I7 with 16GB or I5 with 32GB RAM? (my test)

Leo · Dec 25, 2012

I am currently using MacBook Pro 2.2GH Intel Core Duo, 4GB 667 MHz RAM and selecting a new 2012 iMac.

Today on my laptop i have opened one of my photo and applied a Photoshop CS6 Liquify filter. The RAM and CPU usage I was controlling by using installed on my laptop iStat Nano (FREE little statistic program) and Mac Activity Monitor.

iStat Nano (from one of the Internet Forums):

http://istat-nano.en.softonic.com/mac

I have made brush size 300 pix and with mouse quickly run randomly across the image with all filter options. The CPU usage was around 50% however Activity monitor showed 1.6GB read and 1.005GB was written. It took about 15 seconds to complete the task.

I am not sure of my conclusions below:

1) CPU power have never been utilized. Its usage was around 50%

2) HD was used as scratch memory as I have small RAW and it slowdown the whole thing.

3) The Fusion Drive may add a lot of improvement if used as intended and may be also used as a scratch memory reducing requirement for Large RAM?

4) How large a large RAM should be?

My plan was to select between two new iMacs:

iMac 21.5": I7 3.1GHz, 16GB RAM and Fusion Drive

or

iMac 27": I5 2.9GHz, 8GB RAM (upgrade later to 32GB) and Fusion Drive

My conclusions based on this crude test: My better option would be I5 with Fusion Drive and Large RAM.

Am I mowing in the right direction?

Leo

webfrasse · Dec 25, 2012

My take on this is that CPU can't ever be upgraded = by the fastest available

Ram, I can upgrade myself on the 27" = I ordered with 8GB

Disk, from what it looks right now it's probably not a user upgradeable device = I ordered with 3TB Fusion

In your case it looks like your holding back on $200 on a machine that will last 4-5 years. The one thing that will give it extended life is the faster cpu. Lets say it will give you one more year, that's $17/month for that year of spread out over the 5 years, $3.30/month.

Najinsky · Dec 25, 2012

That suggests the Liquify filter is not exploiting multiple cores. So you have 1 core flat out at 100% and the other nearly idle, averaging around 50% across the 2 cores. So, counter-intuitively from the raw stats, a faster CPU core will make a difference.

-Najinsky

Leo said:
Leo wrote:

I am currently using MacBook Pro 2.2GH Intel Core Duo, 4GB 667 MHz RAM and selecting a new 2012 iMac.

Today on my laptop i have opened one of my photo and applied a Photoshop CS6 Liquify filter. The RAM and CPU usage I was controlling by using installed on my laptop iStat Nano (FREE little statistic program) and Mac Activity Monitor.

iStat Nano (from one of the Internet Forums):

http://istat-nano.en.softonic.com/mac

I have made brush size 300 pix and with mouse quickly run randomly across the image with all filter options. The CPU usage was around 50% however Activity monitor showed 1.6GB read and 1.005GB was written. It took about 15 seconds to complete the task.

I am not sure of my conclusions below:

1) CPU power have never been utilized. Its usage was around 50%

2) HD was used as scratch memory as I have small RAW and it slowdown the whole thing.

3) The Fusion Drive may add a lot of improvement if used as intended and may be also used as a scratch memory reducing requirement for Large RAM?

4) How large a large RAM should be?

My plan was to select between two new iMacs:

iMac 21.5": I7 3.1GHz, 16GB RAM and Fusion Drive

or

iMac 27": I5 2.9GHz, 8GB RAM (upgrade later to 32GB) and Fusion Drive

My conclusions based on this crude test: My better option would be I5 with Fusion Drive and Large RAM.

Am I mowing in the right direction?

