Friends,
New here to the forums - but it looks interesting. I hope this CPU area is a good place to start with this topic / question.
I'm in the market for 2 new systems and want some advice. My business is web based photography / video. Basic Playboy style pretty girl stuff. The two systems will have specific functions which they do day after day after day.
#1 -- Photoshop work. Our image files are around 4mb (1000 x 1500) to 18mb (2000 x 3000). Each file is opened in Photoshop and retouched using all sorts of Photoshop tools and plug-ins, including Grain Surgeon (which currently take the most time).
The process also includes conversions from various formats -- Canon Digital RAW to PSD or TIFF, then after retouching, to JPG for web display.
So, I am looking for a great system to do this work. What CPU, what MB, Ram, Video, etc. Overall, what are the right components for a machine built just for this purpose?
The current system was purchased in March 2002 and is:
Windows 2000 with all updates. Dual AMD 1600mp, 1GB Ram, ATI 9200se Video (128mb), Western Digital 160gb (7200rpm / 8mb buffer) HD as main drive, and WD 40gb (7200rpm / 2mb buffer) as scratch disk for Photoshop CS. Works good, has been super reliable, but with newer file sizes, and my company's expansion into larger workloads, it seems slow. The RAW file conversion and Grain Surgeon processes are the worst.
#2 -- The second system we need is solely for digital video work. Thus far we are looking at two things. Digital video editing / DVD authoring, and live streaming in Windows Media Player format.
The current system is a twin to the one shown above (purchased same time), except the drives are both 80GB versions and it has the original NVidia Video card (64mb).
It works fine for both jobs, and my experience level is such that I'm not sure if this is as good as it gets, or if it is slow -- never used any other system for these tasks.
Today I am looking for advice on systems to replace these two. My main bit of confusion seems to be the dual processor issue. More than one friend or local tech has told me that the duals are a waste of time for these systems, and one even went so far as to say that under Windows 2000 and the current software, I was only using one CPU anyway....
Thanks in advance,
Jimmy
New here to the forums - but it looks interesting. I hope this CPU area is a good place to start with this topic / question.
I'm in the market for 2 new systems and want some advice. My business is web based photography / video. Basic Playboy style pretty girl stuff. The two systems will have specific functions which they do day after day after day.
#1 -- Photoshop work. Our image files are around 4mb (1000 x 1500) to 18mb (2000 x 3000). Each file is opened in Photoshop and retouched using all sorts of Photoshop tools and plug-ins, including Grain Surgeon (which currently take the most time).
The process also includes conversions from various formats -- Canon Digital RAW to PSD or TIFF, then after retouching, to JPG for web display.
So, I am looking for a great system to do this work. What CPU, what MB, Ram, Video, etc. Overall, what are the right components for a machine built just for this purpose?
The current system was purchased in March 2002 and is:
Windows 2000 with all updates. Dual AMD 1600mp, 1GB Ram, ATI 9200se Video (128mb), Western Digital 160gb (7200rpm / 8mb buffer) HD as main drive, and WD 40gb (7200rpm / 2mb buffer) as scratch disk for Photoshop CS. Works good, has been super reliable, but with newer file sizes, and my company's expansion into larger workloads, it seems slow. The RAW file conversion and Grain Surgeon processes are the worst.
#2 -- The second system we need is solely for digital video work. Thus far we are looking at two things. Digital video editing / DVD authoring, and live streaming in Windows Media Player format.
The current system is a twin to the one shown above (purchased same time), except the drives are both 80GB versions and it has the original NVidia Video card (64mb).
It works fine for both jobs, and my experience level is such that I'm not sure if this is as good as it gets, or if it is slow -- never used any other system for these tasks.
Today I am looking for advice on systems to replace these two. My main bit of confusion seems to be the dual processor issue. More than one friend or local tech has told me that the duals are a waste of time for these systems, and one even went so far as to say that under Windows 2000 and the current software, I was only using one CPU anyway....
Thanks in advance,
Jimmy