NationStates Jolt Archive

i've been out of the PC world for some time now. once upon a time i understood all the jargon and knew where the top processors and GPUs stacked up against each other. i knew when nvidia got one up over ATI, when AMD trounced Intel, etc. these days i haven't got a fucking clue. for starters, when i knew about this stuff, clockspeed was what mattered and it was easy to compare chipsets that way. these days its not. so i need help.

what i want is a new computer, sometime soon, that will be great for 2D graphics processing. photoshop, illustrator, desktop publishing, video editing, etc. can anyone please advise me as to what's good in this area these days?

i mean, the latest and greatest video cards may do 3D amazingly well, but that's not what i want. i need 2D power. does photoshop even use the GPU? if not then i just need a whopping great CPU, surely?


any other hints or tips for getting (2D) performance for these tasks? i'm planning on getting a 10,000rpm (or perhaps 15,000rpm) HD for working with DV video.



my budget is about £1,500-£2,000 ($3000-$4000; €2000-€2700), and i'd like to get this super performance with a laptop, if at all possible.

thanks :)

Something with a big ass monitor is all that comes to mind. That or two big ass monitors.

Something with a big ass monitor is all that comes to mind. That or two big ass monitors.

i certainly do want a bigass monitor. two might be a bit much... once the viewable area is more than i can take in without moving my head, its too big :P

i certainly do want a bigass monitor. two might be a bit much... once the viewable area is more than i can take in without moving my head, its too big :P

As I understand it, the trick is to have one screen for your work area, and the other for all your tools and the like.

Photoshop and those applications eat up a lot of RAM, so getting quality RAM is also plus.

As for processors, I don't really know but Intel I've heard has got a one-up on AMD nowadays with their dual-core and quad-core processors for gaming at least. I'm not sure how it'll do with heavy multimedia editing, though.

Also, I can't give much advice on laptops, and companies don't tend to let you do all too much customizing with them either.

Photoshop and those applications eat up a lot of RAM, so getting quality RAM is also plus.

planning on getting 4gb at least. i have 2 at the mo and its just about enough. does quality really make a difference or is quantity most important?

Also, I can't give much advice on laptops, and companies don't tend to let you do all too much customizing with them either.

very true... i'd like to get a laptop (as they're useful in this business for doing presentations, taking work home, etc (plus i get to use it as a personal computer at home)) but desktops seem streets ahead in terms of power these days. for example, i got my current laptop just over a year ago. it has a T7400 processor. the highest processor spec i can find on Dell is a T7600... not much of a change in a year...

My understanding is that the gpu will be used for processing 2d graphics so more memory on the graphics card would be a good idea.

Mac - you know it's true.

My understanding is that the gpu will be used for processing 2d graphics so more memory on the graphics card would be a good idea.

I always think of the RAM on video cards as a way to lay off some of the stress on my main memory.

My understanding is that the gpu will be used for processing 2d graphics so more memory on the graphics card would be a good idea.

well i have 512 at the mo. that seems to be pretty good still, right?

Mac - you know it's true.
Truer words hath ne'er been spake.

well i have 512 at the mo. that seems to be pretty good still, right?

512 megs on a gpu is fine, especially considering the highest today is 1 gig, and that's only the highest price ones out there.

well i have 512 at the mo. that seems to be pretty good still, right?

Seems a pretty reasonable amount to me.

512 megs on a gpu is fine, especially considering the highest today is 1 gig, and that's only the highest price ones out there.

Seems a pretty reasonable amount to me.

maybe i'm just unreasonably impatient :p

computers have never, ever been fast enough for me. and the faster they get, the bigger the files become and the more complex the operations become... especially with multimedia graphics and the like :(

AFAIK the GPU is not required to be great, and even antique graphics cards suffice fully. Better have much 'normal' RAM and a fast CPU, no idea whether PS supports multithreading in all but a few commercial filters...

I have no knowledge of computers, but the school I looked at for photography said their entire school basically used Macs. So, get a Mac?

I have no knowledge of computers, but the school I looked at for photography said their entire school basically used Macs. So, get a Mac?

it's because mac brainwashes people to believe only their platform utilizes multimedia-editing applications

The only real differences between Macs and PCs these days is the UI.

