What computer to easily process D800 files?

Started Jul 30, 2013 | Discussions
j_photo
Senior MemberPosts: 1,248Gear list
Like?
Re: What computer to easily process D800 files?
In reply to hajagosb, Aug 2, 2013

My IT consultant just recommended Dell Precision with an i7 processor and SSD drive, 16GB ram. But that doesn't sound that different from what you have right now.

 j_photo's gear list:j_photo's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon Df
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
23Brian
New MemberPosts: 16Gear list
Like?
Re: What computer to easily process D800 files?
In reply to hajagosb, Aug 2, 2013

Junk your PC and buy a IMAC. No problems. . . . .ever.

 23Brian's gear list:23Brian's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon D4s Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
moogle73
Forum MemberPosts: 63Gear list
Like?
Re: What computer to easily process D800 files?
In reply to 23Brian, Aug 2, 2013

23Brian wrote:

Junk your PC and buy a IMAC. No problems. . . . .ever.

loves when the "fan boys" come out of the woodwork without reading the whole thread... The original author has already stated he DOES NOT WANT A MAC.  So telling him to "junk" his perfectly good, and rather good in terms of spec's laptop/pc for something he already stated he does not want doesn't really help the thread or the OP in anyway....

helping and contributing to the thread would have gone along the lines of "well personally I prefer macs, but if you want to stay with pc's then maybe try (insert helpful comment here)"

 moogle73's gear list:moogle73's gear list
Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Biological_Viewfinder
Senior MemberPosts: 1,194
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to RomanJohnston, Aug 2, 2013

RomanJohnston wrote:

Biological_Viewfinder wrote:

RomanJohnston wrote:

IT for broke people? How about not spending money when it is not needed? Or are you in the habit of spending money when it is not needed. I am about the numbers...pure and simple. Get as much done with as small an expenditure as possible. Usually a mandate with ANY IT shop. Show me a business that wants ANY of its money to be spent without a reason or benefit and I will show you a business that is on its way to not being a business.

I own DSLR camera equipment. Everyone who does is in the habit of spending money when it is not needed. My computer build from 2 years ago has 12 gigs. I'm not really interested in going BACKWARDS with your recommendations of 8 gigs. This is 2013, the minimum now is 16, and the recommended is 32, and I'm going for 64.

Not everyone does. I JUST finally broke down and got a D800....and only because of the extra pixels for my monster prints for my customers. No one said go backwards...I said 8 gigs is the sweet spot and my benchmarking is proof of that. If you have 16 gigs...by all means...keep it. No one is mandating ANYTHING to you....so you need to chill out. If you want to waste your money on 32 gigs....have at it. Currently I dont know of a MoBo or Processer that will handle 64...so good luck with that.

Just look up Asus motherboards (they have the best documentation anyway), and then Intel 2011 (that's the pin count, not the year); and you'll see that they have *SEVERAL* motherboards capable of 64GB.
You know for someone supposedly in IT, you don't know Jack (<-- actually a tech reference, not that I expect you to get anything and why I'm spelling it all out for you so you don't think I'm talking about something from 2 years ago or high on coffee or something... I'm doing my best to K.I.S.S. for you).

-- hide signature --

There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RomanJohnston
Forum ProPosts: 18,503Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to Biological_Viewfinder, Aug 2, 2013

Biological_Viewfinder wrote:

RomanJohnston wrote:

Biological_Viewfinder wrote:

RomanJohnston wrote:

IT for broke people? How about not spending money when it is not needed? Or are you in the habit of spending money when it is not needed. I am about the numbers...pure and simple. Get as much done with as small an expenditure as possible. Usually a mandate with ANY IT shop. Show me a business that wants ANY of its money to be spent without a reason or benefit and I will show you a business that is on its way to not being a business.

I own DSLR camera equipment. Everyone who does is in the habit of spending money when it is not needed. My computer build from 2 years ago has 12 gigs. I'm not really interested in going BACKWARDS with your recommendations of 8 gigs. This is 2013, the minimum now is 16, and the recommended is 32, and I'm going for 64.

