Going to 64 bit

  • Thread starter Thread starter philo
  • Start date Start date
P

philo

Over the past few years I've built a number of machines for some
photographers.
Now that Photoshop CS2 is out and has additional capabilities...they are
starting to outgrow these 1 - 2 ghz machines...So I am planning on going
with the newer 64bit motherboards & cpu's.

First off...does anyone have H/W recommendations as to a good motherboard?

Also...has anyone had experience with the 64bit version of XP? (Maybe I
should just take advantage of the free trial and find out for myself.)
 
Research xp64 thoroughly for the applications you will want to be using. I
had nothing but trouble in getting it installed and stable with all of the
software I wanted to run. I bailed and returned to XP Pro until Vista comes
out. Going to let them work on that a bit . . . it's going to be an
exciting O/S but it's a bit raw right now.
 
Chinooks_FURY said:
Research xp64 thoroughly for the applications you will want to be using. I
had nothing but trouble in getting it installed and stable with all of the
software I wanted to run. I bailed and returned to XP Pro until Vista comes
out. Going to let them work on that a bit . . . it's going to be an
exciting O/S but it's a bit raw right now.
Click to expand...


It will only have to run Photoshop CS2 and nothing else...
I guess the only way I will know is to try it though!
 
Over the past few years I've built a number of machines for some
photographers.
Now that Photoshop CS2 is out and has additional capabilities...they are
starting to outgrow these 1 - 2 ghz machines...So I am planning on going
with the newer 64bit motherboards & cpu's.

First off...does anyone have H/W recommendations as to a good motherboard?

Also...has anyone had experience with the 64bit version of XP? (Maybe I
should just take advantage of the free trial and find out for myself.)
Click to expand...

Dual core Athlon 64 X2 4400+ with an Nforce4 motherboard. The name brand
Nforce 4 motherboards are all pretty much identical and all work fine. I
have an MSI K8N Neo4 with an X2 4400+ and 4G of RAM. I'm running 64
bit Fedora Core 3 so I can't tell you anything about Windows,
but the hardware has been stable. It's been up 24/7 for 6 months running
compute intensive applications.

The X2 4400+ is the processor of choice for high performance systems. The
4800+ is only slightly faster but it's significantly more expensive then
the 4400+. The 4600+ has a slightly faster clock but it has smaller caches
then the 4400+ and the 4800+, 1M/CPU for 4400+ and 4800+ vs .5M/CPU for
the 4600+, and it's more expensive so don't even consider it. For cheaper
systems the 3800+ is the choice. It only has .5M caches but it's cheap for
a dual core. Photoshop is a multithreaded application so you definitely
want to be using a dual core processor.

If you need more than 4G of RAM then you'll want an Opteron 2xx system.
The 2xx Opterons support registered DIMMs which allows you to put up to 8G
per Opteron and 16G in a dual Opteron system. You can get either a pair of
dual processor Opterons or two single processor Opterons.
 
Dual core Athlon 64 X2 4400+ with an Nforce4 motherboard. The name brand
Nforce 4 motherboards are all pretty much identical and all work fine. I
have an MSI K8N Neo4 with an X2 4400+ and 4G of RAM. I'm running 64
bit Fedora Core 3 so I can't tell you anything about Windows,
but the hardware has been stable. It's been up 24/7 for 6 months running
compute intensive applications.

The X2 4400+ is the processor of choice for high performance systems. The
4800+ is only slightly faster but it's significantly more expensive then
the 4400+. The 4600+ has a slightly faster clock but it has smaller caches
then the 4400+ and the 4800+, 1M/CPU for 4400+ and 4800+ vs .5M/CPU for
the 4600+, and it's more expensive so don't even consider it. For cheaper
systems the 3800+ is the choice. It only has .5M caches but it's cheap for
a dual core. Photoshop is a multithreaded application so you definitely
want to be using a dual core processor.

If you need more than 4G of RAM then you'll want an Opteron 2xx system.
The 2xx Opterons support registered DIMMs which allows you to put up to 8G
per Opteron and 16G in a dual Opteron system. You can get either a pair of
dual processor Opterons or two single processor Opterons.
Click to expand...


Ok...
Since on the present systems...the cpu's are pretty much maxed out...
the X2 may just very well be usable for many years to come.
The 1 -2 ghz machines I plan to upgrade have done quite well for several
years...

Also thanks for mentioned FC3...as that was going to be my 2nd
question...(just as a matter of curiosity)
but at present my FC3-32bit is doing fine...and I don't plan on
upgrading my own machine anytime soon
 
philo said:
It will only have to run Photoshop CS2 and nothing else...
I guess the only way I will know is to try it though!
Click to expand...

What about monitor calibration software or using ICC profiles or printer
drivers? How well do these work in 64bit Windows?

- John
 
Also thanks for mentioned FC3...as that was going to be my 2nd
question...(just as a matter of curiosity)
but at present my FC3-32bit is doing fine...and I don't plan on
upgrading my own machine anytime soon
Click to expand...

