Mac Or PC

[Dennis_Vied]

Ira, before you toss everything, try reducing the amount of RAM that you have allocated in Photoshop. I know it sounds counter-intuitive, but it happened to me. I was getting that same error, and I was advised that I had too much RAM allocated in Photoshop. I reduced it, and it solved the problem.

As to the rest of it, yes, we all need more RAM. What's that old saying? Something about you can't be too rich or too thin, or have too much RAM?

[AndrewRodney]

Here's what Scott Byer of Adobe has to say about this (http://blogs.adobe.com/scottbyer/200...itswhen.html):

A 32 bit pointer means that an application can address 2 ^ 32 bytes of memory, or 4GB, at the most. The operating system an application runs on slices that application address space up, so that the application can actually only allocate a part of that address space for itself. Thus, on Windows XP, an application can use 2GB of address space, on Macintosh OS X 10.4, an application gets 3GB, on Windows XP 64-bit edition, a 32-bit application gets nearly 4GB of address space.

More ram is always useful, but assuming that a current 32 bit application on a 64 bit OS is the same or as beneficial as a 64 bit application is not the same!

The tech page is somewhat vague:

Photoshop can access up to 8 GB of RAM

Access and use?

And then pretty clear:

The RAM above the 100% used by Photoshop, which is from approximately 3 GB to 3.7 GB,

So there's the ceiling. I said 3 gigs, it's 3-3.7 gigs.

[DougAxford]

I just finished working on 2 enormous psd files last week that challenged my pc system. I have more than enough scratch disk space on a Raptor drive but had memory errors that were driving me nuts. One solution I found was to shut down PS after finishing each section of the file. Even with that, sometimes PS will leave the tmp files on your scratch disk and you have to manually remove them.

Then, I got an 'out of memory error' that shocked me. My separate O/S drive was full. WTF??? I spent 10 min going through each folder to find the culprit. PS had put a HUGE load of tmp files in Documents & settings>Doug>Local Settings>Temp 15 Gigs of tmp files created by PS that day. I triple checked all my PS settings and there is absolutely nothing that I can find that should direct anything there.

Once cleared, problem vanished. If someone could help me on that, I'd appreciate it.

I tested the best mac system on loan by a 'mac crazy' friend for a week, 5 years ago and found it to be slower than the system I had at the time. He thought I was nuts and refused to see the truth. I have no doubt that things have changed and mac with 64 bit may indeed be faster now.

I have another friend who just bought a quad core and swore it was so much faster. The benchmark tests on PS I've read, say that most PS work is identical on a duo vs a quad.

IOW, there are a lot of problems and even more misconceptions. I would suggest that you contact a mac dealer and ask for a one week test drive. Keep in mind that any new computer always seems to work fantastic for the first few months, then slows down. Also, factor in the cost of replacing or adding Adobe programs.

Personally, it's the same as Cannon/Nikon. They take turns bettering each other every time. If I were starting out, I'd have both systems in my shop. My present opinion is that I think mac is doing a better job than microsoft at making an O/S that works cleaner and faster. But then, Linux beats them both. How many of us have gone that route?

[Jerry Skrocki]

The tech page is somewhat vague:

"If you have more than 4 GB (to 8 GB), the RAM above 4 GB is used by the operating system as a cache for the Photoshop scratch disk data."

I think that statement from the Adobe Tech Note is very clear.

Using ram as scratch disk memory is definitely faster than having to write/read to the hard drive.

[AndrewRodney]

Jerry, we're getting OT here since the original question was about the Mac and PC. But I think your original statement is confusing and incorrect:

The current version of OSX (Leopard) is a true 64bit operating system and as such can utilize up to 8 gigs of ram for Photoshop before going to the physical hard drive for scratch disk space.

