Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-03-2017, 05:23 PM   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 288
What REALLY matters in computer hardware?

Over the years, as my photography and video have evolved, I have received conflicting advice on really matters for PP and rendering . My current k-70 has a RAW file size around 28.5 Mb, and HDD RAW of around 90mb. Individually, just about anything can manage PP on these, but when I start doing panoramic stitches in PS, my previous i5 SP3 would often stagger. Particularly when i asked it to stitch 36 HDR images--just said no. 14 was OK, mostly. Likewise, with video processing, (mainly Gopro) it was pretty good, but you really had to limit the length or it would just fall over. So, earlier this year I purchased a faster machine. Lenovo Yoga 900 . This was powered by an i7-6500U, 2.5ghz, with 8mb of RAM. Brilliant display, so the smaller size is not really a handicap in PP. It manages all the above quite well, with only the rare "not responding" moment in LR. I started using LRTimelapse shooting in RAW. This means I may have up to 800 RAW images to work with at once, and all the corresponding changes. Again, it does it quite well, but is just slow--export from the program for the finished product will take 1.5 hrs for a render of that size, or probably 45 minutes for a more normal 400 frame shoot. Likewise during the processing, reload and visual preview take quite a while. looking into this machine, I believe it has Intel graphics integrated into the CPU, could be wrong? Video editing is now done with Premiere Elements 15.
So what has the greatest effect on ability to process large visuals files efficiently? Processor speed? Graphics card? RAM? A combination of all 3? Is hyperthreading ability an advantage?

10-03-2017, 05:31 PM - 1 Like   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,207
Paragraph - Wikipedia
10-03-2017, 05:33 PM - 4 Likes   #3
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 51,584
QuoteOriginally posted by ranmar850 Quote
Over the years, as my photography and video have evolved, I have received conflicting advice on really matters for PP and rendering . My current k-70 has a RAW file size around 28.5 Mb, and HDD RAW of around 90mb. Individually, just about anything can manage PP on these, but when I start doing panoramic stitches in PS, my previous i5 SP3 would often stagger. Particularly when i asked it to stitch 36 HDR images--just said no. 14 was OK, mostly. Likewise, with video processing, (mainly Gopro) it was pretty good, but you really had to limit the length or it would just fall over. So, earlier this year I purchased a faster machine. Lenovo Yoga 900 . This was powered by an i7-6500U, 2.5ghz, with 8mb of RAM. Brilliant display, so the smaller size is not really a handicap in PP. It manages all the above quite well, with only the rare "not responding" moment in LR. I started using LRTimelapse shooting in RAW. This means I may have up to 800 RAW images to work with at once, and all the corresponding changes. Again, it does it quite well, but is just slow--export from the program for the finished product will take 1.5 hrs for a render of that size, or probably 45 minutes for a more normal 400 frame shoot. Likewise during the processing, reload and visual preview take quite a while. looking into this machine, I believe it has Intel graphics integrated into the CPU, could be wrong? Video editing is now done with Premiere Elements 15.
So what has the greatest effect on ability to process large visuals files efficiently? Processor speed? Graphics card? RAM? A combination of all 3? Is hyperthreading ability an advantage?
It's definitely a combination of everything. In many practical applications, whether or not you have a SSD is a key factor, as this speeds up application load times, booting, and disk read/write.

Rendering is often delegated to the GPU, so you would want a dedicated graphics card rather than integrated graphics for this to go quickly. Unless you are doing video, a super beefy graphics card is not necessary. For general-purpose (i.e. non-GPU accelerated) computing, generally the CPU clock speed is what you want to maximize.

Having lots of cores is nice, but most applications can't fully leverage them. Therefore, IMO a very fast dual-core can be better than a slow quad-core, for instance, especially if you don't run anything else intensive alongside photoshop. Most non-budget CPUs have hyperthreading, so that's a constant for practical purposes.

Finally, you'll want to have "enough" ram for whatever you are doing. 16Gb is a good amount these days. Most PCs have upgradable RAM so this is the easiest thing to fix up, followed by the HDD to SSD.

If you look at your computer's task manager while intensive processes are running, you should be able to see where the bottleneck lies. If all cores are maxed out, you need more cores and more speed. If one core is maxed out but the others are not, then you only need faster cores. If the RAM is close to being full, you need more of it. If the disk utilization is close to max, you need a faster drive.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:
10-03-2017, 05:37 PM   #4
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2016
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 69
Excellent reply from Adam. I have two laptops, both with the same CPU. One has a graphics card; the other doesn't. The one with the graphics card is much, much faster.

