bang for $ using PhotoShop CS

[gordeaux]

I have just started with PhotoShop CS on a PC (previously I've been using PictureWindow for processing). PhotoShop maxes out the CPU on the PC and I'm wondering where I would likely get the most performance bang for the buck.

I now have a Pentium4 @3.06 GHz which does not support hyperthreading, 1GB RAM, a single SCSI 320 hard drive, 146GB (50% full, defragmented regularly), 10K rpm.

Would another 1GB of RAM help a lot? A 2nd hard drive? Or would replacing the motherboard to get hyperthreading help more? The final step is to go to dual processor Xeon chips, but that's the most expensive option.

Most of my work is processing RAW photos for web and printing. Sharpening and outputting of finished files is giving me 10-30 second waits.

Any guidance greatly appreciated.

[evilenglishman]

I don't think another gb of ram would help you. It wouldnt hurt - but I don't think you would see any marked improvement.
Your cpu is okay.
What make/model is your motherboard?
What speed is the ram?

[dtrayers]

What are you doing with PS-CS that maxes out your PC?

I'm running it on a 1.6Ghz Thinkpad with 1G of RAM and a relatively slow 40G hard drive. It runs fine. I can have a browser open, several office documents, Breezebrowser, and PS-CS and unless I try to edit 3 or 4 pictures at once, or use a filter like lens flare, things move right along.

A couple of things you should try. PS would prefer to have a separate physical drive for a scratch disk. Short of that a separate partition dedicated for a scratch disk. That's what I have done on my Thinkpad.

Also, PS will only use as much RAM as there is scratch disk space available, so if scratch space is limited then it will limit the RAM.

Have a read HERE (http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=216941&page=0&view=collap sed&sb=5&o=186&fpart=1) on a technique for determining the optimum percentage of RAM to allocate to PS. I haven't tried it yet but it looks like a sound method.

[yallcome]

Dude, you should be getting good performance out of your system. Something's not quite right if it runs poorly. Hmmmmm I'm sure there will be some suggestions offered.

[Scottes]

Dude, you should be getting good performance out of your system. Something's not quite right if it runs poorly. Hmmmmm I'm sure there will be some suggestions offered.

I agree. I'm running a P4 1.6G with a measly 1/2 G of RAM. With CS, Capture1, and Mozilla open I can run things fine. Flipping between CS & C1 definitely causes me to wait as it swaps out, but once this is finished things run fine.

With CS running alone I've opened 6 16-Bit TIFFs from RAW and edited them all - no issues.

I will admit that I definitely want another 512M of RAM though.

[scottbergerphoto]

I am running a very similiar set up and I have no problems. Do you have a program running in the background like Virusscan? That will really slow things down. I suggest you check to see what's running on your system. Hit CTRL+ALT+DEL and look at your task list. Close whatever you don't need to run and then see how PS CS is running. If it runs better, go to File>Run and type msconfig and Enter. Check what is loading at Start Up. Uncheck whatever you don't need, reboot. If your system is running faster, you can go back and slowly re-add things you removed by re -checking them and then checking your speed again.
Regards,
Scott

[gordeaux]

I don't think another gb of ram would help you. It wouldnt hurt - but I don't think you would see any marked improvement.
Your cpu is okay.
What make/model is your motherboard?
What speed is the ram?

The computer is Dell Precision 340 workstation. I'm not sure what the speed of the RAM is, but it all came from Dell with the original system. PC800 ECC 4 RIMS is what the order says. Can you tell from that, or how can I get the information you are interested in?

[gordeaux]

I am running a very similiar set up and I have no problems. Do you have a program running in the background like Virusscan? That will really slow things down. I suggest you check to see what's running on your system. Hit CTRL+ALT+DEL and look at your task list. Close whatever you don't need to run and then see how PS CS is running. If it runs better, go to File>Run and type msconfig and Enter. Check what is loading at Start Up. Uncheck whatever you don't need, reboot. If your system is running faster, you can go back and slowly re-add things you removed by re -checking them and then checking your speed again.
Regards,
Scott

Maybe we're getting off track here with the "problem" idea. I'm not sure there's a "problem" with my system. I'm wondering how to reduce/eliminate the 10-20 second delays when I choose File, Save for Web.

There might be a problem, though. I'm new to PhotoShop CS and am working at home alone. That's why I ask. How long does it take for your system to perform this task with a 3000x2400 size image?

