My new pc spec

STARRIDER

STARRIDER

In Memoriam
Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,570
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
[FONT=&quot]Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]17 in 1 3.5" Internal Card Reader[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Onboard High Definition Audio[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Corsair Ultra Low Noise 600W PSU[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]LG Blu-Ray ReWriter (Blu-ray playback software supplied for Windows 7 only)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1000GB 7200RPM Hard Disk - 6Gbps[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1000GB 7200RPM Hard Disk - 6Gbps[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Intel 240GB 520 Series Solid State Drive[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Chillblast NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 1024MB Graphics Card[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]16GB PC3-10666 1333MHz DDR3 Memory (2 x 8GB sticks)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Asus P8Z77-V Motherboard[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Generic thermal paste[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Corsair Hydro H60 High Performance Liquid CPU Cooler[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Intel Core i7 3770K Processor 3.50 GHz (No Overclocking)

no gaming,lightroom-photoshop and general pc use

Your thoughts much appreciated ;)
[/FONT]
 
i5 is ok for still photos but i7 is better for videos so research tells me. That setup is very close to my computer.
Bazza
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
neil_g said:
andy did some tests on this recently and found the i5 performed just as well.

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=385181&highlight=video

and

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=5141081&postcount=74
Click to expand...

No idea who Andy is, but most websites running benchmarks on video and image editing performance show the i7 scoring a good 10-25% higher on all tasks compared to the i5. Especially given that that the CS7 suite is likely to include full optimisation for Hyperthreading, the i7 seems like a decent investment.
 
Last edited:
I only use Lightroom, not Photoshop, but it can still use all cores on my i7 quad. What it doesn't do is offload any processing to my GFX card, which is wasted potential, especially as it's half decent spec.
 
London Headshots said:
No idea who Andy is, but most websites running benchmarks on video and image editing performance show the i7 scoring a good 10-25% higher on all tasks compared to the i5. Especially given that that the CS7 suite is likely to include full optimisation for Hyperthreading, the i7 seems like a decent investment.
Click to expand...

click the links, andy is arad85.

benchmark <> real life.

for the record i have an i7.
 
Thanks guys for your interest and comments,most of this kinda stuff is way over my head,been a long time getting to this kind of spec,saving hard..fed up battling with 4gig ram,32bit :bang: hopefully i'll find a massive improvement..
Just need to find my "Mojo"again and get out there and take some photos..
 
STARRIDER said:
Thanks guys for your interest and comments,most of this kinda stuff is way over my head,been a long time getting to this kind of spec,saving hard..fed up battling with 4gig ram,32bit :bang: hopefully i'll find a massive improvement..
Just need to find my "Mojo"again and get out there and take some photos..
Click to expand...

in that case the difference should blow your mind :D
 
London Headshots said:
No idea who Andy is, but most websites running benchmarks on video and image editing performance show the i7 scoring a good 10-25% higher on all tasks compared to the i5. Especially given that that the CS7 suite is likely to include full optimisation for Hyperthreading, the i7 seems like a decent investment.
Click to expand...
Andy is me...

Yes, 10% higher for second pass encode, often slower for first pass of the encode though - HD streams max out at 4 threads being optimum for my settings of H264 encodes (8 threads is actually slightly slower). In real world tests, it just seems to make little real difference TBH - I'd be quite happy with an i5 next time around.

Have a look at: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/15

and

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/16

and you'll see that apart from the 2nd pass video, the i5 is max around 10% slower on everything. (yes, I know that's for 2nd gen - it's just I knew the comparison existed without looking too far).

BTW: you don't really optimise for hyperthreading, you just optimise for multiple processes. And Adobe does that pretty well at the moment (you can play with the tile size on PS5/6 to see if the parallelism makes any appreciable difference. If I could justify it, I'd probably get a hex core, but I am waiting for Haswell as my next big leap....

I also think that CS7 will move more towards acceleration via the graphics card. It may be then that I will invest in my first high performance graphics card... who knows.
 
tdodd said:
but it can still use all cores on my i7 quad.
Click to expand...
Yes, but because hyperthreaded means you don't have two complete cores, they fight each other for resources and the result is not a lot of extra speed. The achieved speed difference is significantly lower than the price differential.

