Pc Spec Suggestions

[AnnieP]

Hi everyone, I am fed up with trying to PP my photos on my old LapTop, and am trying to persuade Mr P to let me buy a new PC set up.

I will stay with Windows rather than Mac, unless anyone can convince me that Mac is Much better.

I use Shoot in Raw and use Lightroom and Photoshop as my main two programmes.

I would really like some idea on the kind of spec to go for, including monitor.

Thanks

Ann

[ricktas]

8GB ram as a minimum
Probably a good i7 processor
two hard drives or an SSD and a hard drive
usb3 ports - a good usb3 card reader is invaluable for fast transfer from card to computer
good graphics card, gaming cards are always worth considering
an IPS screen, and a hardware calibrator - like a Spyder
Now for something really odd, a gaming mouse. All those buttons can be programmed to do things in lightroom

There is a starting point.

[rackham]

8GB ram as a minimum
Probably a good i7 processor
two hard drives or an SSD and a hard drive
usb3 ports - a good usb3 card reader is invaluable for fast transfer from card to computer
good graphics card, gaming cards are always worth considering
an IPS screen, and a hardware calibrator - like a Spyder
Now for something really odd, a gaming mouse. All those buttons can be programmed to do things in lightroom

There is a starting point.

In an ideal world, maybe.

You'll do just fine with an i5, 4gb ram. SSD is nice but not totally necessary either. Same goes for the rest... Rick's suggested specs are certainly desirable but by no means would I consider any of them to be minimum standards.

Or maybe I'm a little too fond of my ghetto lappies, however much they do the job for me. Your mileage may vary.

[MrQ]

+1 to what Rackham has said except I'd definitely go with more RAM (at least 8GB), especially since it will probably be the cheapest part.

[PhotoPaul]

You might be best to tell us your budget, otherwise we could sprout all kinds of specs without any practicality.

[ROA44]

just wondering why you would be avoiding a Mac. At the moment I can't afford anything but would like to have a mac as I get sick of all the Win's changes and am able to get around XP alright now. I have just gained access to my Sisters New Toshiba i7 laptop because she can no longer use a computer due to blindness & with Win's 8 and am finding it annoying. Apart from money the only reason I'm unsure about apple is an extra apple screen is about $400's compared to $330's for 2 x 23" LG IPS Monitors. A number of people I know have over the last couple of years changed over to mac's and wouldn't go back to a windows machine plus I'm not that tech savy so am tempted to consider.

[wideangle]

I would think of buying a computer as an investment into the future. Spending a little more now on components will allow you to be able to use the computer longer, whereas if you brought cheaper components then it might be good right now but get slower because of camera upgrades/new software etc. It's hard to gauge though what system would be suited to you as you don't mention the price at which you are willing to spend on a new computer.

- - - Updated - - -


just wondering why you would be avoiding a Mac. At the moment I can't afford anything but would like to have a mac as I get sick of all the Win's changes and am able to get around XP alright now. I have just gained access to my Sisters New Toshiba i7 laptop because she can no longer use a computer due to blindness & with Win's 8 and am finding it annoying. Apart from money the only reason I'm unsure about apple is an extra apple screen is about $400's compared to $330's for 2 x 23" LG IPS Monitors. A number of people I know have over the last couple of years changed over to mac's and wouldn't go back to a windows machine plus I'm not that tech savy so am tempted to consider.

You can always get Windows 7 if you don't like the interface of Windows 8, it's still available.

[ricktas]

You can always get Windows 7 if you don't like the interface of Windows 8, it's still available.

You can also turn the Win8 interface off and it looks just like Win7

[wideangle]

You can also turn the Win8 interface off and it looks just like Win7

But I still think you have to load into "metro" first when booting up.

[AnnieP]

Hi everyone. Thanks for all your replies. I've been stuck at work all day, so just getting your comments now.

A couple of things.. Re budget... It's not really about the $$$, more about buying something that won't need replacing in a year. Obviously I want to get value for money, but if I know what spec will be good then I can look at getting it built.

Re Mac.... I have been using Pcs for the past 15 years and really know my way around windows.... And although I have an iPad and an iPhone I still feel much more comfortable using windows.

How about screen size? Is bigger always better?

