First post: Help with pro-sumer homebuilt desktop upgrade

Manga27 <csands@gmail.com> wrote:

> I use Firefox, Trillian, Skype... do there have to be 64-
> bit versions of these programs, or will they be compatible with
> Windows XP x64 natively?

If you don't find the answer here, there are USENET groups for all
types of software (and everything else).

Manga27 <csands@gmail.com> wrote:

> It seems Photoshop CS3 can still handle 6 to 8 GB ram, though the
> system ends up using the ram higher than 4GB for a virtual scratch
> disk. So, if anyone can help me decide whether or not to upgrade
> to WinXP / Vista x64, it would be greatly helpful - the major
> concern being support for all of the other programs I need.

And, as you've already been told, you need to find drivers for
64-bit Windows or Vista. If Photoshop doesn't make primary use of
higher than 4 GB of RAM, why are you bent on a 64-bit operating
system? I think you're in for some significant research. Somehow I
doubt anyone here can tell you whether a 64-bit Windows will work
for you. One thing for sure, if you're using Windows 9x, run to the
store and buy windows XP or Vista.

One way to at least guarantee hardware compatibility with your
64-bit Windows is to buy a prebuilt system from a major PC maker
(OEM).

Good luck.

Manga27 wrote:
> On Apr 16, 8:38 pm, "Fishface" <inva...@ddress.ok?> wrote:
>> And here's what Adobe has to say on the subject:
>
<<snip>>
>
> Does this also affect the software I load into 64-bit Windows? (for
> example, if I use Firefox, Trillian, Skype... do there have to be 64-
> bit versions of these programs, or will they be compatible with
> Windows XP x64 natively?
>
> Looking forward to your thoughts.
>
> Take care,
>
> ... Christopher
>

When you use a 64 bit OS, it supports the execution of native
64 bit executables. But it also supports 32 bit executables.
That means you could take a five year old copy of Photoshop and
run it on your 64 bit OS. It is likely, that the same kind of
limits that may have been present in the 32 bit program, will
still be present when it is run in a 64 bit environment. To
understand more, you'd have to research exactly what aspects
of the execution environment, are maintained by WOW64.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WOW64

Paul

Manga27 wrote:

> "... If you have more than 4 GB (to 6 GB), then the RAM above 4 GB is
> used by the operating system as a cache for the Photoshop scratch disk
> data. Data that previously was written directly to the hard disk by
> Photoshop is now cached in this high RAM before being written to the
> hard disk by the operating system. If you are working with files large
> enough to take advantage of these extra 2 GB of RAM, the RAM cache can
> speed performance of Photoshop. Additionally, in Windows Vista 64-bit,
> processing very large images is much faster if your computer has large
> amounts of RAM (6-8 GB)."
>
>
> This seems very interesting to me, since I am working now with huge
> files: 500MB to 1GB in some cases, and growing daily. But, it seems
> that many people are wary of using 64-bit operating systems since many
> device drivers are missing... ? Is this a correct assumption, or am I
> missing something here?

It does sound promising and you can learn a lot from other people's
experiences with Vista 64 by reading the comments here:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832116215

> Does this also affect the software I load into 64-bit Windows? (for
> example, if I use Firefox, Trillian, Skype... do there have to be 64-
> bit versions of these programs, or will they be compatible with
> Windows XP x64 natively?

I only know what I've read, which isn't all that much. There is a translation
layer for running 32 bit applications. I've heard that there are no drivers for
even Microsoft branded keyboards with "extra buttons." As for your apps,
Google!

When choosing a motherboard and video card, just make sure they are well
supported by the manufacturers for 64 bit operating systems. Microsoft has
a news server and there is a 64 bit computing group. You can add this news
server to your OE or Thunderbird:

msnews.microsoft.com

....or use the web based interface:

http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com....64bit.general

Ask for peoples experiences in comp.publish.prepress. These are the
professionals and might have experience with this.

"Fishface" <invalid@ddress.ok?> wrote:

> It does sound promising and you can learn a lot from other people's
> experiences with Vista 64 by reading the comments here:
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832116215

Not that it's relevant to this particular issue, but beware when
reading user reviews. Some (hopefully very few) of them come from
people who don't know what they're talking about, especially on
technical issues.

Thanks for the advice, Joe.

The reason I've been bent on a 64-bit system, is that I wanted to get
above 4GB RAM. The 2GB / Dual Core system I have now is painfully
slow in my work, and I don't think doubling the ram and proc. to 4GB /
Quad is going to be enough.

Based on Adobe's documents (referenced in the thread above: thanks,
Fishface!) it would seem that Photoshop only can reference up to
~4GB... So, if I have 4GB, I might get 2GB RAM for Photoshop as some
processes are used for Windows / other programs.

But if I have 8GB RAM, Photoshop will be able to use a full 4GB, and
Windows can use anything above the 4GB.

(Also as a side note, if there is unused RAM it sounds as if Photoshop
will use this as a scratch disk - which I am sure is infinitely faster
than a hard-drive scratch disk.)