Leo

Leo · Dec 25, 2012

webfrasse said:
webfrasse wrote:

My take on this is that CPU can't ever be upgraded = by the fastest available

Ram, I can upgrade myself on the 27" = I ordered with 8GB

Disk, from what it looks right now it's probably not a user upgradeable device = I ordered with 3TB Fusion

In your case it looks like your holding back on $200 on a machine that will last 4-5 years. The one thing that will give it extended life is the faster cpu. Lets say it will give you one more year, that's $17/month for that year of spread out over the 5 years, $3.30/month.

Leo · Dec 25, 2012

Member said:
Najinsky wrote:

That suggests the Liquify filter is not exploiting multiple cores. So you have 1 core flat out at 100% and the other nearly idle, averaging around 50% across the 2 cores. So, counter-intuitively from the raw stats, a faster CPU core will make a difference.

-Najinsky

Member said:

Leo wrote:

I am currently using MacBook Pro 2.2GH Intel Core Duo, 4GB 667 MHz RAM and selecting a new 2012 iMac.

Today on my laptop i have opened one of my photo and applied a Photoshop CS6 Liquify filter. The RAM and CPU usage I was controlling by using installed on my laptop iStat Nano (FREE little statistic program) and Mac Activity Monitor.

iStat Nano (from one of the Internet Forums):

http://istat-nano.en.softonic.com/mac

I have made brush size 300 pix and with mouse quickly run randomly across the image with all filter options. The CPU usage was around 50% however Activity monitor showed 1.6GB read and 1.005GB was written. It took about 15 seconds to complete the task.

I am not sure of my conclusions below:

1) CPU power have never been utilized. Its usage was around 50%

2) HD was used as scratch memory as I have small RAW and it slowdown the whole thing.

3) The Fusion Drive may add a lot of improvement if used as intended and may be also used as a scratch memory reducing requirement for Large RAM?

4) How large a large RAM should be?

My plan was to select between two new iMacs:

iMac 21.5": I7 3.1GHz, 16GB RAM and Fusion Drive

or

iMac 27": I5 2.9GHz, 8GB RAM (upgrade later to 32GB) and Fusion Drive

My conclusions based on this crude test: My better option would be I5 with Fusion Drive and Large RAM.

Am I mowing in the right direction?

Leo

Click to expand...

My understanding of CPU interaction with CS6 is skin dip. I have read somewhere on Internet that CS6 was written for Hyper Threading, that is why I have selected Liquify Filter. However, your point is easy to agree.

Thank you.

Leo

f8BeThereToo · Dec 26, 2012

The CS6 Liquify filter relies on the GPU rather than the CPU for acceleration, so I think that you are barking up the wrong tree by focusing on the CPU... Ditto with the installed RAM.

The GPUs in the new iMacs are a lot more powerful than the GPU in your Core2Duo Mac. You will certainly notice a difference...

More info on GPU enhanced CS6 functions: http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq.html#cs6_features

The i5 vs. i7 question is another matter altogether... Whether or not a quad-core CPU will be worth the money to you depends on what you do with your computer and whether the software that you use takes advantage of the extra cores. In some situations a dual-core is the way to go because the quad-core won't be utilized to its full potential; those extra cores will just be sitting there waiting for something to do.

I don't buy the useful-life argument when it comes to going with an i7 vs. an i5 CPU. In some cases it may be better to put the money you save by going with the i5 toward hardware that will definitely make a difference such as a RAM upgrade. I have also read some convincing arguments that putting the money you save toward an earlier future computer upgrade is more cost-effective in the long-run. The more powerful CPU won't necessarily get you more when it comes time to sell your Mac.

Barefeats.com has some excellent tests of the new i5 and i7 iMacs running various CS6 processes. I think that studying them will help you decide which iMac will give you the biggest bang for your buck.