I have several A64 machines, a 3400+ laptop, a 3800+ desktop and an X2
4400+ compute server. The laptop and desktop both run 32 bit FC4 and the
server 64 bit FC3. I've also tried 64 bit FC4 on the laptop and desktop
and it works fine. My reason for sticking with 32 bit FC on the laptop and
desktop is because I use Win4Lin which needs a 32 bit kernel. The laptop
also has a Broadcom 802.11g chip which has no Linux driver so I have to
use Ndiswrapper with the 32 bit XP driver. The laptop and desktop only
have 1G and 2.5G respectively so there is no compelling reason to run a 64
bit OS on them. My server has 4G and 32 bit Linux only supports 3G in a
single process so that's why I use 64 bit FC on it. As far as I can tell
there isn't a significant performance difference between 64 bit Linux and
32 bit Linux. I am using custom kernels for my 32 bit machines, required
because I use Win4Lin, and I've compiled those kernels for AMD64 rather
than for i586 which is what the standard 32 bit kernels are targeted at.
I've also compiled in the AMD64 speed governors, I'm not sure if those are
compiled into the standard 32 bit FC4 kernels (I think they are now but
they weren't in the initial release).
 
I have several A64 machines, a 3400+ laptop, a 3800+ desktop and an X2
4400+ compute server. The laptop and desktop both run 32 bit FC4 and the
server 64 bit FC3. I've also tried 64 bit FC4 on the laptop and desktop
and it works fine. My reason for sticking with 32 bit FC on the laptop and
desktop is because I use Win4Lin which needs a 32 bit kernel. The laptop
also has a Broadcom 802.11g chip which has no Linux driver so I have to
use Ndiswrapper with the 32 bit XP driver. The laptop and desktop only
have 1G and 2.5G respectively so there is no compelling reason to run a 64
bit OS on them. My server has 4G and 32 bit Linux only supports 3G in a
single process so that's why I use 64 bit FC on it. As far as I can tell
there isn't a significant performance difference between 64 bit Linux and
32 bit Linux. I am using custom kernels for my 32 bit machines, required
because I use Win4Lin, and I've compiled those kernels for AMD64 rather
than for i586 which is what the standard 32 bit kernels are targeted at.
I've also compiled in the AMD64 speed governors, I'm not sure if those are
compiled into the standard 32 bit FC4 kernels (I think they are now but
they weren't in the initial release).
Click to expand...

Well
for now I've got to get a machine put together...
as for myself...i'll prob. go with a 64bit machine as soon as they
become obsolete <G>

anyway..i looked at the prices for those X2's and will have to think
on that for a few days...they are not cheap!
 
John Hinkey said:
What about monitor calibration software or using ICC profiles
Click to expand...

Don't know.

printer drivers? How well do these work in 64bit Windows?
Click to expand...

At least all the low end ones are fine now. I had just bought a MFC (low
end) just before making the move to 64bit XP, and had to wait about 5
months before I could use it. Now all is fine, they even have a new
version of the driver! Not 100% sure about the better printers, but I bet
they are fine also.


--
____________________________________________
/ David Simpson \
| City of Heroes, Basic Stamp, RPGs, War Games |
| (e-mail address removed) |
| http://www.nyx.net/~dsimpson |
\____________________________________________/
 
David Simpson said:
Don't know.



At least all the low end ones are fine now. I had just bought a MFC (low
end) just before making the move to 64bit XP, and had to wait about 5
months before I could use it. Now all is fine, they even have a new
version of the driver! Not 100% sure about the better printers, but I
bet
they are fine also.


--
____________________________________________
/ David Simpson \
| City of Heroes, Basic Stamp, RPGs, War Games |
| (e-mail address removed) |
| http://www.nyx.net/~dsimpson |
\____________________________________________/
Click to expand...
No drivers yet for my HP 1600 All-in-One printer-scanner. There is a work
around to use the printer function.
 
No drivers yet for my HP 1600 All-in-One printer-scanner. There is a
work around to use the printer function.
Click to expand...

Bummer. HP must be slow. My Brother MFC has been out for about 5 months,
and I think epson has thiers. BUT, multi functios are harder to do,
because of the scan and fax functions. Plain printers should be OK.


--
____________________________________________
/ David Simpson \
| City of Heroes, Basic Stamp, RPGs, War Games |
| (e-mail address removed) |
| http://www.nyx.net/~dsimpson |
\____________________________________________/
 
Actually the 3800X2 at around $300 these days is a bargain. They routinely
overclock to 2.5gh+, run cool and provide smooth performance. They've been
eclipsed somewhat by the Opteron 165, which has a larger (1 mb) cache and
were initally cheaper... but spotty inventories has made the prices vary
widely. I run the Suite on my 3800x2 and they all perform beautifully...
 
Dennis Gordon said:
Actually the 3800X2 at around $300 these days is a bargain. They routinely
overclock to 2.5gh+, run cool and provide smooth performance. They've been
eclipsed somewhat by the Opteron 165, which has a larger (1 mb) cache and
were initally cheaper... but spotty inventories has made the prices vary
widely. I run the Suite on my 3800x2 and they all perform beautifully...
Click to expand...


<snip>

I still did not get the parts ordered...
but it looks like the 3800X2 will be the way to go
 
Back
Top