Take care,

.... Christopher


On Apr 17, 1:51 pm, John Doe <j...@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:
> Manga27 <csa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And, as you've already been told, you need to find drivers for
> 64-bit Windows or Vista. If Photoshop doesn't make primary use of
> higher than 4 GB of RAM, why are you bent on a 64-bit operating
> system? I think you're in for some significant research. Somehow I
> doubt anyone here can tell you whether a 64-bit Windows will work
> for you. One thing for sure, if you're using Windows 9x, run to the
> store and buy windows XP or Vista.
>
> One way to at least guarantee hardware compatibility with your
> 64-bit Windows is to buy a prebuilt system from a major PC maker
> (OEM).
>
> Good luck.

All,

Thanks very much for the continued comments. I've taken all
considerations mentioned here and was able to configure this system
for ~$1,337. (I still haven't purchased it yet - I want to get
everyone's approval first.) ;-)

Interestingly, though I am not a 'h@x0r', I found it funny the price I
came up with is $1,337 which I have seen is geek-speak for "leet".
LOL

NOTES:
I took JR's suggestion of the Rapter but only added one to use as a
scratch disk, to save about $200.
I dropped the SLI since I don't need it at the moment, and can upgrade
later.

QUESTIONS:
Can anyone give me a good reason to go for Vista Business over Home
Premium?
Will an additional Rapter really affect the overall speed of the
computer enough to justify $200+?



Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300, LGA 775, 2.5GHz, 64-Bit Quad-Core, 6MB Cache;
1333MHz
Intel factory Auto-RPM Silent CPU Air Cool
Asus nForce 650i SLI, 8GB Max, SLI, RAID,1394, S/PDIF, Audio, GbLAN.
[ P5N-E SLI ]
8G (4x2GB) PC6400 DDR2/800
Geforce 8600GT: 512MB
320GB SATA-II 7200RPM w/16MB Buffer
Western Digital Rapter 150GB SATA 10000RPM w/ 16MB Buffer
20x Dual-Format/Dual-Layer DVDRW Driver
MSI TV@nywhere Plus, TV Tuner, w/Remote Control
High Definition 7.1 Digtial Surround Sound
Integrated onBoard 10/100/(1000) Port(s)
108Mbps: Zonet ZEW1620, 802.11b/g PCI Internal Wireless Adapter
Windows Vista Home Premium - 64 Bit Edition - w/ DVD set

URL Link :
http://www.pcusa.com/shopKitConfig.a...0,10,0,5,0,0,0,

All,

This is a repost - sorry if it was duplicated, but it seems Google
lost my original. Based on the suggestions of everyone here, I have
come up with this $1,337 system - I'd appreciate someone "signing off"
on this config before I hit the checkout button.

NOTE: I've added a Rapter 150GB as the secondary (scratch) disk, but
used a standard 7,200RPM 320GB for the main drive. Can anyone let me
know, would dropping the 320GB slower drive and using a Rapter 150GB
as the main drive give that much of a performance boost to be worth
the extra $200+?

NOTE: I gave up on SLI - I don't need it right now, I'm not a gamer
and my work is 2D not 3D, so the performance increase would be
negligible.


NZXT: Alpha [ CS-NT-ACP-WOW ] ( Front USB, Audio ), Black
Original Case Power Supply QTY: 1
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300, LGA 775, 2.5GHz, 64-Bit Quad-Core, 6MB Cache;
1333MHz
Intel factory Auto-RPM Silent CPU Air Cool
Asus nForce 650i SLI, 8GB Max, SLI, RAID,1394, S/PDIF, Audio, GbLAN.
[ P5N-E SLI ]
8G (4x2GB) PC6400 DDR2/800
Geforce 8600GT: 512MB
320GB SATA-II 7200RPM w/16MB Buffer
Western Digital Rapter 150GB SATA 10000RPM w/ 16MB Buffer
MSI TV@nywhere Plus, TV Tuner, w/Remote Control
Integrated onBoard 10/100/(1000) Port(s)
108Mbps: Zonet ZEW1620, 802.11b/g PCI Internal Wireless Adapter
Windows Vista Home Premium - 64 Bit Edition - w/ DVD set

URL Link :
http://www.pcusa.com/shopKitConfig.a...0,10,0,5,0,0,0,



Thanks everyone!

