Computer Build: SSD and Photoshop question

noVICE · 10-01-2011, 04:48 PM

I am currently sorting out my new PC and I have been having some disagreements with a friend of mine about scratch disks and the best way to setup the HDDs.
Because I assumed that Adobe knows best I planned out my HDDs as follows:
1.SSD with OS and program files
2.SSD scratch drive
3.Sata III data drive

My friend feels that the concept of having a separate scratch drive is really only necessary when you are using plate drives and he feels that this setup would be the best:
1.SSD with OS and scratch
2.Sata III with program files and data

His point of view is that having three HDDs will potentially decrease the overall speed as the motherboard is having to look at three sources not two and that the read/write speed of an SSD is so fast that even though Adobe recommends not having your scratch drive on the same drive as your OS (and possibly program as well) I would not notice any decrease in performance by combining the OS and scratch.

My opinion is that scratch drives should be separate and preferably independent. I like faster load times for the programs (hence having them on the boot SSD) and it means that my data is completely separate from the programs (which I prefer).

Thanks for your help.

agsy · 10-01-2011, 05:38 PM

I have never used a scratch disk. On my system the virtual memory is turned off and it runs beautyful. I think if you have plenty of RAM (I use 8GB but some MOBO's can use 16 or maybe even more), you would not need a scratch disk, the system will use the RAM for temporary work.
My setup is two Raid0 disks, one for OS and files and the other for backup. I run Photoshop64 bit on Windows7 64. The biggest file I worked with was a panorama put together with 27 twelve MP images and the system handled it pretty well.
I've read that SSD disks are not the best for constant read/write applications, that is why it's not recommended to defragment them. They are super fast though, but I still think you can get away without a scratch disk. I would use an SSD for the OS + applications and a disk for data.
My 2 cents

.

George Lama · 10-01-2011, 10:10 PM

Photoshop scratch drives are overflow virtual memory should Photoshop RAM virtual memory run out. This is not to be confused with Windows virtual memory - separate thing altogether.

Per Adobe, you don't want the scratch drive to be the same drive as your OS (and Windows virtual memory) and you don't want it to be the same drive as large data files you're working on.

In short, three drives are the ideal:
1) OS
2) Data
3) Scratch Drive

And yes, the faster the drives, the better, but you need to balance this out with the overall performance of the rest of the system.

Wheatfield · 10-02-2011, 07:28 AM

My present system is an SSD for the OS (Win7 64), a striped RAID for Windows Scratch, a mirror for file storage and an SSD for Photoshop swap.
It seems pretty fast. It's certainly faster than when I used the striped drive for Photoshop swap.
I think a fast SATA drive is still quicker for extended read.writes than an SSD, but for the small read/writes that tend to be what is used for ram overflow, the SSDs are faster.

noVICE · 10-02-2011, 03:53 PM

Thanks for the responses so far. I would like people to comment on the two setups above. I guess the main issue is

Does Photoshop need an independent scratch drive or can the scratch drive be on the same drive as the OS IF it is a SSD drive?

**Just1MoreDave** · 10-02-2011, 04:10 PM

A lot of the performance data you'll see is based on "typical use", and might not reflect how you use PS. You could build the system you've planned without the second SSD scratch drive, and see how it works. Then later add stuff if you think it's needed.

George Lama · 10-02-2011, 07:33 PM

In general, if you're going to work with very large/heavy photoshop files and run multiple heavy apps for your work, you want a separate drive for each, regardless of whether it's an SSD, 7200 RPM SATA, or other.

My workload for photography is usually Lightroom heavy and photoshop light. My wife on the other hand typically runs InDesign, Illustrator, Bridge, and multiple image files in Photoshop as she does her graphic design work. Sometimes she throws Lightroom in the mix. Add to that the usual Outlook, iTunes, and Chrome and her system is cranking as she does her design work. In her setup, three drives are best.

If all you're doing is light/medium duty Photoshop and Lightroom work, you could do with two drives.

Your results may vary, so take your needs into account.

bluespearbone · 10-02-2011, 08:15 PM

if you need optimum transfers, the drive[s] handling the swap/scratch should hang off an additional controller.

Chex · 10-02-2011, 09:03 PM

I just built an I7 2600+ 16GB with a Gigabyte Z-68 motherboard w/i-SSD (20GB intel SSD) and 2 x 2TB 5900 RPM in Raid 0 + Blu-Ray burner (backing up to blu-ray is a lot quicker than multiple DVD's

Anvh · 10-03-2011, 02:18 PM

What kind of data does Adobe write to the scratch disk?
Are it small or large packages?

I've no idea what it's really doing.

einstrigger · 10-03-2011, 03:01 PM

^For above, the scratch disk holds temporary files, just like ram. Could be large or small, whatever exceeds your RAM.

To the OP, forget the 2nd SSD for a scratch disk. If you have a modern processor (i.e. Quad Core i5 to i7), upgrading your RAM would be more cost efficient and beneficial. RAM is cheap cheap cheap these days and you'd do well with 16GB, allocating half of that to Photoshop. You can set it in preferences.

