🚀 go-pugleaf

In my experience the four biggest contributors to PS performance
are, in order:

1. CPU speed
2. Memory speed
3. Disk subsystem speed
4. CPU cache size

Don't get too hung up with all the multiprocessor/hyperthreading
marketing glitz.  PS is multiprocessor aware but will use a second
CPU only for a very limited number of operations (e.g. certain
filters).  One is usually better off with a single cpu system with a
faster FSB.  There are exceptions to this, e.g. if the system will
not be a dedicated PS workstation.

Rick

"Al Treacher" <big.al@stones.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message news:rqqoa0179fjs7rscf3ddmacufuccf33q32@4ax.com...
> Hi folks,
>
> The PC I currently run Photoshop in is now a very long way past its
> "best by" date, so the time has come to build a new one.  I've sought
> advice from a couple of techie friends about the basic system
> architecture and I've got essentially three direction that I could
> take, it seems.  Neither of my "advisors" use Photoshop regularly, so
> I'd like to get opinions from other people that do...
>
>
> Option 1:
> Dual-processor motherboard with a pair of 2.8GHz Intel Xeon CPUs.
>
> Considerations:
> Two processors, each with HyperThread tech, so in theory I'd get a
> performance equivalent to maybe three and a bit individual processors.
> **IF** Photoshop supports more than two processors - I know it
> supports two, but would it support (essentially) four?
>
> Also, it looks like the Front-Side-Bus speed of Xeons is low compared
> to the other Intel processors available, at 533MHz or possible even
> only 400MHz.  I'm guessing this is because of the necessity to
> synchronize more threads, but I could be wrong.
>
> Would this result in Photoshop running slower than a single processor
> system running a 800MHz FSB?
>
> I'm having problems finding the details of the cache size for Xeons.
> It looks like there is an average (512KB) level 2 cache, with a 2MB
> level 3 cache on some chips, but finding which ones seems impossible!
> Any ideas?
>
>
> Option 2:
> Single Pentium 4C (Prescott) 3.2GHz CPU.
>
> HT tech again, so essentially a dual processor on a single CPU.
> 800MHz Front-Side-Bus.
> 1MB of level 2 cache.
>
> Seems like a good all-round option, but I'd like to find out if the
> dual Xeons would outperform this when running Photoshop.
>
>
> Option 3:
> Single Pentium 4C (Northwood) 2.8GHz CPU overclocked to about 3.2GHz.
> (Using PC4000 DDR500 RAM.)
>
> Raising the FSB speed to 900+MHz would increase the speed the core was
> running at, and also give faster RAM transfer.  How much of a
> performance increase (if any) would be noticeable?
>
> Of course, there's the slight hit-and-miss of getting a chip that will
> reliably overclock and keeping it cool, but I'd deal with that...!
>
>
>
> I'd thought this was going to be a relatively easy project and I'd
> have had the thing up and running now...  How naive of me...
>
> Your thoughts/observations/experiences and opinions are welcome!
>
> Cheers,
> Al
>