Thanks Annie :)

[wideangle]

CPU: Core I7
RAM: 16GB
HDD 1: SSD (operating system and programs)
HDD 2: HDD (storing your photos)
Mid range graphics card
Dell US412M(24") IPS monitor or U2173HM (27")

Should set you back around $2000 for a good setup. This should last you quite some time and it's worth paying a little more now so that you can have a computer that last's longer into the future.

[AnnieP]

CPU: Core I7
RAM: 16GB
HDD 1: SSD (operating system and programs)
HDD 2: HDD (storing your photos)
Mid range graphics card
Dell US412M(24") IPS monitor or U2173HM (27")

Should set you back around $2000 for a good setup. This should last you quite some time and it's worth paying a little more now so that you can have a computer that last's longer into the future.

Thank you so much, that was just the kind of info I was after.

Anyone else got anything different to add??

Now I've just got to price it up and go cap in hand to Mr P!

[wideangle]

There are plenty of good quality monitors out there, just make sure they have IPS or PLS, not TN. Samsung S27A850D is another to check out, a little cheaper than than the Dell equivalent too.

[J.davis]

Try this for suggestions and general ideas
http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/rmp_sg_whirlpoolpcs_multi_tasking_configs

[ricktas]

Have a look at some of these : http://www.scorptec.com.au/systems/all/
Especially the ones towards the bottom. They are high spec'd. I got all the parts for my current desktop computer from scorptec and built my own, but their reputation for build design and quality is superb. At least they will give you an idea of some specifications, if nothing else.

[agb]

The critical part of a computer for images is the monitor. You do not need, though it is nice to have, the latest cpu and SSD, and 19GB ram etc, but it's the quality of the monitor that will really make a difference. Wide colour gamut, will all the parameters able to be adjusted, brightness, and individual colours so that you can properly calibrate it.

[ricktas]

The critical part of a computer for images is the monitor. You do not need, though it is nice to have, the latest cpu and SSD, and 19GB ram etc, but it's the quality of the monitor that will really make a difference. Wide colour gamut, will all the parameters able to be adjusted, brightness, and individual colours so that you can properly calibrate it.

Try stitching 6 shots from a D800 with 4gb ram into a pano... it takes forever.

[PhotoPaul]

My current PC, which I built myself, works wonderfully for editing photos and video. I also use it for tracking audio.

Specs are:

Motherboard: Gigabyte Z77-D3H
CPU: i7-2600 3.4ghz
RAM: 16gb
HDD: Internal 300gb Sata 3 + External 600gb USB 3.0. Also have another portable 1tb usb 3.0
Monitor: Viewsonic VX2453 (not the best, but better than what I had previously)
Graphics: Radeon HD6800 series, 1gb RAM GDDR5.
Running Windows 7 x64 Ultimate.

An SSD would be great, but I haven't suffered any awful load times on this computer. That's also when I have had many raws open at once in Photoshop whilst doing things in Illustrator. I think RAM is your best friend here. It's cheap and it never hurts to have more than you think you'll need.

I built this computer pretty cheaply from memory (I've had it for a few years now). I did have to upgrade the motherboard once as the original one I bought was faulty and long story short it was easier just to buy a new one from a local shop. All the other hardware is roughly 4 years old now. Still going strong. It could easily be done through MSY or ARC quite cheaply if you are able to build it yourself.

[AnnieP]

The critical part of a computer for images is the monitor. You do not need, though it is nice to have, the latest cpu and SSD, and 19GB ram etc, but it's the quality of the monitor that will really make a difference. Wide colour gamut, will all the parameters able to be adjusted, brightness, and individual colours so that you can properly calibrate it.

So Graham, what monitor do you use, or would you use if you had the choice?

- - - Updated - - -

Ric I will definitely be making sure I have lots of ram.... That's my problem now..... Sooooo sloooowwwww

[cupic]

Dell IPS monitor cheap and effective 24" or 27",minimum 16gb of RAM

[Cage]

I build my own computers but I just had a look at Rick's link for Scorptec (I've also bought gear from them) and their Huntsman Platinum model would be ideal for your requirements, teamed with something like a 24" Dell U2412M Ultrasharp Monitor.

All the components in this set-up are very well regarded.

[agb]

So Graham, what monitor do you use, or would you use if you had the choice?

