Which video card(s) for CS 3 or 4?

Discussion in 'Photoshop' started by Father Kodak, Jan 7, 2009.

  1. Father Kodak

    Father Kodak Guest

    How would you answer these questions:

    In general, which video card maker, AMD/ATI or nVidia, has "better"
    performance for CS 3 or 4? "Better" is a combination of stability and
    performance?

    If you were buying or building a new system today and Photoshop usage
    was a key factor, what would you look for in a video card? How much
    memory, what speed GPU, etc.

    Thanks

    Father Kodak
     
    Father Kodak, Jan 7, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Father Kodak

    Rob Guest


    This may help and explain more. These have been tested by Adobe as being
    compatible with CS4. Plus as they say you need the latest drivers to go
    with the card, don't just rely on the cd that comes with the card.

    http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=kb405711&sliceId=1
     
    Rob, Jan 8, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. For CS3 it doesn't matter that much. CS3 make no use of most the the
    power of the video card. For CS4 the juries is still out.
    But more people seem to be reporting problems with nVidia than any other
    maker. But that may be because more people are using nVidia than the
    others makers. It does seem that the nVidia "helper" or control program
    causes more problems than it should. The conventional wisdom is to
    delete it or never install it. It is NOT need to run the card Windows
    controls do all that is needed. All you need is the driver.

    John Passaneau
     
    John Passaneau, Jan 8, 2009
    #3
  4. Father Kodak

    Frank Arthur Guest

    Adobe lists the tested Video Cards for use with Photoshop CS4
     
    Frank Arthur, Jan 8, 2009
    #4
  5. Father Kodak

    D Lirious Guest

    Unless you have a massive (i.e. 30inches or larger) hi resolution panel even
    a motherboard based graphics chip will work fine with Photoshop.
    All modern computer video systems, meaning nearly anything made in about the
    last ten years, have enough available ram to drive all but the largest and
    highest resolution video systems.
    The GUI based functions in CS4 are currently a demonstration project only
    and seem irrelevant in actual usage.
    Unless you are are an ardent computer gamer the most basic, old video card
    will work as well as a tri-SLI configuration for Photoshop.
    I have an ATI 4870, a wonderful gaming card. But for Photoshop, with my 20
    inch LCD panel, that card is using no more resources than any other video
    system that would be a fraction of the price. And wasting electricity.
    If Photoshop did not run on wimpy video systems no one would be able to run
    Photoshop on the latest Mac desktops which are saddled with obsolete video
    systems at ultra premium prices.
     
    D Lirious, Jan 8, 2009
    #5
  6. Father Kodak

    RDOC Guest

    Yes I would like to know more about the system you built since I am
    about to build a new system and I am using CS4. Thanks
     
    RDOC, Jan 9, 2009
    #6
  7. Father Kodak

    RDOC Guest

    Please if you it would be a great help to me. Thanks
     
    RDOC, Jan 10, 2009
    #7
  8. Father Kodak

    RDOC Guest

    JD I thank you for an excellent and prompt reply to my question and it
    will be a big help. I would say you did a very nice job and came up
    with a very good workable system. Thanks again.
     
    RDOC, Jan 10, 2009
    #8
  9. Father Kodak

    Father Kodak Guest

    Sorry for the late reply.

    I'm starting to do my planning for my next system.

    My next system will be 64-bit because that is clearly the future of
    desktop computing and my systems have to last me 3-4 years minimum,
    before I replace them. My current system runs Win XP but it's quite
    clear from the lack of driver support that Windows XP 64 bit is NOT
    the way to go. So then I have to decide which of the many flavors of
    Vista-64 (separate issue ...)

    understood. Also the overall 4 GB limit of 32-bit systems.
    Father Kodak
     
    Father Kodak, Jan 13, 2009
    #9
  10. Father Kodak

    RDOC Guest

    Now I am more confused than I was before your answer. Ok let me say
    this, I want to build a system for $1500 to $2000 and I want to be
    able to use my old software and peripherals with no monster problems.
    Right now I am using 32 bit Windows XP which I could start the new
    system on and than switch over to Windows 7 on the new system after it
    finally comes out since I hear that those trying it aren't having
    driver problems. Maybe you could suggest a motherboard and cpu and a
    video card that I could use that would fit what I am looking for. Also
    any other specific suggestions would be greatly appreciated since I am
    lost at this point. I want the system to be good for Photoshop,
    multitasking and spreadsheet work. Thanks and your help is appreciated.
     
    RDOC, Jan 13, 2009
    #10
  11. Father Kodak

    Father Kodak Guest

    Good point.
    Can you post the specific URL. There are tons of websites that come
    up in a Google search.


