What do I really need in a PC?

I am using an old (ten years?) Dell Inspiron 9300 laptop. It gets the job done, but I'm often wanting more for photo editing (PS can run pretty slow) and the colors never match my prints. I was thinking about getting a new monitor (the P2415Q sounds great) and a new PC. I can keep my 9300 for portability if I ever need it, plus it won't fetch more than fifty bucks anyhow!

But I am clueless when it comes to computers. What do I really need for photo editing? My 9300 is 1.73GHz and maxed out at 2GB RAM. Sure, I'd love an i7 with 32GB RAM and perhaps one of those SSD thingees (not sure what that is!) but what would you all recommend?

For the PC alone, I am looking to spend $500-$750 (the less the better) and that should include an operating system (I see some computers come without?). I can purchase the monitor separately and will spend $300-$450 on that as well.

So mostly for photo editing (1D4 and 5D2 files). I have never tinkered with video, but partially because my laptop cannot handle that. I have found some i7 16GB RAM desktops around the upper limit of my price range that I have considered.

Just looking for some thoughts or suggestions, really!

You'll want a quad-core of some sort, 8GB of RAM, and an SSD - whether you like it or not. There are some inexpensive ones out there, but an SSD alone will speed up your system way more than a faster processor will.

Messing around in PCPartPicker I get something that's also in the $650 range: http://pcpartpicker.co​m/p/p2n7jX

You definitely don't need an i7, an i5 or a mid-higher level AMD CPU would be more than enough.

You could put together a PC for under $400 that would be more than up to the task of photo processing.

With your budget and needs I would look at an i5 based machine. The money saved on an i5 can be put into an SSD. I would also stay with the onboard graphics unless you can find a good price on a PC with an entry level GeForce card. 8GB of RAM will do, but 16GB will give you head room for the future.

If you do printing and are finding your prints don't match the onscreen colors(most don't) I would look to save a little on the PC and monitor and invest in a Color Calibration tool such as the Datacolor Spyder4 or Spyder5 Express.

If you have someone available that can assist in the questions part of building yourself, definitely go that route. You can choose what components go into your PC and you will understand what you need to upgrade later on in the future.

If you aren't, there are tons of good deals on premades like a Lenovo i7-4790 with 16GB and 2TB Hybrid HDD for $649 on www.techbargains.com. Definitely get a better monitor + calibration tool. No point in capturing photos with a 1D4/5Dii to only have the result look inconsistent onscreen with prints.

Thank you all very much for the advice! I'm glad to see a nice pc can certainly be had in my price range

you can haply run without a quad core, I am running a Dual core and it out-performs the base line haswel i3 and even the i5 (when clocked).

I have an old Inspiron 9100 that won't die, but there is no way I could ever run PS or LR on it. It was a monster of a machine in it's day, but much slower that the lowest spec'd PC you can currently purchase.

I think if you get an i5 desktop with 8GB RAM, 180GB SSD for your boot drive and 1TB HDD for a data drive you'd be really happy.

I'd suggest a 5th Gen i7 as well as 16Gb RAM and +1 for an SSD (Samsung EVO 850). SSD's could be had for just above $100 now for 256gb. Once you have one, you'll never want to go back to the standard "spinning" hard drive.

I would definately agree on the SSD front but don't worry if you can't get 16gb, 8gb is plenty. The more the better is the general rule but there is a point of deminishing results. the difference between 8 and 16gb is about 1 sec if that on a batch edit, but if you can afford it, go for it.

bikfoto wrote in post #17666649
I'd suggest a 5th Gen i7 as well as 16Gb RAM and +1 for an SSD (Samsung EVO 850). SSD's could be had for just above $100 now for 256gb. Once you have one, you'll never want to go back to the standard "spinning" hard drive.

That's major overkill on nearly all fronts...

2D rendering takes very little processing power, even an i3 dual core would likely be enough for most tasks, an i5 would be more well rounded. 8GB of RAM is more than enough for photo processing, heck I don't even run up 4GB most of the time when running LR and PS at the same time (it's not hard to monitor what you're using). The SSD is a good idea for running the OS and the main software on though, 250GB should definitely be enough.

The only thing you might need more RAM and a higher end CPU for is when you get into video editing and gaming, for photos an i5 and 8GB of RAM is plenty.

urbanfreestyle wrote in post #17666654
I would definately agree on the SSD front but don't worry if you can't get 16gb, 8gb is plenty. The more the better is the general rule but there is a point of deminishing results. the difference between 8 and 16gb is about 1 sec if that on a batch edit, but if you can afford it, go for it.

This.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17666795
That's major overkill on nearly all fronts...

2D rendering takes very little processing power, even an i3 dual core would likely be enough for most tasks, an i5 would be more well rounded. 8GB of RAM is more than enough for photo processing, heck I don't even run up 4GB most of the time when running LR and PS at the same time (it's not hard to monitor what you're using). The SSD is a good idea for running the OS and the main software on though, 250GB should definitely be enough.

The only thing you might need more RAM and a higher end CPU for is when you get into video editing and gaming, for photos an i5 and 8GB of RAM is plenty.

This.

+1 to your additions!

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17666795
That's major overkill on nearly all fronts...

2D rendering takes very little processing power, even an i3 dual core would likely be enough for most tasks, an i5 would be more well rounded. 8GB of RAM is more than enough for photo processing, heck I don't even run up 4GB most of the time when running LR and PS at the same time (it's not hard to monitor what you're using). The SSD is a good idea for running the OS and the main software on though, 250GB should definitely be enough.

The only thing you might need more RAM and a higher end CPU for is when you get into video editing and gaming, for photos an i5 and 8GB of RAM is plenty.

Just because I don't like blanket statements... It could make sense to use a more powerful CPU and have more RAM depending on the nature of your work. For basic image processing of files from a 18~36mp camera system, the above is indeed true, but once you start getting deep into layers, stitching panos, image stacking or using 50mp+ camera systems, the load on your system increases exponentially such that you'll end up having to take coffee breaks after hitting the process button like its 1999.

My 5-year old iMac is still hanging in there and can process 5D2 files very well, just as it always had, but once I want to stitch together two 51mp files from the Z, it tanks hard and takes a couple of minutes to do.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17666795
That's major overkill on nearly all fronts...

2D rendering takes very little processing power, even an i3 dual core would likely be enough for most tasks, an i5 would be more well rounded. 8GB of RAM is more than enough for photo processing, heck I don't even run up 4GB most of the time when running LR and PS at the same time (it's not hard to monitor what you're using). The SSD is a good idea for running the OS and the main software on though, 250GB should definitely be enough.

The only thing you might need more RAM and a higher end CPU for is when you get into video editing and gaming, for photos an i5 and 8GB of RAM is plenty.

This.

For limited photo processing an i5 and 8GB of ram is enough, maybe. If your doing any kind of batch processing on anything serious at a professional level than it's not.
And if your blending lots of layers, building composites or doing HDR or Panaromics, then even 16GB of ram is often not enough.

I can easily use all 16GB of ram in my machine and make the i7 quad core CPU run at 100% just working on photos in Lightroom and Photoshop.

Some differing opinions here...loving it! I will try and stretch my budget as far as I can, knowing what I need today may differ from what I may need tomorrow.