Practical requirements, PS CS

Although I’m running a P4 1.8Gz, I also have 512mg of RAM, which works fine. Photoshop CS would benefit from1Gb of RAM, but runs very well with 512.

The Matrox card is an excellent choice for PS, as it is gearded towards providing an excellent 2D image.

From: "cvort"

I’m wondering if I’ll run into any problems using Photoshop CS with the following configuration:
Windows XP, PIII 1GZ, 512 MB SDRAM, Matrox G450 with 32 MB RAM. Even though the memory requirement is 192 MB, is 512 MB, in practice, too little?

A lot depends on the size of your files. If you’re working mostly on web-sized images you’re fine. If you are working mainly with digital camera images up to, say, 6 Mpixels you’re OK but will hit disk sooner than you think.

If you’re working with high rez film scans, say 4,000 dpi medium format scans, you’ll be working off the disk quite often, even with the full amount of RAM Photoshop supports (2 GB).

I’d try to upgrade to at least 1 GB of RAM unless you’re working mostly with web sized images.

I ran a series of tests on CS vs V7 with various file sizes and various amounts of RAM dedicated to Photoshop. As one example, taking a 6 Mpixel Canon 10D tiff file and running an action with 5 basic operations in V7 took 13 seconds so long as I had enough memory (378 MB or greater), then slowed down to 26 sec (252 MB), 32 sec (192 MB), 43 sec (140 MB), and 62 sec (98 MB, or as close to 50% of 192 MB as I could get). CS was faster but had a similar slowdown percentage wise, from 5 sec to 14, 19, 30 and 49 sec with the various memory allocations.

Larger files took much longer. More RAM is a good thing to have.

Bill

In article , "cvort"
wrote:

Hello,
I’m wondering if I’ll run into any problems using Photoshop CS with the following configuration:
Windows XP, PIII 1GZ, 512 MB SDRAM, Matrox G450 with 32 MB RAM. Even though the memory requirement is 192 MB, is 512 MB, in practice, too little? Going to the scratch disk often is really a pain. Is there anyone out there with a similar configuration using PS CS? Thanks.

Up it to 1gb RAM and add three more spindles (fixed drives) and spread your work files over all four.

More RAM: don’t I know it, but my motherboard maxes out at 512 MB. I was happy with PS 7 with Win 98 for the file sizes I’ve used, so if the system doesn’t take a big hit because of the increased RAM requirements of Win XP, then I’ll try to squeeze a little more life out of my current system before buying a new one.

"Bill Hilton" wrote in message

From: "cvort"

I’m wondering if I’ll run into any problems using Photoshop CS with the following configuration:
Windows XP, PIII 1GZ, 512 MB SDRAM, Matrox G450 with 32 MB RAM. Even

though

the memory requirement is 192 MB, is 512 MB, in practice, too little?

A lot depends on the size of your files. If you’re working mostly on

web-sized

images you’re fine. If you are working mainly with digital camera images

up

to, say, 6 Mpixels you’re OK but will hit disk sooner than you think.
If you’re working with high rez film scans, say 4,000 dpi medium format

scans,

you’ll be working off the disk quite often, even with the full amount of

RAM

Photoshop supports (2 GB).

I’d try to upgrade to at least 1 GB of RAM unless you’re working mostly

with

web sized images.

I ran a series of tests on CS vs V7 with various file sizes and various

amounts

of RAM dedicated to Photoshop. As one example, taking a 6 Mpixel Canon

10D

tiff file and running an action with 5 basic operations in V7 took 13

seconds

so long as I had enough memory (378 MB or greater), then slowed down to 26

sec

(252 MB), 32 sec (192 MB), 43 sec (140 MB), and 62 sec (98 MB, or as close

to

50% of 192 MB as I could get). CS was faster but had a similar slowdown percentage wise, from 5 sec to 14, 19, 30 and 49 sec with the various

memory

allocations.

Larger files took much longer. More RAM is a good thing to have.
Bill

Good idea, but with my next computer…my current one can’t upgrade to those plus, if I were to do that, why not a new video card, serial drives in a RAID configuration (which would require a better power supply), some more optical drives, etc. and before you know it, I’ve got a new computer. I’m actually trying to squeeze a few more months to a year out of my current system if I can.

"jjs" wrote in message

In article , "cvort"
wrote:

Hello,
I’m wondering if I’ll run into any problems using Photoshop CS with the following configuration:
Windows XP, PIII 1GZ, 512 MB SDRAM, Matrox G450 with 32 MB RAM. Even

though

the memory requirement is 192 MB, is 512 MB, in practice, too little?

