A Dell Question...

[john-in-japan]

I have a laptop, old, slow and not enough memory. Will soon upgrade 5D to 5D2 or 1dsMarkII if I can get a good deal.
Considering Dell XPS630 with 4GB, 2 big hard disk (how big?) drives in parallel and a raid card. Not sure it comes with DVD writer. Can I assume this will be all I will need with Photoshop, Lightroom and other photo related software installed? I don't do gaming. This will basically be for photo work. Budget $2K +- without monitor. Monitor recommendations appreciated.
Mucho Arrigato!
John

[Moppie]

Nothing wrong with it, and it will handle the high res 14bit RAW files with out any problems.

However, how much photography do you do?

As a basic home photography workstation it is ok, but if your a proffesional using it to edit mulitple shoots for customers then, I would look at something a bit more custom and adaptable.

Also, what is your level of PC tech knowledge?

And, unless you are familar with it, and have used it before, avoid RAID.
It is designed as a redundancy solution for enterpise level applications.
It is NOT a backup solution.

[john-in-japan]

Thanks!
Photography a hobby, albeit serious.
PC tech knowledge low.
Basic home/travel photography, wanting to produce the best photos I am capable of taking. I travel in Asia quite frequently, and love taking photos, printing large on occasion.
John

[Moppie]

How familar are you with local computer retailers in Japan?

The ideal system would be one we could spec for you, and you get built by a local shop.
That would give the best mix of performance, reliablity and price.

[john-in-japan]

Again thanks!
I get to Akihabara quite frequently, This is the big electronics showcase in Tokyo. I think they will/can build most anything in the Dell or Acer line as well as Japanese brands. I am a long term ex-pat here, but prefer English versions, and they can do these also. I am sure if I had a list of specs, they can come up with it. I just don't know what to ask for.
Thanks again,
John

[tim]

Get a custom made machine with specs something like this.

Intel Core i920 chip
6GB RAM
Three big hard drives (seagate or western digital), plus a 1.5TB external as backup for important files. Don't bother with RAID.
Good PSU, case, CPU and case fans
Decent graphics card, don't go crazy though. 256MB is enough RAM really, 512 is more than enough.
Decent monitor

[Moppie]

Ask about a system with the following bits:

Windows Vista Home Premium 64bit.
Processor: Intel Core i7 920
Mother Board: ASUS P6T X58
RAM: 6GB of Corsiar PC 10600, in 3 x 2GB chips
Graphics card: Not critical, ask for something mid range
Power supply: Not sure what you will have availabe, but prepared to spend $100 minimum on a good one with 600W or more.
Case, again, not sure. Just also be prepared to spend a little more, and get a good quality one with quite fans, etc.

Harddiscs, This is somewhat up to you and your work flow, but I would recomend the following:

1 x 320GB (wester digital or samsung) for OS, programs and windows scrach disc.
Also use this for other things, games, music, movies etc. You might want to use a bigger drive for this, or do as I do and use a smaller drive just for the OS and programs, and another drive for the games, music etc.

2 x 500GB drives for PHOTOS ONLY. If your really keen on that 1Ds or 5D MKII, make this a pair of 1TB drives :)

Keep on these only your photos and lightroom catalouge, and maybe important documents. Do not clutter them up by installing software, or storing music etc on them.

Use only 1 drive to save things to. The other drive becomes your internal back up, and redundancy. I label mine "Image Libary" and I only save, and work on files from this drive.
The other drive I labeled "Image Library 2". (This is very easy to do with Vista).
Once I have taken the photos off the camera and put them on "Image Library" I use a program called Karens Replicator, to copy all the new files onto "Image Library 2".
I check this drive often, just checking the files are still there, and loading ok.

This way one drive fails, I can replace it and copy the files back off the other drive with out losing any data.
AND, because I am only moving files and directories between the discs, the back up process is easy, as is restoration should it be needed.

I also keep 2 back ups on removable hard drives, again they are just copies of the first drive.

I the idea is to keep my photos seperate from everything else in the system.
This helps keep them safe, simplifies the back up process, and also means that if the system drive failed, and I had to re-install everything, or, worst case, lost the whole system, working from a back up is simply a matter of plugging it into a new system.

I keep things like documents etc, backed up seperatly.