The amount of RAM you need depends on a number of factors: the size of your files, the extent and kind of image editing you tend to do, etc. My image editing needs are relatively modest so 16GB is overkill for me; people working with large files with extensive edits may find 16GB RAM to be too little. Some of the Barefeats tests cover RAM requirements.

cyclomac · Dec 26, 2012

Hi webfrasse,

From what you said:

"Disk, from what it looks right now it's probably not a user upgradeable device = I ordered with 3TB Fusion"

This information from Macbidouille.com site may interest you:

Aujourd'hui, pour la première fois depuis la sortie des Mac Intel et de BootCamp, un Mac est annoncé comme incompatible avec ce système. C'est l'iMac 27" doté d'un disque de 3 To. L'émulation Bios de cette machine étant incapable de gérer un disque de 3 To, il est impossible d'y installer Windows. Or, Windows refusant de s'installer sur un disque amovible, la voie semble bel et bien fermée.

It seems that iMac with 3T hard drives is incompatible for Bootcamp to function because of a bios problem that can't manage 3T drives.

Important to know if you would like to install Bootcamp + windows on it.

kb2zuz · Dec 26, 2012

Last I check (somewhere around CS2), Photoshop has over a million lines of code. They do not re-write every line of code every version. This is why there are still some filters that will not run on 16-bit images, they never updated those lines of code for those filters to make them compatible with more than 8-bit images (the decisions behind not updating those filters is more complex that just that, but it's just an example) even filters that have been updated to run with 16-bit images, doesn't mean that they are made to be multi-threaded. And just because parts of CS-6 have been updated to be multi-threaded doesn't mean all have. So you may find some filters that work better with an i7 than an i5, and some that do not. That said CS 7 and CS8 may have more things updated to utilize multiple threads, and unfortunately the processor is not something you can upgrade in the future.

If you do get the 27" you can upgrade the ram up to 32GB at any point quite easily (and if you buy the RAM from 3rd party companies it will be MUCH cheaper than buying 32GB through apple). The processor and the video card cannot be updated, and the hard drive would be extremely difficult to update internally (though you can add external drives later very easily).

webfrasse · Dec 27, 2012

cyclomac said:
cyclomac wrote:

Hi webfrasse,

From what you said:

"Disk, from what it looks right now it's probably not a user upgradeable device = I ordered with 3TB Fusion"

This information from Macbidouille.com site may interest you:

Aujourd'hui, pour la première fois depuis la sortie des Mac Intel et de BootCamp, un Mac est annoncé comme incompatible avec ce système. C'est l'iMac 27" doté d'un disque de 3 To. L'émulation Bios de cette machine étant incapable de gérer un disque de 3 To, il est impossible d'y installer Windows. Or, Windows refusant de s'installer sur un disque amovible, la voie semble bel et bien fermée.

Looks like French to me...

cyclomac said:
It seems that iMac with 3T hard drives is incompatible for Bootcamp to function because of a bios problem that can't manage 3T drives.

Important to know if you would like to install Bootcamp + windows on it.

I know it is incompatible at the moment but Windows doesn't interest me one bit. The little I need it I run it in a VM. Don't need it at all at home. Only need it for work sometimes so then it becomes my employers problem;-)

Leo · Dec 27, 2012

Member said:
MrMojo wrote:

The CS6 Liquify filter relies on the GPU rather than the CPU for acceleration, so I think that you are barking up the wrong tree by focusing on the CPU... Ditto with the installed RAM.

The GPUs in the new iMacs are a lot more powerful than the GPU in your Core2Duo Mac. You will certainly notice a difference...

More info on GPU enhanced CS6 functions: http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq.html#cs6_features

The i5 vs. i7 question is another matter altogether... Whether or not a quad-core CPU will be worth the money to you depends on what you do with your computer and whether the software that you use takes advantage of the extra cores. In some situations a dual-core is the way to go because the quad-core won't be utilized to its full potential; those extra cores will just be sitting there waiting for something to do.

I don't buy the useful-life argument when it comes to going with an i7 vs. an i5 CPU. In some cases it may be better to put the money you save by going with the i5 toward hardware that will definitely make a difference such as a RAM upgrade. I have also read some convincing arguments that putting the money you save toward an earlier future computer upgrade is more cost-effective in the long-run. The more powerful CPU won't necessarily get you more when it comes time to sell your Mac.

