CS4 Question: Quad Core Intel vs. Intel Core i7

[kd...@adobeforums.com]

Hi All,

Between the two processors below, which would you recommend for a system with Vista 64bit and CS4:

Quad Core Intel® Xeon® Processor E5420 (2.50GHz,2X6M L2,1333)

or

Intel® Core™i7-920 Processor(8MB L2 Cache, 2.66GHz)

I have read some potential instabilities with the i7 processor, CS4, Vista 64 bit. But maybe this is old info and this processor is fine.

Any recommendations would be great! Thanks-

[Zeno_...@adobeforums.com]

that xeon is based on the old Core 2 quad architecture so its slower then the i7 920

[David_E_...@adobeforums.com]

I think the information about i7 stability issues concern people overclocking and not finding their system sweet spot. Once they have dialed everything in they are happy. If you don't overclock then you should not have any problems. Just do the normal research on what works best with what component.

[Free...@adobeforums.com]

i7 stability issues concern people overclocking

Either that, or BIOSes aren't quite ready. They'll get updated and bug-fixed. The i7 is still new.

A lot of people had initial stability problems with Vista 64 because the mobos didn't fully support more than 4GB with the then-current BIOS versions. But they caught up.

[dave_...@adobeforums.com]

old Core 2 quad

old?!! gasp! :)

[Lawrenc...@adobeforums.com]

Yep. Old on this case means possessing Front Side Bus. Strange, but people who should know better think it still exists with i7.

Don't even consider anything but the i7, kdog. I've been testing software concerning overclocking on all the versions, and so long as you stay at defaults, stability will not be any concern (barring defects of course!).

So far as overclocking, Intel provide a utility to overclock and find any tendencies to become unstable when tuning and will set the system back to defaults. Also, a tip: If you want to overclock and have a stable system, get a tool like Prime 95 or a utility that runs intensive calculations and run it for 8 hours after you think the computer is optimum. It will find instabilities.

[Myle...@adobeforums.com]

I agree. Anything other than a Core7i or Nehalem Xeon is a compromise - if you plan on making a living of your work. For hobyists/ home users, quad cores and dual cores are okay, though.

Mylenium

[Bart_...@adobeforums.com]

Quad cores are still good for professionals, I use two.

Amazing how I can go from a 'professional' to 'hobbyist/home user' in eighteen months. Bite me!

[Q_P...@adobeforums.com]

Vista64, PsCS4 & a quad core here. Seems pretty fast to me. I regularly work on 400 to 500 meg files and I run a lot of filters and actions for things like resizing and so on.

Fact: I make my living doing photography.
Fact: I work out of my home.
Which fact determines if I'm a professional?

Q

[Free...@adobeforums.com]

I'm still on a dual-core.

<ordering a copy of Elements, blushing>

But seriously: I don't see much in Photoshop that is processor-limited. Most of the time the CPU is just hanging around, drinking banana daiquiris and waiting for RAM and disk access.

As far as hardware upgrades are concerned, the CPU has always been low on my list.

[Bart_...@adobeforums.com]

Which fact determines if I'm a professional? None of the above!

[dave_...@adobeforums.com]

Amazing how I can go from a 'professional' to 'hobbyist/home user' in
eighteen months. Bite me!

bummer bart, don't tell me you got laid off? :(

[Bart_...@adobeforums.com]

I'm self-employed, not likely. ;)

[Q_P...@adobeforums.com]

"Which fact determines if I'm a professional? None of the above!"

Exactly...
Q

[Zeno_...@adobeforums.com]

In the end, it really depends on how much you're willing to spend for your hardware. In this case, the Core i7 is clearly better as the new Nehalem architecture from Intel (the one used in i7) has much better performance in Photoshop than the older(there, older, not old, better now?) core 2 quad architecture.

[dave_...@adobeforums.com]

I'm self-employed, not likely.

you laid yourself off?!! :o

you must really suck! :P XD

[Bart_...@adobeforums.com]

Suck like a Quad-core!

[dave_...@adobeforums.com]

lol! lotta fans huh? :)

[Bart_...@adobeforums.com]

Just three; one at the front, one at the back and one on top. All Emperors have them.

[dave_...@adobeforums.com]

XD

[Myle...@adobeforums.com]

Quad cores are still good for professionals, I use two.

Amazing how I can go from a 'professional' to 'hobbyist/home user' in
eighteen months. Bite me!

I think everybody just mistook and twisted my words... I do lots of 3D graphics and compositing and never can have enough performance. If you don't and your PS work doesn't demand the memory I/O and processing performance, then it's certainly okay to go with other processors. Hell, If I did web design for a living, I'd run DW on a netbook and not complain... Still, since even a Core7i will be old tech soon, I'm wondering: Why not get the most modern tec within the budget? seems the only reasonable conclusion to me...

Mylenium

[Bart_...@adobeforums.com]

I have a Q6600 o/c 3.1, with 8GB of RAM o/c'd. Works like all get out, have no problem with Premiere, AE, Flash & Maya. I think I'm good to go with Vista x64 (upgraded from WIN2K).

[dave_...@adobeforums.com]

i have the e6600 <http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupId=27250> (core2duo) with only 2 gig ram that screams for games, blu-ray playback and dvd backup. i'll bet the quad is amazing. i'll bet the i7's are insane!