The above system, with 3-4 hard drives should cost less than US$2000, and being pretty new it will last a long time before needing to be replaced.
I would expect 4-5 years of use before things move to file sizes and level of complexity beyond what it could process, or be upgraded to process.

[Moppie]

I have had a digg around the Dell website.

Very frustrating process, but it appears thier work stations with extra hard drive bays are VERY expensive, and use the old Core 2 Quad chips, while the XPS gaming machines that use the new i7 chips have very limited upgrade options, and the choice of only 2 hard drives.

[john-in-japan]

Many, Many Thanks!
I will start in that direction.
John

[WI10DUser]

Instead of the XPS 630, look at the new Studio XPS 435T. Same hi-end components as the 630 but a more robust case with more expansion options.

[philmar]

Get a custom made machine with specs something like this.

Intel Core i920 chip
6GB RAM
....

Would s/he need a 64 bit OS in order to best use the RAM - or will any flavour of Vista do this?

[philmar]

the above advice is very good ASSUMING he shoots RAW. Might be overkill if he is shooting jpeg.

[MaxxuM]

A workstation may be a bit overkill - they are meant for heavy work loads and uncompromising stability with a price to match. With large RAW files, the two limiters are CPU and hard drive speed. I don't think a workstation is necessary, just a quick HDD and good CPU. Also, the i7 CPU doesn't improve Photoshop performance much (about 10%). Paying 2-3x more for the i7 for only a 10% increase in speed in my book isn't a good buy. Now, if you are going to play games and do heavy video work (more than just a few family vids) an i7 would be a sound investment.

[tim]

Would s/he need a 64 bit OS in order to best use the RAM - or will any flavour of Vista do this?

Vista64.

A workstation may be a bit overkill - they are meant for heavy work loads and uncompromising stability with a price to match. With large RAW files, the two limiters are CPU and hard drive speed. I don't think a workstation is necessary, just a quick HDD and good CPU. Also, the i7 CPU doesn't improve Photoshop performance much (about 10%). Paying 2-3x more for the i7 for only a 10% increase in speed in my book isn't a good buy. Now, if you are going to play games and do heavy video work (more than just a few family vids) an i7 would be a sound investment.

Do you have statistics on this? Interactive speed in photoshop is fine most files, but when you deal with large batches of RAW files the speed could come in handy.

[In2Photos]

A workstation may be a bit overkill - they are meant for heavy work loads and uncompromising stability with a price to match. With large RAW files, the two limiters are CPU and hard drive speed. I don't think a workstation is necessary, just a quick HDD and good CPU. Also, the i7 CPU doesn't improve Photoshop performance much (about 10%). Paying 2-3x more for the i7 for only a 10% increase in speed in my book isn't a good buy. Now, if you are going to play games and do heavy video work (more than just a few family vids) an i7 would be a sound investment.
I see this mentioned by a few people and I just don't get it. I think this is the first time that people have said, don't buy the latest fastest machine, get the older one. :lol:

Here is a few things I wrote on another forum when I decided to build an i7 machine.

I have no doubts that I could have saved a few hundred and done a Q8x00 series or something else. But like the OP here I buy computers once every 4-5 years. The i7 will allow me to expand more than the Q8x00 PC would have as long as Socket 1366 is around. It is a gamble I know, but Lightroom absolutely flies now and that is what I am after. Edits are instantaneous. I don't spend all my time on my PC. I have two young kids so I only use it after they go to bed. That means I have LESS time to spend waiting. Every micro second does count. I used to have to let my PC run all night exporting my files and then run around in the morning trying to upload them. Now I can get them done before bed and shut off the PC until next time. I probably save more money in energy use than I spent going to i7.

And..
I went with the i7 because every other PC I have owned was based on old tech. Each time I felt like I was missing out on something. For some reason it just wasn't what I was expecting. i am not one to have to have the latest and greatest (I just bought my first HDTV last year and I used to work in the A/V industry!). This build is the first time I have been impressed with the machine after I built it.

I spec'ed out a Q8300 build against the i7 before deciding. The price difference was about $250. The i7 had more RAM 6 vs 4, but all else was equal. So the premium was about 30% to go i7. Worth every penny this time around. I probably would have been satisfied with the 8300, but that little something in the back of my mind might have still been tugging at me. So I guess it was $250 for piece of mind.

