What CPU is better for photoshop and lightroom

[PCnoobmuch]

I found this http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Pentium+G4560+%40+3.50GHz

and says the fx 6300 is better price performance to the intel pentium g4560


What would you recommend for lightroom and photoshop, i will use lightroom more

Thanks!

 

[Hamperking68]

I'd go with the G4560

Photoshop and most adobe products tend to play alot nicer with Intel CPU's

 

[USAFRet]

All things being equal, the Pentium.

But what is the rest of this system?

 

[PCnoobmuch]

All things being equal, the Pentium.

But what is the rest of this system?

I am not really sure, i am thinking rx 470/480 depending on the price, probably rx480 b/c pricing so close. I would go with a cheaper GPU if i think 16 gb needed but i think 8 gb will be fine, yes?

What you recommend ?

 

[Solandri]

I am not really sure, i am thinking rx 470/480 depending on the price, probably rx480 b/c pricing so close. I would go with a cheaper GPU if i think 16 gb needed but i think 8 gb will be fine, yes?

I wouldn't even bother with a GPU for Photoshop and Lightroom. The functions they accelerate are relatively minor and aren't used that often (mostly filters). The GPU does (supposedly) accelerate Raw processing in LR, but according to benchmarks the speedup by the GPU is negligible. Video rendering (Adobe Premiere) is where a GPU really helps.

LR is pretty frugal with RAM, so 8GB should be fine. Photoshop is a RAM hog though, and having lots of it will greatly increase your undo buffer. (LR records edit steps in its undo buffer, and recomputes the effect of edits on the image on the fly. So it only needs a few kB for a long history of edits. OTOH, the important part of PS is layers, and those layers will eat RAM like candy.) PS will mostly work in 8GB. But if you work with large photos, a lot of photos simultaneously, or do a lot of editing on each photo, 16GB will be more comfortable.

 

[PCnoobmuch]

I am not really sure, i am thinking rx 470/480 depending on the price, probably rx480 b/c pricing so close. I would go with a cheaper GPU if i think 16 gb needed but i think 8 gb will be fine, yes?

I wouldn't even bother with a GPU for Photoshop and Lightroom. The functions they accelerate are relatively minor and aren't used that often (mostly filters). The GPU does (supposedly) accelerate Raw processing in LR, but according to benchmarks the speedup by the GPU is negligible. Video rendering (Adobe Premiere) is where a GPU really helps.

LR is pretty frugal with RAM, so 8GB should be fine. Photoshop is a RAM hog though, and having lots of it will greatly increase your undo buffer. (LR records edit steps in its undo buffer, and recomputes the effect of edits on the image on the fly. So it only needs a few kB for a long history of edits. OTOH, the important part of PS is layers, and those layers will eat RAM like candy.) PS will mostly work in 8GB. But if you work with large photos, a lot of photos simultaneously, or do a lot of editing on each photo, 16GB will be more comfortable.

Ya i take picture with raw, thanks

 

[synphul]

Solandri made some good suggestions. A dedicated gpu like a 470/480 is mostly a waste. Only a handful of things in photoshop take advantage of dgpu processing and ram will be of much more benefit. Depending on the size of the files you're working with and complexity of layers/filters etc the difference between 8gb and 16gb of ram will likely be far more noticeable than a discrete gpu gaming card.

Most things in photoshop rely heavily on 1-2 cores. Lightroom most tasks rely on 2-4 cores and don't scale a whole lot beyond that. Instead of spending on the cpu and a gaming card you may want to put that money toward an i5. 16gb of ram would be preferable to 8gb, especially if looking to work in the two programs simultaneously. Photoshop will run on 4-8gb of ram but does eat it up if you allow it to and will work much smoother with more ram.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Lightroom-CC-6-Multi-Core-Performance-649/

 

[PCnoobmuch]

Solandri made some good suggestions. A dedicated gpu like a 470/480 is mostly a waste. Only a handful of things in photoshop take advantage of dgpu processing and ram will be of much more benefit. Depending on the size of the files you're working with and complexity of layers/filters etc the difference between 8gb and 16gb of ram will likely be far more noticeable than a discrete gpu gaming card.