[gordeaux]

Also I found this in the Adobe knowledgebase

Optimize performance of Photoshop (Windows)
http://www.adobe.com/support/techdocs/12dde.htm

in case anyone else is interested.

[scottbergerphoto]

Thanks for the link. It's printing out as I type. In response to your question, I don't have that delay. It only takes about 2-5 secs.
Scott

[CyberDyneSystems]

The bottleneck is,. as very often is the case,. the Hard drive.

It really doesn't matter what speed your HD is,. it will allways be slower than the CPU and RAM.

First question... Does anyone know if WinXP Service Pack 1 alleviated the horrendous SCSI bottleneck that the original WinXP introduced? (I went all IDE with WinXP because of this "bug".. it was disastrous)

I assume this has been addressed by MS with SP1..

Options:
1. I'd look at adding at least a second hard drive.

Windows likes to have a swap file,. and PS likes to have a "Scratch Disk"

Adobe recomends that the Scratch disk be different from the windows swap file.

Perhaps a very fast smaller HD for the PS scratch disk would help a bit.

2. The next step is a bigger one,. especially if working with SCSI drives.. and that is a RAID-0 set up. I would only consider this option if the Dell you own allready is equipped with a RAID controller.

[gordeaux]

The bottleneck is,. as very often is the case, the Hard drive.

It really doesn't matter what speed your HD is, it will allways be slower than the CPU and RAM.

PhotoShop tells me my efficiency during this operation is 100%. I think that means PhotoShop isn't even using the hard drive while it's doing this. Am I right on this?

[4walls]

Also I found this in the Adobe knowledgebase

Optimize performance of Photoshop (Windows)
http://www.adobe.com/support/techdocs/12dde.htm

in case anyone else is interested.
I found this interesting from Adobe's website...Output
Recommended resolution

Macintosh monitor
72 ppi

Windows-compatible monitor
96 ppi

300 dpi laser printer
100 ppi

600 dpi laser printer
150 ppi

725 dpi inkjet printer
150 ppi

1200 dpi or higher imagesetter
2x the screen frequency (lpi) value you specified

[hickory]

gordeaux,

here's an article about AutoFX PhotoEdges plugin that might be a problem:

http://graphicssoft.about.com/b/a/061630.htm

watch out for the pop-ups.......

apparently the plugin is slowing load time to as much as two minutes if it is installed.

good luck!

tom

[gordeaux]

After some testing of different conditions, my conclusion is that nothing affects my performance (in this specific case) other than CPU speed.

All testing was done with the same 48MB .PSD file. Repeated tests with a second comparable hard drive installed used for the PhotoShop scratch disk as well as storing the source file on a network drive don't have any effect on the task's speed -- always 21-23 seconds. The CPU usage goes to 100% for the whole 21-23 seconds. PhotoShop.exe is using 98-99% of the CPU time during this time.

None of enlarging, shrinking and moving the Windows swap file to another drive made any difference.

Task manager shows I still have 400MB of physical RAM available, so I don't think more RAM would make any difference.

Thanks for all the ideas everyone contributed. :)

[4walls]

After some testing of different conditions, my conclusion is that nothing affects my performance (in this specific case) other than CPU speed.

All testing was done with the same 48MB .PSD file. Repeated tests with a second comparable hard drive installed used for the PhotoShop scratch disk as well as storing the source file on a network drive don't have any effect on the task's speed -- always 21-23 seconds. The CPU usage goes to 100% for the whole 21-23 seconds. PhotoShop.exe is using 98-99% of the CPU time during this time.

None of enlarging, shrinking and moving the Windows swap file to another drive made any difference.

Task manager shows I still have 400MB of physical RAM available, so I don't think more RAM would make any difference.

Thanks for all the ideas everyone contributed. :)
Just curious, have you tried to increase the amount of RAM that PS uses under EDIT > PREFERENCES > MEMORY AND IMAGE CACHE. Here you can adjust how much RAM that PS is allowed to use.

[gordeaux]

I've got it set to 600MB. Since Windows isn't swapping and since my total RAM usage is only 180MB (out of 1GB) after starting Windows but before starting PhotoShop, I figure that should still leave 200MB or so of RAM available for Windows.

The PhotoShop guideline I saw was that PhotoShop would like to have up to 5 times the size of the file available in RAM. My files are around 40MB X 5 = 200MB so I figure 600MB is triple that.

Nothing seems like it will run out of RAM in this arrangement. But -- as I keep saying -- I welcome any thoughts anyone else has about this.