|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Mar 18, 2008 5:47:53 GMT
Here's a link to an informal PS speed test posted at DPR: forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1004&message=24871820It's not really a scientific test, but rather a fun benchmark with which folks can measure the speed of PS on their system in doing a specific task. My new system did it in 20.3 sec.System info:CS3 Windows XP Home Edition SP2 Q6600 quad core 2.4 GHz, nVidia GeForce 8500 GT 512 MB vcard 4 GB RAM, boot.ini hacked so PS can see 2.4 GB memory, 90% allocated to PS All normal applications running (real-life processing conditions). If you folks wish to measure your system's PS speed compared to other photogs, just click on the DPR link and perform the task as specified. Post your speed here and system specs. Some older systems take quite some time to do the task, here's an example. ;D 5 min 10 sec
Athlon XP 1800 (1.4GHz), 1.25GB Ram and Photoshop 7/XP Home. |
|
|
|
Post by mantarey on Mar 18, 2008 6:59:16 GMT
Wow, that is blazing fast.  |
|
|
|
Post by bindi on Mar 18, 2008 7:28:42 GMT
Mine took 50 seconds, Romy. Sounds like your Quad core system is a real winner!
|
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Mar 18, 2008 7:49:24 GMT
Mine took 50 seconds, Romy. Sounds like your Quad core system is a real winner! That's very good too, Bindi. Just finished benchmarking my old system: CS3 Pentium 4 3.0 GHz WXP HE SP2 2 GB RAM 100 secs! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Martin Alvendia on Mar 18, 2008 8:03:55 GMT
Tried it on my laptop.... Centrino Core 2 Duo 1.66GHz+1.49 GB of RAM = 55.5secs I want a New System!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Mar 18, 2008 8:19:35 GMT
Tried it on my laptop.... Centrino Core 2 Duo 1.66GHz+1.49 GB of RAM = 55.5secs I want a New System!!! That's as fast as we probably need, Martin! I survived on the P4 3 GHz ( 100 sec in this test) and I thought it was fast.... until I tried a Q4. ;D Seriously, SODIMM RAM prices have fallen that you can easily boost your PS speed by sticking a couple of 2GB modules into your system (just make sure your board supports 4 GB). Then we'll hack your boot.ini file too so PS can see much of the new memory.  |
|
|
|
Post by Martin Alvendia on Mar 18, 2008 10:46:58 GMT
That's as fast as we probably need, Martin! I survived on the P4 3 GHz ( 100 sec in this test) and I thought it was fast.... until I tried a Q4. ;D Seriously, SODIMM RAM prices have fallen that you can easily boost your PS speed by sticking a couple of 2GB modules into your system (just make sure your board supports 4 GB). Then we'll hack your boot.ini file too so PS can see much of the new memory. You just lit a light bulb over my head! hmmmmmm..... |
|
|
|
Post by Neon Rosell II on Mar 18, 2008 12:23:47 GMT
Hu hu hu!! My PP work machine(core 2 duo, 1.66Ghz, 1Gb ram) took 71 sec!!! You would have finished 3 pics as against my 1 pic  |
|
|
|
Post by Bobby Kintanar on Mar 18, 2008 12:56:45 GMT
You guys are crying? Heck, mine took a whole of 2 minutes and 11 Seconds! Shucks - it's an AMD Athlon 64; 1Gig. memory with 1T Timing; running at 2.1 Ghz with a 256 mb ATI Radeon GPU on Windows XP Home Edition SP2 -- Ahh, this was THE State of the Art - 3 years ago! Built it myself. Hehehe. Stable as a Rock, I'll live with it a little while longer. :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Mar 18, 2008 13:48:08 GMT
Hu hu hu!! My PP work machine(core 2 duo, 1.66Ghz, 1Gb ram) took 71 sec!!! You would have finished 3 pics as against my 1 pic That's a pretty decent speed Neon, but you'll notice a boost if you stick in more RAM.... they're cheap now and take but a couple of minutes to install. You guys are crying? Heck, mine took a whole of 2 minutes and 11 Seconds! Shucks - it's an AMD Athlon 64; 1Gig. memory with 1T Timing; running at 2.1 Ghz with a 256 mb ATI Radeon GPU on Windows XP Home Edition SP2 -- Ahh, this was THE State of the Art - 3 years ago! Built it myself. Hehehe. Stable as a Rock, I'll live with it a little while longer. :-) My kind of machine, Bobby.... slow but sure.... I can set the conversion settings, hit the go button, go out and smoke a stick of lung-buster, and by the time I'm back, the 16-bit TIFF is ready! ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by reneripr on Mar 19, 2008 1:03:56 GMT
Oh God....
My 5 or 4 year state of the art machine took 2minutes and 35 seconds.
Its a Pentium 4, 2.6 GHz and 2Gbyte of memory.
I need to assembly a new machine...., but before some flash stuff, a 100-400 lens, a Gitzo or Manfrotto level and a full week of photo-birding at a remote forest in my country.
Saludos,
Rene
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark Itol on Mar 19, 2008 9:40:37 GMT
It took 114 seconds on my Thinkpad with a Pentium M 1.8 GHz processor and 512MB RAM. Thanks for sharing. |
|
|
|
Post by Bobby Kintanar on Mar 19, 2008 10:48:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobby Kintanar on Mar 19, 2008 10:53:07 GMT
Mark, your Thinkpad is on a Pentium M, with lower memory, lower clock speed, and it finished the job in less time than mine? Oh, boy, maybe there IS something wrong with my rig already! Gotta check out my RAMS! :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by Ding Carpio on Mar 19, 2008 22:17:37 GMT
And I thought my barely-a-year-old Dell SC430 was fast. It's a dual core 2.8GHz Intel with 1GB of RAM.
