Another PC upgrade request for help

Hi Dave...

Quote:

---

Can I be nosey and ask which card?
And what connections used to your monitors?

---

The Video card is the GeForce 1060 (6Gb), and I'm connecting 3 screens specifically: -
* My ' Primary' BenQ SW2700 which uses the Display Port and for 10 bit capability (and 99% Adobe RGB capable)
* AOC 2470W as Secondary and connected to the DVI/HDMI Port
* HPW2207 (about 8 years old and was sitting in the garage), which I also have connected to a DVI/HDMI port but set up for Portrait view which I use mostly when surfing web etc.

I upgraded to the 6Gb Video card rather than the 3Gb version because although a bit more expensive, I was getting much more bang per buck goung from 2 to6! PC Specialist steered me away from the much much more expensive Quadro cards since the big processing hit is photoshop only rather than games!

The processor is an AMD FX(TM)-4350 Quad with 24 Gb of memory.

:)

Boab, Bill, James,

Life, and sorting other technology issues, has prevented me giving this the final push' to decide on system and supplier over last couple of days.

Looks wise to go to 32GB RAM now, leaving room for another two sticks to reach 64 GB, should the mood take me.

Hmmm, all SSD, now there's a thought, probably not one I can justify right now though.

There seem to be a lot of variations of "1060" card, e.g. many manufacturers using the 1060 chipset, so I must be careful choosing to get the right configuration of I/O connectors.

I have a 22" DVI monitor on another computer which I could swap for the little 'VGA only' AOC if necessary.

Quote:

---

set up for Portrait view which I use mostly when surfing web etc.

---

James, does having the monitor in portrait orientation bring any unexpected issues?
e.g. with video playback?

I ask because that's one way I was considering going, to resolve the width limitation.

Thanks all, Dave

Good luck Dave - be sure and keep us updated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James G

Hi Dave...


The Video card is the GeForce 1060 (6Gb), and I'm connecting 3 screens specifically: -
* My ' Primary' BenQ SW2700 which uses the Display Port and for 10 bit capability (and 99% Adobe RGB capable)
* AOC 2470W as Secondary and connected to the DVI/HDMI Port
* HPW2207 (about 8 years old and was sitting in the garage), which I also have connected to a DVI/HDMI port but set up for Portrait view which I use mostly when surfing web etc.

I upgraded to the 6Gb Video card rather than the 3Gb version because although a bit more expensive, I was getting much more bang per buck goung from 2 to6! PC Specialist steered me away from the much much more expensive Quadro cards since the big processing hit is photoshop only rather than games!

The processor is an AMD FX(TM)-4350 Quad with 24 Gb of memory.

:)

---

James - I stay away from nVidia cards for photo and video editing because their drivers do not do support 10-bit colour properly; unless you head over to the very expensive Quaddro cards. This in my view is nothing more than a cash grab as nVidia has done this in the way they implemented their drivers, rather than any technical limitations of their cards.

The view I've heard is AMD cards do proper 10-bit colour, but have not found anything definitive one way or the other. Your dealer obviously sells to gamers, not people who do PP work. Check out the following:


http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answe...a-geforce-gpus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Humphries

Hmmm, all SSD, now there's a thought, probably not one I can justify right now though.

---

If I were to decide, I would skimp on the RAM and go SSD. When I look at the various things I did when I rebuilt my machine a few months ago, the SSD is the single component that had the highest impact on performance in editing.

The issue (at least a few months ago) when it came to RAM was that the largest available was an 8GB module, with 4 memory slots on the motherboard. At the time 16GB sticks were not available, so the largest I could go on a standard motherboard was 32GB, which is what I did. The MB is 16GB stick capable, so I can go that way when the larger RAM sticks become available.

I run a lot of accessories that use USB 3, and found that in general Gigabyte motherboards have more USB ports than other makes (ASUS, MSI, etc), so I ended up going that way. The board I have also takes one m.2 drive and because I do some video work, which takes up a fair bit of buffering that should NOT be the system drive, that was another consideration I had. I looked at one ASRock MB that took two m.2 drives, but the USB drives ultimately determined what I bought and I have a single m.2 drive on the MB and it is really fast.