10-03-2017, 06:03 PM   #5
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,694
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
whether or not you have a SSD is a key factor
OR an M2 SSD - these have incredibly high I/O bandwidth, and make use of processing in parallel. If you are upgrading your PC look into a motherboard that supports M2 drives [most of them do these days] some even have faculty for two of them to be installed.

QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
If the disk utilization is close to max, you need a faster drive.
or you need higher capacity to keep drive flogging to a minimum. I will also add having a suitable backup solution to protect your work from loss is also something to be considered.

Last edited by Digitalis; 10-03-2017 at 06:15 PM.
10-03-2017, 06:13 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,041
I used to have a similar question when look for a new machine, and this is no scientific data back me up on this one but only from observing 5 of my laptops.
Machine with faster / better processor + traditional HDD can run / process graphic and render video faster than the machine with middle grade processor + ssd + more ram + faster graphic card.

I guess that is not a surprise.

So now, when I look for a new laptop, I always go for

1. The best processor I can find,
2. Best or middle class graphic card depend on money at the time, but it need to have a didicate graphic card, not the on board one.
3. Minimum ram because I can upgrade it later and far cheaper when buy it on amazon or eBay.
4. SSD (I would put this one #2 or #3 a few year ago but most modern laptop come with SSD now a day.)

Last edited by pakinjapan; 10-04-2017 at 07:51 PM.
10-03-2017, 06:26 PM   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 288
Original Poster
Thank you for all the replies. The laptop runs a SSD, 512gb, forgot to mention that. But , as I am using an external portable HDD to store all my work, including the raw stockI am working from, the SSD would effectively have less bearing on it? I have looked at Task Manager--the i5 was always tapped out at 100%. The i7, it varies, may only run at 80%, peaking at 100%, but I don't believe I've ever looked at individual cores performance in TM.

10-03-2017, 06:51 PM   #8
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 2,903
QuoteOriginally posted by ranmar850 Quote
Thank you for all the replies. The laptop runs a SSD, 512gb, forgot to mention that. But , as I am using an external portable HDD to store all my work, including the raw stockI am working from, the SSD would effectively have less bearing on it? I have looked at Task Manager--the i5 was always tapped out at 100%. The i7, it varies, may only run at 80%, peaking at 100%, but I don't believe I've ever looked at individual cores performance in TM.
And if I follow your original post, you are using the integrated graphics? A discrete graphics card with a decent "gaming" GPU on it would probably do wonders for you. Do be aware that you can get into situation where the graphics card is bound by the CPU. So there is a point where you have to upgrade the CPU to get full performance out of the graphics card, but if you're using integrated graphics on an i5 or an i7, I think you'll find a nice boost with a nice new video card. I'm of course assuming your software has an option to use your GPU. Light Room does, the Pro version of Aftershot does, but I don't see an option in DCU5 to use your GPU. So I would do some checking before a purchase just to be sure. Also, the i7 should handle multi-threaded applications better if they are written that way.

Also, is your external drive a USB 2.0 or 3.0 interface? That would make a huge difference in transfer speeds - make sure it's plugged into a "blue" port.
10-03-2017, 08:42 PM   #9
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 16,394
QuoteOriginally posted by ranmar850 Quote
Thank you for all the replies. The laptop runs a SSD, 512gb, forgot to mention that. But , as I am using an external portable HDD to store all my work, including the raw stockI am working from, the SSD would effectively have less bearing on it? I have looked at Task Manager--the i5 was always tapped out at 100%. The i7, it varies, may only run at 80%, peaking at 100%, but I don't believe I've ever looked at individual cores performance in TM.
Don't work from the external HD.