[Moppie]

A workstation may be a bit overkill - they are meant for heavy work loads and uncompromising stability with a price to match. With large RAW files, the two limiters are CPU and hard drive speed. I don't think a workstation is necessary, just a quick HDD and good CPU. Also, the i7 CPU doesn't improve Photoshop performance much (about 10%). Paying 2-3x more for the i7 for only a 10% increase in speed in my book isn't a good buy. Now, if you are going to play games and do heavy video work (more than just a few family vids) an i7 would be a sound investment.


First of all, the last page in this thread: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=170063&page=18
would prove you wrong.

The new single chip i7 machines with 6GB of ram are out running the old dual Xeon Mac Pros with 8GB of ram.

Second, even if there is some truth to photoshop not being able to fully access the extra virtual cores in the i7, what happens when CS5, or CS6 comes out, and it is able to to use them?


Core 2 quads are quite suitable, that is true, but they are also old technology now, last generation stuff that is being discontinued.
Why buy old technology, when you have a budget that allows for new technology that will give a longer service life?

[MaxxuM]

Do you have statistics on this? Interactive speed in photoshop is fine most files, but when you deal with large batches of RAW files the speed could come in handy.

I see this mentioned by a few people and I just don't get it. I think this is the first time that people have said, don't buy the latest fastest machine, get the older one. :lol:

Don't get me wrong, the i7/Harpertown's are speed demons - faster than any quad's out today - but they are pricey and yield only small gains in Photoshop. Here are some stats:

Adobe Photoshop CS4 is fully x64 compliant and ready and able to use every single CPU cycle our processor has available including the implementation of GPU support utilizing the GTX 280 in our test system. It is just a shame it can't fully utilize all 8 threads of the i7 processor yet. (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/14946-corsair-dominator-gt-3x2gb-pc3-15000-triple-channel-memory-review-9.html)

Tom's Hardware (http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/Photoshop-CS-3,Marque_fbrandx14,826.html)

ExtremeTech (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2333775,00.asp)

Skimming through the benchmarks here and at MacRumors I see i7 times from 11-21 seconds, just slightly faster or even the same as current quads. The i7's that are getting the best times (11-12 seconds) are massive machines, sometimes overclocked, and easily workstation price. These times (IMO) do not warrant 50%+ costs (of machines in these reviews) - UNLESS the user is a professional with thousands of photos to sift through during frequent batch processes. The time gained is minimal. i7 CPUs are not cost effective for most people - even professionals - particularly if you're trying to save a little money.

To understand why there is so little gain compared to other programs which on average are seeing upwards of 40% improvment is simply the nature of Photoshop. One cannot apply filters out of order - one must complete before the next begins. Photoshop is not multicore/multithread optimized as is are video and rendering programs. With a good HDD and video card (say 4870) load and screen refresh will give older systems a good boost in speed.

i7's are the future and they are faster than current systems, but the price is pretty extravagent at the moment. I'm willing to bet there will be price reductions in the summer that will make them more appealing.

[Ziffle]

john-in-japan,

I agree w/ the suggestions here. Depending on your needs - either i7 or quad core will work.

I just pick-up a dell system.
XPS430 - Quad core (8300) w/ 6 gig ram. 750 gig HD
Dell monitor: 2209WA. This is a non TN monitor.

The desktop has extra slots for expansion and good air flow - quiet fan.
Running vista home prem. until new window comes out.

Photo software:LightRoom 2.3 (64 bit version)
LightRoom flies on this machine.
I process 50D files that run in the 18-22 meg each in size.

And i will be adding another hard drive and storing w/ the same idea as Moppie described.

Good luck...
Later,
_Mark

[tim]

Don't get me wrong, the i7/Harpertown's are speed demons - faster than any quad's out today - but they are pricey and yield only small gains in Photoshop. Here are some stats:

Adobe Photoshop CS4 is fully x64 compliant and ready and able to use every single CPU cycle our processor has available including the implementation of GPU support utilizing the GTX 280 in our test system. It is just a shame it can't fully utilize all 8 threads of the i7 processor yet. (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/14946-corsair-dominator-gt-3x2gb-pc3-15000-triple-channel-memory-review-9.html)

Tom's Hardware (http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/Photoshop-CS-3,Marque_fbrandx14,826.html)

ExtremeTech (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2333775,00.asp)

Skimming through the benchmarks here and at MacRumors I see i7 times from 11-21 seconds, just slightly faster or even the same as current quads. The i7's that are getting the best times (11-12 seconds) are massive machines, sometimes overclocked, and easily workstation price. These times (IMO) do not warrant 50%+ costs (of machines in these reviews) - UNLESS the user is a professional with thousands of photos to sift through during frequent batch processes. The time gained is minimal. i7 CPUs are not cost effective for most people - even professionals - particularly if you're trying to save a little money.