Get something multi-core with a lot of ram.

Or if you're really serious about it, get an SGI graphics station :P

The only real differences between Macs and PCs these days is the UI.

Get something multi-core with a lot of ram.

Or if you're really serious about it, get an SGI graphics station :P

not to mention macs don't like people fiddling around with their hardware.

want to upgrade? buy a whole new computer!

Nah. You can upgrade pretty easily since they switched to intel.

It's just a PC in disguise these days.

so like one of those prebuilt PCs

still bad

and this is coming from someone who had to buy a dell laptop for college

the lack of customization makes my loins shudder

not to mention macs don't like people fiddling around with their hardware.

want to upgrade? buy a whole new computer!

Nah. You can upgrade pretty easily since they switched to intel.

It's just a PC in disguise these days.

so [a Mac is] like one of those prebuilt PCs

Only a lot more expensive. Looking at the specs of the stock $2500 Mac Pro (without monitor :eek:) straight off their website, I know you can get the same specs or better for $500-1000 cheaper if you go with a PC. Just no warantee.


the lack of customization makes my loins shudder

I don't know a ton about modifying them yourself (people here say yes, you can) but, they offer customization on their website. However, it is UNGODLY expensive. To take the stock two Dual-Core Xeon (yes, Xeon) processors of a Mac Pro at 2.66 and upgrade to 3.0 GHz is $800, and upgrading to the now-standard two gigs of RAM costs $300. Adding a card to allow a RAID (wtf?) will run you a grand, plus the hard drives. Extrapolating from the figures on their site, a 250Gb 7200 RPM HD costs $200. For reference, a hard drive matching their specs for a PC costs $70-80. I'm not sure why anyone takes Apple seriously.


And to get back on topic, I have to recommend my new favorite computer company, CyberPower. They build to your specs and leave it practically bare-bones (none of that worthless software that comes pre-installed, yay!), at a very respectable price. The biggest complaint about them is that their customer service isn't that great, but by and large people like the place, and they're becoming really popular. A laptop meeting your specs from them (albeit slower HD and only 2 gigs RAM) would be around $1800/£900, plus shipping. A ludicrously overpowered PC exceeding your specs would run about $2200/£1100 plus shipping, including monitor.

I have no knowledge of computers, but the school I looked at for photography said their entire school basically used Macs. So, get a Mac?

it's because mac brainwashes people to believe only their platform utilizes multimedia-editing applications

Well, all the graphic artists our office works with as well as the film-editing business where my friend works use Macs. I dunno, don't you think they would have noticed that it's all just a big brainwashing hoax by now and switched to PCs if those were better suited for what they need to do?

Mac - you know it's true.

Agree. Usually I try to stay away from the creepy iCult, but Apple's computers really are better when it comes to graphics. A photographer I know uses one, even though he has a PC for other things.

If you are really wanting a laptop, right now the best would be the top of he line MacBook Pro with the upgraded (only about $100 extra) display. But go for a PC laptop with a better display before the 15inch macbook pro.

Powerwise, the MacBook Pro can do the job. And the current chipset - unlike the original release - can do the job just as well and just as fast (or according to PC World's review even faster among those they tested) as a native Windows laptop. And for once, the power to price ratio is even fairly comprable.

Whichever laptop you decide on, you will want with a DVI port, and a graphics card that can support a high resolution external moniter. Because sooner or later the display on any laptop made today just isn't going to cut it.

If you decide to go desktop or with a less expensive laptop (and if you are sticking with 2D and not going 3D or motion, you really do not NEED top of the line power, especially if you don't mind slightly slower rendering time) I'd suggest looking at the Eizo ColorEdge CE240W (http://www.eizo.com/products/graphics/ce240w/index.asp) if you don't mind spending around half your budget on a moniter.

i certainly do want a bigass monitor. two might be a bit much... once the viewable area is more than i can take in without moving my head, its too big :P

You need 2 monitors for video editing. It's just SO much easier.

I'm very pleased with this MacPro2 I'm using at work.

I have no knowledge of computers, but the school I looked at for photography said their entire school basically used Macs. So, get a Mac?
actually this comes from going to our printers' the other day and the guy's mac displaying and working with my big InDesign file waaay quicker and smoother than my laptop did. i kinda realised that i need more 2d power (this thing is still pretty fucking good on 3d)

but i won't go mac because
a) i don't at all get on with the UI, after using them for some time at the printers', at repro houses, etc
b) i do like customising my UI, as well as my hardware (something lost with laptops...)
c) i hate Apple, the company, and ipods, iphones, and the rest. i also don't like the attitude of mac users.
d) all my software is PC based and i'm fucked if i'm going to buy it all again (would cost me thousands)
e) my office network and the rest of the office run on PCs. also i'm the tech-guy (in a somewhat informal fashion - its a small business), and i understand PCs.


so its no to a mac for sure.

the reason macs are used in repro houses, printers, photography studios, etc, is largely because once upon a time macs were pretty much built to do the job of processing 2d graphics like photoshop, etc. those companies don't switch for pretty much the reasons i gave just now (or at least a, d and e)
these days that specialisation isn't there, to my understanding. the reason this guy's mac worked better than my laptop was likely a) because it cost twice as much (not because its a mac, necessarily, but just because they can afford to, and do, buy top-notch hardware at that place), and b) because it was a desktop, which are - it seems to me - streets ahead of laptops at the moment in terms of performance.

this is why i've decided largely to ditch laptops


The only real differences between Macs and PCs these days is the UI.

Get something multi-core with a lot of ram.

Or if you're really serious about it, get an SGI graphics station :P
but if photoshop doesn't utilise the GPU(s) then SLI graphics will be a total waste of time and money.

but certainly a lot of ram = good.
big files + short deadlines = big ram and high rpm HDD (or Raid 0 striped)

not to mention macs don't like people fiddling around with their hardware.

want to upgrade? buy a whole new computer!

that's what i find with laptops. i miss being able to upgrade my PC. i used to, on average, buy some new upgrade for it once a year or therabouts. now with laptops i'm buying a whole fucking new one every year or so. its entirely due to the demands of the work i do and how much more demanding it gets. as technology gets faster what you need to do with it gets more complicated (and bigger). i was knocking around several tens of gigabytes of pictures yesterday just from one photoshoot, for example.

i don't play games on my computer at all these days. so this is why i say i don't care about 3d perfomance, just 2d graphics processing.


i realised i should have said my current specs are
Intel Core 2 Duo T7400 (2.16ghz)
512mb GeForce Go 7900 GTX with DVI out
2gb RAM
120gb 7,200rpm HD
17" 1920x1200 screen.... i intend to keep this resolution with whatever monitor i get

thanks for all the replies, people :)

i've been out of the PC world for some time now. once upon a time i understood all the jargon and knew where the top processors and GPUs stacked up against each other. i knew when nvidia got one up over ATI, when AMD trounced Intel, etc. these days i haven't got a fucking clue. for starters, when i knew about this stuff, clockspeed was what mattered and it was easy to compare chipsets that way. these days its not. so i need help.

what i want is a new computer, sometime soon, that will be great for 2D graphics processing. photoshop, illustrator, desktop publishing, video editing, etc. can anyone please advise me as to what's good in this area these days?

i mean, the latest and greatest video cards may do 3D amazingly well, but that's not what i want. i need 2D power. does photoshop even use the GPU? if not then i just need a whopping great CPU, surely?


any other hints or tips for getting (2D) performance for these tasks? i'm planning on getting a 10,000rpm (or perhaps 15,000rpm) HD for working with DV video.



my budget is about £1,500-£2,000 ($3000-$4000; €2000-€2700), and i'd like to get this super performance with a laptop, if at all possible.

thanks :)
A laptop will really limit you. Nobody ships laptops with HDDs running at 10,000 RPM. 5,000 is still the norm, and you pay extra for 7,500. Get a desktop.

The key to Photoshop and the like is RAM. You need both quantity and quality. Get 4GiB or more, and Vista/XP 64bit. DDR3 is out. Intel's Penryn chipset (released 4 days ago) supports it, as do Intel's P35 based motherboards. The unfortunate part is, this will all cost you a pretty penny. It is quite a bit faster than the older DDR2, and uses less power.

As for the Proc, it is going to be doing allot of work--get a good one. A Penryn for sure, and just buy the best one you can budget. The best bang for the buck tends to be the most expensive non-Extreme Edition. For the sake of pure confusion, they decided to call Penryn Core 2 Duo, too. A Penryn is 45nm tech, while the older models are 60nm.
BTW, Intel has always been better for Photoshopping than AMD.

As for the GPU, how often do you play games? 2D graphics tend not to be optimized very well on modern cards. Hell, they may not even be accelerated (meaning the graphics card offloads it to your CPU). On Vista, it might make some difference, as PS will now be a texture that gets mapped to a 3D object, but it shouldn't require something amazing. I'd probably say a Nvidia 8600, or ATI HD 2600. The Nvidia will probably have much better drivers, while the ATI will be cheaper.

Motherboard, I cannot recommend you anything specific, but ASUS and P35 based.

For HDDs: I do not know how to setup 15,000RPM disks. They require a special controller card or something as they would easily max out a SATA cable. Get more than one, and RAID it.

Also, bigger monitors are a definite plus. Two is handy for some apps, but not all. Does photoshop allow you to have floating toolbars like the Gimp does?

Advising Core 2 Quad Q6600 on this, a very good processor at a very good price but it's at the 1066 FSB only. If you're getting DDR2 RAM and an E6x50 processor, get DDR2-667 so the FSB and RAM are synced.

For GPU, you may probably stick with the onboard GMA X3100 or X3500 on the Bearlake motherboard; it already has HT&L so rendering an image as a texture to a quad will be quick 'n' easy.

XP supports only up to 4GB of RAM. That's all I have to say. :D

actually this comes from going to our printers' the other day and the guy's mac displaying and working with my big InDesign file waaay quicker and smoother than my laptop did. i kinda realised that i need more 2d power (this thing is still pretty fucking good on 3d)

but i won't go mac because
a) i don't at all get on with the UI, after using them for some time at the printers', at repro houses, etc
b) i do like customising my UI, as well as my hardware (something lost with laptops...)
c) i hate Apple, the company, and ipods, iphones, and the rest. i also don't like the attitude of mac users.
d) all my software is PC based and i'm fucked if i'm going to buy it all again (would cost me thousands)
e) my office network and the rest of the office run on PCs. also i'm the tech-guy (in a somewhat informal fashion - its a small business), and i understand PCs.


so its no to a mac for sure.

the reason macs are used in repro houses, printers, photography studios, etc, is largely because once upon a time macs were pretty much built to do the job of processing 2d graphics like photoshop, etc. those companies don't switch for pretty much the reasons i gave just now (or at least a, d and e)
these days that specialisation isn't there, to my understanding. the reason this guy's mac worked better than my laptop was likely a) because it cost twice as much (not because its a mac, necessarily, but just because they can afford to, and do, buy top-notch hardware at that place), and b) because it was a desktop, which are - it seems to me - streets ahead of laptops at the moment in terms of performance. Mac basically abandoned much of their Graphics root when they switch to Intel chips. The PowerPC was the only reason the had an edge over a PC, and that edge is gone. There was a reason that the PowerMac used PowerPC chips for 6 months after the rest of their line was Intel based.

but if photoshop doesn't utilise the GPU(s) then SLI graphics will be a total waste of time and money.SGI != SLI

SGI make high end Linux workstations. They are hella expensive, but are much faster than a PC.

but certainly a lot of ram = good.
big files + short deadlines = big ram and high rpm HDD (or Raid 0 striped)
Both. RAID a high rpm disk. Also, higher capacity disks are faster.



Also, if you intend on using this as a work computer, you might want to check ATI and Nvidia's professional lineup. That would be the FireGL for ATI and Quattro for Nvidia. ATI also has the FireMV, which is designed for 2D graphics across multiple displays (it has piss poor 3D, but that is not the point).

I go to RISD, and almost all computers here are macs.

this is what i'm thinking of getting now, after rejecting Dell and passing Alienware. this is from www.pcspecialist.co.uk

the price is pretty good at £1266 inc VAT and Delivery ($2,592; €1,769)

Processor (CPU)
Intel® Core™2 Quad Q6600 (4 X 2.40GHz) 1066MHz FSB/8MB L2 Cache

Memory (RAM)
4GB CORSAIR DOMINATOR DDR2 1066MHz - LIFETIME WARRANTY

Motherboard
ASUS® P5K PREMIUM/WiFi: DUAL DDR2, SATA II,2 x x16 VGA, 3 x PCI

Operating System
64 BIT WINDOWS® VISTA Ultimate (inc CD & License) (£119)

USB Options
8 x USB 2.0 PORTS (6 REAR + 2 FRONT) AS STANDARD

Memory - 1st Hard Disk
160GB SERIAL ATA II HARD DRIVE WITH 8MB CACHE (7200rpm)

2nd Hard Disk
160GB SERIAL ATA II HARD DRIVE WITH 8MB CACHE (7200rpm)

3rd Hard Disk
36GB WD Raptor® SATA 16MB CACHE (10000rpm)

RAID (HDD 1 & 2)
RAID 0 (STRIPE)

1st CD/DVD Drive
20x Dual Layer LightScribe DVD Writer ±R/±RW/RAM

2nd CD/DVD Drive
NONE

Graphics Card
512MB GEFORCE 8600GTS PCI Express + D-SUB +DVI + HDMI

2nd Graphics Card
NONE

Sound Card
Sound Blaster® X-Fi™ Xtreme Audio 7.1: £28

Modem
NONE, I WILL BE USING BROADBAND

Network Facilities
INTEGRATED DUAL GIGABIT LAN (P5K WS)

Floppy Disk Drive
NONE

Memory Card Reader
INTERNAL 52 IN 1 CARD READER (READS XD, MS, CF, SD, etc)

Case
Stylish Silver Aluminium Trigon Case + 2 Front/Side USB

Power Supply & Case Cooling
700W Quiet Quad Rail PSU + 120mm Case Fan (£79)

Processor Cooling
ASUS SILENT KNIGHT II PURE COPPER ULTRA COOLER (£36)

Firewire & Video Editing
2 x IEEE 1394a FIREWIRE ONBOARD (1 in back + 1 on board)

TV Card
DIGITAL TV CARD (Dual Tuner!) (Watch/Record Freeview on PC) £28

Monitor
NONE

2nd Monitor
NONE

DVI Cable
2 Metre DVI Cable (£5)

Keyboard & Mouse
NONE

Mouse
NONE

Speakers
NONE

Printer
NONE

Surge Protection
NONE

Webcam & VoIP
NONE

Media Center Kit
Microsoft Remote Control and Receiver for Media Center PC (£19)

Anti-Virus
NONE

Office Software
NONE

Warranty
1 Year Return-to-Base incl 1st Month Free Collect & Return

Delivery
Standard Insured Delivery to UK Mainland (Mon-Fri 8am-6pm) (Free)

Quantity
1

the idea is i have two RAID 0 striped 160Gb 7,200rpm HDDs for Windows and for files, and the 3rd 36Gb 10,000 for Photoshop's scratch disk/swap file, and files i'm working on, especially DV video.

the ram seems pretty good as well. not just 4gb but low latency but high bandwidth.

decent quad-core processor

good graphics card with DVI and HDMI

and dual gigabit lan so i get a double connection to our server.

vista 64 bit of course to make the most of the RAM




any thoughts? :)

monitor will have to be on top of that, though... which adds a couple of hundered quid at least :-S
the other problem, of course, is RAID 0 somewhat increases risks of data loss. so i'll just have to be careful to use the office server more :P

this is what i'm thinking of getting now, after rejecting Dell and passing Alienware. this is from www.pcspecialist.co.uk

the price is pretty good at £1266 inc VAT and Delivery ($2,592; €1,769)

Processor (CPU)
Intel® Core™2 Quad Q6600 (4 X 2.40GHz) 1066MHz FSB/8MB L2 Cache

Memory (RAM)
4GB CORSAIR DOMINATOR DDR2 1066MHz - LIFETIME WARRANTY

Motherboard
ASUS® P5K PREMIUM/WiFi: DUAL DDR2, SATA II,2 x x16 VGA, 3 x PCI

Operating System
64 BIT WINDOWS® VISTA Ultimate (inc CD & License) (£119)

USB Options
8 x USB 2.0 PORTS (6 REAR + 2 FRONT) AS STANDARD

Memory - 1st Hard Disk
160GB SERIAL ATA II HARD DRIVE WITH 8MB CACHE (7200rpm)

2nd Hard Disk
160GB SERIAL ATA II HARD DRIVE WITH 8MB CACHE (7200rpm)

3rd Hard Disk
36GB WD Raptor® SATA 16MB CACHE (10000rpm)

RAID (HDD 1 & 2)
RAID 0 (STRIPE)

1st CD/DVD Drive
20x Dual Layer LightScribe DVD Writer ±R/±RW/RAM

2nd CD/DVD Drive
NONE

Graphics Card
512MB GEFORCE 8600GTS PCI Express + D-SUB +DVI + HDMI

2nd Graphics Card
NONE

Sound Card
Sound Blaster® X-Fi™ Xtreme Audio 7.1: £28

Modem
NONE, I WILL BE USING BROADBAND

Network Facilities
INTEGRATED DUAL GIGABIT LAN (P5K WS)

Floppy Disk Drive
NONE

Memory Card Reader
INTERNAL 52 IN 1 CARD READER (READS XD, MS, CF, SD, etc)

Case
Stylish Silver Aluminium Trigon Case + 2 Front/Side USB

Power Supply & Case Cooling
700W Quiet Quad Rail PSU + 120mm Case Fan (£79)

Processor Cooling
ASUS SILENT KNIGHT II PURE COPPER ULTRA COOLER (£36)

Firewire & Video Editing
2 x IEEE 1394a FIREWIRE ONBOARD (1 in back + 1 on board)

TV Card
DIGITAL TV CARD (Dual Tuner!) (Watch/Record Freeview on PC) £28

Monitor
NONE

2nd Monitor
NONE

DVI Cable
2 Metre DVI Cable (£5)

Keyboard & Mouse
NONE

Mouse
NONE

Speakers
NONE

Printer
NONE

Surge Protection
NONE

Webcam & VoIP
NONE

Media Center Kit
Microsoft Remote Control and Receiver for Media Center PC (£19)

Anti-Virus
NONE

Office Software
NONE

Warranty
1 Year Return-to-Base incl 1st Month Free Collect & Return

Delivery
Standard Insured Delivery to UK Mainland (Mon-Fri 8am-6pm) (Free)

Quantity
1

the idea is i have two RAID 0 striped 160Gb 7,200rpm HDDs for Windows and for files, and the 3rd 36Gb 10,000 for Photoshop's scratch disk/swap file, and files i'm working on, especially DV video.

the ram seems pretty good as well. not just 4gb but low latency but high bandwidth.

decent quad-core processor

good graphics card with DVI and HDMI

and dual gigabit lan so i get a double connection to our server.

vista 64 bit of course to make the most of the RAM




any thoughts? :)

monitor will have to be on top of that, though... which adds a couple of hundered quid at least :-S
the other problem, of course, is RAID 0 somewhat increases risks of data loss. so i'll just have to be careful to use the office server more :PSeems like a suitable machine. Does it tell you how the RAM is split up? 2GiB sticks, or 1GiB sticks. RAID0 is fine once you get past the initial part of the bathtub curb, and don't experience many power losses.

Seems like a suitable machine. Does it tell you how the RAM is split up? 2GiB sticks, or 1GiB sticks. RAID0 is fine once you get past the initial part of the bathtub curb, and don't experience many power losses.

the RAM issue is one of the things that put me off Alienware (who were my previous favourite). a number of reviews said their use of 4x 1Gb sticks made the perfomance suffer quite badly.

this one says on the motherboard selection "Dual DDR2", which suggests to me that the mobo only takes two sticks anyway. meaning the RAM will likely be 2x 2Gb.... http://uk.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=534&l4=0&model=1729&modelmenu=1


what is this "bathtub curb"? :confused:
my only experience with RAID to date is RAID 5 on our office servers (which i still don't understand how it can work tbh :p)

Two important considerations: Are you selling your current computer (which frankly is still an EXCELLENT machine!) or keeping it? It's an important consideration.

Also, is this computer going to be for the sole purpose of photoshopping, or are you likely to use it for other things, like the occasional game? If the latter, step up the graphics card, you won't regret it.

BTW, you linked the wrong motherboard in your post :p, there's a P5K Premium and P5K3 Premium. (you linked the latter). The difference between the two is that the latter is a DDR3 board and the former a DDR2 board. DDR2 is still the way to go at this point as the DDR3 is still rather expensive for minimal benefit at this point, as latencies are still quite high.

(the actual board you would get is here (http://uk.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=534&l4=0&model=1749&modelmenu=1))

There are definitely four memory slots on that motherboard though. The memory slots, if you don't know are the two pairs of yellow and black slots near the bottom of the preview image.

Also, make sure you get a good brand PSU. It sucks when they fail, as they can take the whole computer with them. Good brands are more stable, and tend to last a fair bit longer.

As far as RAID, RAID 0 is faster, but if something goes wrong, you're ****ed. It's usually not a problem though, and hard drives are cheap anyway, so as long as you back up your data you shouldn't have a problem.

Why only 36Gb Raptors and not the bigger 74Gb ones?

Mac - you know it's true.
Only to an extent, they aren't as customisable as a windows or linux machine (unless you make a hackintosh, but that is of course illegal)
Stick with the OS you like, I only ever do image/video editing on Ubuntu Studio, but only because it works better for me.
the PC you decided to use seems pretty good to me

500 gig SATA II hard drives are actually pretty cheap too

Mac - you know it's true.
I hate Macs but for what you want the comp for he's right

You sound like you know a bit about computers, so I'd suggest building one.
For the type of machine you want, you'd need around 1TB of memory, 4-6GB of RAM, and a 64-bit motherboard. Use 64-bit XP professional as your OP. The parts I'd suggest you use are listed below;

motherboard (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128044)

processor: (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115030)

RAM (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231122)

Hard Drive (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148278)

Case (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147069)

DVD/CD drive (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827135151)

montor (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001240)

Video card (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150249)

OP (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116378)

should run you around $1,200+tax and shipping. (not sure how much that would be in pounds)

the RAM issue is one of the things that put me off Alienware (who were my previous favourite). a number of reviews said their use of 4x 1Gb sticks made the perfomance suffer quite badly.

this one says on the motherboard selection "Dual DDR2", which suggests to me that the mobo only takes two sticks anyway. meaning the RAM will likely be 2x 2Gb.... http://uk.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=534&l4=0&model=1729&modelmenu=1


what is this "bathtub curb"? :confused:
my only experience with RAID to date is RAID 5 on our office servers (which i still don't understand how it can work tbh :p)
Errr, I meant bathtub curve. For whatever reason, I always spell it curb. For that matter, I always try to spell bathtube.

Basically, the bathtub curve is a curve that represents the probability of a device breaking down over time. Typically, there is a very high failure rate in the short term, which decreases quickly and stays flat for a long period of time, where it finally curves back up. It got the name from generally resembling an old style bathtub. Wikipedia has a decent picture. It could look more bathtuby, but it explains the shape quite well.

RAID0 increases the odds of you losing your data because it would only take a single drive failure to lose anything. Other RAIDs store the same data in multiple places as in order to decrease the likelihood of losing any data, however they do use more disk space to store the same amount of data.

As for the RAM, your motherboard will take 4 pieces, provided you actually buy the DDR2 version that SimNewtonia linked. Dual DDR2 means that if you set two of the same size/brand/chipset/etc RAM (most 2x2GiB are identical enough to do this) in the same colored slot, the system will receive a performance boost.