Skip navigation

Photoshop CS5 Users - Performance Checks Wanted From You

Jan 28, 2012 1:34 PM

  Latest reply: Pierre Courtejoie, Mar 15, 2012 4:40 AM
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 1, 2012 5:17 AM   in reply to Pierre Courtejoie

    Actually in this case I just saved to the desktop. So Windows pagefile yes (C drive), but PS scratch disk no. That has its own drive.

     

    I have never touched the plugin. Compatibility on (but agree It shouldn't matter here)

     

    I must be counting too s l l o  o    o     w      l                             y

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 1, 2012 6:52 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel Carboni wrote:

     

    you're clearly seeing your write caching at work, because few systems today can write a gigabyte per second.

    Yes, that makes perfect sense.

     

    I'll dig up some more details in a minute. I built it myself, so I'm hoping this is payback for the way I did it: I went for "old" components and technologies that had been on the market for at least a year or so. No cutting edge. This is the explanation for the i5 750: I wanted the 1156 socket, not the newer 1366 required by the "big" i7's.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 1, 2012 10:07 AM   in reply to twenty_one

    Minute's up D.Fosse.

     

    I did a bit of cleanup, including turning off buffer flushing for the key HD's.

     

    It seems that simply rebooting helps the Opn/closing time for the test file. Open lost 1/2 sec to open in 1.5 sec, Close is practically instantaneous.

     

    The rest changed very little. But it is encouraging that my worst case at 2500 pix is only 2x the time on Noel's machine His 5 sec, mine 10 sec.)

     

    D Fosse, it doesn't surprise me that your i5 750 performs as well as it does. The only difference I see between the i7 920 and ther i5 750 (without actually having one here, on an Intel board!) is the thread count. The CPU speed is 2.66GHz, exactly that of the 920, and that little puppy was screamingly fast! Of course, that was back in 08/09. Today it's a slug!

     

    Be aware that that LGA socket and the associated cpu's are being discontinued some time this year, if not already.

     

    A final note on stability. Overclocking is a fine way to check it, because if the unit will overclock stably to the level of the next faster version, it  is, FAPP, that version (assuming they both are either locked or unlocked) My AMD will not overclock, so I regard it as but marginally stable and certanly not in the next higher speed class, or even at 5% faster. I'll probably replace it with a Phenom. So far, it hasn't crashed at stock +, the plus being I have it set for max performance with all 4 cores active at all times.

     

    So, what you get when you buy the lowest speed at the attractive price point is what is left after gleaning the better units to meet the demand. Therefore, some folks who bought the i7 920 may in fact have a higher speed unit.

     

    I noticed that my computer's score in Passmark had an unusual score for Memory Mark, in that it was equal to or better than the units to which I compared, where, in some instances, they were much better. I also note here that my Open?Close times do as well as Noel's and Fosse.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 1, 2012 12:02 PM   in reply to Hudechrome

    Hudechrome wrote:

     

    Minute's up D.Fosse.

     

    Yeah, sorry about that, got sidetracked...and I can't find the documentation without opening the case.

     

    It's a Gigabyte motherboard, I think it's called GA P55 (and that probably refers to the Intel chipset), with four 2GB DDR3 modules. This was a bit of a hassle because the mobo required 1.65 volt modules (IIRC) but most on the market were 1.8 volt. But I found a Kingston matched set, running at 1333 MHz.

     

    BIOS settings are auto whenever possible. I tried to leave it alone.

     

    Four internal HDs, all Samsung, totalling 3 TB. The mobo does RAID, but they all run as single volumes. System 750GB with Windows pagefile. 2 x 1 TB Documents. 250GB PS scratch disk.

     

    Win 7 pro 64 bits. I made a very conscious decision to not fiddle with the Windows install, I just let it do its thing.

     

    Did I forget something?

     

    ---

     

    About the save time: It is of course entirely possible that stuff happens after the cursor stops spinning. That's all I looked at - hit save and watch the cursor.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 1, 2012 1:08 PM   in reply to twenty_one

    Yeah, it's the P55 chipset, which means the i5 750 is not directly related to the i7 9xx series.

     

    I'm surprised that the higher voltage RAM could not be accomodated. Probably, unless you were to go into BIOS to make that chage, it wouldn't do it. On the Asus for AMD, BIOS accomodates 1.5 to 2.205 on Auto. Perhaps it's one of the things that is sacrificed for lower cost.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 1, 2012 2:57 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Wow! A 63% increase in file size.

     

    I'll wait for the save to finish!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Pierre Courtejoie
    7,038 posts
    Jan 11, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 1, 2012 3:44 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Glad to be of help, Noel.

    Lawrence, that is the idea, if one wants very fast saves of some files, but can afford disk space, it works wonderfully.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 1, 2012 5:29 PM   in reply to Pierre Courtejoie

    At age 74, I have more time than....hmmm, at age 74, maybe I don't have more time!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Pierre Courtejoie
    7,038 posts
    Jan 11, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 15, 2012 4:40 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    I am wondering if part of this test could be recorded in an action (a path that could be stroked, with different settings (using tool presets for the different settings) to make a more repeatable benchmark

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (1)