Not everyone does. I JUST finally broke down and got a D800....and only because of the extra pixels for my monster prints for my customers. No one said go backwards...I said 8 gigs is the sweet spot and my benchmarking is proof of that. If you have 16 gigs...by all means...keep it. No one is mandating ANYTHING to you....so you need to chill out. If you want to waste your money on 32 gigs....have at it. Currently I dont know of a MoBo or Processer that will handle 64...so good luck with that.

Just look up Asus motherboards (they have the best documentation anyway), and then Intel 2011 (that's the pin count, not the year); and you'll see that they have *SEVERAL* motherboards capable of 64GB.
You know for someone supposedly in IT, you don't know Jack (<-- actually a tech reference, not that I expect you to get anything and why I'm spelling it all out for you so you don't think I'm talking about something from 2 years ago or high on coffee or something... I'm doing my best to K.I.S.S. for you).

-- hide signature --

There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

No need to wear your ass hat...oh...too late!!!

Your on ignore. (I can find that feature.....because I am in IT....lol)

Have a nice day!

Roman

-- hide signature --

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious; It is the source of all true art and science.
~ Albert Einstein
http://www.commercialfineart.com/
http://www.pbase.com/romansphotos/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fakuryu
Senior MemberPosts: 1,075Gear list
Like?
Re: What computer to easily process D800 files?
In reply to hajagosb, Aug 2, 2013

hajagosb wrote:

At the moment, I'm using an almost two years old Dell XPS laptop with SSD drive, 16GB RAM and i7 processor running Windows 8. It should be fast.

I'm doing heavy retouching often, 2-4 GB layered Photoshop files and sometimes for events processing a lot of files in Lightroom. And my computer feels kind of slow for both.

What do you have, where it's really fast in response? What should i focus on choosing a new computer, more memory, or faster processor? I'm going for a desktop now.

The question is, how heavily do you multitask? Adobe CS6 is a threaded program that benefits in using more cores or processor threads and RAM. Photoshop CS6 also uses OpenCL GPU acceleration and having a dedicated video card to do that does help in rendering.

What you would need is processor that has a lot of cores, at least 16gb of RAM, a videocard that has excellent GPGPU function and AMD comes to mind.

AMD FX8350 processor, at least 8gb (16gb hopefully) of quality DDR3 1866 RAM, a 128gb OCZ Vector SSD and at least an AMD HD7850 videocard.

Intel sucks w/ heavy multitasking and the current lineup of Nvidia's videocard (except the US$1000 GTX Titan and some Pro GPU) GPGPU lags behind AMD (actually it sucks).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cntceTUFR-s

That is a video I made for a local computer enthusiast website. I use an overclocked i5-3570k, 8gb DDR3 1600 GSkill RAM and a 2g HD7850 by Sapphire. Compared to my friend's (who uses a D800 by the way) FX8150, same RAM and an older and slower HD6950 (if I remember). In paper and various review sites, my setup should be vastly superior (I even use a lower resolution monitor), well it is w/ 1 heavy task but it does suck with that kind of work load. I know, I used to have an AMD setup. Well I made that video before to visually explain the advantages of AMD on the site, which was mainly for gaming which is plagued by fan boys.

Another friend of mine who also owns an expensive i7-3930k setup and an FX8350 agreed that for those kinds of task, even that very expensive processor is lagging behind is FX8350.

BTW the same generation of an i7 processor for laptops is not the same and as fast vs the ones for desktop.

Hope this helps.

-- hide signature --

There is no such thing a "Pro" level gear, just Pro level work.

 fakuryu's gear list:fakuryu's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Pentax K-r Pentax Q Pentax K-5 II
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
physguy88
Regular MemberPosts: 102
Like?
It sounds like you're missing GPU acceleration
In reply to hajagosb, Aug 2, 2013

All the components you listed are more than fast enough to process your files. However, your laptop, like most, may not have a very powerful GPU. Since Photoshop makes very heavy use of GPU acceleration, this could be your problem.

A GPU is optimized for graphics processing. Even a $200 mid level model is literally dozens of times faster than even the latest Intel CPU in this regard. There's no real way to compensate for its loss (if that's your problem). Unfortunately, fast GPUs are also very power hungry and puts out lots of heat, so not many lap tops have them built in and, as far as I know, one can't easily upgrade either.

