Memory size has the largest single affect on processing speed.
To hit the the real comfort zone you need approx:
3 x scan size (16bit 2900dpi 35mm is 60Mb) for PS (and most other image
software) = 180MB
64Mb for PS itself
64Mb for Win 9x/ME 128 for 2000/XP
scan size + 20Mb for disk cache = 80MB
So that's 180+80+64+64=388MB win9x/me or 452Mb 2000/XP. So 512MB would be
adequate. The numbers are frightning for 4000dpi 6x9 scans.
More will help particularly upto 2x make small improvements.
Less will start to impact on performance 256MB would only be usable with
30MB scans.
XP would be the preferred operating system but you will need to confirm that
everything you buy is XP compatible. If you get Win9x/Me (98SE is the best
of these) and more than 512MB then you will need to set a value lower than
512000 for MAXFILECACHE in the vcache section of WIN.INI.
Obviously faster memory is better hence rambus/ddr preferred, PC133 is ok
but not with PIV. Price/performance wise DDR with Athlon is probably best.
In memory bandwidth tests DDR is much faster than PC133 but in most tests
with real programs most of the advantage is lost (due to PC133 benefitting
more from caching) and only around 5% is generally seen.
For memory type and processor choice see:
Clearly faster CPU's are better but only proportional to 70% of clock speed.
So a 2Ghz PIV is not 33% faster than 1.5GHz but around 20-25% faster.
Remember you have to pay a hell of a lot for the fastest - particularly
PIV - for not much extra gain over 5-10% slower CPU. It's better to spend
the money elsewhere.
I would say disk speed is next important to memory size. SCSI best but very
expensive,
followed by IDE RAID, but with a large cache a decent sized 7200rpm disk
would be adequate - particularly for files 60Mb or less.
No matter how big your hard drive you will need somewhere to archive scans
CD-Writers are cheapest and most universally compatible. DVD's hold more.
The bigger the monitor the more of a scan you will be able to see. If you
have the space but can't afford a 25/21" monitor you can often pick these up
very cheap second hand as no one wants them (obviously buy with care). For
smaller sizes only consider new as you get a 3-year warranty and there isn't
much of a saving second hand.
You need a graphics card appropriate for your monitor (resolution and
refresh). Matrox are generally well liked for this sort of work, I prefer
the Nvidia Geforce range as they are great for games and not much worse for
2d work. You may wish to consider a dual monitor graphics card allowing you
to display the picture full screen on the large monitor and use a smaller
monitor for the tool pallettes and perhaps another background process. This
is possible with some matrox cards and I believe also with some Geforce 2MX
cards.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave King" <kingphoto@mindspring.com>
To: <steve@gccl.fsbusiness.co.uk>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 6:00 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Building PCs ... the RAM.
Please keep this topic on list! It's of very high relevance IMHO, and those
who say not can just skip this thread. Fair enough?
Thanks,
Dave King
----- Original Message -----
From: Ezio c/o TIN <ezio.lucenti1@tin.it>
To: <kingphoto@mindspring.com>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 11:35 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Building PCs ... the RAM.
Please, some good soul can explain to me ... why I should buy expensive DDR
RAM in huge quantity (mass RAM is going to be 512MB or 1GB ... on my system
very soon) ... when the bandwidth of MEMORY BUS is always the same e.g. on
Asus A7V266 = 2.1GB/s ???
This bandwidth is not saturated by any type of currently available memory
and I strongly doubt the system is going to use all of it ... so why to pay
the difference ?
Just a matter of having a learning attitude .... :o) ...
P.S.: please send answers OFF LIST ... not to bother the colleagues /
friends.
Sincerely.
Ezio
www.lucenti.com e-photography site
ICQ: 139507382
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