From Adobe's CS5 help page:

Quote:

When your system does not have enough RAM to perform an operation, Photoshop uses a proprietary virtual memory technology, also called scratch disks. A scratch disk is any drive or drive partition with free memory. By default, Photoshop uses the hard drive on which the operating system is installed as the primary scratch disk.

When you consider an average RAW file is anywhere between 12-24mb, having 8GB out of 16GB dedicated to Adobe should be ample, even if you had multiple files open with a bunch of layers added. If Photoshop actually needed more virtual memory, then your SSD (Primary Partition) would kick in as the scratch. SSD's are still big money right now versus getting more sticks of RAM. So I would change your setup the following way:

1. 120GB SSD (OS, primary partition, programs)
2. 16GB ram DDR3 PC1333 or 1600 (allocating 8GB within Photoshop Preferences)
3. Two 1 TB HDD SATAIII (In RAID array to store and backup workflow or processed images)

Anvh · 10-03-2011, 11:47 PM

Originally posted by einstrigger

^For above, the scratch disk holds temporary files, just like ram. Could be large or small, whatever exceeds your RAM.

I knew that much but was hoping there was a system behind it, so for example that it won't write things on the scratch disk that need to read constantly.

noVICE · 10-04-2011, 04:58 AM

Thanks for all the replies! Regarding how i usually work... I often have Photoshop, Adobe Bridge and several background programs running at one time, sometimes Illustrator as well. I like to do large panoramas and usually work with RAW files. My proposed system is an i5 2500k with 16GB of RAM.
So... is the extra SSD for scratch an overkill?

agsy · 10-04-2011, 05:12 AM

What I would do is I would try the system out first without the scratch disk and see how can it handle the workflow. 16gb of ram would kick some butt.

noVICE · 10-04-2011, 05:39 AM

That's a fair point agsy, but the only thing is setting it up as my friend suggests means that my programs will have to be reinstalled if I change my mind....and boy am I lazy...
I thought I might bounce the idea around a bit, but it seems that I am just going to have to bite the bullet.

10-01-2011, 04:48 PM	#1
noVICE Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 164	Computer Build: SSD and Photoshop question I am currently sorting out my new PC and I have been having some disagreements with a friend of mine about scratch disks and the best way to setup the HDDs. Because I assumed that Adobe knows best I planned out my HDDs as follows: 1.SSD with OS and program files 2.SSD scratch drive 3.Sata III data drive My friend feels that the concept of having a separate scratch drive is really only necessary when you are using plate drives and he feels that this setup would be the best: 1.SSD with OS and scratch 2.Sata III with program files and data His point of view is that having three HDDs will potentially decrease the overall speed as the motherboard is having to look at three sources not two and that the read/write speed of an SSD is so fast that even though Adobe recommends not having your scratch drive on the same drive as your OS (and possibly program as well) I would not notice any decrease in performance by combining the OS and scratch. My opinion is that scratch drives should be separate and preferably independent. I like faster load times for the programs (hence having them on the boot SSD) and it means that my data is completely separate from the programs (which I prefer). Thanks for your help.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Old Computer Question/s	Ratmagiclady	General Talk	36	07-24-2011 06:23 AM
Photoshop question	fourfivesix	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	16	01-26-2011 08:31 PM
Photoshop question	mikemike	General Talk	8	07-26-2010 11:49 PM
simple question about computer in sleep mode	barondla	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	9	02-12-2010 10:23 PM
Photoshop question	jbrowning	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	3	11-10-2009 10:35 AM

10-01-2011, 05:38 PM	#2
agsy Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 551	I have never used a scratch disk. On my system the virtual memory is turned off and it runs beautyful. I think if you have plenty of RAM (I use 8GB but some MOBO's can use 16 or maybe even more), you would not need a scratch disk, the system will use the RAM for temporary work. My setup is two Raid0 disks, one for OS and files and the other for backup. I run Photoshop64 bit on Windows7 64. The biggest file I worked with was a panorama put together with 27 twelve MP images and the system handled it pretty well. I've read that SSD disks are not the best for constant read/write applications, that is why it's not recommended to defragment them. They are super fast though, but I still think you can get away without a scratch disk. I would use an SSD for the OS + applications and a disk for data. My 2 cents .

10-01-2011, 10:10 PM	#3
George Lama Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Buffalo/Rochester, NY Photos: Albums Posts: 1,133	Photoshop scratch drives are overflow virtual memory should Photoshop RAM virtual memory run out. This is not to be confused with Windows virtual memory - separate thing altogether. Per Adobe, you don't want the scratch drive to be the same drive as your OS (and Windows virtual memory) and you don't want it to be the same drive as large data files you're working on. In short, three drives are the ideal: 1) OS 2) Data 3) Scratch Drive And yes, the faster the drives, the better, but you need to balance this out with the overall performance of the rest of the system.