Bottom line: I'm afraid you need to either buy a desktop PC with a good GPU or buy a bulky laptop with a good GPU.

Other than that if a fast GPU still doesn't fix your speed issues I'm not sure what else could be wrong. Could be something about the software setup on your computer.

Oh, and by "fast GPU" I mean a stand alone GPU in the $250 range.  Anything more is overkill for what you need.  I recommend something like Geforce GTX660 or the equivalent ATI card.

I'd stick with the Intel i7.  On balance the desktop model is the best processor you can get.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
physguy88
Regular MemberPosts: 102
Like?
Also make sure you have 64 bit Windows and Photoshop
In reply to physguy88, Aug 2, 2013

Also, since you are using more than 4 Gb of memory, you probably want to make sure you are running the 64 bit versions of Windows and Photoshop.

32 bit versions cannot effectively utilize more than 4 gb of system memory.  Since your laptop came with 16 gb of RAM, you should already have the 64 bit versions, but it's just a sanity check.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
physguy88
Regular MemberPosts: 102
Like?
Re: It sounds like you're missing GPU acceleration
In reply to physguy88, Aug 2, 2013

Also, Lightroom will always be slow because it does not have GPU acceleration at all.  Your best bet is to stick with Photoshop.

I'd also recommend ditching Windows 8 for Win 7 x64.  Besides being completely unintuitive and a pain in the rear to use, Win8 has all sorts of performance and compatibility issues like all MS OSes early in their service life.  I'd wait at least another year before moving to Win8.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hajagosb
Regular MemberPosts: 202Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to moogle73, Aug 2, 2013

Thanks for the lot of helpful responses.

For the others, please let's leave me the right to decide if it's slow for me or not. And it is. I do photography for a living. Luckily sometimes retouchers a working on my images, but on many projects i prefer do do it my own.

I do a lot of composites lately, in 16 bit, with even 50 layers. It can take several  minutes to save a 2-4 Gb file. Correct me if i'm wrong, but i call it slow. It also affects simpler task when you have these huge files even with the ssd.

It's not about the Windows, but the hardware. I can understand, for a hobbist i can be okay to wait a bit once in a while, but for daily work it doesn't worth it.

About Lightroom previews,  i think it's the best to make 1:1 size, so you can check sharpness too.

 hajagosb's gear list:hajagosb's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hajagosb
Regular MemberPosts: 202Gear list
Like?
Re: It sounds like you're missing GPU acceleration
In reply to physguy88, Aug 2, 2013

I use 64 bit and happy with Win8 performance. Do you think an Nvidia GT540M is not enough? PS is using the GPU for the view, but it doesn't effect the many layers, the swap file and the processing i think, no?

 hajagosb's gear list:hajagosb's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Obsydian
Forum MemberPosts: 98Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to hajagosb, Aug 2, 2013

If slow writes to disk appear to be your problem, have you tried benchmarking your components and comparing them against the results others achieve?  if the SSD appears to be performing slower than it should, the laptop maybe have been setup incorrectly to enable TRIM support - the SSD will appear fast initially but performance will degrade over time.

If you're CPU bound, is the processor overheating?  A fan failure or degradation of the thermal interface material may mean that the processor throttles itself to prevent overheating.

 Obsydian's gear list:Obsydian's gear list
Sony RX100 Nikon D90 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 10-24mm f/3-5-4.5G ED +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fakuryu
Senior MemberPosts: 1,075Gear list
Like?
to the topic starter
In reply to fakuryu, Aug 2, 2013

I forgot to change the title of my above post. I cant edit it using my mobile phone.
--
There is no such thing a "Pro" level gear, just Pro level work.

 fakuryu's gear list:fakuryu's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Pentax K-r Pentax Q Pentax K-5 II
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hajagosb
Regular MemberPosts: 202Gear list
Like?
Re: What computer to easily process D800 files?
In reply to fakuryu, Aug 2, 2013

Im not that much into multi tasking, but sometimes it happens, that some processes are ging in the back like exports or batch.