To understand why there is so little gain compared to other programs which on average are seeing upwards of 40% improvment is simply the nature of Photoshop. One cannot apply filters out of order - one must complete before the next begins. Photoshop is not multicore/multithread optimized as is are video and rendering programs. With a good HDD and video card (say 4870) load and screen refresh will give older systems a good boost in speed.

i7's are the future and they are faster than current systems, but the price is pretty extravagent at the moment. I'm willing to bet there will be price reductions in the summer that will make them more appealing.

I wonder if the Photoshop benchmarks are applicable to Bridge/Lightroom. In Photoshop you tend to work on one image at a time, in Bridge/LR you can work on hundreds or thousands at a time and I suspect the gain would be larger.

[Moppie]

Don't get me wrong, the i7/Harpertown's are speed demons - faster than any quad's out today - but they are pricey and yield only small gains in Photoshop. Here are some stats:

Adobe Photoshop CS4 is fully x64 compliant and ready and able to use every single CPU cycle our processor has available including the implementation of GPU support utilizing the GTX 280 in our test system. It is just a shame it can't fully utilize all 8 threads of the i7 processor yet. (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/14946-corsair-dominator-gt-3x2gb-pc3-15000-triple-channel-memory-review-9.html)

Tom's Hardware (http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/Photoshop-CS-3,Marque_fbrandx14,826.html)

ExtremeTech (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2333775,00.asp)




A benchmark is only as good as the test, and Toms Hardware photoshop tests are, CRAP.

Photoshop is a very complex program, I suggest running the benchmark test at the top of the forum with the performance monitor open.
Some process are VERY CPU intensive, but will hardly touch the RAM, others the complete opposite, and some use a mixture of the two.
Toms Hardware run benchmarks that rely heavily on RAM intensive processes, hence very little difference in performance between machines with similar RAM and bus speeds but vastly different processors.

As a general rule, the old filters are single threaded, and very RAM intensive. The gausian blur for example barley gets my Q6600 above idle, but uses all the free RAM.
There is not a lot you can do to improve the performance of those older filters, however there are new processes that do make better use of new systems, and it is these that will run faster on a faster CPU, as they are multi threaded.
Converting files from one type to another, or batch resizing are good examples.

And, as I said, photoshop is constantly evolving to make use of new hardware technologies. I would like to see you try and run CS4 on a Pentium 1 :lol::lol:

[john-in-japan]

Thanks Mark and others.
I do shoot Raw and want to shoot more in Raw but feel limited when I get back from a trip and download huge volume. With the 5D2 or 1dsMarkII, it will bcome almost impossible to manage these files with my current laptop (Sony Vaio). Some of the above is a bit Greek to me. Mark, your setup looks straightforward to me. Given my circumstances, would this be considered reasonable. Dell is supported here very well.
Given XPS630 versus XPS435 would you favor one over the other?
Extreme Appreciation,
John

[Ziffle]

J-i-J,
Don't quote me on the PC thing. I'm a power user and know enough to be dangerous.

Looking at the Dell site on the XPS 630 - you can get a several different processors.
i would at least stay in the Q8xxx, Q9xxx to i7 range.
All 3 processors are on 45 nm technology - so they are siblings - w/ different support chips.
Between the 2 (630 vs 435) it depends on what configuration you want/decide for the 630.

I prefer a relatively clean system w/ good air flow/space in the box.

As mentioned earlier - get a good balance on processor/RAM. It does no good to get an i7 and 2 gig RAM. Talk about choke.

Also check out Cyberpowerpc.com. There out of California. I have heard good things. No personal experience though. The only thing there is you don't need the top of the line graphics card (they specialize in gaming PC - decent prices). If you where gaming or doing 3-d modeling (solidworks/Pro-E) then you would want to splurge here.