- - - Updated - - -

Ric I will definitely be making sure I have lots of ram.... That's my problem now..... Sooooo sloooowwwww

Sorry to be late getting back to you. This http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2413.htm or similar, if I could afford it.

[mortalitas]

Why would you choose the 24 inch over the 27 inch? I ended up going for the ASUS 27 inch ips as my main screen, just another brand to consider.

[Cage]

Oh and I'd add a SSD for the O/S and select programs such as your PP ones.

[ricktas]

Why would you choose the 24 inch over the 27 inch? I ended up going for the ASUS 27 inch ips as my main screen, just another brand to consider.

space? I have a 27 inch monitor, but it doesn't fit my computer desk properly and so it sits much further forward than I would like. Sometimes people just do not have the room to be getting the biggest... and Freud might like to talk about size fetishes.

[GTP 290]

I'm just running on a Harvey Norman special, does that make me dodgy? haha

It does everything I need and I'm running twin 24 inch monitors and about to get a third.

[mortalitas]

Also, ram doesn't make a computer faster... The CPU does that, ram allows for faster access of memory allocated to open program's. so upgrading your ram won't necessarily increase your speed unless it was bottle necking in the first place. Editing photos in order of priority my resource allocation would be

first and foremost:
screen. Better rendition of colours, more accuracy.
secondly
cpu, photo and video processes are very CPU intensive, if you can afford it, try for a hex core i7, if not, get the best you can afford
thirdly would be the RAM.
No point in having heaps of ram, with a terrible CPU, the computer will still run slow. In theory 8 gb should suffice, but the best part of ram is, you can always upgrade easily and cheaply later on.
finally the graphics card.
this is last because graphics cards are optimised for 3d rendering primarily, so any mid range card will suffice for photography, your CPU will bottleneck before your graphics card will.
i would opt for Mirrored raid 10 drives over solid slate, a lot cheaper, and a lot more space.

i have some idea about computers as I study software engineering. I have also built many computers, including my own.

hopefully this helps, I have tried no keep it relatively jargon free :)

- - - Updated - - -


space? I have a 27 inch monitor, but it doesn't fit my computer desk properly and so it sits much further forward than I would like. Sometimes people just do not have the room to be getting the biggest... and Freud might like to talk about size fetishes.

Good point, I didn't think of that.
I have 3 of Them... I'd hate to think what Freud would say about that :S

[MrQ]

Also, ram doesn't make a computer faster...
While that's not incorrect, insufficient RAM will definitely result in making a computer slower. Plus, as mentioned earlier, RAM is dirt cheap and will likely be the cheapest component of the system. My mouse cost me more than my 16GB of RAM.

Don't over spec. None of the suggestions here are bad, but some may be excessive (depending on your budget). PC hardware is much like cameras - you can get a good one without spending too much, but there's always something slightly better for just a bit more ... :)

If you've got a local computer store they should be happy to talk to you about your needs. If you don't have a local then send an email to one of the suppliers already mentioned. Tell them it's for photography rather than gaming/officework and give them an idea of your budget.

[Cage]

Unless I misunderstood, I believe the OP was looking for a step-up from a laptop for PP.

The system I have does that quite well, and the system I suggested the OP have a look at from Scorptec is a further step-up from what I'm using.

I agree the monitor is very important and my next improvement will be from the 22' TN I have at present to probably an IPS 24".

However, and I speak from experience here, 8GB of RAM is not enough to do any more than basic PP.
When I first put my current system together I was plagued with screen freezes, and after many months of frustration and no help from MS, I installed a little program called Core Temp and had it running on my desktop so I could watch my CPU usage and RAM usage.

Guess what? The next time my screen froze my RAM usage was off the clock, I doubled my RAM from 8GB to 16GB and I haven't had a screen freeze in twelve months. I believe it was something to do with the way W7 64bit allocates RAM usage, or maybe it was my system configuration, or lack of it.

Anyway it was a relatively cheap fix. And I will have another look at a RAID array.

[hakka]

But I still think you have to load into "metro" first when booting up.

No, I have win8 and haven't seen metro for months.


Try stitching 6 shots from a D800 with 4gb ram into a pano... it takes forever.