Quote:

---

does having the monitor in portrait orientation bring any unexpected issues?
e.g. with video playback?

---

Dave, video, TV recordings, and camera and web avi all play back normally when the screen is in portrait mode.

Quote:

---

Your dealer obviously sells to gamers, not people who do PP work.

---

Hi Manfred, I'd agree, and so would they. In fairness they advised the NVidia card as having 10 Bit capability and the decision was my choice and in part economic. I'm not technically savvy enough to be aware of differences in the way 10 bit is implemented by NVidia :(

That said, here is the screen shot for the control panel of the 1060 and it does indicate I have 10 bit output colour depth on the Display Port.

http://i66.tinypic.com/717fdg.jpg

James, if you paid for a quality wide gamut display, it makes a difference and your Benq SW2700 meets that description. The problem is the way nVidia has designed their drivers. If you want true 10-bit colour, they want you to buy one of their outrageously expensive Quaddro cards.

I was having problems with Photoshop and On-1 programs crashing and decided to get a new computer and monitor. I had upgraded my old computer a Gateway with 16 Gigs of RAM and it should have worked just fine but, it never did. I was using a Samsung monitor....

I now work with

Dell XPS

iT-6700K CPU @4.00 Gh

32 GB Ram

240 GB SSD
3 TB standard drive
along with two backup external hard drives

I also use a new Benq SW 2700 monitor

In addition to the editing programs crashing, I had problems playing some YouTube videos.

Both Photoshop CC and ON-1 work flawlessly and my YouTube videos play just fine.

I have not done any video editing with my new setup but, suspect that this will also go more smoothly with my new system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver

If I were to decide, I would skimp on the RAM and go SSD. When I look at the various things I did when I rebuilt my machine a few months ago, the SSD is the single component that had the highest impact on performance in editing.

--snipped--

---

Could you elaborate on how going all SSD has had the highest impact on performance with photo editing software?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lunaticitizen

Could you elaborate on how going all SSD has had the highest impact on performance with photo editing software?

---

Leo, I also mentioned that having gone fully SSD I'd never go back to HDD. I don't have any objective, quantitative data re the impact on performance change with editing software, but the computer never gets hot, and is silent. Subjectively, everything seems faster with no noticeable pauses during intensive tasks, and this article would support that (it is undated, but the note at the foot is claiming copyright to 2017!); If you do go and do your own searching, ignore anything much more than 12 to 18 months old as performance/price has improved considerably in recent times.

Edited to insert URL missed out first time :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lunaticitizen

Could you elaborate on how going all SSD has had the highest impact on performance with photo editing software?

---

Extremely fast loading and saving of the working files. Loading the operating system at startup as well as the software (In my case Bridge and Photoshop) is much faster than with a conventional mechanical drive. Even with 32GB of system RAM, I do get instances where the computer seems to need scratch space and will swap out RAM to the system drive (I do tend to have at least 3 or 4 other pieces of software open at the same time).

Some of my edits are huge (I do exceed the 2GB limit for saving as a *.psd; I use a non-destructive workflow and have multiple layers in every edit). I often have a couple of large files open simultaneously while editing. I see very little of the lag I experienced with mechanical drives.

The reason I know that this is purely an SSD benefit is that I initially did nothing other than replace my mechanical system drive with an equal sizedSSD drive.

Bill and Manfred,

Thank you for your explanation. So you are saying that the read/write performance of SSD is generally better than HDD. Do you guys also store your huge files there or you have a separate HDD or NAS or even SAN system to be the data vault?

The reason I'm asking is that as far as I know, consumer grade SSD capacity is usually much smaller than HDD, let's say below 500 GB. If you are using an SSD to store your files then it would fill up quite fast, wouldn't it? :eek:

Dave, while going all SSD is not really feasible now, it might be better to purchase an inexpensive, small-capacity SSD to become the boot drive and the drive where you place your image files temporarily. After you finished editing then you can transfer it to a large-capacity HDD, or even better, to a RAID 1 storage pool. You can create such a pool easily with Windows 10. For SSD, I'd suggest Samsung.

