okay how is this computer not good for photoshop? it runs smooth and i have freaking 2gigs of ram it never slows down....plus i have 400 gigs of memeory...
you realize ram is memory? and no computer can have 400gigs of memory..... your HARD DRIVE, might have 400 gbs of space...but not your memory, and its not that good for PS because of the extremly LOWEND onboard video
on board will work but ps lags if you have a crappy processor.. i have a amd 3500 7900gt and 2 gigs and ps still lags sometimes
he wont be CPU limited in PS cause the e6400 is a good processor, but his ram is only pc4200 so thats not that good.
Alright, I'll take that back, when you start getting into bigger resolutions, larger then a moderate LP, then you would probably see a bunch of lag (try using the Liquefy filter on a image bigger then or equal to 1280x1024.)
the speed of the rams not really going to matter.. i have ddr 3200 and it works fine its more about the processor with more catche for ps if it has more than 1 mb catche it will work nicely
by some peoples standards it could be considered slow. there are people running c2ds and corew 2 quads at close to 4GHz day to day. yours runs at 2.13 and will always run at 2.3 unless you swap out half the parts in it. harddrive... there are also people using massing RAID configurations with 15kRPM SAS drives. Those drives are A LOT faster than yours or even mine, just a single one, not the 4+ in the array. RAM, you have basic entry level RAM clocked at about half the speed of the really highend stuff, some photoshop stuff can be memory bandwidth intensive. motherboard, runs at 266.6666FSB, some people run theirs at 400-500, bus bandwidth can become a factor. ================================= but in full seriousness, it's not a bad system, it's just priced a bit high for what you got. It will, as you said, "last forever" for what you use it for. It's about as powerful as my old system from this time last year(save for the harddrive which is a bit slower, but I had the fastest SATA drive on the market) again your systems not bad at all, it rapes some of the most powerful systems of last year in quite a few things(except for the video card and harddrive but for your assumed needs that is nothing) there is nothign wrong with it, but I, john, dev and oasis all have systems with CPUs running about 50% faster than yours so we're a bit more strict than the average joe at rating. for the most part, that is true, RAM has relatively minimal performance impact on c2ds, but there are some apps(win rar for example, also many media encoders) and PS filters which do rely heavily on it. also, he has the "cache cripled" version of the c2d with only 2mb l2 cache so memory performance is a bit more important as is bus speed.
A single 76Gt doesn't always outperforms dual 76GS's; http://www.motherboards.org/reviews/hardware/1597_6.html Still I agree a single 7600GT is much better bang/buck and about the OEM marketing you said. Btw, link is dead.