It took 85 seconds!
You think it'll jump in performance if I add more memory? Video card's just an nVidia GEForce4 MX440 AGP8X. I could've opted for a better graphics card but I assume it would be wasted power as I don't do gaming. Suggestions on how I can tweak this baby?
|
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Mar 20, 2008 1:33:06 GMT
And I thought my barely-a-year-old Dell SC430 was fast. It's a dual core 2.8GHz Intel with 1GB of RAM. It took 85 seconds! You think it'll jump in performance if I add more memory? Video card's just an nVidia GEForce4 MX440 AGP8X. I could've opted for a better graphics card but I assume it would be wasted power as I don't do gaming. Suggestions on how I can tweak this baby? That's decent Ding, but adding more RAM would make your baby sing. Memory is very cheap now, following the pricing track of CF cards. Easy to install too. The bottleneck in processing multi-layered files with many history (so you can undo what you're doing) in PS is the RAM. Even 4 GB is not enough, and PS had to resort to using one of your drives as a scratch disk (virtual RAM). If the scratch disk is fragmented, or its read/write speed is slow, PS starts to crawl. Go for 4 GB if your board supports it (XP OS does), or at least 2 GB. You'll be surprised with the jump in responsiveness. Not sure if your Dell is a laptop, which has normally only two RAM slots. Desktops with newer motherboards usually have 4 slots. There are 2 GB RAM modules (both for laptops and desktops) available now. The desktop 2 GB IIRC is going currently for PHP 1.6K. You're right on the video card, you don't need to upgrade unless you're deep into games. However, when you have a premium LCD display, you probably need to do it to maximize your display's potential, as the upscale Vcards can yield better colors and detail. |
|
|
|
Post by Mark Itol on Mar 20, 2008 3:23:07 GMT
Mark, your Thinkpad is on a Pentium M, with lower memory, lower clock speed, and it finished the job in less time than mine? Oh, boy, maybe there IS something wrong with my rig already! Gotta check out my RAMS! :-) Assuming I did the procedure correctly. Started clocking after I hit the OK button on the radial blur. Hehehe. |
|
|
|
Post by Ding Carpio on Mar 20, 2008 4:55:24 GMT
If the scratch disk is fragmented, or its read/write speed is slow, PS starts to crawl. Go for 4 GB if your board supports it (XP OS does), or at least 2 GB. You'll be surprised with the jump in responsiveness. Yes, my desktop Dell motherboard supports up to 4gb. It has four slots. At the moment, it has four 256mb memory strips. On the scratch disk, maybe I should install even an old small HD and use exclusively as scratch? There are 2 GB RAM modules (both for laptops and desktops) available now. The desktop 2 GB IIRC is going currently for PHP 1.6K. Any idea how much 1gb strips cost nowadays? Any recommended source? Mine are DDR2 533MHz. Am I stuck with the MHz or can I change them with faster ones? |
|
|
|
Post by Romy Ocon on Mar 20, 2008 5:26:36 GMT
Yes, my desktop Dell motherboard supports up to 4gb. It has four slots. At the moment, it has four 256mb memory strips. On the scratch disk, maybe I should install even an old small HD and use exclusively as scratch? I don't recommend using an old HDD as a scratch disk, as these generally have slower read/write speeds and can be actually slower than just using you present HDD. At PC Express, a Western Digital 320 GB SATA 8 MB cache is only PHP 3400. I recommend you buy another HDD, partition it, use one part as a scratch disk (say 50 GB) and the larger part as additional storage (270 GB). You can have the HDD installed at the same time as your new RAM. Any idea how much 1gb strips cost nowadays? Any recommended source? Mine are DDR2 533MHz. Am I stuck with the MHz or can I change them with faster ones? PC Express is the cheapest reliable PC supplier I've used. Their online price list is not updated, but I have a hard copy of their pricing last week for DDR2 533 memory modules: Apacer/Transcend/PQI 1 GB 533/667 - PHP 850.00 Kingston 1 GB 533 /667- PHP 900 Corsair 1 GB 533/667 - PHP 950 2 GB modules are rarely in stock, so i just used 4 pcs of Transcend 1 GB 800 DDR2 in my new machine.... works flawlessly. I recommend the same brand - get 4 pcs 1 GB DDR2 533/667 (PHP 3400 total, plus probably a small service fee). You can bring your desktop to any PC Express outlet and have it installed in under 1 hour. Here are the location of PC Express branches, I suggest you call first to verify stock availability: www.pcx.com.ph/about/branches.aspNote that the BIOS will see the 4 GB, the OS will report only about 3.4 - 3.5 GB (XP won't report the around 500 MB which is allocated to other devices like Vcards, etc.). Without hacking the boot.ini file, PS will see only less than 2 GB. With the hack, CS2 or CS3 will see 2.5-2.6 GB. If you do upgrade your RAM, I can walk you through the hack by phone. |
|
|
|
Post by Ding Carpio on Jun 16, 2008 21:49:50 GMT
20 seconds!!!!
Been silent for a bit. Having been from vacation, I then assembled my PC from parts I lugged home. Then, mired in post-processing a gazillion photos (still doing it).
Then I remembered this thread and did the test.
I was just using my PC clock which did not have sub-second increments and I can swear it clocked somewhere between 19-20! Ahhh, all the pains paid off. Thanks, Master Romy for the inspiration.
In the box: Intel Q6600 (G0 stepping so very overclockable), 8gb RAM, Asus P5K-E mobo, 500gb system disk, two 750gb data disks (all with 32mb cache).
Still happy with it but, when the need for (more) speed arises, will tinker around overclocking and RAID. But that won't be till after I PP all my photos and bore you with all my posts.
|
|