10-02-2011, 07:28 AM	#4
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,986	My present system is an SSD for the OS (Win7 64), a striped RAID for Windows Scratch, a mirror for file storage and an SSD for Photoshop swap. It seems pretty fast. It's certainly faster than when I used the striped drive for Photoshop swap. I think a fast SATA drive is still quicker for extended read.writes than an SSD, but for the small read/writes that tend to be what is used for ram overflow, the SSDs are faster.

10-02-2011, 03:53 PM	#5
noVICE Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 164 Original Poster	Thanks for the responses so far. I would like people to comment on the two setups above. I guess the main issue is Does Photoshop need an independent scratch drive or can the scratch drive be on the same drive as the OS IF it is a SSD drive?

10-02-2011, 04:10 PM	#6
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	A lot of the performance data you'll see is based on "typical use", and might not reflect how you use PS. You could build the system you've planned without the second SSD scratch drive, and see how it works. Then later add stuff if you think it's needed.

10-02-2011, 07:33 PM	#7
George Lama Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Buffalo/Rochester, NY Photos: Albums Posts: 1,133	In general, if you're going to work with very large/heavy photoshop files and run multiple heavy apps for your work, you want a separate drive for each, regardless of whether it's an SSD, 7200 RPM SATA, or other. My workload for photography is usually Lightroom heavy and photoshop light. My wife on the other hand typically runs InDesign, Illustrator, Bridge, and multiple image files in Photoshop as she does her graphic design work. Sometimes she throws Lightroom in the mix. Add to that the usual Outlook, iTunes, and Chrome and her system is cranking as she does her design work. In her setup, three drives are best. If all you're doing is light/medium duty Photoshop and Lightroom work, you could do with two drives. Your results may vary, so take your needs into account.

10-02-2011, 08:15 PM	#8
bluespearbone Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Derbyshire, United Kingdom Posts: 325	if you need optimum transfers, the drive[s] handling the swap/scratch should hang off an additional controller.

10-02-2011, 09:03 PM	#9
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	I just built an I7 2600+ 16GB with a Gigabyte Z-68 motherboard w/i-SSD (20GB intel SSD) and 2 x 2TB 5900 RPM in Raid 0 + Blu-Ray burner (backing up to blu-ray is a lot quicker than multiple DVD's

10-03-2011, 02:18 PM	#10
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	What kind of data does Adobe write to the scratch disk? Are it small or large packages? I've no idea what it's really doing.

10-03-2011, 03:01 PM	#11
einstrigger Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Sacramento, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 728	^For above, the scratch disk holds temporary files, just like ram. Could be large or small, whatever exceeds your RAM. To the OP, forget the 2nd SSD for a scratch disk. If you have a modern processor (i.e. Quad Core i5 to i7), upgrading your RAM would be more cost efficient and beneficial. RAM is cheap cheap cheap these days and you'd do well with 16GB, allocating half of that to Photoshop. You can set it in preferences. From Adobe's CS5 help page: Quote: When your system does not have enough RAM to perform an operation, Photoshop uses a proprietary virtual memory technology, also called scratch disks. A scratch disk is any drive or drive partition with free memory. By default, Photoshop uses the hard drive on which the operating system is installed as the primary scratch disk. When you consider an average RAW file is anywhere between 12-24mb, having 8GB out of 16GB dedicated to Adobe should be ample, even if you had multiple files open with a bunch of layers added. If Photoshop actually needed more virtual memory, then your SSD (Primary Partition) would kick in as the scratch. SSD's are still big money right now versus getting more sticks of RAM. So I would change your setup the following way: 1. 120GB SSD (OS, primary partition, programs) 2. 16GB ram DDR3 PC1333 or 1600 (allocating 8GB within Photoshop Preferences) 3. Two 1 TB HDD SATAIII (In RAID array to store and backup workflow or processed images)

10-03-2011, 11:47 PM	#12
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by einstrigger ^For above, the scratch disk holds temporary files, just like ram. Could be large or small, whatever exceeds your RAM. I knew that much but was hoping there was a system behind it, so for example that it won't write things on the scratch disk that need to read constantly.

10-04-2011, 04:58 AM	#13
noVICE Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 164 Original Poster	Thanks for all the replies! Regarding how i usually work... I often have Photoshop, Adobe Bridge and several background programs running at one time, sometimes Illustrator as well. I like to do large panoramas and usually work with RAW files. My proposed system is an i5 2500k with 16GB of RAM. So... is the extra SSD for scratch an overkill?

10-04-2011, 05:12 AM	#14
agsy Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 551	What I would do is I would try the system out first without the scratch disk and see how can it handle the workflow. 16gb of ram would kick some butt.

10-04-2011, 05:39 AM	#15
noVICE Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 164 Original Poster	That's a fair point agsy, but the only thing is setting it up as my friend suggests means that my programs will have to be reinstalled if I change my mind....and boy am I lazy... I thought I might bounce the idea around a bit, but it seems that I am just going to have to bite the bullet.