Barefeats.com has some excellent tests of the new i5 and i7 iMacs running various CS6 processes. I think that studying them will help you decide which iMac will give you the biggest bang for your buck.

The amount of RAM you need depends on a number of factors: the size of your files, the extent and kind of image editing you tend to do, etc. My image editing needs are relatively modest so 16GB is overkill for me; people working with large files with extensive edits may find 16GB RAM to be too little. Some of the Barefeats tests cover RAM requirements.

MrMojo,

Thank you for timely reply. I am planning to place an order today or tomorrow. Preliminary,I am gearing for 27" I5 2.9MHz. as I have read in several places that i7 runs much hotter when utilized. My old iMac in hot summer weather was slowing and then quitting. In some cases (hot days) to complete editing images with Lightroom for prints competition I had to place ice on the iMac top to finish editing and printing. As I am not in video - photography only.

I need help with questions related to RAM - Fusion Drive use. Currently my computer (2007 MacBook Pro) with 4GB RAM uses HD for scratch memory. It seems that this is a bottle-neck. My iMac HD failed.

Q1 Will iMac with 32GB need any scratch memory ?

My another option is 21" iMac with i7, 16GB RAM and Fusion Drive. However, if 16GB is not be enough then Q2

Q2 If 16GB is not enough then Fusion Drive would be used as scratch memory. Would it be same fast as RAM?

Q3 Hyper Threading use based on hardware, OS and specifically written software. I have read complains that the added threads in some cases create execution errors. Is it possible?

Thank you for the help.

Leo

Leo · Dec 27, 2012

kb2zuz said:
kb2zuz wrote:

Last I check (somewhere around CS2), Photoshop has over a million lines of code. They do not re-write every line of code every version. This is why there are still some filters that will not run on 16-bit images, they never updated those lines of code for those filters to make them compatible with more than 8-bit images (the decisions behind not updating those filters is more complex that just that, but it's just an example) even filters that have been updated to run with 16-bit images, doesn't mean that they are made to be multi-threaded. And just because parts of CS-6 have been updated to be multi-threaded doesn't mean all have. So you may find some filters that work better with an i7 than an i5, and some that do not. That said CS 7 and CS8 may have more things updated to utilize multiple threads, and unfortunately the processor is not something you can upgrade in the future.

If you do get the 27" you can upgrade the ram up to 32GB at any point quite easily (and if you buy the RAM from 3rd party companies it will be MUCH cheaper than buying 32GB through apple). The processor and the video card cannot be updated, and the hard drive would be extremely difficult to update internally (though you can add external drives later very easily).

kb2zuz · Dec 27, 2012

Leo said:
Leo wrote:

Leo said:

MrMojo wrote:

The CS6 Liquify filter relies on the GPU rather than the CPU for acceleration, so I think that you are barking up the wrong tree by focusing on the CPU... Ditto with the installed RAM.

The GPUs in the new iMacs are a lot more powerful than the GPU in your Core2Duo Mac. You will certainly notice a difference...

More info on GPU enhanced CS6 functions: http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq.html#cs6_features

The i5 vs. i7 question is another matter altogether... Whether or not a quad-core CPU will be worth the money to you depends on what you do with your computer and whether the software that you use takes advantage of the extra cores. In some situations a dual-core is the way to go because the quad-core won't be utilized to its full potential; those extra cores will just be sitting there waiting for something to do.

I don't buy the useful-life argument when it comes to going with an i7 vs. an i5 CPU. In some cases it may be better to put the money you save by going with the i5 toward hardware that will definitely make a difference such as a RAM upgrade. I have also read some convincing arguments that putting the money you save toward an earlier future computer upgrade is more cost-effective in the long-run. The more powerful CPU won't necessarily get you more when it comes time to sell your Mac.

Barefeats.com has some excellent tests of the new i5 and i7 iMacs running various CS6 processes. I think that studying them will help you decide which iMac will give you the biggest bang for your buck.

