Upgrade PC or get a new one (for 5DsR photos)

With your settings:

psd: 66.79
psd again: 46.57 (might have been building previews alongside the first run?)
jpg: 52.67
jpg: 52.96
tiff: 45.96
dng: 10.11 that's TEN point one one!
psd: 46.59

skid00skid00 wrote in post #17922220
With your settings:

psd: 66.79
psd again: 46.57 (might have been building previews alongside the first run?)
jpg: 52.67
jpg: 52.96
tiff: 45.96
dng: 10.11 that's TEN point one one!
psd: 46.59

Seems like we're in the same ball park.

Good job. Now, can you overclock? There's a great guide at http://www.overclock.n​et/f/5/intel-cpus

skid00skid00 wrote in post #17923299
Good job. Now, can you overclock? There's a great guide at http://www.overclock.n​et/f/5/intel-cpus

What kind of throughput increase do you think I would realize by overclocking?

KatManDEW wrote in post #17931439
What kind of throughput increase do you think I would realize by overclocking?

I got 10% higher frequency on my latest chip, but a whopping 50% on the PC I built prior. It depends on the specific parts you get.

Update: One small BIOS tweak wiped out my system C: drive, and I had to reinstall Windows 7

I'm pretty much back up and running, but now the system won't shut down reliably. It usually goes to sleep (or hibernates) when I select Shut Down from the Start menu.

I've tried everything I can think of in Windows Power Options. And I checked everything in the BIOS that looks like it might be applicable. It didn't do this before I reinstalled Windows

If I shut down, resulting in sleep/hibernate, and then wake it up and select Shut Down when Windows asks for my password, it will then shut down. If I go into power options and change any of the sleep settings and save it, and then change back to my original Power Options settings and save it, then it will usually shut down after I do that.

Anyone have any ideas what's going on?

absplastic wrote in post #17914516
I wouldn't say you are being ridiculed, but I think people are right to ask for clarification because the system you describe yourself as having should be an absolute beast that eats 5DSR files for breakfast, burps, and says, "is that all you got?" It's better hardware than I have, and my system does not choke on 5DSR files in any way.

The photos from my most recent fashion shoot are all in the range of 53.1 to 63.8 MB RAW files right from the camera. Exported from Lightroom as PSD, they range from 236 to 301 MB, with the most compressible white cyclorama shots being the smallest. I'm using a laptop, which is a Macbook Pro Mid-2014, 2.5GHz i7 with 16GB of 1.6GHz DDR3 RAM, 512GB SSD, 3TB RAID 1 main storage, NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M available and enabled for OpenCL.

These 200-300 MB photoshop files open into Photoshop CC in under 1 second from either the SSD or Thunderbolt RAID. Slightly slower from USB 3.0 backup drive, as expected. Applying a Gaussian blur to an entire 5DSR file ranges from near instantaneous as makes no difference at small radii, to 6 seconds if I do the 1000 pixel radius maximum. The most complex liquify operation I've ever done took maybe 1 to 1.5 seconds to return a result, if that.

The only time I regularly encounter operations that take more than 1 second in normal usage are when applying 3rd party filters such as Imagenomic or MacPhun effects. It's possible that these don't leverage OpenCL or multiple cores as well as Adobe functions. Not sure. The other thing that I've seen take up to 10 seconds is saving out a multi-layered file, like if I save a portrait while I still have a dozen masked effect layers or frequency separation layers. These tend to be files upwards of 1 gigabyte, so I don't expect them to save instantly, but I feel like 5-10 seconds is pretty reasonable. For Lightroom CC to join 2 5DSR files together as a 100MP panorama is a 5 to 6 second operation. Again, not instant, but compared to how slowly HugIn rendered panoramas, this seems blazingly fast. On a fast desktop tower machine I would expect it could be twice as fast or faster.

When I moved from CS6 to CC, things got SO much faster. Kudos to Adobe, there are serious performance upgrades in these latest versions.

Just to qualify the new system is like grease lightning, booting is almost instantaneous.
Moving files is instant - everything I hoped for, and a ton more. Actually it exceeded my expectations by 400%.
Sadly I got a duff motherboard which is being replaced as I type.