I dont like waiting, so I got this:

http://i1041.photobucket.com/albums/b416/hakka69/_D7A8373s.jpg (http://s1041.photobucket.com/user/hakka69/media/_D7A8373s.jpg.html)

CPU: i7 2700k @4.8ghz
MB: Asus p8z68v pro gen3
RAM: 4x8gb G skill ripjawsX 12800
GPU: EVGA GTX680 x 2
Sound: Creative Recon3d Fataity
PSU: Silverstone strider+ 850w
Case: Fractal Arc midi
SSD: crucial 64gb, 128gb, 256gb, sandisk 240gb.
HDD: 4x WD green 2tb
Monitor: Dell u2412m x 3, Dell S2409w
Cooling: HR02 macho, 6x gelid wing fans, Lamptron FC2 controller

http://i1041.photobucket.com/albums/b416/hakka69/_D7B4862_02-1.jpg (http://s1041.photobucket.com/user/hakka69/media/_D7B4862_02-1.jpg.html)

[arthurking83]

......

However, and I speak from experience here, 8GB of RAM is not enough to do any more than basic PP.
When I first put my current system together I was plagued with screen freezes, and after many months of frustration and no help from MS, I installed a little program called Core Temp and had it running on my desktop so I could watch my CPU usage and RAM usage.

Guess what? The next time my screen froze my RAM usage was off the clock, I doubled my RAM from 8GB to 16GB and I haven't had a screen freeze in twelve months. I believe it was something to do with the way W7 64bit allocates RAM usage, or maybe it was my system configuration, or lack of it.

.......

I guess it depends on the software used for this basic PP!

I'm running 8Gb RAM, and have never experienced lockups or freezes .. but then again, I don't use Photoshop! :p

LOL! seriously tho, I do use a DAM software called IDImager, and because it can, it uses up almost all 8 of those Gigs of RAM .. and the PC does tend to feel a lot more sluggish. IDIMager itself can appear to have hung(but it hasn't).

I don't think you need more than 8G of RAM, but it's nice to have the available overhead.

My recommendation would be:

Screen: Asus PB278Q ($649)
CPU: AMD AM3+ FX8350 ($219)
Mobo: Asus Sabertooth 990 ($191)
Alt Mobo: Asus M5A99FX-Pro-R2 ($159)
HDD: 2x 3Tb Seagate Barracuda ($135 ea)
RAM: 16G (either) Gskill or Patriot 1333 ($118)
PSU+CASE: Antec or CoolerMaster ($150-200) make sure the case has front facing USB3 ports!!)
Graphics Card: <any brand> 2Gig GT640 ($90ish)
Blu Ray burner: LiteOn ($75)
Win7 x64 ($93 Home/ $138 Pro)

Total: $1900 (give or take depending on actual items acquired)

If you have a $2K budget, then this allows a new keyboard/mouse if required, but depending on your usage, maybe something as simple as a small graphics tablet may assist you in some manner, whether that's for photography or other PC work.
Other things of value are panel mounted card readers + IO ports, and they usually only cost about $30 or so.

I'm the sort of person that recycles stuff like mice keyboards and other such peripheries. I'm still using the same DVD burner I had 10 years ago ... can't ever see myself using a BluRay burner .. I haven't even burned a DVD for a few years I think!
I will only upgrade or update if I think there's a need, advantage, or a problem with my current devices.

I wouldn't go down the path of running raid arrays and suchlike. Just keep it simple.
I don't imagine that AnnieP is the type to want to extract every last nanosecond of performance from her PC, just something that will do the job rather quickly.
Those PC specs will see your computer boot up in about 25sec. (as long as you don't over clutter it with auto loading 'wasteware')
If those PC parts don't provide you with near instant photo editing, as well as most other tasks, then I'll sell my(near instant) PC (with it's far inferior hardware specs!!) in protest.

My PC is now 3 or more years old and is still running at near instant velocities when it comes to most photo editing.
And I use an apparently badly written, badly made software for all my PP work.
I don't do all that much pano stitiching, but the few panos I have done, using PTGui, haven't taken all that long to process. Pano stitching is one of the most hardware intensive processes.
Some of my last panos, involved 8x or even 15 x D800 tiff files(200Mb files!) stitched in PTGui, wouldn't have taken 30sec or so .. maybe a minute to complete.
ViewNX2 was a bit slow in initially opening the nearly 2G tiff file, but FSViewer only took about 5sec to finally render it.