By the way, not all Quadro cards are expensive. For example, a Quadro K420 card could be bought for less than 150 USD, I believe. You still need a monitor that has a DisplayPort connector though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lunaticitizen

Bill and Manfred,

Thank you for your explanation. So you are saying that the read/write performance of SSD is generally better than HDD. Do you guys also store your huge files there or you have a separate HDD or NAS or even SAN system to be the data vault?

The reason I'm asking is that as far as I know, consumer grade SSD capacity is usually much smaller than HDD, let's say below 500 GB. If you are using an SSD to store your files then it would fill up quite fast, wouldn't it? :eek:

Dave, while going all SSD is not really feasible now, it might be better to purchase an inexpensive, small-capacity SSD to become the boot drive and the drive where you place your image files temporarily. After you finished editing then you can transfer it to a large-capacity HDD, or even better, to a RAID 1 storage pool. You can create such a pool easily with Windows 10. For SSD, I'd suggest Samsung.

By the way, not all Quadro cards are expensive. For example, a Quadro K420 card could be bought for less than 150 USD, I believe. You still need a monitor that has a DisplayPort connector though.

---

Leo - All I have on one my 1TB SSD is my software and I do not use it for any user file storage whatsoever. I have two large (4TB) mechanical drives in addition to the 256GB m.2 drive. A also have two separate networked NAS drives for archival storage.

The cheap Quadro cards are no bargain and have 1GB to 2GB of slow DDR3 RAM; these are really meant for CAD workstations, not for serious still and image editing. Right now I am waiting for the new Radeon Pro WX line to hit the market (replaces the FirePro line, which are getting rather long in the tooth) as these cards are likely to offer far better value than the nVidia pro cards. They were announced at NAB 2016, but don't see any signs of them shipping yet. I know AMD did have a driver issue on certain Photoshop functionality, so am waiting to hear this issue has been fixed.

At this point I would probably look at getting at least a 4GB card to future proof my system.

Leo

I have 2 SSDs, an Apple 250GB that houses the OS and apps, and a 750GB Samsung EVO that holds the data, both internal. The 750 is getting to the 80% full level at which time I will replace it with a 1TB after cleaning it up.

You can get a Samsung 1TB 850 EVO Series SATA 6Gb/s 2.5" SSD for £300.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver

Leo - All I have on one my 1TB SSD is my software and I do not use it for any user file storage whatsoever. I have two large (4TB) mechanical drives in addition to the 256GB m.2 drive. A also have two separate networked NAS drives for archival storage.

The cheap Quadro cards are no bargain and have 1GB to 2GB of slow DDR3 RAM; these are really meant for CAD workstations, not for serious still and image editing. Right now I am waiting for the new Radeon Pro WX line to hit the market (replaces the FirePro line, which are getting rather long in the tooth) as these cards are likely to offer far better value than the nVidia pro cards. They were announced at NAB 2016, but don't see any signs of them shipping yet. I know AMD did have a driver issue on certain Photoshop functionality, so am waiting to hear this issue has been fixed.

At this point I would probably look at getting at least a 4GB card to future proof my system.

---

Oh okay, I didn't know that the inexpensive Quadro cards aren't suitable for image editing. I saw that they have a DP connector and support OpenGL so I just thought that they could display 10-bit color with Photoshop without any problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billtils

Leo

I have 2 SSDs, an Apple 250GB that houses the OS and apps, and a 750GB Samsung EVO that holds the data, both internal. The 750 is getting to the 80% full level at which time I will replace it with a 1TB after cleaning it up.

You can get a Samsung 1TB 850 EVO Series SATA 6Gb/s 2.5" SSD for £300.

---

Bill, with half of that amount of money I can buy three 2GB HDDs and create a storage pool in Windows 10 with parity space to protect me against a single drive failure. So in total you get 4GB worth of storage, and most importantly, a peace of mind. :D

I know that some people prefer performance over redundancy, but it's just that I'm trained to never consider a system without any failure recovery plan. So for now it's mostly HDD instead of SSD because they have large capacity, and cheap. :cool:

An update:

The latest spec. intention is as follows:

