desktop help please

bluespearbone · 07-30-2011, 01:09 AM

Don't worry too much about the size of the drive as you can always add inexpensive external unit[s] later. With money saved get something for calibrating the (whichever chosen) monitor so that you see the image properly e.g. Spyder Express. Go for a minimum of 4GB Ram as the memory is the biggest factor when considering the speed of image editing.

Kai · 07-30-2011, 07:23 AM

I would certainly get minimum of 8gb ram.

What do you guys think of this setup:
Running on a sata solid state harddrive c: for all of program files and such, can you get away with 64gb to keep the cost down?
(what is a good software solution for automatically store user data on a different drive d:?)

Having another sata drive to store files such as images and such, 1Tb minimum.

Backing up external drive for cheaper cost or off-site if able.

Kai · 07-30-2011, 07:37 AM

Originally posted by adr1an

Dont spend money on SATAIII drives over SATAII - Your PC cannot exceed the *Physical* Limitations of a 7200RPM drive at SATAI, let alone SATAII...
That big speed increase is only in the Brochure. Having said that - SATAIII isn't just about Speed - If you know you want some of the NQ features etc of SATAIII etc, go for it.. but don't think it'll give a single byte faster transfer for you

You can get cheap *fast* drives such as the Samsung ones for next-to-nix these days...

Anyway - thats my two cents worth - but I build big govt. infrastructure systems and 'stuff' so tend to do things in particular ways... generally the over the top and over engineered way

would you mean 6gb/s of sataII, would one benefit from a solid state drive instead? Or is a solid state drive just hype because motherboard bus is not as fast anyway?

adr1an · 07-30-2011, 08:12 AM

Originally posted by Kai

would you mean 6gb/s of sataII, would one benefit from a solid state drive instead? Or is a solid state drive just hype because motherboard bus is not as fast anyway?

No, SSD is a different kettle of fish. SATAII and III have transfer limits well beyond the physical transfer speed of 5400 and 7200 RPM *hard drives* - check it out, but you'll find even Spinpoints peak out at about 190MB/s... This is the physical limitation of spindle/head movements. Feel free to research, but you'll find even Burst and Sustained Transfer of the Fastest SATA drives is well below the quoted specs of SATAII/III . This is why 'enterprise' drives are stupid expensive 15000 RPM jobs... and even then....

SSD is different because its basically solid state RAM and doesn't have to contend with moving parts and spindle speeds etc. This is where you can really approach the transfer specs of SATAII/III etc. Theres some scary fast SSD out there - beauty of not having a rotating platter to contend with

And then you get into wether the SATA controller is built in, or is leveraging the PCI-E Bus.... A lot (if not all) "Dual Controller" Mobo's around at the moment will share bandwidth from the PCI-E slots for the 'second' controller (Not to mention their USB3.0 Controller) - so if you run Dual GFX + use that SATA Controller....

Last edited by adr1an; 07-30-2011 at 08:22 AM.

Kai · 07-30-2011, 08:21 AM

Originally posted by adr1an

No, SSD is a different kettle of fish. SATAII and III have transfer limits well beyond the physical transfer speed of 5400 and 7200 RPM *hard drives* - check it out, but you'll find even Spinpoints peak out at about 190MB/s... This is the physical limitation of spindle/head movements. Feel free to research, but you'll find even Burst and Sustained Transfer of the Fastest SATA drives is well below the quoted specs of SATAII/III . This is why 'enterprise' drives are stupid expensive 15000 RPM jobs... and even then....

SSD is different because its basically solid state RAM and doesn't have to contend with moving parts and spindle speeds etc. This is where you can really approach the transfer specs of SATAII/III etc. Theres some scary fast SSD out there - beauty of not having a rotating platter to contend with

Ah, so the 7200rpm limits the transfer rate of that type of drives!! Ouch enterprise price!! Great to know! Thanks.

cats_five · 07-30-2011, 11:40 AM

An SSD is a very expensive way to buy disk space - a 60GB SSD costs more than a 1TB HDD. As commented above, RAM is what makes most difference when processing images.

I got the impression you are hard up, at present there are more cost-effective ways IMHO of spending your money. For example, you can get hardware screen calibration devices for not much more than a bargain basement SSD.

What are you planning to do for software?

anthers · 07-30-2011, 12:18 PM

Just my 2 cents - the nec 23" has a pretty good reputation for an entry level ips monitor - I seriously considered it before springing for the more expensive 24" HP ZR24W.

For computer specs, for image editing and/or video consider the Core i3 chip, it's reasonably fast, great value and power consumption for the performance, has built in video that will be fine for desktop apps. Get 8gb of ram and get the 64-bit version of windows 7. It will be plenty fast for lightroom and photoshop and even some decent video editing. Don't spend money on an ssd drive.