The amount of RAM you need depends on a number of factors: the size of your files, the extent and kind of image editing you tend to do, etc. My image editing needs are relatively modest so 16GB is overkill for me; people working with large files with extensive edits may find 16GB RAM to be too little. Some of the Barefeats tests cover RAM requirements.

Click to expand...

MrMojo,

Thank you for timely reply. I am planning to place an order today or tomorrow. Preliminary,I am gearing for 27" I5 2.9MHz. as I have read in several places that i7 runs much hotter when utilized. My old iMac in hot summer weather was slowing and then quitting. In some cases (hot days) to complete editing images with Lightroom for prints competition I had to place ice on the iMac top to finish editing and printing. As I am not in video - photography only.

Limiting the decision to just i5 vs i7, it's a toss-up. It will not give you a huge bump in speed now, but may have more application in the future. Some people feel that it's a $200 insurance policy others feel that's money that could be spend elsewhere, both are valid opinions.

Leo said:
I need help with questions related to RAM - Fusion Drive use. Currently my computer (2007 MacBook Pro) with 4GB RAM uses HD for scratch memory. It seems that this is a bottle-neck. My iMac HD failed.

Q1 Will iMac with 32GB need any scratch memory ?

I cannot say that it will never need scratch memory, but it will need much less than a computer with 4GB. The nice thing is if in 4 years you're using photoshop CS 9 and your files from your 40 MP camera start making 32GB not enough and you are regularly using scratch space, you can add an external SSD via firewire and dedicate that as a scratch disk for photoshop.

Leo said:
My another option is 21" iMac with i7, 16GB RAM and Fusion Drive. However, if 16GB is not be enough then Q2

Q2 If 16GB is not enough then Fusion Drive would be used as scratch memory. Would it be same fast as RAM?

The swapping out to an SSD or fusion drive (using it as a scratch disk) would be slower than pulling right from RAM.

Leo said:
Q3 Hyper Threading use based on hardware, OS and specifically written software. I have read complains that the added threads in some cases create execution errors. Is it possible?

I've heard people say that but I have not seen any actual proof or actual reasoning as to why it would happen other than the possibility that the programs were written poorly--from a computer science stand point writing for multiple threads is always more difficult and if you're not careful you can make problem.

If the choice is between a 21" i7 and a 27" i5, go for the 27" i5... the ability to go to 32GB of RAM (even if you don't right now) will make the computer much faster and last longer in the end. The 27" also have a better video card which will speed up some Photoshop filters and Lightroom. If it were me I'd say the biggest improvements you could make would be in order:

27" (more RAM upgradability and better graphics card)
More memory (though if you get the 27" you can add it later more cheaply)
Fusion drive or full SSD (mostly in speeding up start up and application startup, but could help scratch disk usage)
Upgrade the video card from 660M with 512MB to 675MX with 1GB or upgrade the 675MX to a 680MX with 2GB of RAM (helps with filters and apps that are optimized for GPU and allows for higher resolution external monitors)
i5 to i7 adds hyperthreading which can speed up threaded applications and filters and has some more cache (which does give a general speed benefit)

So I'd only consider the i7 after I've already got a 27" iMac with fusion drive and a 680MX video card and I've set some money aside to upgrade the RAM after I get it. If I haven't broken the bank after that point, ok maybe the i7 is a nice insurance policy, but if money's tight those other things would come first in my book.

graybalanced · Dec 27, 2012

Leo said:
Leo wrote:

1) CPU power have never been utilized. Its usage was around 50%

As someone else already said, Liquify in CS6 uses the GPU. You can look at the GPU graph in iStat Menus. It is at the bottom of the CPU menu.

Leo said:
2) HD was used as scratch memory as I have small RAW and it slowdown the whole thing.

RAM is always the fastest type of memory, so if you really want speed, install as much RAM as you can afford. Any time you go to disk, you are going slower than RAM. SSD is the next fastest, and then after that spinning disks as a RAID. A single spinning disk is the slowest.

