Mar 15, 2018 - Mac Pro Chillblast Photo OC Lite IV Difference CPU Cores 6 x Intel “Ivy Bridge-E” Cores (2013 Spec) 6 x 2017 Spec Intel “Coffee Lake” Cores.
We're going to build our very own photographers PC, capable of working at blazing speeds with 50-megapixel images and dozens of layers in Adobe Photoshop. The high-end system we will be discussing here will have a budget of $1,500 in mind. For this, we're going to build our post-processing dream PC, but it doesn't include a monitor. Let's start comparing specs. A (Personal) Numbers Game PC building is about comparing numbers, but also about personal preference. With two major contenders on the CPU market, Intel and AMD, most people tend to stick to either. It’s the same with ATI Graphics (an acquired subsidiary of AMD) and NVidia.
Even in a time when the price/performance numbers of AMD/ATI systems look better, I am still an Intel/NVidia guy. I can’t explain why exactly. Maybe because I’ve build PCs since the age of 12 and in only one of those instances (and it wasn’t the first build), an ATI-card died. You’re going to have to forgive me for this manufacturer’s choice, but rest assured that the rest of this comparison is as objective as I can be. If you specifically want AMD/ATI, I suggest that you look at the new range of processors and the series graphics cards, both of which I’ve heard very good things about. To be able to write this article, I've used the fantastic spreadsheets of PassMark software, which have been my reference for and for over a decade.
Processor: Intel Core i7-7700 A processor is the beating heart of your machine. In photography editing, the power of the processor will determine for some amount how fast and snappy your edits translate into the results you see on the screen. The is at the top end of the desktop Intel Socket 1151 range, surpassed in performance only by the “unlocked”. “Unlocked” means that these processors are well suited for those who aim to overclock them.
Our 7700 operates at 3.6 GHz and scores a respectable 10,816 points on CPU-Benchmark. Some of the specs include 8 MB SmartCache, four physical cores and eight hardware threads. Now, if these or any of the following specs don’t say a whole lot to you, that’s OK. Let me just say that this CPU’s price/performance index is absolutely top-notch for a current generation Intel processor.
It’s going for around $300. Motherboard: GIGABYTE GA-H270-HD3 If the processor is your computer’s heart; the motherboard is undoubtedly its blood circulation system. It connects the individual parts through its integrated chipset. I’ve opted for a H270 board, because the main differences between it and its bigger brother, the Z270 chipset, are the overclocking capabilities and consequently the Z270’s higher price point. Boasts three PCI-e x16 slots for connecting a wide range of fast components such as a video card, sound, or ultra-fast storage. Additionally, we see four USB 3.0 and four USB 2.0 connectors. There are four memory slots, which we’ll cover next.
Memory: Kingston HyperX FURY 32 GB 2133 MHz RAM stores instructions temporarily. The higher the amount of this temporary storage, the larger your files can be without your new computer slowing down on you. Because of the ever-increasing resolutions of digital camera sensors, working in layers in Photoshop, and panorama stitching, I rather choose a higher amount of RAM and pay a little extra.
The memory speed and latencies say something about how fast a new set of instructions can be added or cleared from the memory. Our motherboard runs 2,133 MHz memory out of the box, so that’s what we’ll pick. We will fill all four slots with modules, for a total of 32 GB RAM. If you’re knowledgeable about timings, then I think you will agree that choosing CL14 14-14-32 is a good contender among both the cheaper and more expensive choices we have. Graphics Card: ASUS GeForce GTX 1060 6GB ROG STRIX OC So why would we need a graphics card for photo editing?
Aren’t today’s processors kitted out with on-board video? In short, yes they are. Although modern software like our beloved Adobe products Lightroom and Photoshop are actually designed from the ground up to work with dedicated graphics cards. Complex operations in Photoshop and Lightroom are a lot (!) faster if you’re using a video card, because these are basically computers on their own.
They have their own processor (called a GPU), cooler, memory, and motherboard. That’s the main reason why this part is the most expensive part in our build.
We don’t, however, need the most expensive or fastest card out there (unless of course you’re also an avid gamer). For Photoshop’s GPU intensive features like blurring, sharpening, and the Camera Raw filter, memory interface width is actually more important than raw GPU-performance. A 2 GB 256-bit video card will outperform a 4 GB 128-bit video card, because of the parallel computing power of that card. This is why professional-grade Radeon R9, Tesla, and Quadro all feature the highest possible memory bandwidth.