I'm not personally big into having my pc be my media center.... so i don't care for all the add ons in the media department - TV, blue-ray, etc.
My XPS came w/ TV tuner - but is disabled now. when i add the wireless i will pull the card.

I will do sound when burning DVD picture slide show w/ music.

Make sure you get a non-TN monitor. There are threads on this too.

Hope this help.... good advice on this thread and a other on POTN.

Later,
_Mark

[john-in-japan]

What About: ($1799 with $449 Savings USA Pricing)
(Posted in error in another thread on Dell - hopefully will be deleted soon)
My Components
SYSTEM COLOR Black Bezel Chassis edit
PROCESSOR Intel® Core™2 Q9400 (6MB,2.66GHz, 1333FSB) edit
WARRANTY AND SERVICE 3Yr Ltd Hardware Warranty, InHome Service after Remote Diagnosis edit
OPERATING SYSTEM Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition SP1, 64-Bit edit
MEMORY 8GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 800MHz (4 DIMM) edit
HARD DRIVE 750GB - 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB Cache edit
ADDITIONAL HARD DRIVE 1TB - 7200RPM, SATA 2 3.0Gb/s, 32MB Cache edit
OPTICAL DRIVE Dual Drives: 16x DVD-ROM Drive + 16x DVD+/-RW w/ dbl layer write capable edit
MONITORS No Monitor edit
VIDEO CARD SLi, Dual nVidia GeForce 9800GT 512MB edit
SOUND CARD Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio edit
SPEAKERS No speakers (Speakers are required to hear audio from your system) edit
KEYBOARD Dell USB Keyboard edit
MOUSE Dell Optical USB Mouse edit
My Accessories
SECURITY SOFTWARE McAfee SecurityCenter 15-months edit
PRODUCTIVITY Microsoft Works 9.0 edit
My Service
REMOTE ACCESS Dell Remote Access, free basic service edit
DATASAFE ONLINE BACKUP Dell Online Backup 2GB for 1 year edit
DIAL-UP INTERNET ACCESS No ISP requested edit
ALSO INCLUDED WITH YOUR SYSTEM
Adobe Software Adobe® Acrobat® Reader 9.0 Multi-Language
LABELS Windows Vista™ Premium

[tim]

$1799 seems pretty expensive for a PC without an i7 CPU.

[MaxxuM]

$1799 seems pretty expensive for a PC without an i7 CPU.

It's a higher end system starting around $1,000. Add to that, more memory, second hard drive and it looks like a warranty upgrade and it's up to $1,800.

[MaxxuM]

What about: ($1799 with $449 Savings USA Pricing)
(Posted in error in another thread on Dell - hopefully will be deleted soon)
My Components
SYSTEM COLOR Black Bezel Chassis edit
PROCESSOR Intel® Core™2 Q9400 (6MB,2.66GHz, 1333FSB) edit
WARRANTY AND SERVICE 3Yr Ltd Hardware Warranty, InHome Service after Remote Diagnosis edit
OPERATING SYSTEM Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition SP1, 64-Bit edit
MEMORY 8GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 800MHz (4 DIMM) edit
HARD DRIVE 750GB - 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB Cache edit
ADDITIONAL HARD DRIVE 1TB - 7200RPM, SATA 2 3.0Gb/s, 32MB Cache edit
OPTICAL DRIVE Dual Drives: 16x DVD-ROM Drive + 16x DVD+/-RW w/ dbl layer write capable edit
MONITORS No Monitor edit
VIDEO CARD SLi, Dual nVidia GeForce 9800GT 512MB edit
SOUND CARD Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio edit
SPEAKERS No speakers (Speakers are required to hear audio from your system) edit
KEYBOARD Dell USB Keyboard edit
MOUSE Dell Optical USB Mouse edit
My Accessories
SECURITY SOFTWARE McAfee SecurityCenter 15-months edit
PRODUCTIVITY Microsoft Works 9.0 edit
My Service
REMOTE ACCESS Dell Remote Access, free basic service edit
DATASAFE ONLINE BACKUP Dell Online Backup 2GB for 1 year edit
DIAL-UP INTERNET ACCESS No ISP requested edit
ALSO INCLUDED WITH YOUR SYSTEM
Adobe Software Adobe® Acrobat® Reader 9.0 Multi-Language
LABELS Windows Vista™ Premium

It looks fine. There will be better priced computers and/or better equipped, but overall it's fine. These day's there really isn't much to set computers apart and they all start to blend into beige boxes to me (from the 90's) - they're just more flashy now. For me it now rests on one factor more than any other - OS. I love OS X, it's easy to use, quicker than Vista and far more stable and navigation is so easy that it's just silly. You need to find out what's important to you. Ask yourself what it is that will make a computer more enjoyable for you.