Case = Corsair Carbide Series SPEC-03 Mid Tower
Motherboard = Asus Z170E (has 4 memory slots, more USB 3 than 2)
CPU = i5 6600K Processor @ 3.5 GHz - I'd like and i7 6700K @ 4 GHz, but there are budget limitations
CPU cooler = Antec A30 92mm (bigger fan than 'stock cooler')
RAM = Kingston HyperX Fury Black 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 PC4-21300 2666MHz Dual Channel (budget!)
GPU = Asus GeForce GTX 1060 DUAL OC 3GB GDDR5 (budget again, not sure much better is necessary for PS and LR)
C:\ (OS & LR catalogue and previews, perhaps current working folder of images, etc.) SSD = SanDisk Z410 480GB SSD (up to 535MB/s R | 445MB/s W), giving me say; 400 GB usable capacity with margins
D:\ (docs, not images) HDD = WD Blue 2TB HDD (5400RPM | 64MB Cache) enough room to store a couple of 'SSD' back ups
E:\ (optical) 24 x DVD writer (generic)
PSU = Novatech Power Station V2 Modular 600 Watt PSU (not huge, but adequate for what I intend I believe)
OS = Windows 10 Pro
3 year extended (collect & return) warranty

The astute will have noticed the PSU is Novatech, which reveals my preferred builder and supplier, to whom I'll be 'chatting' or talking tomorrow afternoon (if they are not having their work's Xmas lunch!), with the intent of purchasing.

I believe the i5 CPU limits me to a maximum RAM of 32 GB (compared to 64 GB if i7)
I understand that unless I am creating huge PS or LR files, 16 GB RAM will be sufficient.

I intend to add an external USB3 card reader.
Re-use monitors I have, probably substituting a 22" HP (1680 x 1050) with DisplayPort for the little VGA only AOC as the second monitor, possibly set vertical.
Images are already on external drives, most of which will get quicker when USB 3 connected (I hope).

Performance has got to be far better than what I am used to (2010 era, 6 GB RAM, USB 2 only), so I figure I won't notice:
the improvement a large M.2 SSD might have given over what I am buying,
same goes for the 5400 rpm WD drive, yeah 7200 rpm would be nice, as would 2 drives and RAID 0 (Mirrored)
and 32 GB of RAM, but I'm effectively retired, so "when its gone, its gone" applies to funds.

Compared to my initial 'dream' spec., I have doubled the SSD, halved the RAM and cut the CPU to balance performance against cost.

This looks like coming out at about £1360 :eek: far more than I had hoped (in naivety), hence pruning the spec. - hopefully in sensible areas - Anyone got any last thoughts to offer?
The i5 vs i7 saves about £100, as does the RAM (in round figures).

Thanks for replies subsequent to my last above.

Cheers, Dave

Dave - I would definitely sacrifice the i7 down to an i5 before I cut down on the RAM.

Image editing does not take need multi-threading and the i5 has 4 cores. The i7 has 4 cores as well, but 8 threads, so when I render video or do video compositing, the extra 4 thread have a real effect on my workflow.

The 16GB of RAM should be adequate and I assume you will only be using two of four slots, so upgrading to 32GB will be a fairly easy task, if you ever decide to head that way.

I personally would go to an AMD graphics card, as nVidia has crippled drivers for 10-bit video (they only support PS properly on their workstation Quadro cards). AMD seems to have not done that.

A thought on RAM vs processor. While I am sure Manfred is right in principle, it's much easier to upgrade RAM subsequently.

Dave

True Dave,

The problem is justifying the extra spend, that said, I do use it many (probably too many) hours a day, so on that basis it might be valid, although web surfing and here hardly need the i7 over the i5, so shouldn't count - I'd have to do more photography!

As my family know, getting pictures out of me after a shoot is worse than extracting blood from a stone.


Noted Manfred,

I wasn't sure how nicely an AMD GPU would play on an Intel motherboard, fearing it might bring up incompatibility issues, even if these are only minor niggles - I have enough of those with the old PC, in part the nVidia drivers for my GT320 card don't always install correctly. However, my son has a laptop with an AMD chipset and he finds that even more exasperating to update (on AMD website), which kinda made me stick with what I know.

I gather AMD, as far as motherboards and processors go, don't support as wide a range of SSD as Intel, so that steered me away from an AMD CPU. Always been happy with i5 in current PC.
'Back of my mind' thinks it recalls reading or hearing of an AMD + (PS or LR) specific issue too.

Thanks chaps, Dave