These cards also cost an arm and a leg, so they’re not for our build. Most enthusiast, non-professional cards feature a 384-bit memory bus, but also cost anything upwards of $700. Our price range lets us put in a respectable 192-bit GTX 1060 card with 6 GB of video memory. The $350 features 1,280 CUDA cores that run at 1,645 MHz.
Main Storage and Cache: Samsung 850 EVO, 250 GB SSD We’re inching closer to software. Software, such as your operating system, installs on a drive and in 2017 these come in three flavors: traditional hard drives, solid state drives, and combinations of the two. SSDs are the fastest option and can be connected through a so-called SATA-cable or directly on the motherboard for best performance at a cost.
Your main storage is the one on which we’re going to install Windows, Lightroom, and Photoshop. But we will also use this drive for cache.
Cache is temporary storage that acts much like an extension of your RAM. If the RAM fills up, the cache folder on your storage device will fill to avoid problems such as blocking your entire system.
This is why we need a sizable amount of space on this drive at all times. We’re going for a 250 GB SSD. The series has a lot going for it. The 250 GB version reads at 540 MB/s and writes at 520 MB/s. For its $100 price, you’ll be hard-pressed to find an equal or better performing drive. Storing Your Photos: Western Digital Black, 2 TB HDD When it comes to storing your precious photos, size does matter. This drive reads at 164 MB/s and boasts 2 TB of storage.
That’s more than enough for putting any stages of your edited photography on there; raw files, original PSDs, and JPEGs for the web. And should you run out of storage, there’s always the option of putting another one in there, because our motherboard supports four additional drives. The drive sets you back $136. Power, Case, and Peripherals This build, like any high-end system, is quite power hungry because of its graphics card, which requires at least 500 watts of power. All the other components don’t require that much, so let’s stick on the safe side and put in a 750-watt power supply. The Corsair is an 80 PLUS gold-standard power supply with full, modular cable management. And because it has an active thermal regulation system, the fan is only fully engaged when it’s most needed.
A great case has a good amount of airflow, so cable management is a priority. Aside from that, picking a case is entirely subjective, so I won’t get into this in great detail. As long as it fits your ATX-motherboard and the 298mm long video card. The same subjectivity holds true for any peripherals like a mouse, keyboard, and speakers, assuming you even want the latter. All of the components in this category will cost around $250, depending on how fancy your case and mouse are.
Next Our build comes to a grand total of $1,426, with all the parts coming from Amazon. But we're not there yet. Because there are so many factors to consider, buying a monitor for photography editing is worthy of an entire article by itself. And once all the boxes of your new PC build arrive, it’s time to put everything together and tweak the system to get the most out of your rig.
You’ve guessed it, we’re in for another multi-part article. If you have any questions about these parts, or have a better idea for any the components selected for this build, you’re welcome to make suggestions. You can also comment with 'I have a Mac' to get the discussing going. This is build is just one of the millions of combinations you could make to build your post-processing dream PC. Until next time: Happy comparing.
RAID is not only about fault tolerance, but performance as well. With proper controller and HDDs you'll be able to shame any SSD drive, unless these drives are in raid as well. Dell PERC H700 (especially one with 1Gb RAM, where you can manage cachecade if you have SSD pool, so all your HOT data will be cached on SSD and the HOTest in the controller RAM). As of the article - it is about nice setup, but. I do not have any issues to edit 3Gb tiff panorama on my old AMD Phenom II 955, 16Gb RAM and 2Gb Nvidia somewhat titan card.
Edit, once it is loaded, but load takes time, where Photoshop hunger for CPU power. For editing I have no issues at all. My experience and knowledge tells that Adobe products have lack of optimization for multi threading (a lot of legacy code), so if you consider editing, choose CPU with highest single core clock of the same generation and it won't that matter i5 or i7. If your measure is export/import, this is where core amount wins - adobe runs parallel export of one file per core. Next important thing is RAM - no 'swap' = no iowait = CPU won't do sleep cycles waiting for data. As of HDD for Photoshop, these days speed is somewhat 150Mb/sec (or faster) - how much will it take to load file (well, unless your file is tremendously huge or your file is split across all drive by tiny pieces (do defrag sometimes:) ) )?
But I'll agree that you want to have all your previews on SSD and (if you are not on budget) all 'recent' RAWs/edits. I did step towards LR. Another myth from the same lane - LR catalog, where it is nothing more than SQLite DB and if you have enough RAM it is cached in there. You definitely do not want to have all your IO against the same HDD. Yeah for sure, but for $23 more you can get a m2 the same size as the one you listed.