[In2Photos]

What about: ($1799 with $449 Savings USA Pricing)
(Posted in error in another thread on Dell - hopefully will be deleted soon)
My Components
SYSTEM COLOR Black Bezel Chassis edit
PROCESSOR Intel® Core™2 Q9400 (6MB,2.66GHz, 1333FSB) edit
WARRANTY AND SERVICE 3Yr Ltd Hardware Warranty, InHome Service after Remote Diagnosis edit
OPERATING SYSTEM Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition SP1, 64-Bit edit
MEMORY 8GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 800MHz (4 DIMM) edit
HARD DRIVE 750GB - 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB Cache edit
ADDITIONAL HARD DRIVE 1TB - 7200RPM, SATA 2 3.0Gb/s, 32MB Cache edit
OPTICAL DRIVE Dual Drives: 16x DVD-ROM Drive + 16x DVD+/-RW w/ dbl layer write capable edit
MONITORS No Monitor edit
VIDEO CARD SLi, Dual nVidia GeForce 9800GT 512MB edit
SOUND CARD Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio edit
SPEAKERS No speakers (Speakers are required to hear audio from your system) edit
KEYBOARD Dell USB Keyboard edit
MOUSE Dell Optical USB Mouse edit
My Accessories
SECURITY SOFTWARE McAfee SecurityCenter 15-months edit
PRODUCTIVITY Microsoft Works 9.0 edit
My Service
REMOTE ACCESS Dell Remote Access, free basic service edit
DATASAFE ONLINE BACKUP Dell Online Backup 2GB for 1 year edit
DIAL-UP INTERNET ACCESS No ISP requested edit
ALSO INCLUDED WITH YOUR SYSTEM
Adobe Software Adobe® Acrobat® Reader 9.0 Multi-Language
LABELS Windows Vista™ Premium

Sounds a little pricey!

You don't need dual video cards for photo editing. As Tim mentioned an i7 build would likely be less (mine was).

[Moppie]

You don't need dual video cards for photo editing.


I agree, they add an extra layer of complexity too.

[geralds34]

john-in-japan,

I agree w/ the suggestions here. Depending on your needs - either i7 or quad core will work.

I just pick-up a dell system.
XPS435 - Quad core (8300) w/ 6 gig ram. 750 gig HD
Dell monitor: 2209WA. This is a non TN monitor.

The desktop has extra slots for expansion and good air flow - quiet fan.
Running vista home prem. until new window comes out.

Photo software:LightRoom 2.3 (64 bit version)
LightRoom flies on this machine.
I process 50D files that run in the 18-22 meg each in size.

And i will be adding another hard drive and storing w/ the same idea as Moppie described.

Good luck...
Later,
_Mark

Looking at similar system. I just got the 2209WA added to my current system. Did the 6 gb RAM take all the mem slots? When using LR2.3, it doesn't take all the RAM avail to it, is there a setting in LR to tell it to take more RAM? How many internal drives can the XPS435 take? For external backup, just USB or eSATA?

[Ziffle]

Geralds34,

Total Expansion Slots2 PCI, 1 PCI-E x1, 1 PCI-E x8, 2 PCI-E x16
I will have to look at the RAM install physically. board expandable to 8 Gig.
I would think 3 x 2 gig sticks of DDR3.

Running the 64 bit LR2.3 is different than the 32 bit version.
It appears to be cleaner /w regards to memory used.
64 bit version only uses several hundred meg when single edit.
Need to batch run and see what it does.

i run 32 bit LR2.3 on my laptop and it loves to grab the memory. But this dogs the laptop.
Currently not aware of LR setting.

BTW - i missed typed the model #: it is XPS 430.

Hope this help.
I will get back - if there is time this weekend - on the physical memory slots used.

Later,
_Mark