After reading your question and a few of the other replies, my reply went off a little sideways. Following those Adobe links may enhance PS performance on your XP box to the point where you don't need to add hardware. Or if you could make a few relatively low-cost upgrades, say a second hard drive, for better performance.
The older laptop that I have with XP, single core and hard drive and 1 Mb RAM runs almost PS almost as well as my new dual-core Vista box with 3GB RAM and dual hard drives. In short, just about any new mid-level XP box with a gig or two of RAM will run PS pretty well if it's configured properly unless you using huge image files from high end cameras. I'm guessing that an $800 to $1000 XP desktop would make you very happy.
If you don't mind hitting that $1500 mark, I'd recommend going to an electronic retailer, get an HP DV97xx laptop and inexpensive external flat panel monitor for home. As a photographer, you'll appreciate the mobility that a laptop allows. I recommend the external monitor too because it allows you to move the PS tools out of the workspace to the external monitor, which is really nice when editing. If you really want to splurge, get one of the larger flat screens that flips so that you can edit portrait pictures on an appropriately oriented screens.
On the XP v. Vista issue, 1-2 GB RAM on XP or 2-3 on Vista is adequate for general PS operations at least for me. I was skeptical about Vista but it's kinda hard to avoid on non-customized configs. Nonetheless, I've found PS is works fine on either. Just a note, if you end up with Vista, the 'Home' version will see at most 3GB of ram - you can learn more about that from MS. That was another reason that I was skeptical about Vista. I've found that for what I'm doing, PS runs fine on XP and Vista. Furthermore, with the stated resources on either box, I can multi-task with a browser, mp3 tunes, etc. without having system melt downs.
Anyhow, hope this helps and good luck again.
Have you consider a worksation like HP model xw4600 or Dell Precision 490. Is about $1,400 and the monitor is free. You can upgrade and manage, the operating system, the graphics with high performance, the memory up to 32GB, the storage up to 2.5 TB !! and the processor from Intel Core 2 Duo up to Intel Quad-Core Xeon (3Ghz). Workstation are designed to analysis engineering, advanced 2D and 3D graphics and programs like Dreamweaver, Adobe, Autodesk, Avid, Pinnacle, and many more. Im not suggested a PC, because you cannot upgrade with a second processor, or second disc, etc.
weak against any sub $1000 Mac. why waste money?
Have a minimalist desktop with a good processor.
2GB of ram is enough.
2gb is enough if you're on a Mac. windows on the other hand is a memory hog. i'd go with 4gb on xp. for graphic intensive apps, please stay away from vista as its still broken and may take a year or two for microsoft to fix it...
Nonsense!!!! XP does not need nor can it take advantage of 4Gb, unless its XP 64 bit (which I would not reccommend).
Go to the Adobe forums to see the problems some are having with OSX 10.5x Leopard and CS3 apps. Many there do not reccommend it!
windows require a lot of memory. of course so will your graphics apps. windows also has a tough time releasing memory once the program is closed, its called a memory leak... and you would rather use a 32bit OS than 64?
also what does Mac have to do with this topic? OS X is a totally different OS - LOL
Windows XP is only viable in its 32 bit incarnation. XP 64 bit was an experimental version. Its only recently that XP 64 drivers have appeared in greater numbers. Of course why bother with XP 64 bit when Vista 64 bit offers the same level of power with better hardware and software compatability? Many use 32 bit Windows as that's what they have installed on their PC by the maufacturer. Vista uses memory A LOT more effeciently than XP by the way.
I mention OSX as you mentioned Vista being 'broken'. I suspect you have used Vista for all of 5 minutes to come up with that over uesed line. OSX Leopard is 'broken' according to what others are saying esp with Adobe CS3 apps. Not having personal exp, I cannot say this for sure myself, so would never actually call OSX Leopard 'broken' until I have used it.
| Forum legend: | |
| Locked thread | |
| Moderator | |
![]() |
CNET staff |
![]() |
Samsung staff |
| Norton Authorized Support team | |
| AVG staff | |
| Windows Outreach team | |
![]() |
Dell staff |
| Intel staff | |