Posted by Les Barstow on January 30, 2008 at 3:40 AM
I'm shopping for computer parts and am wondering - just how much improvement do you get in Photoshop CS3 from, say, a quad-core Intel Core2 vs. the two cores of the Duo?
I'm on a tight budget, and the CPU is a prime target for cutting costs until I can afford an upgrade.
Posted by David Bostedo on January 30, 2008 at 11:01 AM
Les - You won't see too much performance bump in PS with 4 cores. The program isn't usually processor limited - memory is much more important. There's a pretty good discussion of this over at NatureScapes :
Posted by Les Barstow on January 30, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Thanks, David. The thread you link to is in regards to a system very similar to the one I'm building, right down to the motherboard and quad-core processor option I was considering. I'll go with the dual-core CPU for now and invest the savings elsewhere.
Posted by Greg Barteluk on January 30, 2008 at 5:01 PM
I am expecting delivery of a Q6700 core in a few days so I'll let you know if I notice much of an increase in performance over my current core 2 duo E6600.
Posted by Jack Garrett on January 30, 2008 at 6:49 PM
Les, I work for Microcenter in Denver and the hot item right now is the Intel E8400 core 2 duo. It is 3.0 Gh and 6 MB of 2nd level cache. We are selling the processor for $189.99 and you can get 2 GB of DDR2 RAM for $69.99 and another 30 off in rebate! Our store is currently in the midst of Build your own PC month and you can get some great deals!
Jack Garrett
Posted by Jack Garrett on January 30, 2008 at 6:54 PM
I forgot to add that memory is probably the most important thing with CS but you probably already knew that!
Jack
Posted by Fred Stearns on January 30, 2008 at 9:52 PM
I recently upgraded from a Pentium 4 to a Core 2 Quad. There was a big jump in speed. However, I also have a Core 2 Duo processor in my Laptop and find that the desktop is faster, but I have 3 GB in the desk top. I would go with more memory, but that is all that XP Pro will handle. The way I understand it is that the program has to be written to take advantage of the extra processors in the processor. I guess it will take another PS update to take incorporate the new functions.
Posted by Les Barstow on January 31, 2008 at 12:15 AM
Jack - if only I'd known. I was in the store over lunch looking for an ASUS P5K (non-Deluxe) motherboard. The store was out of stock, so I ordered online after I got back to work... Most of my stuff I ordered from Tiger, but only because they had a slightly different set of parts than what Microcenter had in stock (e.g. their memory was a couple of bucks more, but had more aggressive timing and same basic rebate...)
I'll be back in before I build the system to purchase misc. parts. I work in the area and my job occasionally takes me over to the store; I'll try to find you so you can sticker my purchases from now on!
Posted by Les Barstow on January 31, 2008 at 12:29 AM
Fred, I'm doing similar - going from a 1.8GHz P4 to a 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo. It's going to be a big jump in speed all on its own even based on single core processing power. (Core 2 clock speeds have been halved from P4 speeds while doubling processing power; theoretically, a 1.8GHz Core 2 single core is approximately 4 times as powerful as a 1.8GHz P4 - then add the second core...)
I'm starting with 2GB of DDR2-800 RAM (double my current 1GB) and have space for another pair of DIMMs; I'll put in another 2GB when I get a few more bucks... (As an aside, XP will recognize 4GB of memory, not just 3; however, the system board will suck some of that memory up before showing it to Windows, and you usually wind up with just over 3GB if you install 4. For example, I just configured a Dell Inspiron M6300 laptop with 4GB and XP Pro; the system BIOS sucked up .75GB and handed XP 3.25GB when all was said and done. )
Posted by Jack Garrett on January 31, 2008 at 12:33 AM
Thanks Les...I work Mon, Tues and Fri, Sat. I'd be glad to help you...and the P5K board is awesome..we keep selling out!
Jack
Posted by Greg Barteluk on January 31, 2008 at 11:01 AM
If anyone else is doing a P4 to core 2 duo upgrade, I will soon have a slightly used E6600 CPU and a some RAM for sale cheap.