Also, it is said that Photoshop will always assign some scratch area even if it isn't immediately needed. This is also how Mac and Windows OSs work. All use virtual memory that is always on. The idea is to use it as little as possible.

Leo said:
3) The Fusion Drive may add a lot of improvement if used as intended and may be also used as a scratch memory reducing requirement for Large RAM?

There are two problems with this that make it the least appealing option. First, as I said in #2, because it is not RAM, it is slower than RAM. For office work that is not bad. For Photoshop work that is bad. RAM is the cheapest way to speed up the computer. Put as much in the computer as you can afford. Starving your Mac of RAM has a domino effect that spreads slowness throughout the system since it both makes you use slower memory and it reduces the free space on your drive. Just give it the RAM it needs.

Second, it's better to not use your system drive as the scratch drive. Your system wants to read/write files. Photoshop wants to read/write image files and scratch files. Guess what happens when all three streams happen on the same disk? The disk can only handle one at a time and makes the other two wait until it's done. (At least that's the way it works with spinning drives, does anyone know if SSD can do multiple parallel read/writes?) The Fusion Drive appears as a single drive to the system, and will automatically decide where to put files. That is not always the best thing for Photoshop.

The best way to use a scratch disk is to have it as a completely separate disk (not a partition) than the boot disk or the disk containing the photos. This is how I have my Mac Pro set up. Main drive for the system and home folder, internal drive #2 for photo storage, and internal drive #3 for scratch. When system files, image files, and scratch files need to be read or written, all three streams can be done independently, at the same time, each at full speed, no waiting.

Leo said:
4) How large a large RAM should be?

Depends on what you do. 8GB is OK for most things, but increase to at least 16GB if handling larger files, files with more layers, files with more bits (16-bit, 32-bit HDR) multiple files (HDR, panorama...), any of those things in Photoshop that makes you hold more in memory.

Lloyd Chambers seems to think that his work is fastest when he uses 96GB of RAM, but he's not a typical case. He thinks 24GB is a good amount.

Leo said:
My conclusions based on this crude test: My better option would be I5 with Fusion Drive and Large RAM.

Am I mowing in the right direction?

Although some of your conclusions weren't correct, your overall sense is good: A Fusion Drive and a higher amount of RAM is a good direction. But if you want more performance, connect an external drive to assign as scratch disk, and maybe another one for photo storage.

Leo · Dec 27, 2012

Thank you tall for the help. Finally it clicked in

Your explanation was very easy to understand and to the point.

My iMac to be purchased: iMac 27", Quad I5 2.9GHz, 8GB RAM (upgrade to 24GB), 1T Fusion Drive, Magic Trackpad, Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad = $2,049

Use: Photography (still images only)

Software: Lightroom 4 and CS6

>Ship: Available to ship: January

>Pick up: Not eligible

I probably order iMac in January to Pick Up it at a local Apple store.

Now I can sleep

))

Leo

f8BeThereToo · Dec 28, 2012

Like others have mentioned, using the internal drive for scratch space isn't a very good idea. I use a scratch partition on a fast external drive. It's 20GB of empty space that isn't used for anything else. Adobe has guidelines for determining the amount of scratch space to allocate for Photoshop.

JulesJ · Dec 28, 2012

Leo said:
Leo wrote:

My plan was to select between two new iMacs:

iMac 21.5": I7 3.1GHz, 16GB RAM and Fusion Drive

or

iMac 27": I5 2.9GHz, 8GB RAM (upgrade later to 32GB) and Fusion Drive

My conclusions based on this crude test: My better option would be I5 with Fusion Drive and Large RAM.

Am I mowing in the right direction?

Leo

Which of the above two are you choosing? your first choice was I7 with fusion drive And large Ram. You are confusing me!

