Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

New PC - does this look suitable?

Dec 7, 2012 1:04 PM

I'm looking to replace an old PC with a custom build:

- i7-3770 3.4GHz

- H77 chipset

- 16GB DDR-1600 RAM

- 3TB HDD

- 256GB SSD

- DVD Writer

- On board graphics only

- RaidMax Super Hurricane case

- 500W PSU

- Win8 or 7 64 bit

- Card Reader

I will continue to use a 30" (2560*1600) monitor.

Does this spec look suitable for Lightroom / PSE and some basic video editing in Premiere Elements with plenty of headroom (I assume LR5 will gobble even more resources than LR4!!)?

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 7, 2012 1:42 PM   in reply to GKN 100

    Too much PSU.

     

    Sent from phone.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 7, 2012 1:51 PM   in reply to GKN 100

    I would look seriously at a Xeon Quad processor instead of the i7 even if the Xeon had only 2.8 Ghz or 3 Ghz.

    Processor speed is not everything; you also need to look at workload, i.e. throughput.

    Don't be taken in for a "gamer's PC" - a gamer needs speed above all but the games have a relatively "thin" data stream.

     

    16 GB of RAM seems almost overkill; I have 12 GB and run Lr and Photoshop (+ a bunch of other programs) at the same time with no problems.

     

    I would replace the 3 TB drive with 3 drives @ 500 GB each. Keep in mind that with Lr that constantly reads and writes to and from the HD, the read-and write cycles build up. If you have only one internal HD it has to do all the read-and-write cycles and that can slow down your system, i.e. your RAM and processor have to wait for the drive to spin and do its reading and writing.

    But if you have 3 internal drives you are able to distribute the read-and-write cycles on 3 drives simultaneously.

     

    I'm not sure about your onboard graphics. When I looked into the specs of my new computer (now about 9 months old) I found that onboard graphics alone would not be optimal.

    Again, i think it's good enough for browsing the web and gaming. But photo editing, particularly if you have a camera with a full-frame sensor, i.e. large Raw-files, it's a different matter.

    I would not go with onboard graphics alone - my personal opinion. But then again, you can try it out, and - if there's a slot for it - get a graphics card later.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 7, 2012 1:52 PM   in reply to web-weaver

    Dorin,

    I'd like to digress. 500W PSU is not too much if you don't want to max it out all the time.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 7, 2012 2:10 PM   in reply to web-weaver

    web-weaver wrote:

     

    I'm not sure about your onboard graphics. When I looked into the specs of my new computer (now about 9 months old) I found that onboard graphics alone would not be optimal.

     

    Again, i think it's good enough for browsing the web and gaming. But photo editing, particularly if you have a camera with a full-frame sensor, i.e. large Raw-files, it's a different matter.

     

    I would not go with onboard graphics alone - my personal opinion. But then again, you can try it out, and - if there's a slot for it - get a graphics card later.

    I use onboard, but I used to use a decent card - the onboard is just as fast as the card in Lightroom, from what I can tell - I can't imagine it matters whether images are raw, or full frame... - you sure about all that?

     

    3D/gaming is what you really need a card for, these days.

     

    PS - I agree 500W does not seem too excessive - I'm not sure where Dorin was coming from...

     

    Cheers,

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 7, 2012 4:57 PM   in reply to Rob Cole

    Rob,

     

    The old standby was that you don't need a graphics card for photo editing because the CPU does the processing.

    But I'm not sure if that's still true for Lr4 and CS6. You most probably know that Lr has an option to enable OpenGL for Video in Preferences/Interface. OpenGl is - as far as I know - a feature of certain graphic cards. So Lr uses the graphic card at least for video editing.

     

    I don't dobt that onboard graphics is as fast as a dedicated graphics card. But again, speed is not the only factor.

    One of the greatest benefits of a dedicated graphics card may be that it frees the processor(s) for other things.