Going

to the scratch disk often is really a pain. Is there anyone out there

with a

similar configuration using PS CS? Thanks.

Up it to 1gb RAM and add three more spindles (fixed drives) and spread your work files over all four.

Oops – sent this reply to you, not group. Sorry.
Thanks. This gives me some encouragement to go ahead…I’m upgrading from Win 98 as well with a "clean install", which means finding all my old programs, updates etc. to prepare for the "big move". I would hate to go thru all that just to find Photoshop didn’t work as needed.

"No Where Man" wrote in message

Although I’m running a P4 1.8Gz, I also have 512mg of RAM, which works

fine.

Photoshop CS would benefit from1Gb of RAM, but runs very well with 512.
The Matrox card is an excellent choice for PS, as it is gearded towards providing an excellent 2D image.

"cvort" wrote in message

More RAM: don’t I know it, but my motherboard maxes out at 512 MB. I was happy with PS 7 with Win 98 for the file sizes I’ve used, so if the system doesn’t take a big hit because of the increased RAM requirements of Win

XP,

then I’ll try to squeeze a little more life out of my current system

before

buying a new one.

Windows XP actually has a smaller RAM footprint. 512MB will be fine until you really want to speed up things a bit. Putting your swap file on a different physical drive will also help.

Bart

The rule of thumb I’ve seen for PS is five times as much ram as the largest graphic file you’ll ever work with.

Paul Riemerman

"cvort" wrote in message

Hello,
I’m wondering if I’ll run into any problems using Photoshop CS with the following configuration:
Windows XP, PIII 1GZ, 512 MB SDRAM, Matrox G450 with 32 MB RAM. Even

though

the memory requirement is 192 MB, is 512 MB, in practice, too little?

Going

to the scratch disk often is really a pain. Is there anyone out there with

a

similar configuration using PS CS? Thanks.

You should be allright, maybe upgrade to a better videocard (depending on what display you use). The new ATI’s and nVidia’s are faster and sharper for huge displays (I own a 22" CRT and just kicked out the G550).

I’ve 1 GB memmory, used to have 512 MB. For most images I can’t detect any improvements, they just fit fine in the memory. Only with posters it may be a problem, but there is always a stage when 1 GB is even too less 😉

Waldo

"cvort" wrote in message

Hello,
I’m wondering if I’ll run into any problems using Photoshop CS with the following configuration:
Windows XP, PIII 1GZ, 512 MB SDRAM, Matrox G450 with 32 MB RAM. Even

though

the memory requirement is 192 MB, is 512 MB, in practice, too little?

Going

to the scratch disk often is really a pain. Is there anyone out there with

a

similar configuration using PS CS? Thanks.

Yes – the consensus seems to be that I’ll be OK. Thanks for the input.

"Waldo" wrote in message

You should be allright, maybe upgrade to a better videocard (depending on what display you use). The new ATI’s and nVidia’s are faster and sharper

for

huge displays (I own a 22" CRT and just kicked out the G550).
I’ve 1 GB memmory, used to have 512 MB. For most images I can’t detect any improvements, they just fit fine in the memory. Only with posters it may

be

a problem, but there is always a stage when 1 GB is even too less 😉
Waldo

"cvort" wrote in message

Hello,
I’m wondering if I’ll run into any problems using Photoshop CS with the following configuration:
Windows XP, PIII 1GZ, 512 MB SDRAM, Matrox G450 with 32 MB RAM. Even

though

the memory requirement is 192 MB, is 512 MB, in practice, too little?

Going

to the scratch disk often is really a pain. Is there anyone out there

with

a

similar configuration using PS CS? Thanks.

A second hard drive whether you upgrade or not, would be a good idea. This will eliminate a lot of your scratch disc waits. I’m figuring another 512 of RAM (I have 512 now) along with the upgrade to CS. With a PIV 2.?Gz. The graphics card is pretty unimportant with Photoshop. Just about anythign currently on the market will do fine — unless you are also into video or animation, etc.

—
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist’s Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
"cvort" wrote in message

Hello,
I’m wondering if I’ll run into any problems using Photoshop CS with the following configuration:
Windows XP, PIII 1GZ, 512 MB SDRAM, Matrox G450 with 32 MB RAM. Even

though

the memory requirement is 192 MB, is 512 MB, in practice, too little?

Going

to the scratch disk often is really a pain. Is there anyone out there with

a

similar configuration using PS CS? Thanks.