PC for photo editing

[kenny]

My old PC finally died. Going to replace it but not looking to spend a lot.

Bestbuy had a few inexpensive PC's. Was wondering what type of spec's are recommended for CS5 and LR3. My 6 year old machine was able to process raw slowly so anything is better than that but didn't want to spend more if not needed.

Deciding between Dell & gateway
Each have an i3 version with 6G RAM, shared internal video card. 1TB HDD

Each also have an i5 with 8G RAM, 1TB. Dell's graphic card was 1G dedicated. Gateways was shared and part of MB

Pricing is i3's are the same, then gateway i5 then Dell i5.

Wasn't sure if an i3 is powerful enough to really handle everything or needed the extra RAM and CPU with i5 versions.

Thanks

 

[nvtsallo]

If you can wait intel is launching its 4th gen of processor this month and that would be the way to go.

Specs
Core i5 min.
1gb ddr3 or higher video card
8gb ddr3 ram min.
120gb ssd for os
1tb or more rotational hd for data.

Monitor invest in this like you would your lenses. The more the better quality. Hp zr series are good. If you pm me I can help you pick some specific items

 

[photo_chick]

If you plan to upgrade to CS6 (or a later version) you're going to want i5 or better. And a dedicated video card with at least 1GB, avoid the Intel onboard graphics. I agree with the rec. on a good monitor just keep in mind that it's only going to be as good as the video card you use.

I don't think a SSD is a necessity. It's nice to have, but not a requirement. It will also increase the cost of your machine quite a bit.

 

[kenny]

Ok thanks. Looks like the dell i5. That machine had a separate dedicated video as opposed to on board on the gateway.

 

[kenny]

How does amd stack up against intel for editing?

 

[photo_chick]

How does amd stack up against intel for editing?

As far as CPU's? I like using my husband's six core AMD machine better than my Intel i5. It's a little snappier when it comes to processing filters and such. But there's other factors besides just AMD or Intel there. Both machines have similar newish (within the last two years new) higher end Radeon video cards in them.

 

[11290]

If you plan to upgrade to CS6 (or a later version) you're going to want i5 or better. And a dedicated video card with at least 1GB, avoid the Intel onboard graphics. I agree with the rec. on a good monitor just keep in mind that it's only going to be as good as the video card you use.

I don't think a SSD is a necessity. It's nice to have, but not a requirement. It will also increase the cost of your machine quite a bit.

I'm using the Intel i5-3570k with the HD 4000 graphics in a new build. Just use PS Elements 10 & 11 and EasyHDR and the "onboard graphics" have been doing well. Yes I could have, and still can, put in a card but so far haven't seen the need to drop another $150 or so for one.

As far as SSD's, I put in a Samsung Pro series, just using it for a boot drive, and LOVE it. Still too pricey but a good addition none the less. Might migrate a program or 2 over to it soon.

 

[boBQuincy]

I'm using the Intel i5-3570k with the HD 4000 graphics in a new build. Just use PS Elements 10 & 11 and EasyHDR and the "onboard graphics" have been doing well. Yes I could have, and still can, put in a card but so far haven't seen the need to drop another $150 or so for one.

As far as SSD's, I put in a Samsung Pro series, just using it for a boot drive, and LOVE it. Still too pricey but a good addition none the less. Might migrate a program or 2 over to it soon.

I am using an i5 with HD3000 graphics on a 1920 x 1200 monitor for a lot of work in PS CS5 and HDR in Photomatix. So far I have not seen the need for an external graphics card but if I go to CS6 that may change. My PC has two small SSDs, one for the system drive and one for the PS scratch drive, these really boosted performance at less than $100 each.

 

[nvtsallo]

Ok thanks. Looks like the dell i5. That machine had a separate dedicated video as opposed to on board on the gateway.

Just curious. Is there a specific reason your stuck on these two gateway and dell's? They released intels 4th generation today and I would get a system with that. Skip the graphics card and see how the integrated performs. This generation improves the integrated card.