I suppose I'm just that little bit more patient than others! :p

anyhow, the point is to not overspend on PC gear, as it all becomes redundant at some point in the future. My PC's tend to last me about 7 to 10 years.
Those PC parts will last you easily for about 10 years worth of computing.

I reckon if the PC box is costing more than about $1200-1400, you're wasting money! Money that would otherwise be better spent on camera gear ....... or holidays!(or chocolate :th3:)

Hope that helps

[AnnieP]

OMG Hakka! Lol what a set up! I LOVE technology and would love a set up like that.

Thank you ALL for your replies. There is a lot to consider. Although I am looking for a step up from my old laptop, I am happy to take quite a few steps which hopefully will keep me going for a few years.

Annie :D

[Rattus79]

I'm going to take a wild stab in the dark and guess you like to play a couple of games when you're not processing photos Hakka ....

[hakka]

I'm going to take a wild stab in the dark and guess you like to play a couple of games when you're not processing photos Hakka ....

I've played battlefield 3 once or twice.

[AnnieP]

I'm going to take a wild stab in the dark and guess you like to play a couple of games when you're not processing photos Hakka ....
My thoughts exactly!!

[arthurking83]

I've played solitaire, three times, lost all three and never looked at it again.
Then I played minesweeper, and won on my first go. I reckon my on board graphics controller must be pumping out about 1fps without any issues.

Use common sense and keep 'ya dollars for really important bits.

[Rattus79]

Use common sense and keep 'ya dollars for really important bits.

Good call.

I get by quite happily on an i5 2500k (sandybridge) - with a mild overclock to 4 gig
a 440 GT Vid Card - Old news and cost me $70
Cheap Gskil ram - 1600mhz - 12 Gig (about $30)

but by far the best $$ for performance gain you can get is an SSD
the speed increase is incredible! turn your sluggish POS model into a super duper you beaut computer (exaggeration)

The on board video from the Ivy Bridge processors is not half bad, and is more then enough to run photoshop. Lightroom does not use the graphics card for acceleration. (yet)

Sure, I'd kill for a system like hakka's (watch out mate!) but I'm still happy with my setup.

2 more cents, The Dell ultrasharps everyone keeps mentioning are brilliant! they are the only single bit I would even consider buying from dell.

Building your own system is really quite easy, most things can only go in one way, and it's really quite hard to get wrong these days. One thing that hasn't changed from way back in the day is to take extra care installing the CPU. Always Earth yourself before handling them, and wear cotton clothing, no synthetics. (less static)

I buy my parts from Umart.com.au

- - - Updated - - -


Use common sense and keep 'ya dollars for really important bits.

Good call.

I get by quite happily on an i5 2500k (sandybridge) - with a mild overclock to 4 gig
a 440 GT Vid Card - Old news and cost me $70
Cheap Gskil ram - 1600mhz - 12 Gig (about $30)

but by far the best $$ for performance gain you can get is an SSD
the speed increase is incredible! turn your sluggish POS model into a super duper you beaut computer (exaggeration)

The on board video from the Ivy Bridge processors is not half bad, and is more then enough to run photoshop. Lightroom does not use the graphics card for acceleration. (yet)

Sure, I'd kill for a system like hakka's (watch out mate!) but I'm still happy with my setup.

2 more cents, The Dell ultrasharps everyone keeps mentioning are brilliant! they are the only single bit I would even consider buying from dell.

Building your own system is really quite easy, most things can only go in one way, and it's really quite hard to get wrong these days. One thing that hasn't changed from way back in the day is to take extra care installing the CPU. Always Earth yourself before handling them, and wear cotton clothing, no synthetics. (less static)

I buy my parts from Umart.com.au

[arthurking83]

I keep seeing these recommendations that SSD's are better value for money in terms of speed /$ .. which I totally disagree with(on the whole).

If you use fast HDD's to begin with, and 100+ Mb/s is plenty fast enough for 99% of most people's usage patterns, the performance gain is actually pretty bad value for money(taking the actual storage space into consideration!)