Put what you need onto your local drive.
10-03-2017, 08:55 PM   #10
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,543
QuoteOriginally posted by ranmar850 Quote
I have looked at Task Manager--the i5 was always tapped out at 100%
This doesn't matter. It were a car, driving everywhere at 100% means your engine is too small or your foot is too heavy..
But a computer isn't like a car, 100% just means the computer has allocated up to 100% of the processor to the task, because it's available. A faster processor with more cores will still get allocated up to 100%. If not, you would have to wait longer.
10-03-2017, 09:03 PM   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 288
Original Poster
USB 3.0 drive and port. Big issue, of course with SSD's is lack of size. Mine is 512gb, bigger than many, but nowhere big enough for any kind of storage. I reckon I'd end up in an awful mess if I started importing the the SSD to do the work, then saving elsewhere. In fact, I think I tried that with the SP3, very hard to manage, IMO. Was transferring to a folder in a 256 gb micro sd in the laptop via USB connection from camera, working, then exporting everything to the external HDD upon completion. Cumbersome, and easy to break links to LR. Workflow now is to stick the class10 256gb MicroSD from the camera into the lappie, transfer the files to the external HDD, then get to work. Finished exports go back to the external drive, LR catalogue is stored internally on the SSD.
For video editing, though, I may try the purely local approach, then export the finished product to the external drive, and delete everything from the SSD. I currently have 230gb free on that. When will they start doing 2tb SSD's for laptops at a good price? Moores Law no longer applies? :-)
10-03-2017, 09:08 PM - 1 Like   #12
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 43
Most of your rendering probably doesn't use the GPU that much.
Check with this page : Photoshop graphics processor (GPU) card FAQ
....straight from the horses mouth...
That said, I PS does support OpenCL for some functions (odd, I always thought it was CUDA) so AMD will fare better than nVidia in that regard.


1) RAM and lots of it. 8GB is not enough
2) Get a fast, local SSD. Configure PS to use a 2nd physical drive for the swap, not the primary.
3) Faster CPU

4) Decent external graphics card


I used to work for the subsidiary of a very large camera company (no, sorry, was not Pentax). I dealt with massive graphics files, far beyond what normal users would have. No problem running with old Core 2 Duo machine even, but the IT crew stuffed my workstation with 32GB RAM and the 2nd drive that was exclusively used for PS swap space. This was not even an SSD


Please keep in mind what GPU are normally designed to do, they were often focused on 3D rendering. "Rendering" , stitching panoramic images is not the same thing.They can be used as specialized processing units now but that depends on the software supporting it (e.g. CUDA or OpenCL). The top-of-the-line Intel graphics is getting decent now but it isn't the one in your i5.


Also, if you're serious, go desktop. I use a high-end HP workstation laptop these days and it might be comparable to the ancient Dell desktop workstation I used to use. Your little consumer grade laptop isn't going to cut it. Sure, the paper specs look the same but when you dig down deep, there's a reason it costs less ... little things here and there, from RAM to HDD speed, etc. plus I believe it will throttle when your CPU starts heating up.
10-03-2017, 10:06 PM   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 288
Original Poster
Well, i wouldn't really call a $2600 i7 ultrabook with a 3000x 2000 display a "little consumer grade laptop" ( that i5 is long gone), but I take your point. If I won lotto, I'd have a top end desktop at home--problem is, I am a very mobile person, home less than 50% of the time, and the majority of my photo taking and processing is done away from home, so a lightweight laptop it must be. I did have a 17" desktop replacement HP Pavilion laptop for a few years, and it and its associated power supply took up nearly 5kg of my 7 kg carry-on allowance, and I hate checking stuff in, I fly a lot.
But thank you for the info. My original enquiry was really just aimed at what I might do in the future --retirement is coming soon, and a desktop will probably then be on the agenda.
10-03-2017, 11:54 PM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,041
QuoteOriginally posted by ranmar850 Quote
My original enquiry was really just aimed at what I might do in the future --retirement is coming soon, and a desktop will probably then be on the agenda.
You might want to look at a workstation class laptop on your next upgrade. My Yoga laptop only go with me during a trip. Heavier but powerful Work station stay home and do all the heavy lifting.
10-04-2017, 01:49 AM - 1 Like   #15
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,694
QuoteOriginally posted by ranmar850 Quote
retirement is coming soon, and a desktop will probably then be on the agenda.
Then I wouldn't advise spending too much money on a mobile solution, Desktop PCs are much more capable than equivalent priced laptops.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
ability, graphics, machine, matters, matters in computer, photography, photoshop, pp, size, video
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Machinery Hardware Photography. Tonytee Post Your Photos! 7 11-11-2016 10:58 PM
Calling all computer hardware literates. Help installing SSD LeDave General Talk 35 07-12-2016 03:06 PM
Panasonic shows why 4k video matters jimr-pdx Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 13 03-04-2016 03:06 PM
K-1 vs K-3 autofocus system - some hardware and other differences rawr Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 7 02-20-2016 09:42 PM
Finally on the forum that really matters! hugostar Welcomes and Introductions 3 04-04-2011 12:55 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:23 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top