And I'm sure for the same price or $25 more you could get a compatible MOBO. I just saw the title as 'High End' so I wanted to mention the M2 ssd's. For me PERSONALLY, I'd pay the extra $25-50 to boost my HDD as much as possible since it's such a crucial part. If I couldn't afford an extra $25-50 I'd wait for a newegg combo sale, get a cheaper video card, or cheaper case. Or just have the components sitting on my desk without a case:) But like you said, it's a personal choice;).
Is it possible to summarise the main differences between Macs and PCs, the key features that set them apart? The best way to describe the difference between a and a is that they are two different ways of thinking. In most cases, you can come to the same result using either, but they will go about it in a different manner. For example, when using, to close the program, a user simply clicks the red X at the corner of the program window. However, for Macs, this is not the case. When the red X on a Mac program box is clicked, that window closes but the program does not. It is still open and running, even though there are no documents or windows open.
To close a program completely, a user must click on the program name on the top status window (it must be active to do this) and then click on Quit. Another way to close a program, which is usually faster, is to use the shortcut Apple + Q. The Quit command closes all multiple windows that may be open under the program. This is all down to the fact that Macs run on the Mac OS X operating system and PCs run on Windows. It’s down to the individual as to which is easier to use.
You can run Mac OS X on a but not vice-versa, although OS X on a PC wouldn’t work as well as on a Mac. There are also differences in hardware in that Macs are only built by, whereas PCs are built by a number of companies. This reflects in the price, in that Macs are generally more expensive, and the quality of Macs is considered more stable and stylish.
Most creatives, designers, musicians and others seem to use a Mac. Why would you say that is?
Macs appear to be cooler/trendier but they are also a better fit for designers. Apple has carved out a reputation for being the “alternative” choice for those that see themselves as an individual, which is what art is all about.
![Editing Editing](https://digitalphotographycourses.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/iMac-2017.png)
But it’s not just about image. Tend to be the best platform for design and creativity due to the strength of the applications available for them and the fact that Macs are generally high-quality computers. This and the image of using a Mac make up the perfect team for those that see themselves outside the corporate culture. Would you agree that, for those in the creative industries, a Mac is a better fit as a laptop, or are there PCs that can do just as good a job, for less? There are PCs that can do just as good a job, especially as you can build a PC. The only problem is that Macs have applications that run only on Macs. Many would argue that that is not the case, but these applications are built specifically for Macs and so the PC version is usually an after-thought, although this is starting to change.
I can’t speak for every industry but for publishing, it would be very difficult for us to just use PCs. Why do you think Macs, just as with the iPhone and other Apple products, receive so much coverage when they still have a relatively small market share, compared to PCs? It’s just very good marketing. Apple understands how to manipulate the market and how to instigate a media frenzy.
The build-up to a product launch is something Apple has mastered, just by being very secretive about its ideas and what it is creating. This is also helped by the fact that is genuinely very creative, often releasing something fresh and new. Once the product is launched, Apple uses a very subtle yet strong approach. Its advertising is always understated and the company relies on enthusiasts to promote its products by word of mouth.
It’s this passion and eagerness that pushes the media to provide so much coverage. To what extent do you think that the discussion about Mac vs PC is not so much a case of which is better, but rather about your needs as a user and what you primarily need a laptop for? Whenever anyone asks me for advice as to which or Mac they should buy, I always ask: “What do you need it for?” The reason is that unless you’re editing video, graphic design, and so on, then you probably don’t need to spend that amount of money on a Mac. Most people just want to browse the web, check their emails and use a word processor, which doesn’t need a high-powered machine.
This is the reason for the rise of the netbook – they’re cheap and do all basic functions without too much hassle. The needs of the user are paramount, but people like the idea of saying they use a Mac and the image that goes with it, even though in most cases they’re not using it to its full capabilities. Apple has a very strong brand identity. How much of the appeal of Macs do you think has to do with marketing and with its desirability as a brand, a status symbol?
It has everything to do with marketing and branding, but also the fact that its products are great. Apple is very clever and deserves a lot of credit for resurrecting a company that was struggling in the mid-1990s. There’s no question that having a Mac, or iPad has a stigma attached to it, but that shouldn’t take anything away from the fact that these are fantastic products. If they weren’t so good, then all the marketing in the world wouldn’t help. People buy into the marketing but they then add to it by evangelising the products.
When someone has a Mac, they generally tell people about it and promote it either by word of mouth or by writing about it (blogs, Twitter, Facebook). This wouldn’t work if the products weren’t so good and easy to use. Although there are also high-end PCs, Macs are generally far more expensive than a PC. Do you think the higher price is justified? The price point isn’t justified in relation to a similar-specification, but Apple sells the products at a premium, making them more desirable.
