much money are you planing to spend for the whole PC ?


And it wasn't $350 for the CPU, but $350 was the absolute maximum I was prepared to pay for a CPU in any circumstance. I don't want to spend $350 on just the CPU.
a b à CPUs
July 31, 2012 6:53:15 PM

Quote:

SAMSUNG 22X DVD Burner SATA Model SH-222BB/BEBE - OEM Item #: N82E16827151244 $16.99


G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model F3-12800CL10Q-32GBXL Item #: N82E16820231490 $189.99

Microsoft Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit - OEM Item #: N82E16832116992 $139.99

OCZ Vertex 3 VTX3-25SAT3-120G 2.5" 120GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) Item #: N82E16820227706 -$55.00 Instant $94.99 + $15.00 Mail-in Rebate Card

• AMD FX-8150 Zambezi 3.6GHz Socket AM3+ 125W Eight-Core Desktop Processor FD8150FRGUBOX Item #: N82E16819103960 Return Policy: CPU Replacement Only Return Policy

• ASRock 970 EXTREME3 AM3+ AMD 970 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard Item #: N82E16813157280 Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

-$25.00 Instant
-$15.00 Combo
$254.98


• Seagate Barracuda ST3000DM001 3TB 7200 RPM SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive Item #: N82E16822148844 Return Policy: Standard Return Policy


• CORSAIR Enthusiast Series TX650 V2 650W ATX12V v2.31/ EPS12V v2.92 80 PLUS BRONZE Certified Active PFC High Performance Power ... Item #: N82E16817139020 Return Policy: Standard Return Policy

-$60.00 Instant
-$20.00 Combo
$219.98
$10.00 Mail-in Rebate Card



Subtotal:

$916.92


This is from newegg. they don't allow combo deals in their "wishlist", combos reduced the price by $35, add promo codes and another $20 off.

This just leaves the graphics card and a computer case. A lot of times its cheaper to buy a computer case local due to shipping charges.

This is a question I am not sure of, but does photoshop work better with a workstation card such as this one. With cs5, it may not matter much, but CS6 being open cl.

You could get by with a cheap $50 graphics card, but a workstation card may be the way to go if someone can answer that, I never really paid much attention to the workstation cards.
August 1, 2012 7:53:19 AM

good to know for future reference - thanks. the nvidia cards are faster, and now they have CUDA 5, if that makes any difference. it's a whole new architecture of cards with the 600 series. so now I guess Adobe does both CUDA and OpenCL? I will have to lookat the nvidia site and see if there is mention of CUDA any more. I was going to buy an nvidia card.
August 1, 2012 9:41:59 AM

I think its better to contact manufacturing companies for better idea.
a b à CPUs
August 1, 2012 9:01:44 PM

http://www.microsoft.com/oem/en/licensing/sblicensing/p...

buy the parts, have your unrelated friend build it, use the oem version. There is nothing preventing a non liscenced business owner from installing it. The only thing is the System builder that preinstalled the software must provide support for the software.

All the eula is for is to scare people into spending an extra $150 for microsoft support.

OEM versions do not offer any free Microsoft direct support from Microsoft support personnel

- OEM licenses are tied to the very first computer you install and activate it on

- OEM versions allow all hardware upgrades except for an upgrade to a different model motherboard

- OEM versions cannot be used to directly upgrade from an older Windows operating system

If you are afraid to install windows, then you might consider the non-oem version that way you can call microsoft.

Microsofts term of system builder:

To distribute the Software or Hardware in this Pack, you must be a System Builder
and accept this license. “System Builder” means an original equipment manufacturer, an assembler,a refurbisher, or a software
pre-installer
that sells the Customer System(s) to a third party.
http://oem.microsoft.com/public/sblicense/2008_sb_licen...
August 1, 2012 9:27:48 PM

noob2222 said:
http://www.microsoft.com/oem/en/licensing/sblicensing/p...


Microsofts term of system builder:

To distribute the Software or Hardware in this Pack, you must be a System Builder
and accept this license. “System Builder” means an original equipment manufacturer, an assembler,a refurbisher, or a software
pre-installer
that sells the Customer System(s) to a third party.
http://oem.microsoft.com/public/sblicense/2008_sb_licen...



so, just as you quoted, are you selling the system to somebody? usually microsoft requires that OEMs support the product they sell to folks as part of the "OEM Program".
!