I have no experience with AMD, but I will look into it and check some reviews. Thanks for the suggestion.

 hajagosb's gear list:hajagosb's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hajagosb
Regular MemberPosts: 202Gear list
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to Obsydian, Aug 2, 2013

Thanks, this two i will check both. I'm still going to invest in a desktop, because i want the computer wait for me not the other way around. But want to keep the laptop for tethered shoting and on location work.

 hajagosb's gear list:hajagosb's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Biological_Viewfinder
Senior MemberPosts: 1,194
Like?
Re: Basics....
In reply to RomanJohnston, Aug 2, 2013

RomanJohnston wrote:

No need to wear your ass hat...oh...too late!!!

Your on ignore. (I can find that feature.....because I am in IT....lol)

Have a nice day!

Roman

You're is a 5 letter, 1 syllable word; and you can't even get that right.

Also, you don't have to sign your name. It says who you are. Unless you're writing love letters. Or maybe you think you are more important than others and need to prove that by stating who you are twice, which ironically diminishes your perceived worth. But I never claimed you were smart.

Thanks, I'm having a grand day!

-- hide signature --

There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
physguy88
Regular MemberPosts: 102
Like?
Re: It sounds like you're missing GPU acceleration
In reply to hajagosb, Aug 3, 2013

The 450 M is probably better than the base mode integrated GPUs, but it certainly has no where near the horse power of a stand alone desktop GPU. Also, as far as I know, many lap top GPU share the RAM with the CPU, and tend to have access to less RAM at lower throughput than the stand alone cards. With your Photoshop files so big, that might present a problem.

PS does quite a bit with GPU accelration in addition to displaying the file:

http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq.html

But the file display itself could be a big determinant of how snappy it feels.  I think it's not a bad idea to try editing some of your pictures on a computer with a faster video card that has lots of dedicated RAM.  Other than the GPU I really can't think of other hardware issues that could affect the performance of your setup.

PS - are you also using the 64 bit version of Photoshop?  I notice that my installation gives me the option of using either 32 or 64.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
physguy88
Regular MemberPosts: 102
Like?
Re: It sounds like you're missing GPU acceleration
In reply to physguy88, Aug 3, 2013

I found a benchmark comparison between the GT540M and a $250 Nvidia desktop card:

GPU benchmark comparisons

As you can see, depending on what exactly PS uses, the difference could be very substantial.

On the other hand, it's possible that the problem is not raw speed but actually that the GT540M doesn't have access to enough VRAM to load the entire file into its frame buffer. I know Dells with that series come with either 1GB or 2GB, which is enough for most people but you are working with 4GB files.

You can get decent desktop cards with 4GB fast GDDR5 RAM for around $300, but the 6GB cards jump to $1000 or so.

I'm not totally convinced the video card and the VRAM is the problem but I think it's plausible. In either case probably best just to try before you buy if you can find a way.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
physguy88
Regular MemberPosts: 102
Like?
SSD vs RAID
In reply to hajagosb, Aug 3, 2013

Actually some of the other posters raise an interesting issue.

SSDs are clearly best for performing random data access (eg, your computer loading up a bunch of different programs at startup), so for most of us it feels the fastest.

However you are writing out gigabyes and gigabytes of data daily, which is probably not very good for the performance of the SSD (the solid state memory transistors have a finite cycle life). Also, it's not clear to me that an SSD will be faster than 2 fast hard-drives arranged in a RAID setup. Essentially, you are reading and writing one large file at a time. I wonder if you might have better performance with the hard disk in your usage scenario.

In my experience HDs are more prone to unexpected failures than SSDs, but with a good backup scheme, and monitoring of drive health using a program like SpeedFan, they may be your best bet.

What I have in my computer right now is 1 SSD for running all of my computer programs, and HDs for storing all the data.  Of course, I'm not doing the intensive photo-editing work you are.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
khaw
Regular MemberPosts: 399
Like?
Re: SSD vs RAID
In reply to physguy88, Aug 3, 2013

I am using 4  Crucial SSDs in a RAID configuration.  Works great.

They generate very little heat and give excellent bandwidth.

Also, newest generation SSDs most likely last longer than hard drives.

K-H.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads