FWIW, I'd knock ~$100 off the CPU and buy another SSD for use as a Work In Progress drive.
When you get back from a shoot, copy the RAWs onto it. Do all the PS/LS/Gimp/* stuff. When you're more of less done processing that batch, copy them onto the HD. IMO, unless you're doing _lots_ of heavy-duty PP, this will do more for system 'snappiness' than a marginally faster CPU.
p.4 #2 · Computer Build for Photo Editing - Need Recommendations
hugodrax wrote:
Actually On my Mac Mini (2012 model i7 fusion drive model) with the HD4000 I can edit 1080p realtime, even realtime scrubbing and effects using final cut pro and this is with a large number of apps and windows open (even aperture).
It could be because OS X is more efficient and on windows machines you need a monster videocard to do what an HD4000 can do in OS X.
My Windows machines can make me breakfast in the morning and do my laundry on the weekends . My Solaris machines can change the motor oil in my car. Can OSX do that?
Seriously, with all the information available at our fingertips today, there is no excuse for spreading misinformation on this scale. None at all.
p.4 #3 · Computer Build for Photo Editing - Need Recommendations
I'm not sure that OSX is not slower than Win 7 - it has a lot of eye candy, and Win 7 is actually a pretty decent operating system.
The reason for the video editing performance is that HD4000 is heavily optimised for doing video editing, as long as the software is compiled to use the Quicksync extensions. OSX and FCP support the extensions, thus speeding things up. I believe several applications are also available for Windows that use Quicksync.
I think we should probably lay off the Apple-PC conflict here. There are good reasons to choose either ecosystem, which is why both are very successful. It would be nice if we could all accept that truth and move on.
p.4 #4 · Computer Build for Photo Editing - Need Recommendations
aubsxc wrote:
Another thought: if you think you will want to overclock your processor, I would take a hard look at the SandyBridge (SB) i5 2500K and i7 2600K also. The IvyBridge processors (3570k and 3770k) are slightly faster at the same clockspeed and use slightly less energy, but get very hot when overclocked because Intel messed up the die-to-heatspreader connection on these processors..
The last i checked the slightly faster performance of the Ivy Bridge CPUs compensated for the lower max clockspeed, so that a maxed out Sandy Bridge was around the same performance as a maxed out Ivy Bridge, despite a couple of hundred Mhz higher clockspeed. In any case, this only affects those trying to eek out the very last drop from their CPU. For those of us content with a "lazy" overclock to 4.2 - 4.3Ghz it makes no difference.
p.4 #5 · Computer Build for Photo Editing - Need Recommendations
I used a Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H so I could easily build a Hackintosh, I dual Windows 7 and OSX 10.8.2 that out runs Mac Pros. Boot the OS that fits my mood Why choose when you can have both.
p.4 #8 · Computer Build for Photo Editing - Need Recommendations
hugodrax wrote:
Actually On my Mac Mini (2012 model i7 fusion drive model) with the HD4000 I can edit 1080p realtime, even realtime scrubbing and effects using final cut pro and this is with a large number of apps and windows open (even aperture).
It could be because OS X is more efficient and on windows machines you need a monster videocard to do what an HD4000 can do in OS X.
HD4000 and i7 gives a video encoding boost on any platform. This is not a mac specific thing and is not true at all.
p.4 #9 · Computer Build for Photo Editing - Need Recommendations
15Bit wrote:
I'm not sure that OSX is not slower than Win 7 - it has a lot of eye candy, and Win 7 is actually a pretty decent operating system.
The reason for the video editing performance is that HD4000 is heavily optimised for doing video editing, as long as the software is compiled to use the Quicksync extensions. OSX and FCP support the extensions, thus speeding things up. I believe several applications are also available for Windows that use Quicksync.
I think we should probably lay off the Apple-PC conflict here. There are good reasons to choose either ecosystem, which is why both are very successful. It would be nice if we could all accept that truth and move on. ...Show more →
In my opinion OSX is more 'fluid' in its use. I use both platforms extensively (and on the same machine). I have as many annoyances and frustrations with both. However I still get those random pauses while windows is doing something and I don't get them with MacOs. However the gap has closed significantly since Windows 7, I also feel that PS is snappier under win. I have yet to try win8 in anger. I have seen no significant difference with LR on either platform.
To be honest I have been immersed in MacOS now for about 5 years and cant be arsed to change and that is about the biggest reason. This whole idea that PC's are better than mac's really is BS now, they are getting so close together.
I used to be hardcore PC, now I don't really care.
p.4 #11 · Computer Build for Photo Editing - Need Recommendations
WAYCOOL wrote:
I used a Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H so I could easily build a Hackintosh, I dual Windows 7 and OSX 10.8.2 that out runs Mac Pros. Boot the OS that fits my mood Why choose when you can have both.
Exactly but I'd opt for the new Gigabit thunderbolt board
p.4 #12 · Computer Build for Photo Editing - Need Recommendations
Greg Campbell wrote:
FWIW, I'd knock ~$100 off the CPU and buy another SSD for use as a Work In Progress drive.
When you get back from a shoot, copy the RAWs onto it. Do all the PS/LS/Gimp/* stuff. When you're more of less done processing that batch, copy them onto the HD. IMO, unless you're doing _lots_ of heavy-duty PP, this will do more for system 'snappiness' than a marginally faster CPU.
p.4 #14 · Computer Build for Photo Editing - Need Recommendations
I spend more than 40 hours a week editing photos in the Mac OS X environment. In an attempt to find every way possible to speed up the process, I ended up building my own computer with the following hardware:
Motherboard: GA-Z77X-UP5-TH
Processor: i7-3770K Quad-Core 3.5 GHz 6 MB Cache
RAM: 32 GB Memory (4x8GB) DDR3 1600MHz
Power Supply: Corsair 850 Watt HX850
Box: Corsair 500R
Video: EVGA GeForce GTX 680
Mac OS X Mountain Lion
I own many Macs including an 8 core Mac Pro but this one is far faster than any of them. And it's been rock-solid stable for months.
This process is not for the feint of heart and technically installing your purchased copy of OS X Mountain Lion on anything other than Macintosh hardware is a license violation. But I and many other professionals are doing this until Apple comes out with faster professional machines.
And you can build a really fast Hackintosh within your budget.
p.4 #15 · Computer Build for Photo Editing - Need Recommendations
Yup that's the build off tony's page correct ? I have it coming....I also ordered a cooler master hyper 212...did you upgrade cooling ? any issues if not ?
ps..your link is broken but i had included it in my post above
p.4 #17 · Computer Build for Photo Editing - Need Recommendations
...installing your purchased copy of OS X Mountain Lion on anything other than Macintosh hardware is a license violation. But I and many other professionals are doing this...
I'd be interested in knowing whether using software in violation of the license has potential legal implications for a business owner (you mention you're a "professional", so I assume you're running a business).