If Ferraris were cheap, that would ruin their desirability. It says a lot about you if you spend money at the higher end, and if you save up for something, you tend to feel more of a sense of achievement when purchasing it. In a strange way, it’s a win-win situation. A Mac is considered to be the trendier and cooler laptop option. How important do you think style and design are to its popularity? It’s part of the package. Are seen to be premium products and the style and design is part of that image.
The functionality is great but, as I said before, Apple relies on people to promote the product. The fact that these products look great makes people want to show them off. In technology, you rarely find a product that does well on looks alone, but when you marry style with functionality, then it’s a winning formula. Dell has tried a similar tactic with its latest line of laptops coming in an array of colours and even going as far as getting designers and artists to contribute. Apple has always understood the need to sell good-looking technology, dating back to the original iMac. The fact is that if you want people to pay more money, then it needs to look good, perform and, in Apple’s case, enhance your status.
Is it possible to say if a Mac or PC is more secure and, if so, why that is? A Mac is definitely more secure due to the fact that there are few viruses that can infect Macs.
Need virus protection and sometimes that’s not enough. Exists on Macs, but it’s very rare in comparison to PCs. What do you personally use, PC or Mac, and why? Personally, at home I use a PC but at work I have to use both. For my personal life, a PC is more than enough, but at work we manage the website mainly using PCs and put the print magazine together using Macs, due to the graphic and design applications available. I’m comfortable on both platforms, but tend to find a PC easier to use. There are not enough characters in the alphabet - any alphabet - to answer this question.
In fact, it's not a question that should have been posed the way it was. To fully examine what platform and related device is a better choice, we need to know what options are available, what existing infrastructure is and how adamantly people adhere to the type of computer versus something else - how important getting the work done is. If it's really a matter of productivity.and it should be.then platform, type of computer and so much else is extraneous.
I love my Apple devices. They work for what I do. But if they didn't work, I would find something that did. It's that simple. Faisal went about this question in a backward manner.
He should have asked what device would be the best choice to get the work done. Add My Comment. If you're a casual computer user (emails, bills, word, shopping, powerpoint, etc) cheap macbooks are your best bet in my opinion. For years I swore by Dell laptops only because 'Macs are too expensive'. After listening to my Apple-cheerleader-friends, I took a chance on a Macbook back in 2008 and never looked back.
Just recently had to replace it (battery failed and was too expensive to replace, wasn't worth it in a 9 year old machine. Below are reasons: -Never had to reformat the Mac once in 9 years. Ran like a new machine to its very last day (just slow on startup).
Every PC I had: I had to reformat at least twice because they slowed to a hault and were nearly unusable.Security is built-in. No more buying a security update anually.New OS is a free simple update. On a PC, if I wanted to go to Windows XP or 7, had to uninstall manually and buy new OS.Never had quirky freezes, bugs, software that wouldn't work.External devices recognized and compatible immediately. On my PCs I would always go through a lengthy installation process. With the macbook, I plugged a rickety old HP printer in and in 30 seconds, an icon appeared in my dock which was a picture of the exact printer with model # and a message pop up that said 'found HP printer, ready to print'. Bottom line, you will pay more for an Apple product, but you get what you pay for: a low-maintenance very reliable machine.
Add My Comment. You can spend less on a PC and have it last just as long. You just have to have some knowledge about PC hardware.
Apple fanchildren always come across as the kind of people who own a car but can't change the oil or a tire. They quote things like 'it just works'. So, if your knowledge of computers is at a zero, an Apple is probably your best choice. But if you're looking to individualize and 'be unique' the PC offers way more.
Incredible that everyone thinks the Mac is the edgy and unique device.but it looks exactly like all the other Macs (except for maybe a color variance.oh my!). Add My Comment. PC is better, you fools! Are there mouse keys on a mac? 2.The mac scrolling is so counter-intuitive 3. Mac are actually more prone to viruses because anti-virus software like Norton have less power 4.
Don't get me started on how stupid DMG files are. Why make you think there is a flash drive in your computer when there isn't 5.
Why the heck is there no right click button on the mac mice? You have to hit the control button on the keyboard which means you need to have hands on both the keyboard and the mouse 6. On the mac laptops why is there no forward delete button Add My Comment.
It's the Mac OS and the integration with well built hardware that makes Mac computers different. Unix Style Terminal. Cloning is easy for a complete backup. Files and apps are isolated., no fancy dll's and registry. Mac has the best trackpad. Retina screens are sharp and smooth on the eyes.
Unlocks screen with my watch. Have usable applications out of the box. It's a little more secure and Apple is very fast to release an update if security flaws are found. Will you use a Windows without anti-virus? There you go.