.... Christopher

Manga27 wrote:
> All,
>
> This is a repost - sorry if it was duplicated, but it seems Google
> lost my original. Based on the suggestions of everyone here, I have
> come up with this $1,337 system - I'd appreciate someone "signing off"
> on this config before I hit the checkout button.
>
> NOTE: I've added a Rapter 150GB as the secondary (scratch) disk, but
> used a standard 7,200RPM 320GB for the main drive. Can anyone let me
> know, would dropping the 320GB slower drive and using a Rapter 150GB
> as the main drive give that much of a performance boost to be worth
> the extra $200+?
>
> NOTE: I gave up on SLI - I don't need it right now, I'm not a gamer
> and my work is 2D not 3D, so the performance increase would be
> negligible.
>
>
> NZXT: Alpha [ CS-NT-ACP-WOW ] ( Front USB, Audio ), Black
> Original Case Power Supply QTY: 1
> Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300, LGA 775, 2.5GHz, 64-Bit Quad-Core, 6MB Cache;
> 1333MHz
> Intel factory Auto-RPM Silent CPU Air Cool
> Asus nForce 650i SLI, 8GB Max, SLI, RAID,1394, S/PDIF, Audio, GbLAN.
> [ P5N-E SLI ]
> 8G (4x2GB) PC6400 DDR2/800
> Geforce 8600GT: 512MB
> 320GB SATA-II 7200RPM w/16MB Buffer
> Western Digital Rapter 150GB SATA 10000RPM w/ 16MB Buffer
> MSI TV@nywhere Plus, TV Tuner, w/Remote Control
> Integrated onBoard 10/100/(1000) Port(s)
> 108Mbps: Zonet ZEW1620, 802.11b/g PCI Internal Wireless Adapter
> Windows Vista Home Premium - 64 Bit Edition - w/ DVD set
>
> URL Link :
> http://www.pcusa.com/shopKitConfig.a...0,10,0,5,0,0,0,
>
>
>
> Thanks everyone!
>
> ... Christopher

Case - lower drive cage may conflict with long cards. Some video cards
are pretty long (8.5"). The PCUSA page says "8800GTX" compatible,
which I guess is their way of saying a long card fits.

The inside of the case might look like this. Newegg doesn't bundle the
PP500 power supply with this, so you could buy something else.

http://c1.neweggimages.com/NeweggIma...146-041-10.jpg

"Case power supply" is a 500W unit. The NZXT site lists a "PP500", so
this could be the one PCUSA includes. Maybe someone else has an idea
who actually makes this (there is a lot of sub-contracting in the power
supply business).

http://www.nzxt.com/products/pp500/

+12V1DC 1 to 16 amps \__ (no derating when both fully used)
+12V2DC 1 to 17 amps /
+5VDC 0.3 to 40 amps \__ 250W max (plenty for lower rails - typ ~100W used)
+3.3VDC 0.5 to 34 amps /
-12VDC 0.0 to 0.8 amps
+5VSB 0.0 to 2.5 amps

P5N-E SLI CPUSupport page - Q9300 is not currently listed!

http://support.asus.com/cpusupport/c...el=P5N-E%20SLI

P5N-E SLI product page.
http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1...74&modelmenu=1

You should always download the motherboard manual, and have a read through it,
to see if the motherboard has everything you expected (like O.C. controls in
BIOS etc).

http://dlsvr03.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/..._p5n-e_sli.zip
http://dlsvr03.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/...sli-insert.zip

No 2GB sticks were tested for P5N-E, but that is because of the date of
release, rather than being a technical issue. 2GB sticks are a more recent
phenomenon.

http://www.asus.com/999/download/pro...74/1474_10.pdf

For user experiences and problem reports, you can look here.

http://vip.asus.com/forum/topic.aspx...Language=en-us

A thread on instability with 8GB total, here. Sounds like 2x2GB might be a
safer bet for a memory config.

http://vip.asus.com/forum/view.aspx?...Language=en-us

Processor is 95W. 8600GT is 43W (as per the second link). The
power supply should not have a problem with this.

http://processorfinder.intel.com/det...px?sSpec=SLAWE

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards....rd1=513&card2=

Review on your selected supplier "pcusa". 5.29 out of 10. Not
everyone is happy with them. I think this is the place, that puts a
"warranty seal" on the computer case door.

http://www.resellerratings.com/store..._dba_PC_Source

There is a thread discussing pcusa.com here. What you really want
to do, is find an absolutely current web page from them, to see
if the same warranty terms still apply.

http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.co...d54fd1046be0c6

For example, this is an archived web page from Aug.2006

http://web.archive.org/web/200608210...mPage.asp?id=5

"All warranty will be voided if any Warranty Sticker or Seal is broken off
on the purchased products. Any tempering of the warranty condition of any
purchased products voids the warranty of such products"

Good luck,
Paul

Manga27 <csands@gmail.com> wrote:

> The reason I've been bent on a 64-bit system, is that I wanted to
> get above 4GB RAM. The 2GB / Dual Core system I have now is
> painfully slow in my work,

What are the core processor loads? If they are very unbalanced, see
if you can find a utility that spreads the load more evenly. Some
guy just wrote one for Supreme Commander, gamers say it works great.
I would think that sort of utility is highly desirable for work
applications.

> and I don't think doubling the ram and proc. to 4GB / Quad is
> going to be enough.

Doubling your RAM should make a huge difference.

> Based on Adobe's documents (referenced in the thread above:
> thanks, Fishface!) it would seem that Photoshop only can reference
> up to ~4GB... So, if I have 4GB, I might get 2GB RAM for
> Photoshop as some processes are used for Windows / other programs.

Stop guessing and use Performance Monitor or MemStatus to determine
that.

> But if I have 8GB RAM, Photoshop will be able to use a full 4GB,
> and Windows can use anything above the 4GB.
>
> (Also as a side note, if there is unused RAM it sounds as if
> Photoshop will use this as a scratch disk - which I am sure is
> infinitely faster than a hard-drive scratch disk.)

You need to stop guessing and ask regular users in a Photoshop
group, IMO.

Good luck.