computer for graphic design

Discussion in 'Gaming' started by Jimma, Jun 18, 2007.

  1. Jimma

    Jimma Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    201
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    I want to build a new computer for design.
    This is not for tags. This is for A3/ A4 sized documents that can be upwards of 50mb each. Some documents may be double the size of a3 and a4 I was wondering what would be the best setup. Right now I am thinking of: (I like amd and ATI)

    4 gigs of ram(I really want this much)
    1 scratch drive (mabye a raptor)
    AMD dual core
    ati 2900 ( dunno which version I would like dual monitor support)
    500gig hard drive for storage

    What do you guys think. The documents will be huge and I want to create art/designs quickly without too much slow down in Illustrator and photoshop cs3. Of course I would be getting XP instead of vista but would it have to be a 64bit version of xp?
    Thanks
     
  2. brandon

    brandon Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,119
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    all you really ned is 2 gigs of ram or over and a half decent monitor
     
  3. mo2332

    mo2332 Member

    Posts:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 27, 2007
    there are 1s disiend for that
     
  4. `Kakashi

    `Kakashi Banned from GR

    Age:
    36
    Posts:
    1,337
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Location:
    usa
    Yeah, I think that should be good enough. I really never though about getting a scratch drive either, that would help so much with large size PSDs. You should see my computer class when we did the Photoshop chapter, no one could open up Photoshop becuase this stupid girl tried making a document 500x500 inches thinking that the computer automatically shrinks it down. Scratch drives were filled for about 2 days because of her. Anyways, the RAM will be pretty damn pricey. Also, you should invest in like a 350 gig HD with a faster RPM. That would be alot better for opening huge ass PSDs.
     
  5. xlink

    xlink GR's Tech Enthusiast

    Posts:
    8,054
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
     
  6. pianoman0723

    pianoman0723 Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    750
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    sounds good to me. I don't think you need 64-bit. I was working with 15" x 9" at 4000 ppi in 32 with no problems.

    I'm not sure about the specs of that computer (PowerPC PowerMac G5) but it was a beast. I think you'll be fine with what you have there.
     
  7. Cast

    Cast Well-Known Member

    Age:
    33
    Posts:
    1,939
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    if you are gonna get into c4d i would def go with 4gb of ram, your render times will own and you can render at a higher AA and resolution.
     
  8. goshagoose

    goshagoose Active Member

    Posts:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2007
    Nah, I know him in real life. He doesn't do C4D stuff.
     
  9. Geko

    Geko Well-Known Member

    Age:
    114
    Posts:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Location:
    London, UK
    what does he need 4 GB RAM for?
     
  10. Jimma

    Jimma Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    201
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    sorry not to make any offense to anyone at all. 4 gigs is for memory in photoshop. I was stupid and was thinking of a scratch disk to. With 4 gigs of memory I dont need a scratch disk as xelink said. You see photoshop writes a bunch of invisible files while you are working, to that hardrive which can slow down your work flow. Its best to have as much memory as possible so you can work on larger documents at 72~ 300 dpi.
     
  11. dementia

    dementia Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    6,243
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Location:
    Denver
    He doesn't, hes speaking about numbers, its rather clear considering his obvious lack of knowledge of computers in a vain attempt to pursue graphics design.

    As Xelink stated, benchmarks show intel has always been the leading company when it comes to rendering graphics, now moreso than before with their C2D line. 4GB is only truly utilized by 64mb OS systems, as Xelink also stated, making 2-2.5GB around the max any non-hardcore designer would need (and those that do most of the ----- design buy their computers for their design through more consumer friendly companies for such, generally Macs). Judging by the work he says he does, and his files being over 50 meg (zomg), I would say 500GB is fine, its not worth spending $400 for a 1TB 32mb cache HD when the work hes doing clearly doesn't need that.

    The average ----- designer will do complete portraits in inches via multiple computer screen setups with .psds (purely photoshop) ranging from the 2-5GB range, taking days to save, those are the types of designers whom would benefit from internal hard drives like those.
     
  12. Jimma

    Jimma Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    201
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    .... My knowledge of computers is fine. I know more then enough about them, the reason I need help is because I thought there would be at least 1 graphic designer that could help me with a PC set up. I stated this wont be for some crappy c4d piece with some airbrushing and over contrasted highlights or some large "tag tutorial" I am talking about commercial and artistic designs. I was rounding up to 50mbs. I wish to peruse this as a career in the near future so I would like a decent set up that could help me. Oh, sorry for sounding like a dumbass when it comes to computers.
     
  13. xlink

    xlink GR's Tech Enthusiast

    Posts:
    8,054
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    I'm not trying to be offensive, but you only came off as a "dumbass" because you insisted on company A and company B. When you limit yourself to one choice, you're more likely than not going to be ripped off.

    also, Dem, AMD did have the overall lead in photoshop before c2d.
     
  14. dementia

    dementia Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    6,243
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Location:
    Denver
    Depended on the rendering size, perhaps for something as large as his (pretty miniscual), but intel has always proved to be the better rendering processing chip for long term rendering purposes (ie, what a graphic designer is doing).

    I guess I am just used to my 150-200mb website .psds and large piece .psds, but from all the benchmarks ive seen, the longer the rendering process, the more intel starts pulling ahead, but in either case, C2D is still the way to go atm unless you plan on spending multiple thousands on the computer, then the C2Q comes into question.

    Long story short, if you intend to pursue truely serious 100% digital designer work for high end companies, your computer would likely be lookin towards the:

    8800GTX video (would recommend SLI, but not only would it kill your case, the 8800 GTX has reports of handling better solo than in SLI, not to mention finding a board capable of using 2 would prove to be difficult)
    e6700 C2D or Q6600 C2Q
    4-8gb memory
    Some form of 64 bit OS (xps 64 bit runs stable and well) to optimize the memory
    the above HD, or two (these files can be to be tremendously huge, especially on the company design artist land).

    That alone would net you 2600+ (500 for vid card, 500 for processor, 400-800 for the mrmory, 300-400 for the os, 400x2 for the HDs), and thats not including the board, drives, fans, cooling, case, monitor setup (dual screen?), etc.
     
  15. xlink

    xlink GR's Tech Enthusiast

    Posts:
    8,054
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004

Share This Page