Dual CPU's for photoshop ?

I just bumped into this table:
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1472&p=14" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1472&p=14</A>

I am a pretty heavy Photoshop user, and although I am not looking to buy a new system at all (thx, my 933 Mhz does the job just fine), I was surprised to see just how little tests show any real world improvement in going from one P4 to a dual P4. I thought photoshop was a typical example of an SMP optimized application ?

Also astonishing: the dual P3 performs almost as well as the (dual/single) P4 Xeon 1.7. There are a just a few tests where it gets spanked (well, only one really: radial blur).
In others, the dual P3 sometimes even faster than the dual P4 Xeon in spite of the SSE2 optimizations, and the 2x 800 Mhz difference.. What am I missing here ?

Its too bad Anand did not include a single cpu P3.. It would have shed some more light on the cause.. is it the P3 that is actually that good, or is its SMP implementation better than that of the P4 ?

---- Owner of the only Dell computer with a AMD chip
4 answers Last reply
More about dual photoshop
  1. Funny coming across your thread on this subject. I'm a fellow PS user and after seeing that Anandtech piece, I wound up scratching my head, wondering what's going on? So either Anand messed up big-time, or we are both missing something!
  2. There's over a 20 percent increase in performance- that's not bad. You can't expect a processor to double peformance of an application overnight.

    -MP Jesse

    "Signatures Still Suck"
  3. Well, I guess you'r right on the dually thing.. I've been looking hard for other smp tests of photoshop, and none show any performance increase above 20%.. unfortunately, besides the anandtech article, I havent found any other benchmark that show results for each sub test.. this shows that on the majority of photoshop functions, smp doesnt do *anything*, and there are just a few filters that take good advantage of smp, showing 80+% performance increases. But if you dont happen to use these filters often (I mean, who uses gaussian blur all day ?), I really dont see the point of buying an dual workstation for photoshop (contrary to what I previously thought).

    The second conclusion however, is even more striking if you ask me.. I really dont see the point of getting even a single cpu P4 system, looking at the benchmarks. SSE2 is about as impressive as MMX was a long time ago.. A P3 or Atlhon does just as well, sometimes even better, and both at a much lower price point. Looks like my ultimate photoshop workstation is going to be a single cpu palomino.. or a new high end mac running Mac OS X :-)

    ---- Owner of the only Dell computer with a AMD chip
  4. Wow.. I havent been looking hard enough.. in the very same anandtech article.. read this one:
    <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1472&p=13" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1472&p=13</A>

    I quote:"The picture changes dramatically in the Photoshop test. The most noticeable thing being that, just moving to dual processors allows the Xeon to enjoy a 46% performance boost. "

    I really wonder what this ZD winstone thing benches in Photoshop.. (please note, they use version 4.0..)

    Someone should look into this.. Tom ?

    ---- Owner of the only Dell computer with a AMD chip
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Photoshop