JulesJ · Dec 28, 2012

cyclomac said:
cyclomac wrote:

Hi webfrasse,

From what you said:

"Disk, from what it looks right now it's probably not a user upgradeable device = I ordered with 3TB Fusion"

This information from Macbidouille.com site may interest you:

Aujourd'hui, pour la première fois depuis la sortie des Mac Intel et de BootCamp, un Mac est annoncé comme incompatible avec ce système. C'est l'iMac 27" doté d'un disque de 3 To. L'émulation Bios de cette machine étant incapable de gérer un disque de 3 To, il est impossible d'y installer Windows. Or, Windows refusant de s'installer sur un disque amovible, la voie semble bel et bien fermée.

It seems that iMac with 3T hard drives is incompatible for Bootcamp to function because of a bios problem that can't manage 3T drives.

cyclomac said:
Important to know if you would like to install Bootcamp + windows on it.

Why run Windows on your Mac? Get over PCs, or like I do, run one as well as your Mac. a Mac, is a Mac.

JulesJ · Dec 28, 2012

Leo said:
Leo wrote:

Leo said:

Najinsky wrote:

That suggests the Liquify filter is not exploiting multiple cores. So you have 1 core flat out at 100% and the other nearly idle, averaging around 50% across the 2 cores. So, counter-intuitively from the raw stats, a faster CPU core will make a difference.

-Najinsky

Leo said:

Leo wrote:

I am currently using MacBook Pro 2.2GH Intel Core Duo, 4GB 667 MHz RAM and selecting a new 2012 iMac.

Today on my laptop i have opened one of my photo and applied a Photoshop CS6 Liquify filter. The RAM and CPU usage I was controlling by using installed on my laptop iStat Nano (FREE little statistic program) and Mac Activity Monitor.

iStat Nano (from one of the Internet Forums):

http://istat-nano.en.softonic.com/mac

I have made brush size 300 pix and with mouse quickly run randomly across the image with all filter options. The CPU usage was around 50% however Activity monitor showed 1.6GB read and 1.005GB was written. It took about 15 seconds to complete the task.

I am not sure of my conclusions below:

1) CPU power have never been utilized. Its usage was around 50%

2) HD was used as scratch memory as I have small RAW and it slowdown the whole thing.

3) The Fusion Drive may add a lot of improvement if used as intended and may be also used as a scratch memory reducing requirement for Large RAM?

4) How large a large RAM should be?

My plan was to select between two new iMacs:

iMac 21.5": I7 3.1GHz, 16GB RAM and Fusion Drive

or

iMac 27": I5 2.9GHz, 8GB RAM (upgrade later to 32GB) and Fusion Drive

My conclusions based on this crude test: My better option would be I5 with Fusion Drive and Large RAM.

Am I mowing in the right direction?

Leo

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

My understanding of CPU interaction with CS6 is skin dip. I have read somewhere on Internet that CS6 was written for Hyper Threading, that is why I have selected Liquify Filter. However, your point is easy to agree.

Thank you.

Leo

I was told by an Adobe employee a a photo show to run a Liquify at the start when yo first open PS. I'm no techno bu I sort of understood from him that this then opened up some set of memory and left it instantly a viable for PS heavy use from then on in a session. Does this make sense?

JulesJ · Dec 28, 2012

Member said:
MrMojo wrote:

The CS6 Liquify filter relies on the GPU rather than the CPU for acceleration, so I think that you are barking up the wrong tree by focusing on the CPU... Ditto with the installed RAM.

The GPUs in the new iMacs are a lot more powerful than the GPU in your Core2Duo Mac. You will certainly notice a difference...

More info on GPU enhanced CS6 functions: http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq.html#cs6_features

The i5 vs. i7 question is another matter altogether... Whether or not a quad-core CPU will be worth the money to you depends on what you do with your computer and whether the software that you use takes advantage of the extra cores. In some situations a dual-core is the way to go because the quad-core won't be utilized to its full potential; those extra cores will just be sitting there waiting for something to do.