     

    I'd like to draw a comparison to rush hour traffic in a big city. If there's only one bottleneck on a major route you get gridlock. And it doesn't help if normally you can travel at 100 mph on that route. But gridlock will be avoided if traffic can be routed around the bottleneck. In a similar vein, in computers it is good practice to have multiple hardware elements that can do the processing simultaneously. That's why we have multi-processors . And that's why three 500 GB hard drives are better than one 1.5 TB hard drive. That's my thinking, at least.

     

    Don't you think so?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 7, 2012 5:18 PM   in reply to web-weaver

    web-weaver wrote:

     

    Don't you think so?

    I dunno the extent to which graphics card might improve video editing performance - that's outside my area of expertise, and experience.

     

    But based on my understanding, and having experienced both (card & no card) editing photographs in Lightroom, I think the difference is negligible - but I could be wrong (dunno how to consider 100% of factors, nor have I measured scientifically). But it is my understanding that Lr4 does *NOT* use the graphics card to off-load the CPU, granted on-board graphics uses more shared system memory instead of graphics card memory.

     

    Certainly, if there is *any* rub with the graphics card / driver, it may slow Lr down, so it *may* be safer to use onboard.

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 8, 2012 3:09 AM   in reply to GKN 100

    Good system, psu little bit overdone for onboard graphics.

     

    To compare: I build this PC last year and added the SSD this year:

    -i7 870@2.93GHz

    -P55 chipset

    -8GB DDR3-1600 RAM

    -1TB HDD

    -256GB Samsung 830 SSD (c: drive)

    -DVD writer

    -Nvidia GTS450 video card (replaced gpu cooler by a large heatsink)

    -350W PSU (Used this psu calculator: http://www.bequiet.com/en/psucalculator/expert )

    -Card Reader

    -Cooler Master Hyper TX 3 cpu cooling (quiet)

    -Win7 64-bit

     

    Windows Experience Index:

    Processor 7.5, RAM 7.5, Graphics 7.2, Gaming graphics 7.2, Primary HD 7.9.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 8, 2012 12:15 PM   in reply to janh1948

    Ivy Bridge HD 4000 graphics are more than capable for LR and approved by Adobe for use with PS CS6:

     

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/254178/ivy_bridge_graphics_entry_level_ cards_are_dead.html

     

    Concerning the 500 W. PS unit.......It's the cheapest component in the system build!

     

    If the OP later on decides to add a Graphics card and lord knows what else, then no worries. Also, by running the PS at 50% to 60% of max. load you increase reliability by at least a factor of 4x. A switching power supply has no issue running at even 10% of max. load, just make sure you buy a good name brand PS unit!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 9, 2012 12:20 AM   in reply to web-weaver

    CPU - 78W

    Mobo ~ 20W to be safe

    RAM - a couple of W

    HDD - 10W peak

    SSD - 3-4W peak

     

    It adds up to 114W and that's for when run stress test utilities. Even if

    you leave a 200W headroom for a monster video card and you end up with

    314W.

     

    Get a good 350W unit, because you wont find a smaller one anyway.

     

    Sent from phone.

    În data de 07.12.2012 23:52, "web-weaver" <forums_noreply@adobe.com> a

    scris:

     

    **

       Re: New PC - does this look suitable?  created by web-weaver<http://forums.adobe.com/people/web-weaver>in

    Photoshop Lightroom - View the full discussion<http://forums.adobe.com/message/4905035#4905035

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated

    Do your own calculation:

     

    http://www.thermaltake.outervision.com/

     

    Enter ALL devices that you may possibly add to the system in the future. This includes any internal drives, cards, and external USB & Firewire devices that are powered by the port. Add 20% to this continuous power calcualtion to cover short-term peak loads and allow over-clocking the system.

     

    I did quick check with the OPs config plus a GT 650 graphics card and two extra drives (1 int IDE + 1 ext USB) and got 358 Watts. Add 20% = 430 Watts

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 10, 2012 11:22 AM   in reply to GKN 100

    Hi,

     

    REad my answer to http://forums.adobe.com/message/4908689#4908689. I have most of my data on hdd and only the images I work on on ssd. With ssd cache speed is nearly identical to have everything on ssd.

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points