I have 2 x 2nd gen i7s and a third gen i5 (and a 2nd gen i5 if you count the works laptop) and I'm happy with all of them......... I'm looking forward to the 4th gen though :)
 
neil_g said:
:geek:
Click to expand...
Ha... I bought the domain names thenerdygeek.co.uk and thegeekynerd.co.uk the other day.... ;) No idea what I'm going to do with them, but they kinda suited :geek: :D
 
arad85 said:
Andy is me...

Yes, 10% higher for second pass encode, often slower for first pass of the encode though - HD streams max out at 4 threads being optimum for my settings of H264 encodes (8 threads is actually slightly slower). In real world tests, it just seems to make little real difference TBH - I'd be quite happy with an i5 next time around.

Have a look at: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/15

and

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/16

and you'll see that apart from the 2nd pass video, the i5 is max around 10% slower on everything. (yes, I know that's for 2nd gen - it's just I knew the comparison existed without looking too far).

BTW: you don't really optimise for hyperthreading, you just optimise for multiple processes. And Adobe does that pretty well at the moment (you can play with the tile size on PS5/6 to see if the parallelism makes any appreciable difference. If I could justify it, I'd probably get a hex core, but I am waiting for Haswell as my next big leap....

I also think that CS7 will move more towards acceleration via the graphics card. It may be then that I will invest in my first high performance graphics card... who knows.
Click to expand...

Ah I see, thanks for the re-education. I always assumed that one had to specifically code for the CPU architecture, but you're saying you simply have to code for the new ability to perform multiple passes? That makes sense.

I was reading the other day that Adobe et al are unlikely to move towards GPU optimisations because the user base of such systems is comparatively low and optimising would likely equate to an entire rewriting of the program from the ground up.

What do you think?
 
London Headshots said:
Ah I see, thanks for the re-education. I always assumed that one had to specifically code for the CPU architecture, but you're saying you simply have to code for the new ability to perform multiple passes? That makes sense.
Click to expand...
No, you program for parallelism - that is you split the image into several smaller chunks and get several CPUs to work on it. Kind of like several painters painting a large wall. Adding a CPU core is like adding more painters. As long as they don't interfere with each other, the speed at which the wall is painted keeps getting shorter the more painters you add. On the other hand, hyperthreading is like giving a painter two brushes - you have twice as many brushes, but there's no way the painter is going to be twice as quick painting his bit of wall...

London Headshots said:
I was reading the other day that Adobe et al are unlikely to move towards GPU optimisations because the user base of such systems is comparatively low and optimising would likely equate to an entire rewriting of the program from the ground up.

What do you think?
Click to expand...
The thing is the gains to be had from GPU cores (which are specifically designed to work on 2D and 3D images) is huge. Have a look here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xso6CGdsl2c for a couple of year old demo of how much horsepower is in a high end graphics card for images. Given the pricing structure of Adobe s/w and the fact that they already are moving that way (CS5->CS6 had some more GPU accelerations) I can see a lot of it going to GPU in the future. I'm still holding out on buying a fast GPU as the software isn't there just yet....
 
neil_g said:
just needs a mugshot in a "thumbs up" style and thats it..

:lol:
Click to expand...
:D Marvellous.... taken with the obligatory wide angle. I may just have to. I think I even have a camera around here somewhere................. :thinking:
 
arad85 said:
No, you program for parallelism - that is you split the image into several smaller chunks and get several CPUs to work on it. Kind of like several painters painting a large wall. Adding a CPU core is like adding more painters. As long as they don't interfere with each other, the speed at which the wall is painted keeps getting shorter the more painters you add. On the other hand, hyperthreading is like giving a painter two brushes - you have twice as many brushes, but there's no way the painter is going to be twice as quick painting his bit of wall...

The thing is the gains to be had from GPU cores (which are specifically designed to work on 2D and 3D images) is huge. Have a look here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xso6CGdsl2c for a couple of year old demo of how much horsepower is in a high end graphics card for images. Given the pricing structure of Adobe s/w and the fact that they already are moving that way (CS5->CS6 had some more GPU accelerations) I can see a lot of it going to GPU in the future. I'm still holding out on buying a fast GPU as the software isn't there just yet....
Click to expand...

Right I see, thank you for the analogy, makes perfect sense.

Wow, the video is really promising. If there can be a lightroom or photoshop fully optimised for a GPU, I'll be pretty happy. guy in that video talking about a 2 hour saving per day! That's crazy when you think about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top