Not just any old SSD will give you this increase in speed, and if it sounds cheap, then it's probably a cheapie, and in reality no better than a fast HDD.

Ditto re Hakka's setup, and (personal preferences here) .. if I were held at gunpoint and forced to spend big bucks on PC system, I too would have one.

But if that system cost $2.5K as a minimum, well that's about $500 more spent on an accessory that may not really give you 'better images'

This is why usage is the important factor here. $500 saved on a system not used for gaming(or waiting a few more seconds) is then $500 used either on a new lens, tripod, bellows unit, focusing rail ... holiday(again :p) etc.

Don't get my reply wrong tho .. I'm not against SSDs, I just think that the $/Gb value is still too high, and you need to spend at least $200 for a 250G SSD to see any sort of (questionable)benefit.

I actually have one(only!) and tried it in my desktop, and sure enough Windows booted up in about 10sec, ready to go and for me to do stuff, but with my older Samsung 1Tb drive, Windows boots up in about 45sec(now) .. and most of that is in the BIOS anyhow.
What I really don't like tho is not having the 'overhead' of that extra 750G, if needed(even tho I have 4 internal HDDs in my PC .. plus the numerous externally connected drives).

What I found tho, is that the software used on a daily basis(eg. CaptureNX2, LR3, Office, FF, etc) don't actually run faster, they just load a bit quicker. Those extra 5 or 10sec aren't an issue for me, of course everyone has their own personal preferences ... but not having another temporary storage area for those times if it's required, is a right PITA.

As an example, I regularly transfer all my images, held on one of my drives to another internal drive(it's faster than transferring to an external drive). This could total 250 or more Gigs. Then to keep the image storage drive running quick, I format it on a regular basis, maybe two months or so .. just when I remember too ... and it runs about 20Mb/s (approx 20-25%) faster in sustained write times. Maybe a bit quicker in read times, but I can't really remember.
This was especially true of some of my older(250G drives way back) when I first started doing this. I can still only just see a difference when I do this to my faster drives, in that CaptureNX2 will always instantly load an image, after a format .. as opposed to an occasional 2-3sec delay as it thinks about what it needs to do if I haven't formatted it for a while(say 6months or so) .. or ever.

I've tried defrag, and found zero difference in terms of speed difference.

Until SSDs increase in size by a factor of two or three and maintain the same current price levels .. I don't even consider them now as HDD's a so much faster now than they used to be(with the added benefit of a 50% price saving and a 10x increase in capacity).

I've also purchased stuff from UMart, and would also recommend them. My quoted prices are from MSY tho, and I use them almost exclusively now as they're just around the corner from me.

[Dazz1]

I'd like to comment on the RAM required. Some editing programs, and I use Gimp, make special use of extra memory, and having lots of it is a major speedup.

For example, here's what the Gimp doco says


Image processing can require a lot of memory. GIMP uses the operating system services to handle memory, up to a given point, past which it uses its own system so it does not eat all system memory resources. This system consists in sending old data to files in the disk. The decision point is what Tile Cache determines, the limit of operating system resources to use, and is measured in Bytes (or multiples, like MegaBytes). It does not include GIMP's own memory, just the space required for the image data.
A low value means that GIMP sends data really quickly to disk, not making real use of the avaliable RAM and making the disks work without real reason. A too high value, and the other applications start to have less system resources forcing them to swap space, which is making the disks work too, or maybe some will even get killed or start to malfunction due lack of RAM.


If your editing program can do this, and because RAM is cheap, buy lots of it. I wouldn't run less than 8GB, and I use linux, which typically requires less RAM than micro$loppy systems.

[arthurking83]

...... and I use linux, which typically requires less RAM than micro$loppy systems.

Mate!..... if CaptureNX2 would run(natively) on Linux, I'd be there too(for the most part).

Id' rather not have to run an OS through another OS.

BTW, my kids enjoyed using Ubuntu a while back when I had it running on an old PC.
But back then they were new to PCs in general(about 6 and 8 yo).
But once they got their own Windows machines, they do actually prefer the Win environment over the more utilitarian Ubuntu method.

But it did run a whole heap faster on this old box, where Win7 struggled too much. WinXP 32 was fine on it tho.

