Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Muir Woods National Monument, Mill Valley, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 10, 2007 - 08:01pm PT
|
I'm too lazy to actually do it but fairly certain my 3700+ Clawhammer will crush your numbers...
Post yer results, then, Big Boy.
Is PS multi-treaded? I think the results posted above tell the story, dontcha think?
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 08:04pm PT
|
one of the top background painters in the motion picture business today (Fifth Element, etc.) runs Photoshop 4.5 no lie, w/ his custom brushes on a monster dual processor PC FYI
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 08:20pm PT
|
some (perhaps even several) of Photoshops plug-ins are multi-threaded but, the application itself is not.
Photoshop is a single-threaded app.
Cool thread.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 08:21pm PT
|
How much RAM can he run on that thing?
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 08:21pm PT
|
Hmmm...on a 2.8 ghz PIV with 1.5 GB RAM running Gimp 2.2 on FreeBSD 6.2 it took 2 min. 14 sec.
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 08:29pm PT
|
Any current 32 bit OS (MS Windows, earlier versions of OSX, etc) can use 4 gigs. My workstation runs three gigs PC 3200 on a single channel platform (pretty old school), so, basically anyone with a modern PC can blow my benchmarks away.
I'd build a new ultra crusher but, hey, my current box works great.
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Muir Woods National Monument, Mill Valley, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 10, 2007 - 08:46pm PT
|
some (perhaps even several) of Photoshops plug-ins are multi-threaded but, the application itself is not.
Photoshop is a single-threaded app.
Raydog - please explain why my friend's Dual 2 Ghz G5 (48 sec) kicks the snot out of
my 2 Ghz iMac G5 (1:40). As well as the 2.5 Ghz G5 Quad Core (19 sec) smoking the
2.3 Ghz Dual core (41 sec)?
Are you sure Photoshop isn't multi-treaded? What accounts for the speed differences?
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 08:53pm PT
|
really I don't know
re threads -
I know, I was surprised by this too - go ahead and Google it, you might come up with this letter looking thing by the Adobe Photoshop team leader.
however, this was for CS2...
golly maybe it's different now?
also, memory platform makes a big difference as well, 2.5 times to be exact.
sorry I can't be more specific, don't know a whole lot about store bought computers
|
|
maldaly
Trad climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 08:59pm PT
|
iMac G5 1.8 GHz, 1 GB DDR SDRAM 2 minutes flat.
But hell, guys, there wasn't even a good picture left over. Why are we doing this?
Mal
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 09:04pm PT
|
one other fact about CS2 -
it can see (use)2 gigs of RAM before it goes to scratch.
regarding cores- maybe if one supports the OS, then one runs the apps - you have a much better performance -
however I will say this, the area of benchmarking your rig is an interesting and complex one, even just benchmarking a HDD (64megs per second max data transfer rates for conventional 7200 RPM storage technology - pretty slow) - gamers do it, I'm not that into it.
The system runs, grinds thru it's duties with out a problem or a delay - I'm happy.
Enjoy your Mac!
Benchmarking AND over-clocking is way interesting though...
|
|
maldaly
Trad climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 09:07pm PT
|
You guys need to get out and climb more...
|
|
steelmnkey
climber
Vision man...ya gotta have vision...
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 09:09pm PT
|
Posting up late...
Dual 2.7Ghz PPC G5 - 3Gb RAM ... 45.67 sec
(Using Photoshop 7.0.1)
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 09:10pm PT
|
good point mal...zat ist ZE PLAN!
|
|
Gomp
climber
San Diego
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 10:48pm PT
|
6:52 G4 466 Mhz 1 GB ram CS2
Hey Wilbur! It looks different now. I do see a kind of blur...
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 11:02pm PT
|
nice Gomp!
|
|
michaellane
climber
Spokane (spo-KAN), WA
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 11:19pm PT
|
Just got home ... my primary PC: AMD Athlon 64 3200+ w/ PS 7.0 = 1:47
I just outgeeked myself from before ... I did it twice. Daly's right ... I'm going bouldering in the garage to this geeky taste out of my mouth.
|
|
Hardman Knott
Gym climber
Muir Woods National Monument, Mill Valley, Ca
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 10, 2007 - 11:23pm PT
|
Congrats, Jody - you beat my POS 1 Ghz Dell Pentium III laptop by a whopping 4 seconds...
Edit: There's something wrong if it's going that slow! My 1 Ghz G4 eMac did 3:22...
|
|
Larry
Trad climber
Bisbee
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 11:28pm PT
|
Can I play if I use the GIMP on my Linux box?
|
|
Raydog
Trad climber
Boulder Colorado
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 11:39pm PT
|
alright I did it -
rendered in exactly 1:10 sec on a 2004 Gigabyte K8U board w/ 3 gig single channel memory (high latency) an Athlon 3700+ single-core w/ a clock frequency of 2.4 gigahertz running Photoshop CS2 off a 28 gig partition on a 7200 RPM (conventional technology, not perpendicular) drive.
My XP2 installation is fairly tweaked as well.
Now I'm going to try it after dragging the image into an appropriately sized Photoshop art-board as the second (not the background) layer and see what it does.
|
|
Shack
Big Wall climber
Reno NV
|
|
|
May 10, 2007 - 11:46pm PT
|
Ok, had to chime in here...
didn't try it yet but first I want to clarify a couple things...
If you put 4 gigs of ram in a PC,
the system bios will report 4 gigs but the OS will report
anywhere from 2.75 and 3.5 gigs. No way around that.
Any more than 2 gigs is really a waste and can result in a decrease in performance BTW.
Just because an app can virtually address 4 gigs doesn't mean it can use that much physical ram.
It's complicated
but basically it's limited by the Intel X86 design architecture.
Physically addressable memory and virtual memory are totally different.
Edit:
The RAM and video card are irrelevant, this is pure processor action!
This is only half true. The video card doesn't enter the equasion for the actual calculations the cpu is doing but the SPEED of the ram is a big part of the overall performance.
Faster Ram = faster time.
Also the reason a multicore procesor will always outperform a single core, no matter what kind of app your running,
even if it's a single thread app, is because you are always running multiple threads! You're never just running one program.
Open task manager and you'll get the idea.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!