I'm hoping to get into a new computer soon, switching from PC to Mac G5 most likely. I currently have a Dell PC running with 2 GB RAM (1.6Ghz Pentium, I believe), Windows XP. Photoshop isn't blazing fast, but certainly not bad.
For those running Macs, is 2 GB RAM sufficient for an average user of Photoshop; I do work with large scans of 4x5s, up to 200-250 MB. If I were sticking with a PC, I'd probably stay with 2GB, but not sure if a MAC would necessitate more (or get by with less?).
A related question - is ECC RAM useful/necessary for the average user, or does the non-ECC memory handle photo editing applications with reasonable performance?
I don't know if Macs support ECC and non-ECC, but either way ECC is pretty much a waste of money in my opinion. In-memory data errors are extremely rare.
I suspect OS-X, being based on Unix, is doing a better job managing and using memory than Windows so if you were happy with 2GB on the PC you should do at least as well on the Mac.
You probably already considered this but G5 is the last generation fo PowerPC to be used in a Mac. All future models, support etc. will be using Intel chips which are not binary-compatible so you may have a hard time migrating again in the future. I would suggest going to an Intel-based model if you can.
Thanks, Guy. The Macs do support ECC and non-ECC, and there's a moderate but significant price difference (about $200 at 2 GB). I'm planning to get an Epson 7800, so I'm trying to stick to a sensible budget on the computer side.
Yep - I'm actually planning on waiting for the intel chips. I don't know if they'll put them into G5s or come out with a new model. A couple of folks at work have the MacBook Pros running Boot Camp (?) and, aside from a few installation foibles, they're happy with it.
Posted by Bryce Flory on July 17, 2006 at 10:03 PM
not sure on the ECC thing, but i agree with guy, its a bit of a waste of money... the current G5s will take up to 8GB of RAM, but photoshop can only work with up to 4GBs, so i think 2GB will be great... i have 1.5GB in my aging PowerBook G4 1.33mhz, and i certainly dont feel like i'm waiting around for photoshop all that much.... now lightroom & aperture, thats another story.
Posted by Mel Ladewig on July 18, 2006 at 12:23 PM
ECC is generally more useful (or more often used) in servers where you might have lower fault tolerance. I wouldn't buy it for a home computer either, unless it was required by the computer for some reason.
I won't try and pretend to know everything... take my oppinion, and advice as such, however I have been invovled with most every aspect of computers for most of my life (25yrs old) so, having said that, here's my understanding, and oppinion....
Like previously stated, ECC is usually reserved for Servers and other tasks where memory errors are unacceptable, traditionally ECC has been SLOWER than non ECC (now I won't pretend to know about the newer stuff, but theoretically it should still be slower, wether it's noticable or not, probably not, highly likely that for a photoshop task the time difference would be less than a second to only a few seconds for a large task, but think about it, it's having to do a job, then check to make sure there are not errors, that takes extra time)
As far as how much, Ram is Ram... were talking about doing the same task with the same program... now there may be less overhead on a mac, or more overhead (system requirements of ram, likely less w/ Unix based MacOS) but your file sizes are still roughly the same size, were still working with the same number of pixels and the sizes, so if you had less than 2GB on PC and it wasn't enough, better get more... if it was enough, than it's going to be enough.... Speed of memory is going to play a BIG role... Photoshop uses memory, and uses it in a big way... open the task managar some time when you do something, and notice how little the processor is actually being used, but you should see the memory usage go up, or at least fluctuate... I used to have a 75mhz pentium clocked to 100mhz, which outperformed a 166mhz Mac, because I had the memory to back it up, my much older PC beat the brand new (what was it, the G3? whatever it was about the time the first imac came out) mac in the amount of time it took to run things such as unsharp mask, etc.
Discussion
5 repliesFor those running Macs, is 2 GB RAM sufficient for an average user of Photoshop; I do work with large scans of 4x5s, up to 200-250 MB. If I were sticking with a PC, I'd probably stay with 2GB, but not sure if a MAC would necessitate more (or get by with less?).
A related question - is ECC RAM useful/necessary for the average user, or does the non-ECC memory handle photo editing applications with reasonable performance?
Thanks in advance for any help!
I don't know if Macs support ECC and non-ECC, but either way ECC is pretty much a waste of money in my opinion. In-memory data errors are extremely rare.
I suspect OS-X, being based on Unix, is doing a better job managing and using memory than Windows so if you were happy with 2GB on the PC you should do at least as well on the Mac.
You probably already considered this but G5 is the last generation fo PowerPC to be used in a Mac. All future models, support etc. will be using Intel chips which are not binary-compatible so you may have a hard time migrating again in the future. I would suggest going to an Intel-based model if you can.
Guy
Yep - I'm actually planning on waiting for the intel chips. I don't know if they'll put them into G5s or come out with a new model. A couple of folks at work have the MacBook Pros running Boot Camp (?) and, aside from a few installation foibles, they're happy with it.
Like previously stated, ECC is usually reserved for Servers and other tasks where memory errors are unacceptable, traditionally ECC has been SLOWER than non ECC (now I won't pretend to know about the newer stuff, but theoretically it should still be slower, wether it's noticable or not, probably not, highly likely that for a photoshop task the time difference would be less than a second to only a few seconds for a large task, but think about it, it's having to do a job, then check to make sure there are not errors, that takes extra time)
As far as how much, Ram is Ram... were talking about doing the same task with the same program... now there may be less overhead on a mac, or more overhead (system requirements of ram, likely less w/ Unix based MacOS) but your file sizes are still roughly the same size, were still working with the same number of pixels and the sizes, so if you had less than 2GB on PC and it wasn't enough, better get more... if it was enough, than it's going to be enough.... Speed of memory is going to play a BIG role... Photoshop uses memory, and uses it in a big way... open the task managar some time when you do something, and notice how little the processor is actually being used, but you should see the memory usage go up, or at least fluctuate... I used to have a 75mhz pentium clocked to 100mhz, which outperformed a 166mhz Mac, because I had the memory to back it up, my much older PC beat the brand new (what was it, the G3? whatever it was about the time the first imac came out) mac in the amount of time it took to run things such as unsharp mask, etc.