07-30-2011, 07:23 AM	#17
Kai Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: San Diego, Ca. USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 148	I would certainly get minimum of 8gb ram. What do you guys think of this setup: Running on a sata solid state harddrive c: for all of program files and such, can you get away with 64gb to keep the cost down? (what is a good software solution for automatically store user data on a different drive d:?) Having another sata drive to store files such as images and such, 1Tb minimum. Backing up external drive for cheaper cost or off-site if able. Last edited by Kai; 07-30-2011 at 08:25 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Windows XP Desktop Wallpaper Image....	interested_observer	Photographic Technique	6	07-01-2011 03:24 PM
Off Brand Desktop Suggestions	Deiberson	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	35	04-14-2011 03:53 AM
New PC desktop	NaClH2O	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	33	10-11-2010 09:54 AM
CNNmoney predicts that the end of the desktop PC is near	MRRiley	General Talk	18	07-26-2010 02:55 AM
Desktop died - what is important in replacement?	barondla	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	72	02-19-2010 08:01 AM

07-30-2011, 01:09 AM	#16
bluespearbone Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Derbyshire, United Kingdom Posts: 325	Don't worry too much about the size of the drive as you can always add inexpensive external unit[s] later. With money saved get something for calibrating the (whichever chosen) monitor so that you see the image properly e.g. Spyder Express. Go for a minimum of 4GB Ram as the memory is the biggest factor when considering the speed of image editing.

07-30-2011, 07:37 AM	#18
Kai Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: San Diego, Ca. USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 148	Originally posted by adr1an Dont spend money on SATAIII drives over SATAII - Your PC cannot exceed the Physical Limitations of a 7200RPM drive at SATAI, let alone SATAII... That big speed increase is only in the Brochure. Having said that - SATAIII isn't just about Speed - If you know you want some of the NQ features etc of SATAIII etc, go for it.. but don't think it'll give a single byte faster transfer for you You can get cheap fast drives such as the Samsung ones for next-to-nix these days... Anyway - thats my two cents worth - but I build big govt. infrastructure systems and 'stuff' so tend to do things in particular ways... generally the over the top and over engineered way would you mean 6gb/s of sataII, would one benefit from a solid state drive instead? Or is a solid state drive just hype because motherboard bus is not as fast anyway?

07-30-2011, 08:12 AM	#19
adr1an Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Canberra Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 739	Originally posted by Kai would you mean 6gb/s of sataII, would one benefit from a solid state drive instead? Or is a solid state drive just hype because motherboard bus is not as fast anyway? No, SSD is a different kettle of fish. SATAII and III have transfer limits well beyond the physical transfer speed of 5400 and 7200 RPM hard drives - check it out, but you'll find even Spinpoints peak out at about 190MB/s... This is the physical limitation of spindle/head movements. Feel free to research, but you'll find even Burst and Sustained Transfer of the Fastest SATA drives is well below the quoted specs of SATAII/III . This is why 'enterprise' drives are stupid expensive 15000 RPM jobs... and even then.... SSD is different because its basically solid state RAM and doesn't have to contend with moving parts and spindle speeds etc. This is where you can really approach the transfer specs of SATAII/III etc. Theres some scary fast SSD out there - beauty of not having a rotating platter to contend with And then you get into wether the SATA controller is built in, or is leveraging the PCI-E Bus.... A lot (if not all) "Dual Controller" Mobo's around at the moment will share bandwidth from the PCI-E slots for the 'second' controller (Not to mention their USB3.0 Controller) - so if you run Dual GFX + use that SATA Controller.... Last edited by adr1an; 07-30-2011 at 08:22 AM.

07-30-2011, 08:21 AM	#20
Kai Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: San Diego, Ca. USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 148	Originally posted by adr1an No, SSD is a different kettle of fish. SATAII and III have transfer limits well beyond the physical transfer speed of 5400 and 7200 RPM hard drives - check it out, but you'll find even Spinpoints peak out at about 190MB/s... This is the physical limitation of spindle/head movements. Feel free to research, but you'll find even Burst and Sustained Transfer of the Fastest SATA drives is well below the quoted specs of SATAII/III . This is why 'enterprise' drives are stupid expensive 15000 RPM jobs... and even then.... SSD is different because its basically solid state RAM and doesn't have to contend with moving parts and spindle speeds etc. This is where you can really approach the transfer specs of SATAII/III etc. Theres some scary fast SSD out there - beauty of not having a rotating platter to contend with Ah, so the 7200rpm limits the transfer rate of that type of drives!! Ouch enterprise price!! Great to know! Thanks.

07-30-2011, 11:40 AM	#21
cats_five Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Fife, Scotland Posts: 835	An SSD is a very expensive way to buy disk space - a 60GB SSD costs more than a 1TB HDD. As commented above, RAM is what makes most difference when processing images. I got the impression you are hard up, at present there are more cost-effective ways IMHO of spending your money. For example, you can get hardware screen calibration devices for not much more than a bargain basement SSD. What are you planning to do for software?

07-30-2011, 12:18 PM	#22
anthers Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: California Photos: Albums Posts: 125	Just my 2 cents - the nec 23" has a pretty good reputation for an entry level ips monitor - I seriously considered it before springing for the more expensive 24" HP ZR24W. For computer specs, for image editing and/or video consider the Core i3 chip, it's reasonably fast, great value and power consumption for the performance, has built in video that will be fine for desktop apps. Get 8gb of ram and get the 64-bit version of windows 7. It will be plenty fast for lightroom and photoshop and even some decent video editing. Don't spend money on an ssd drive.