I don't buy the useful-life argument when it comes to going with an i7 vs. an i5 CPU. In some cases it may be better to put the money you save by going with the i5 toward hardware that will definitely make a difference such as a RAM upgrade. I have also read some convincing arguments that putting the money you save toward an earlier future computer upgrade is more cost-effective in the long-run. The more powerful CPU won't necessarily get you more when it comes time to sell your Mac.

Come on, wh sells an old Mac. I have my previous four under my bench. No one wants a three year old model or older.

Member said:
Barefeats.com has some excellent tests of the new i5 and i7 iMacs running various CS6 processes. I think that studying them will help you decide which iMac will give you the biggest bang for your buck.

The amount of RAM you need depends on a number of factors: the size of your files, the extent and kind of image editing you tend to do, etc. My image editing needs are relatively modest so 16GB is overkill for me; people working with large files with extensive edits may find 16GB RAM to be too little. Some of the Barefeats tests cover RAM requirements.

JulesJ · Dec 28, 2012

Leo said:
Leo wrote:

Leo said:

MrMojo wrote:

The CS6 Liquify filter relies on the GPU rather than the CPU for acceleration, so I think that you are barking up the wrong tree by focusing on the CPU... Ditto with the installed RAM.

The GPUs in the new iMacs are a lot more powerful than the GPU in your Core2Duo Mac. You will certainly notice a difference...

More info on GPU enhanced CS6 functions: http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq.html#cs6_features

The i5 vs. i7 question is another matter altogether... Whether or not a quad-core CPU will be worth the money to you depends on what you do with your computer and whether the software that you use takes advantage of the extra cores. In some situations a dual-core is the way to go because the quad-core won't be utilized to its full potential; those extra cores will just be sitting there waiting for something to do.

I don't buy the useful-life argument when it comes to going with an i7 vs. an i5 CPU. In some cases it may be better to put the money you save by going with the i5 toward hardware that will definitely make a difference such as a RAM upgrade. I have also read some convincing arguments that putting the money you save toward an earlier future computer upgrade is more cost-effective in the long-run. The more powerful CPU won't necessarily get you more when it comes time to sell your Mac.

Barefeats.com has some excellent tests of the new i5 and i7 iMacs running various CS6 processes. I think that studying them will help you decide which iMac will give you the biggest bang for your buck.

The amount of RAM you need depends on a number of factors: the size of your files, the extent and kind of image editing you tend to do, etc. My image editing needs are relatively modest so 16GB is overkill for me; people working with large files with extensive edits may find 16GB RAM to be too little. Some of the Barefeats tests cover RAM requirements.

Click to expand...

MrMojo,

Thank you for timely reply. I am planning to place an order today or tomorrow. Preliminary,I am gearing for 27" I5 2.9MHz. as I have read in several places that i7 runs much hotter when utilized. My old iMac in hot summer weather was slowing and then quitting. In some cases (hot days) to complete editing images with Lightroom for prints competition I had to place ice on the iMac top to finish editing and printing. As I am not in video - photography only.

I need help with questions related to RAM - Fusion Drive use. Currently my computer (2007 MacBook Pro) with 4GB RAM uses HD for scratch memory. It seems that this is a bottle-neck. My iMac HD failed.

Q1 Will iMac with 32GB need any scratch memory ?

My another option is 21" iMac with i7, 16GB RAM and Fusion Drive. However, if 16GB is not be enough then Q2

Can you tell my why you think 16GB of Ram is not enough. I work professionally on a MBP with 3GB at the moment and rarely get the spinning wheel of doom,and we have a D800!

Leo said:
Q2 If 16GB is not enough then Fusion Drive would be used as scratch memory. Would it be same fast as RAM?

Q3 Hyper Threading use based on hardware, OS and specifically written software. I have read complains that the added threads in some cases create execution errors. Is it possible?

Thank you for the help.

Leo

I7 with 16GB or I5 with 32GB RAM? (my test)

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Najinsky

Guest

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

f8BeThereToo

Guest

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

f8BeThereToo

Guest

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Keyboard shortcuts