The other point in having more RAM that really required is about multitasking.
For example, it's not all that uncommon to have say Ps running, as well as another program for pano stitching, or focus stacking, or whatever(browser, office apps, etc, etc).
So having all this RAM isn't a bad idea. Having slow RAM can be tho .. so if it came to an option of having less RAM, but speedy(to the maximum value of what the mainboard can cope with) .. or more RAM with the same monetary value, but slower than what the board can achieve .. I'd take the lower sized but quicker RAM amount.

For Annie's info too: no matter what you do get, or don't get .. if you do specify say (say)8Gb of RAM to begin with .. or even 16Gb of RAM, make sure it's in 8Gb ram sticks, not 4Gb sticks.
Reason is, a mainboard usually contains a max of four slots, it's usually more cost effective to upgrade later on if you keep the current RAM modules to their maximum individual sizes.

eg, if you specify 8G ram, then make sure it's one 8Gb stick, not 2x4Gig sticks. Same with 16Gig ram, 2x8 may be a better long term prospect than will 4x4Gig sticks.

[Rattus79]

Sure, the $$ value per Gig for an SSD is quite high when comparing to a magnetic medium, but I'm yet to get 200+ Megabyte per second transfer speeds from one either!

I have a 128 gig Samsung SSD, and I've found that almost everything on the PC is quicker now. Up until getting the SSD the biggest bottleneck was waiting for the HDD to catch up, and I didn't slouch on the HDD I got either! My boot times went from over a minute to under 10 seconds, hell, widoze doesn't even have time to complete the win 7 animation before it's up and running!

I suppose at this time, I'd better admit that I am a gamer, and I do like to play the occaisional FPS. Yes, I've played MW3 a couple of times.

Yes, the load times are significantly reduced on a game that is installed on an SSD.

The Key term here is Load Times. by having an SSD load times are significantly reduced. I'd much rather have the SSD then a faster processor. Processors can be made forced to go faster then they were intended. HDD's can not.

- - - Updated - - -


eg, if you specify 8G ram, then make sure it's one 8Gb stick, not 2x4Gig sticks. Same with 16Gig ram, 2x8 may be a better long term prospect than will 4x4Gig sticks.

Good advice, but doesn't RAM still work in pairs?

[Dazz1]

Mate!..... if CaptureNX2 would run(natively) on Linux, I'd be there too(for the most part).

Id' rather not have to run an OS through another OS.

BTW, my kids enjoyed using Ubuntu a while back when I had it running on an old PC.
But back then they were new to PCs in general(about 6 and 8 yo).
But once they got their own Windows machines, they do actually prefer the Win environment over the more utilitarian Ubuntu method.

But it did run a whole heap faster on this old box, where Win7 struggled too much. WinXP 32 was fine on it tho.



Not to get too far off topic, but apparently some people are running CaptureNX2 using Wine. This is running the app natively, just that Wine supplies the libraries that work with linux instead of Windows.

Also, Ubuntu have radically changed their interface (now called Unity) in later versions. I think it's better than Win8 anyway :)

[dt86vyss]

You already have loads of advice... But my two cents... SSD is a must for Windows and Programs, this type of hard drive has been a god send to me! Made LightRoom and Photoshop miles faster! Also, an i7 CPU and loads of RAM like 8 - 16gb. unless you're video editing with heavy rendering, your graphics card is not too important, an everyday $89 cheapy will do just fine.

[AnnieP]

Thank you all for all your replies... I am going to have to sit down and go through it all, but it looks like plenty RAM and SSD for a start....

[AnnieP]

Thanks for all the replies! I took lots from what was suggested and had my computer built -

I love it! The spec I went for is :

Intel i7 3770 cpu
Intel DB75EN mainboard
16 gig Kingmax DDR3 ram
Gigabyte GTX 650 video card
Hard drives -
1 x Intel 240gig SSD
1 x Seagate 2 Terrabyte HDD
Thermaltake V4 case with 500w PSU
Windows 7 64 bit Pro
LG DVD Burner

Then I went all out and bought a Dell 27" UltraSharp Monitor!!

I am keeping the SSD just to run windows and save all programs to the 2TB internal drive.

I have two external WD Hard Drives 1 x 2TB and 1 x 3TB

LOVE IT All.

Annie:D

[Cage]

Well that lot should percolate nicely.