 

[kenny]

Was sticking with dell and gateway originally because that is what best buy has in stock

Ended up getting an asus with amd a8. 12g memory 1g video. Wasn't looking at that because of amd but read amd is better with graphics then intel. Best buy mid seemed pretty knowledgable and preferred this over the others as well. Plus it was cheaper so I could buy additional software I needed

Have 60 days to return. Still skeptical as I always was an intel person. Wil have to test it out and see

 

[nvtsallo]

Was sticking with dell and gateway originally because that is what best buy has in stock

Ended up getting an asus with amd a8. 12g memory 1g video. Wasn't looking at that because of amd but read amd is better with graphics then intel. Best buy mid seemed pretty knowledgable and preferred this over the others as well. Plus it was cheaper so I could buy additional software I needed

Have 60 days to return. Still skeptical as I always was an intel person. Wil have to test it out and see

glad you went with asus. they are generally better pc's since they make the motherboards. The A8 will handle gaming graphics fine but nothing beats the power of the Intel core series processor. Either way for your needs it should be great. I was recently rendering some bluray 1080p content and my core i7 3770k was sitting on 100% only using 4gb/16gb avail of ram. I processed some batch raw files and again a little more ram but nothing else. I have tried many systems on the current amd platform and they just are not the same but they will get the job done. Like you said you have 60 days. within that time will be near back to school sales and maybe you could get the 4th gen core intel series that will be out then. Just keep an eye out for those systems.

 

[photo_chick]

I'm using the Intel i5-3570k with the HD 4000 graphics in a new build. Just use PS Elements 10 & 11 and EasyHDR and the "onboard graphics" have been doing well. Yes I could have, and still can, put in a card but so far haven't seen the need to drop another $150 or so for one.

As far as SSD's, I put in a Samsung Pro series, just using it for a boot drive, and LOVE it. Still too pricey but a good addition none the less. Might migrate a program or 2 over to it soon.

I didn't say it wouldn't run fine with onboard graphics. But Photoshop CS6 (not Elements) runs better with a dedicated GPU. I see the difference between the switchable graphics and the video card on my laptop every time I switch to the Intel HD 3000 graphics (on an i5 processor) to conserve power. It's especially noticeable when using content aware tools, filters, scrubby zoom... anytime you have a large redraw. Things are smoother with faster rendering using the video card rather than the onboard video. And that's not even going into the noticeable difference in the quality of the image displayed on my screen.

This is my experience. Other people's experience may vary.

 

[11290]

I didn't say it wouldn't run fine with onboard graphics. But Photoshop CS6 (not Elements) runs better with a dedicated GPU. I see the difference between the switchable graphics and the video card on my laptop every time I switch to the Intel HD 3000 graphics (on an i5 processor) to conserve power. It's especially noticeable when using content aware tools, filters, scrubby zoom... anytime you have a large redraw. Things are smoother with faster rendering using the video card rather than the onboard video. And that's not even going into the noticeable difference in the quality of the image displayed on my screen.

This is my experience. Other people's experience may vary.

Difficult to compare laptop with SandyBridge architecture (HD300 GPU) to desktop with IvyBridge architecture (HD4000 GPU). Too many other variables but in general the IvyBridge is the "stronger" CPU. Now Haswell is coming and should be better yet.

 

[photo_chick]

Difficult to compare laptop with SandyBridge architecture (HD300 GPU) to desktop with IvyBridge architecture (HD4000 GPU). Too many other variables but in general the IvyBridge is the "stronger" CPU. Now Haswell is coming and should be better yet.

There are similar discrepancies in performance when I commandeer my son's machine. He's got an i7 processor and a pair of Radeon cards in there. I've switched to the Intel onboard graphics on there to keep the fans quieter.... those big video cards get loud late at night. But his desktop was built for gaming and really doesn't compare to what most people will buy off the shelf for image editing. Really though, you can hammer specs all you want but that doesn't change what I've experienced. And other people may experience something different. I only know for what I do I need more than what the onboard graphics provide.

 

[Experiment_626]

If you plan to upgrade to CS6 (or a later version) you're going to want i5 or better. And a dedicated video card with at least 1GB, avoid the Intel onboard graphics. I agree with the rec. on a good monitor just keep in mind that it's only going to be as good as the video card you use.

I don't think a SSD is a necessity. It's nice to have, but not a requirement. It will also increase the cost of your machine quite a bit.

Agreed on the video card; Adobe has specifically said that Photoshop CS6 uses the video card to accelerate a significant number of operations over what you'll see using "onboard" graphics. I believe they have a list of supported cards somewhere on their site (and if they don't, I know someone out there does because I've seen it).

And good call on the SSD. A report I saw indicates that the primary Photoshop benefit you'd see from an SSD is that the application will launch very quickly if you install it there. If you have an SSD that's large enough, you could load large images you're working on and get faster reads and saves. But (and this is backed up by Adobe as well) the single best thing you can do to speed up Photoshop performance is to get as much RAM as you can afford. I'm about to take my Quad-Core Mac Pro at work to its maximum 48GB (max with current SIMMs, anyway) from the 16GB it currently has, and then the one I have here at home will get that 16GB (up from the current 6GB). So looking forward to the jump!

Scott