This has absolutely nothing to do with 64 bit OS and point in fact, Photoshop doesn't and can't access more than the 3 gigs of ram. The OS will not allow this functionality. Now what can be done (and has been done for years) is using the OPTIONAL VM Plug-in that will use some of the additional Ram (3 gigs or so) as a temp scratch disk before going to full scratch disk (unlimited only by size of the drive). And yes, it is faster. But its only useful for taking the additional memory and using a pretty small amount as a VM scratch disk and in no way does this have anything to do with the OS or the amount of bits it can address. That said, people I know inside of Adobe, working with an upcoming version (my NDA doesn't allow me to say more) might tell you that the differences with a 32bit versus 64-bit version of Photoshop does provide some increases in speed IN MOST OF THE APPLICATION (maybe 8-10%) but this isn't the same as using the VM plug-in in OS X with CS3 which is a 32 bit app. So the point above "Leopard is a true 64 bit OS and as such can..." is confusing the issue. Its got nothing to do with an optional plug-in and that said, a true 64-bit application would address far, far more memory and do so pretty much across the board.

[Noel_Carboni]

I suspect no one here is doing intensive work on equivalent (and modern) top of the line PC and Mac workstations, so a direct head-to-head comparison will probably not be forthcoming.

I've decided to stay on XP x64 (opposed to upgrading to Vista). I recently upgraded from 4 to 8 GB of RAM and the performance difference on very large files is tremendous, everything else remaining equal.

There are of course other things to consider besides Photoshop... What system are you familiar with? In my case, with a lifetime of PC experience I would find it difficult to change from the PC to Mac UI. And there are the myriad other programs I use that would have to be researched to find a Mac equivalent. On the other hand, with virtualization technology being what it is, it's possible to run a virtual PC inside a Mac quite well.

It's kind of like considering switching from Nikon to Canon or vice versa. Lots of things to consider, no hard and fast answers.

Myself, right at this moment, if I were going to put together the ultimate image processing workstation today, I'd probably get another PC - Dell has some nice offerings in the Precision Workstation stable.

-Noel

[jeffcable]

Originally Posted by IraParis

I'm posting this in both the Mac and PC forums, hoping to gather as much info as possible, so I apologize for the double posting..
I'm currently on a Dell Workstation 380, XP Pro, and 4 Gigs of ram, w/three Wide Screen LCD Monitors.
I've done everything possible to make CS3 as efficient as possible.
I have one commercial client that I regularly use 500 mb files, w/24 layers.
Not surprisingly, CS3 is extremely sluggish, prone to crash, and I receive too many "Not Enough Memory For This Task" warnings.
I speced out a new Dell Workstation w/ XP Pro 64 bit, and a Mac Pro, each configured to each other as close as possible.
The bottom line is that the Mac is about $600 more.
Will the Mac run CS3, with my large files faster than the PC?
I realize that it is difficult to compare the two, but in a general sense, similarly configured, would the Mac be faster than the PC?
Thanks

Ira, I know that this can be a religious issue but I will try to avoid sounding like an evangelist. My needs are simple and in Photoshop I often work with files that are 1.2GB in size, largely due to the three part sharpening software provided by Pixel Genius. My old (5 years) G4 1.33 GHz 17 inch Mac laptop is equipped with 2GB of RAM and I am running CS suite. I can work reasonably quickly and do not see any of the errors you mention. I will change the machine for a current model when I can no longer do what I need to in an efficient manner.

I got thoroughly fed up with the Windows method of work having used all versions of Windows through 3.11, NT 3.51, NT 4.0 95, 98 and 2k as well as being au fait with DOS. Since going over to Mac and OS X, I have never had any down time. TCO is very reasonable (how many 5 year old laptops do you know that are still capable of working hard?) and I have nothing but respect for the Apple method of doing things. Apple stopped me going insane and showed me that computing does not have to be a daily struggle to get work done. Of course, YMMV

Jeff

[Pro Photo Store]

Visit the B&H Pro Photo Store for the best Gear Prices and regular specials!

Brilliant Color for any Digital SLR
White Balance Cap
The Pros Agree on ColorRight
What People Are Saying