Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS General Gear Talk Computers 
Thread started 29 Mar 2011 (Tuesday) 10:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Good processor vs SSD ?

 
tekkie
Goldmember
Avatar
2,621 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Clarkston, MI
     
Mar 30, 2011 14:09 |  #16

agreed YP5 :) haha its a small world

I put a SSD in my machine a few months ago and was blown away with the difference, using lightroom / CS5 is so much faster now !


Canon 1DMKII, 7D, 5DMKII, 1D MKII
Canon 500L, 100-400L
, 70-200 2.8L, 17-40L, 24-105L, 24mm 2.8,50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 135mm 2.8 SF, 100mm Macro
Canon 430 & 580 flashes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
51,009 posts
Likes: 369
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Apr 01, 2011 04:30 |  #17

I just upgraded to Win7-64 from XP, 4GB to 8GB RAM, with the OS on an OWC 60GB SSD and the Bridge Cache on an OWC 115GB SSD. Processor is an Intel Quad Core Q6600 on an Asus P5Q SE/R. The processor's about 4 years old, it's not a speed demon by any stretch of the imagination, but I figured SSD first would be a good plan and they'll move to my next PC when I get around to building it.

Everything's quite snappy, booting and loading program is very fast. Inside bridge things are a bit quicker, but it's not night and day. I'm going to try putting images onto the SSD as well, to see what that does. I haven't really done any significant photo processing yet though.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Apr 01, 2011 19:52 |  #18

Once you get into actually doing something like post processing and especially rendering, the processor becomes far more important than physical data access. Rendering video is ALL CPU, for example.

Boot time.... once a day, who cares.

Considering the amount of time is spent waiting for an image to load, compared to the amount of time processing it, an SSD is probably the last thing you need to upgrade, assuming you don't already have the fastest quad made and plenty of memory. Still, toys are toys..... go for it.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Swift
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,225 posts
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Ohio, USA
     
Apr 02, 2011 18:09 |  #19

bohdank wrote in post #12141121 (external link)
Once you get into actually doing something like post processing and especially rendering, the processor becomes far more important than physical data access. Rendering video is ALL CPU, for example.

Boot time.... once a day, who cares.

Considering the amount of time is spent waiting for an image to load, compared to the amount of time processing it, an SSD is probably the last thing you need to upgrade, assuming you don't already have the fastest quad made and plenty of memory. Still, toys are toys..... go for it.

Yes I realized it is indeed CPU, not SSD, graphics card, nor RAM. I overclocked to 3.9ghz from 3.2, and noticed an improvement -- yet only by a few seconds.


Canon 550D | Canon 70-200mm f/4L USM | Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM | Canon Speedlight 430EX | Raynox DCR-250 Macro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
YP5 ­ Toronto
Senior Member
Avatar
499 posts
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Markham, Ontario
     
Apr 02, 2011 20:19 |  #20

once again...i find those that actually dont have one or use one understand the overall benefits.... once you go SSD you never go back. Its the same "I don't believe/think" statements that kill me.

People also forget....your cpu and motherboard don't move with you to your next system overhaul/upgrade. The SSD will.


Canon 7D Gripped |Tokina 11-16 | Sigma 30mm F1.4 |Canon EF 24-70L | |Canon EF 70-200L F2.8IS MKI |Sigma 530DG | Giottos 9360 | Giottos MH-1301 | Giottos MH656 | Spyder2Pro | Kata 3IN1-20 | Kata Bumblebee UL-222

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
51,009 posts
Likes: 369
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Apr 02, 2011 21:31 |  #21

bohdank wrote in post #12141121 (external link)
Once you get into actually doing something like post processing and especially rendering, the processor becomes far more important than physical data access. Rendering video is ALL CPU, for example.

I tried an SSD to try to speed interactive processing time, rather than batch processing time. I got a good deal on the SSDs which is why I got them now. I know computers pretty much inside out and the SSDs did pretty much exactly what I wanted and expected. A new motherboard, CPU, RAM etc will be on the cards later this year maybe, but for now with my 12MP camera the Q6600's still fine.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FredM
Member
113 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2005
     
Apr 06, 2011 17:02 |  #22

SSD all the way.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Erik ­ S. ­ Klein
uppity vermin fan
Avatar
1,065 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 187
Joined Jun 2009
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Apr 06, 2011 17:22 |  #23

YP5 Toronto wrote in post #12146235 (external link)
once again...i find those that actually dont have one or use one understand the overall benefits.... once you go SSD you never go back. Its the same "I don't believe/think" statements that kill me.

I just built a new box and it boots off of an SSD, where I keep apps and the OS, but keeps data on a RAID 5 array.

The SSD is quick, but how is it improving CS5 performance other than cached stuff? I don't put photos on the SSD so it's not really in the workflow for photo processing except for the aforementioned caches.

And if I did copy the images over to the SSD to work on 'em I'd be wasting the time to copy them on and off, so most, if not all, processing improvements would be lost.

Or am I not getting something here?


Gear List
www.vintage-computer.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
*sigh*
Hardware Master (or something like that)
Avatar
25,047 posts
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
     
Apr 06, 2011 20:20 |  #24

Erik S. Klein wrote in post #12171964 (external link)
I just built a new box and it boots off of an SSD, where I keep apps and the OS, but keeps data on a RAID 5 array.

The SSD is quick, but how is it improving CS5 performance other than cached stuff? I don't put photos on the SSD so it's not really in the workflow for photo processing except for the aforementioned caches.

And if I did copy the images over to the SSD to work on 'em I'd be wasting the time to copy them on and off, so most, if not all, processing improvements would be lost.

