System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: $1,000 Performance PC
Results: Adobe Creative Suite
Adobe After Effects and Photoshop both appear to gain little from the Core i7 machine's Hyper-Threading technology.
Unfortunately, our OpenCL-accelerated Photoshop numbers aren't quite right due to a check-box issue that kept our last config from properly enabling this API. The CPU-based tests are correct, though, and they show just how close both platforms really
Premiere Pro is a well-threaded test, so we'd expect it to benefit from last quarter's Hyper-Threading technology. On the other hand, our Acrobat workload is not, so the fact that it ran better last quarter as well suggests gains from elsewhere (a larger L3 cache, perhaps). In both cases, the older machine leads at similar clock rates.
Because it’s not a content creation-oriented application, Acrobat X will be added to the “Productivity” results of our overall performance scores.
Current page: Results: Adobe Creative Suite
Prev Page Results: Audio And Video Encoding Next Page Results: ProductivityStay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
-
mayankleoboy1 The only thing i could have tried to change in this build was to get a 64GB SSD , get a 500GB HDD , and if i have any money left, try to get a HD7950.Reply
Otherwise, not much wriggle room here. Nice build! -
Chairman Ray I'm not sure if having an SSD without an HDD is an attractive option for most people. 240GB goes by pretty fast.Reply -
dscudella It's the same PC as the $800 build except they just swapped out the HDD for an SSD. Dissappointing.Reply -
Crashman mayankleoboy1The only thing i could have tried to change in this build was to get a 64GB SSD , get a 500GB HDD , and if i have any money left, try to get a HD7950.Otherwise, not much wriggle room here. Nice build!No point, We Like Our Games To Load Fast!!!Chairman RayI'm not sure if having an SSD without an HDD is an attractive option for most people. 240GB goes by pretty fast.Programs can eat most of a 240GB drive up. In fact, I just shrunk a copy of the test suite, with OS and games, to 132 GB.Reply
Using the drive performance measurement to reflect program load times means loading all the programs on the SSD. And that explains why SSD capacity wasn't sacrificed to make more room in the budget for an HDD.
lightofhonorIt actually plays Skyrim WORSE than the $800 build...Nobody knows why, but the $800 PC did use a newer GPU driver.dscudellaIt's the same PC as the $800 build except they just swapped out the HDD for an SSD. Dissappointing.So it's going to lose the Day 4 Value Roundup, right?
-
mayankleoboy1 dscudellaIt's the same PC as the $800 build except they just swapped out the HDD for an SSD. Dissappointing.Reply
Looking from another perspective, these two builds, with two different builders, with $200 difference, just show(again) how much better price/performance wise are Intel CPU's and AMD GPU's. -
mayankleoboy1 CrashmanNo point, We Like Our Games To Load Fast!!!Reply
I see your point, but I'd rather see slower game loads and better FPS , than faster game loads and lower FPS. And, the OS is accelerated in both cases anyway.