But Im not put off , as it will be worth the wait. Core temps are about 36C to 37C so its hardly breaking sweat. Even the Intel diagnostic stress test showed it 48C UNDER THE CPUs max temp, and all the case fans hit a max of 350rpm. So very quiet, sometimes the Noctua cooler fans rise to 900 rpm for a few mins then subside back to 320 rpm
Basically its silent, except when you stress test it but 14db is still very quiet for the performance.

Oh and this is with a 4K Monitor - so far the MSI Gaming 970 sems to eatneverything thrown at it - photography wise - not done any gaming.

It seems to load the windows operating system from scatch in 3 mins including getting all the updates!
The limitation seems to be the time you interact with the loading like passwords for internet etc.

My performance problems were with the old i7 2630M laptop. That was dire - the healing brush could be 50 dabs in front of the screen.

Submariner wrote in post #17947474
Just to qualify the new system is like grease lightning, booting is almost instantaneous.
Moving files is instant - everything I hoped for, and a ton more. Actually it exceeded my expectations by 400%.
Sadly I got a duff motherboard which is being replaced as I type.

But Im not put off , as it will be worth the wait. Core temps are about 36C to 37C so its hardly breaking sweat. Even the Intel diagnostic stress test showed it 48C UNDER THE CPUs max temp, and all the case fans hit a max of 350rpm. So very quiet, sometimes the Noctua cooler fans rise to 900 rpm for a few mins then subside back to 320 rpm
Basically its silent, except when you stress test it but 14db is still very quiet for the performance.

Oh and this is with a 4K Monitor - so far the MSI Gaming 970 sems to eatneverything thrown at it - photography wise - not done any gaming.

It seems to load the windows operating system from scatch in 3 mins including getting all the updates!
The limitation seems to be the time you interact with the loading like passwords for internet etc.

My performance problems were with the old i7 2630M laptop. That was dire - the healing brush could be 50 dabs in front of the screen.

The thing is, you could've had an imperceivable difference in performance for far cheaper. But it's your build and your cash, so I'm happy that you're happy with it

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17947542
The thing is, you could've had an imperceivable difference in performance for far cheaper. But it's your build and your cash, so I'm happy that you're happy with it

You can't 4K for far cheaper. Until you feel the purr of a high end build, or the Rev of a nice nice car, or the sound of a strativarius violin, you really can't relate with each other.

absplastic wrote in post #17914516
I wouldn't say you are being ridiculed, but I think people are right to ask for clarification because the system you describe yourself as having should be an absolute beast that eats 5DSR files for breakfast, burps, and says, "is that all you got?" It's better hardware than I have, and my system does not choke on 5DSR files in any way.

The photos from my most recent fashion shoot are all in the range of 53.1 to 63.8 MB RAW files right from the camera. Exported from Lightroom as PSD, they range from 236 to 301 MB, with the most compressible white cyclorama shots being the smallest. I'm using a laptop, which is a Macbook Pro Mid-2014, 2.5GHz i7 with 16GB of 1.6GHz DDR3 RAM, 512GB SSD, 3TB RAID 1 main storage, NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M available and enabled for OpenCL.

These 200-300 MB photoshop files open into Photoshop CC in under 1 second from either the SSD or Thunderbolt RAID. Slightly slower from USB 3.0 backup drive, as expected. Applying a Gaussian blur to an entire 5DSR file ranges from near instantaneous as makes no difference at small radii, to 6 seconds if I do the 1000 pixel radius maximum. The most complex liquify operation I've ever done took maybe 1 to 1.5 seconds to return a result, if that.

The only time I regularly encounter operations that take more than 1 second in normal usage are when applying 3rd party filters such as Imagenomic or MacPhun effects. It's possible that these don't leverage OpenCL or multiple cores as well as Adobe functions. Not sure. The other thing that I've seen take up to 10 seconds is saving out a multi-layered file, like if I save a portrait while I still have a dozen masked effect layers or frequency separation layers. These tend to be files upwards of 1 gigabyte, so I don't expect them to save instantly, but I feel like 5-10 seconds is pretty reasonable. For Lightroom CC to join 2 5DSR files together as a 100MP panorama is a 5 to 6 second operation. Again, not instant, but compared to how slowly HugIn rendered panoramas, this seems blazingly fast. On a fast desktop tower machine I would expect it could be twice as fast or faster.