Or am I not getting something here?

Well your computer boot times will be faster, loading CS5 will be faster. It does a better job at caching files, and since you have a Raid 5 array, the SSD and the raid 5 most likely are probably running at very similar speeds (at least they are at my machine at work, my Intel x-25 160GB benches at about 220MB/s and my 3 drive 1.5TB Caviar Black Raid 5 benches at about the same), so going back and forth between the two will be substantially faster.

Also, it's not just the initial boot time of CS5 that is improved, every time you go to grab a tool, or really anything the SSD will be more responsive. SSD's are really complete system upgrades, it just speeds everything up so sometimes it hard to notice the small differences in specific situations.


-Nick | Gear | Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
monk3y
Totally Saturated
Avatar
46,198 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 59
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Cloud and Honey
     
Apr 06, 2011 20:30 |  #25

don't Listen to sigh/Nick ;) :lol:

but yes I agree with him :D


www.monk3y.com (external link) | My GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Erik ­ S. ­ Klein
uppity vermin fan
Avatar
1,065 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 187
Joined Jun 2009
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Apr 06, 2011 21:09 |  #26

*sigh* wrote in post #12173098 (external link)
Well your computer boot times will be faster, loading CS5 will be faster. It does a better job at caching files, and since you have a Raid 5 array, the SSD and the raid 5 most likely are probably running at very similar speeds (at least they are at my machine at work, my Intel x-25 160GB benches at about 220MB/s and my 3 drive 1.5TB Caviar Black Raid 5 benches at about the same), so going back and forth between the two will be substantially faster.

Okay. Agreed...

*sigh* wrote in post #12173098 (external link)
Also, it's not just the initial boot time of CS5 that is improved, every time you go to grab a tool, or really anything the SSD will be more responsive. SSD's are really complete system upgrades, it just speeds everything up so sometimes it hard to notice the small differences in specific situations.

Well, that's where you've lost me. Yes, loading stuff from the disk will be faster from the SSD so a new tool, not yet cached, will come up a bit quicker. No, adding an SSD doesn't speed "everything" up. It speeds up anything that has to do disk access (including when the OS maxes RAM and caches out to disk) but, with sufficient RAM, that doesn't happen much.

Rendering, applying filters and basically anything that PS or other applications do in RAM won't be impacted at all by an SSD. Network speeds won't be impacted and so on.

Think of it this way - if you're running a game your frame rates won't go up at all, but if you change levels, move between screens or something that requires a disk hit that will get a bit faster.

Back to the OP, considering the system specs as they stand, an SSD looks like it would be a better upgrade, but the same question from someone with a slower proc, video card or < 4GB of RAM would yield different results.


Gear List
www.vintage-computer.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
*sigh*
Hardware Master (or something like that)
Avatar
25,047 posts
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
     
Apr 06, 2011 21:11 |  #27

Erik S. Klein wrote in post #12173368 (external link)
Rendering, applying filters and basically anything that PS or other applications do in RAM won't be impacted at all by an SSD. Network speeds won't be impacted and so on.

Think of it this way - if you're running a game your frame rates won't go up at all, but if you change levels, move between screens or something that requires a disk hit that will get a bit faster.

Back to the OP, considering the system specs as they stand, an SSD looks like it would be a better upgrade, but the same question from someone with a slower proc, video card or < 4GB of RAM would yield different results.

Yes, the during the actual processing filters and such are done in the RAM. However... loading up the information needed from the disk to the RAM is impacted by the SSD.

Disk speeds impact almost everything that is going on in your computer, SSD's have an impact on just about anything you do on your computer.


But I agree, the SSD is by far the better option, for an older computer perhaps not, but it's really on a case by case basis.


-Nick | Gear | Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
darktiger
Goldmember
1,944 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Oct 2005
     
Apr 15, 2011 08:11 |  #28

SSD


My Flickr (external link)
My Gear
My Zenfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
uOpt
Goldmember
Avatar
2,283 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Boston, MA, USA
     
Apr 15, 2011 08:18 |  #29

Swift wrote in post #12116081 (external link)
I have an AMD Phenom II - 4 core 3.2ghz, mixed with a 1tb 7200 rpm HD.

Now my question is, if I buy an SSD, would I see major improvements in processing? Opening photos or running actions in PCS5, for example.

Am I missing out on the power of my processor with a 7200rpm HD?

Depends on:
- how old is the HD, what model? 7200rpm means nothing.
- how much RAM do you have?
- do you use Vista, Win7 or some other prefetching OS?

Changing an older HD to a SSD in a machine with small or medium amounts of RAM while not changing anything else will always get you good results for a desktop environment. That doesn't mean it's the best use of money.


My imagine composition sucks. I need a heavier lens.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Swift
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,225 posts
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Ohio, USA
     
Apr 15, 2011 08:21 |  #30

uOpt wrote in post #12226726 (external link)
Depends on:
- how old is the HD, what model? 7200rpm means nothing.
- how much RAM do you have?
- do you use Vista, Win7 or some other prefetching OS?

Changing an older HD to a SSD in a machine with small or medium amounts of RAM while not changing anything else will always get you good results for a desktop environment. That doesn't mean it's the best use of money.

Ram: 8gb ddr3
W7 x64 - of course.
WDC WD1001FALS - 1tb - device manager says its ATA .. ?


Canon 550D | Canon 70-200mm f/4L USM | Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM | Canon Speedlight 430EX | Raynox DCR-250 Macro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,164 views & 0 likes for this thread
Good processor vs SSD ?
FORUMS General Gear Talk Computers 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is maharaj.2000
817 guests, 191 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.