Posted by Greg Barteluk on February 3, 2008 at 10:01 AM
Les: I have switched CPUs and have some results for you. This is not a true apples-to-apples comparison because I changed from an Intel 2.4Ghz E6600 core two duo to a 2.66Ghz Q6700, so in addition to more cores it's also a faster CPU. That said, my methodology was simple: in PS3 is photomerged 6 CR2 filles from my 5D and timed how long the process took. In each test I open PS3, loaded the images, ran photomerge, closed the image, and the ran it again without closing PS3. The second photomerge ran faster I am assuming because PS3 held data in a clipboard.
With the E6600 it took 4:40 for the first merging and 4:28 the second time. With the Q6700 CPU the times were 3:06 and 1:58 the first try, and 2:59 and 1:54 the second test. As you can see the Q6700 is significantly faster. Now how much of the credit for that increase goes to the faster CPU and how much to the extra cores I'll leave for others to debate. Suffice it to say, this machine really smokes.
For the curious my other computer hardware includes: EVGA 680SLI motherboard, 2 x Raptor 160GB 10k rpm HDs, NVIDIA 8800 GTX video card, Vista 64 bit running 8 gigs of RAM.
Posted by Les Barstow on February 5, 2008 at 2:06 AM
I'm guessing most of that came from the extra cores, Greg. The E6600 and the Q6700 are both 1066MHz FSB, if I recall my processors correctly. The only differences are 0.2GHz and two extra cores (and the cache that goes with them...).
In the end I purchased better than I figured; I am now the proud owner of an E4500 Core 2 Duo (rated 2.2GHz) overclocked to 2.92GHz. The ASUS P5K board made this configuration a snap; color me impressed.
I'll undoubtedly upgrade to a quad-core sometime in the future, but with the overclocked older CPU, I'll be happy for a while.
I am in the same boat on the upgrade bug. I was gonna pop for the E8400, but then I saw a review that showed some significant advantages in Lightroom when running a quadcore. Seems like most reviews I have looked at don't show much of a speed increase in CS3 when doing work on a single image. Working with stitching or batch processing should benefit from the extra cores as Greg's experience confirms.
As impressive as the E8400 DuoCore is, I think I might wait on the new 45nm Quadcores, which don't appear to be hitting shelves until late Feb or early March now? Jack - maybe you can help us out here - any ETA? I am in the Denver area too and I need to hit Microcenter before that sale is over. You guys are running some smoking deals right now!!!
Discussion
13 repliesI'm on a tight budget, and the CPU is a prime target for cutting costs until I can afford an upgrade.
http://www.naturescapes.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=122393&highlight=quad+core
Jack Garrett
Jack
I'll be back in before I build the system to purchase misc. parts. I work in the area and my job occasionally takes me over to the store; I'll try to find you so you can sticker my purchases from now on!
I'm starting with 2GB of DDR2-800 RAM (double my current 1GB) and have space for another pair of DIMMs; I'll put in another 2GB when I get a few more bucks... (As an aside, XP will recognize 4GB of memory, not just 3; however, the system board will suck some of that memory up before showing it to Windows, and you usually wind up with just over 3GB if you install 4. For example, I just configured a Dell Inspiron M6300 laptop with 4GB and XP Pro; the system BIOS sucked up .75GB and handed XP 3.25GB when all was said and done. )
Jack
With the E6600 it took 4:40 for the first merging and 4:28 the second time. With the Q6700 CPU the times were 3:06 and 1:58 the first try, and 2:59 and 1:54 the second test. As you can see the Q6700 is significantly faster. Now how much of the credit for that increase goes to the faster CPU and how much to the extra cores I'll leave for others to debate. Suffice it to say, this machine really smokes.
For the curious my other computer hardware includes: EVGA 680SLI motherboard, 2 x Raptor 160GB 10k rpm HDs, NVIDIA 8800 GTX video card, Vista 64 bit running 8 gigs of RAM.
In the end I purchased better than I figured; I am now the proud owner of an E4500 Core 2 Duo (rated 2.2GHz) overclocked to 2.92GHz. The ASUS P5K board made this configuration a snap; color me impressed.
I'll undoubtedly upgrade to a quad-core sometime in the future, but with the overclocked older CPU, I'll be happy for a while.
As impressive as the E8400 DuoCore is, I think I might wait on the new 45nm Quadcores, which don't appear to be hitting shelves until late Feb or early March now? Jack - maybe you can help us out here - any ETA?