When I moved from CS6 to CC, things got SO much faster. Kudos to Adobe, there are serious performance upgrades in these latest versions.

I'm jealous. My new mobo isn't anyway near that fast.

KatManDEW wrote in post #17947634
I'm jealous. My new mobo isn't anyway near that fast.

Yeah but yours is not broken like mine

Maybe Tims right but as I couldnt find anyone who could scientifically tell me which bits make it fast - for an extra £500
I got:-
40 PCIe electrical lanes
32 GB ram. ( note the whole shoot can go in ram)
6 Cores
ECC Ram
And those super fast PCIe NVME discs, someone said they are 4.5 times faster than my interim backup Samsung Evo 850s. And I would say it feels like it.

Call it insurance, I dont know which bits really make it super fast.

As far as I am concerened if I had saved £500 and put it on deposit, Lloyds are only paying 0.7% so thats less than £5 per annum interest! So defo worth it.

But all this depends on the replacement MB running reliably.

idkdc wrote in post #17947609
You can't 4K for far cheaper. Until you feel the purr of a high end build, or the Rev of a nice nice car, or the sound of a strativarius violin, you really can't relate with each other.

Yeah, you most definitely can...

Also, the OP never mentioned anything about 4K other than the screen resolution, which could be powered by the lowest end GPUs.

Reading this makes me want to build my own PC again.

But that is a lot of power for me. I wouldnt even OC since I don't see a 10% performance gain is worth it. I would stick with the latest I7 and that's it. I would do maybe water cool and not for high heat but instead, less dust inside the computer tower.

4k is pretty easy for GPU these days even the Intel integrated ones on the latest I series processors. I have the Surface Pro 3 with HD4400 and I remember it was able to handle 4K.

RHChan84 wrote in post #17947735
Reading this makes me want to build my own PC again.

But that is a lot of power for me. I wouldnt even OC since I don't see a 10% performance gain is worth it. I would stick with the latest I7 and that's it. I would do maybe water cool and not for high heat but instead, less dust inside the computer tower.

4k is pretty easy for GPU these days even the Intel integrated ones on the latest I series processors. I have the Surface Pro 3 with HD4400 and I remember it was able to handle 4K.

I agree on the 10% performance gain and the dust inside the tower.

KatManDEW wrote in post #17947873
I agree on the 10% performance gain and the dust inside the tower.

ATM I cant see any reason for overclocking for my requirements, I think the NVMe discs solve all the performance issues.
As for water cooling, thats too scary for me; and the Noctua D15 is superb. Noise wise multiple fans at low rpms mean its exceptionally quiet.

But the dust issue, thats a real worry.... i just hope that keeping a positive air pressure will keep it down, and I have kept the pc interior clear by using small SSDs flat on the case side. So hopefully I can blow it out regularly.

One thing I dont see is just how much cheaper people say you could do it for. £2,100 seemed fairly reasonable. Sure I didnt need to swap out the fans for quiet Noctuas and buy 3 more fans but £78 seemed OK for that.
Yes one could go the i7 route and save about £200, and save £122 and have 16GB of ram, and save £100 and not have PCIe SSDs. So about £500 overspend. But its still £1000 less than buying one of those iMacs with nowhere near the performance or future flexibility. Since then, I have discovered that the SM MB will be able to take the new E5 Ver 4 processors
So buy one of those for £400, and sell the current one say circa £200; and it might cost me circa £200 for an historical upgrade of 20% power. TBH I cant ever envisage ever needing more cpu power ATM.

Photo of clear case interior with 1.5mm polished stainless steel panels on the right hand side, to mount interim backup SSDs on
Note only the vertical one is currently mounted - the second ( to be cannibalised from my Laptop before selling it ) has yet to be fitted on the silicone pads on the horizontal 2.5mm thick plate ( this replaced a flimsy .7mm steel affair) .