    Actually, if you try hard enough, you can buy video cards that were
    released 2-3 or more years ago. I needed one such card recently for
    an old system and found several choices on newegg, which is my go-to
    store for computer gear.

    Argues for a big case.

    Actually I can. But it's still amazing/dismaying.

    Amen, brother. I once spent years struggling with a system that was
    unstable because of a supposedly high-end Matrox card. Pfui!

    That is a great argument for getting a good video card, despite some
    people's claims that CS 4 is rough around the edges. If it is, I
    wouldn't be surprised. Anything this major, with all the different
    apps being released simultaneously, is bound to have some issues.
    So if the video memory is available, CS 4 will take advantage of that?

    Does it make sense to run two video cards in SLI for Photoshop? I'm
    not a gamer.
    I have this love/hate thing with MS. Love because an entire computing
    ecosystem is built around windows and it mostly/sort of work. Hate,
    because Windows is such a poor excuse for an OS. And I'm not ready to
    buy the Linux on the desktop arguments. Not until Outlook runs on
    Linux.

    True enough. In two-three years, we'll be hearing about 8 and 16 core
    CPUs. All that depends on MS and others "cracking the nut" about
    multi-threading. In that aspect, Solaris scales far better than any
    other OS, Linux included. But who would use Solaris on any desktop
    system in 2009?
    Yeah. That's why I want to seek out real-live examples of
    successfully built systems, including all the hardware, the major
    software, etc.
    If you buy components that are Vista-ready, and you check in advance
    for driver support, you probably won't be disappointed. Just don't
    expect that you could run Windows XP or Linux on that system.
    Again, amen brother.
    I get all the frustration I need from other vendors. # 1 on my list:
    Intuit with Quicken. They would have to do a major, major improvement
    just to get their support up to "it sucks badly" level.
    I guess is also comes down to price, at some point.
    Agree. See my comments above, which I wrote even before reading this
    paragraph.
    Never. Ever time there is a major OS upgrade, there is an
    accompanying die-off of peripherals. Printers, scanners, video cards,
    etc. Most manufacturers (ASUS being one notable exception) do not do
    BIOS and driver upgrades for products that are several years old. Or
    maybe the vendor is no longer in that business, or completely out of
    business.
    I will be surprised if MS even markets a 32-bit version of Windows 7,
    even though they have a 32-bit version available for beta download. By
    2011, PC manufacturers will be building only 64-bit systems, and will
    want to load them up with more than 4 GB so that they can run the
    latest software with reasonable performance. Not many people have
    been upgrading their existing systems from XP to Vista, and by 2011,
    people may simply buy new systems rather than upgrade 5 years old PCs.
    I don't know how you get to $10K, unless you're spending thousands on
    just the monitor(s).
    Or, wait six months and prices will come down.

    Father Kodak
     
    Father Kodak, Jan 13, 2009
    #11
  12. Father Kodak

    RDOC Guest

    Now I am more confused than I was before your answer. Ok let me say
    this, I want to build a system for $1500 to $2000 and I want to be
    able to use my old software and peripherals with no monster problems.
    Right now I am using 32 bit Windows XP which I could start the new
    system on and than switch over to Windows 7 on the new system after it
    finally comes out since I hear that those trying it aren't having
    driver problems. Maybe you could suggest a motherboard and cpu and a
    video card that I could use that would fit what I am looking for. Also
    any other specific suggestions would be greatly appreciated since I am
    lost at this point. I want the system to be good for Photoshop,
    multitasking and spreadsheet work. Thanks and your help is appreciated.
     
    RDOC, Jan 14, 2009
    #12
  13. Father Kodak

    Joel Guest

    It depends on what type of $$$$ you are talking about, if you are talking
    about US$ then with $1500-2000 you should be able to build several handsome
    systems.

    And like few others have mentioned quite afew different information, and
    all you need to do is combine them together then you should have one heck of
    complete answer to not confuse yourself. I can't go by order or detail, but
    general of others have mentioned.

    - WinXP 32-bit has limited to 3GB memory

    - 64-bit supports more than 4+GB (could be up to 8GB or even 16GB which I
    don't have to confirm it).

    - CS4 can benefit from 64-bit OS and Faster graphic card.

    - All Photoshop can benefit from extra memory. Or Photoshop may and may not
    benefit from memory beyond 3GB, but I think the OS does, and if the OS can
    benefit from 3+GB then it should share some to Photoshop (?).

    Now, if you upgrading the *whole* system then it's a different story, or
    your $2000 should be enough for around 2-3 handsome systems. If you just
    upgrading your old then $2000 may be able to cover up to around 4-5 systems
    (or more?). Also, I don't own any fancy graphic card, but I think the
    graphic card may be the most expensive part (unless you gonna buy a good
    22-24" LCD monitor).
     
    Joel, Jan 14, 2009
    #13
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.