Most things in photoshop rely heavily on 1-2 cores. Lightroom most tasks rely on 2-4 cores and don't scale a whole lot beyond that. Instead of spending on the cpu and a gaming card you may want to put that money toward an i5. 16gb of ram would be preferable to 8gb, especially if looking to work in the two programs simultaneously. Photoshop will run on 4-8gb of ram but does eat it up if you allow it to and will work much smoother with more ram.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Lightroom-CC-6-Multi-Core-Performance-649/

ok so i was going to go with this https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/list/8tg4m8 but what about this https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/list/YkNT3F

 

[synphul]

Unless you're planning on gaming the gaming gpu's are going to cost a lot vs what they actually contribute to photoshop or lightroom. If looking to use it as a workstation I'd ditch the gpu, use the integrated graphics for now, go with a slightly faster i5 and an ssd added in there. If it's too far over budget the ssd price can be reduced some by going with a slightly slower drive like a pny or adata.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-7500 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($249.98 @ DirectCanada)
Motherboard: ASRock B250M Pro4 Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($104.05 @ Vuugo)
Memory: Team Vulcan 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($124.99 @ Newegg Canada)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($119.98 @ DirectCanada)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($52.99 @ Memory Express)
Case: BitFenix Nova ATX Mid Tower Case ($34.99 @ DirectCanada)
Power Supply: Corsair CXM 450W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($69.98 @ NCIX)
Wireless Network Adapter: TP-Link TL-WN881ND PCI-Express x1 802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi Adapter ($21.98 @ DirectCanada)
Total: $778.94
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-03-31 17:04 EDT-0400

Given that it's not a gaming computer the corsair cx450m should do fine. Not the best psu but not the worst and with a pc that isn't pushing an overclocked cpu and 1 or 2 overclocked mid/high end gaming gpus, it really doesn't need a high end psu. Many people don't want to fuss with mail in rebates so I didn't include the seasonic 550rm which after rebate would only be $10cad more than the corsair, 100w more power and gold rated efficiency. Sticking with the corsair saves you $20 or $10 + mir hassles.

 

[PCnoobmuch]

Unless you're planning on gaming the gaming gpu's are going to cost a lot vs what they actually contribute to photoshop or lightroom. If looking to use it as a workstation I'd ditch the gpu, use the integrated graphics for now, go with a slightly faster i5 and an ssd added in there. If it's too far over budget the ssd price can be reduced some by going with a slightly slower drive like a pny or adata.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i5-7500 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($249.98 @ DirectCanada)
Motherboard: ASRock B250M Pro4 Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard ($104.05 @ Vuugo)
Memory: Team Vulcan 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory ($124.99 @ Newegg Canada)
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO-Series 250GB 2.5" Solid State Drive ($119.98 @ DirectCanada)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($52.99 @ Memory Express)
Case: BitFenix Nova ATX Mid Tower Case ($34.99 @ DirectCanada)
Power Supply: Corsair CXM 450W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply ($69.98 @ NCIX)
Wireless Network Adapter: TP-Link TL-WN881ND PCI-Express x1 802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi Adapter ($21.98 @ DirectCanada)
Total: $778.94
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2017-03-31 17:04 EDT-0400

Given that it's not a gaming computer the corsair cx450m should do fine. Not the best psu but not the worst and with a pc that isn't pushing an overclocked cpu and 1 or 2 overclocked mid/high end gaming gpus, it really doesn't need a high end psu. Many people don't want to fuss with mail in rebates so I didn't include the seasonic 550rm which after rebate would only be $10cad more than the corsair, 100w more power and gold rated efficiency. Sticking with the corsair saves you $20 or $10 + mir hassles.

What about this ? https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/list/3WZKbj
I can get another 8gb stick and an SSD in future

Btw how much better is this i5 to the other one i listed ?

Thanks!!!

 

[synphul]

The i5 you listed is the 6400, it has a base clock speed of 2.7ghz and can turbo boost up to 3.3ghz (single core fully loaded, when several or all cores are at 100% workload max turbo boost may be a little less, around 3.1-3.2ghz). The i5 7500 has a base clock speed of 3.4ghz and can turbo boost up to 3.8ghz, so it's roughly 500mhz faster.

The newer 7500 I mentioned also has a different integrated gpu, the hd 630 graphics. The older 6400 uses hd 530 graphics. Max frequency of the 630 igpu is 1.1ghz vs 950mhz for 530 graphics. The newer i5 supports a few more data security and features like vpro, tsx-ni and others.

In terms of difference, the biggest difference is going to be the 500mhz faster clock speeds. That puts the 7500 around 18-20% faster. You could add an ssd in the future and could also add ram in the future. It's usually best to get ram as matched sets for compatibility, even if a stick of ram has the same speed and timings it may or may not play well with the stick you get now if you add more later on. Not trying to scare you away from upgrading down the road, just trying to let you know what you may or may not run into.

 

[PCnoobmuch]

The i5 you listed is the 6400, it has a base clock speed of 2.7ghz and can turbo boost up to 3.3ghz (single core fully loaded, when several or all cores are at 100% workload max turbo boost may be a little less, around 3.1-3.2ghz). The i5 7500 has a base clock speed of 3.4ghz and can turbo boost up to 3.8ghz, so it's roughly 500mhz faster.

The newer 7500 I mentioned also has a different integrated gpu, the hd 630 graphics. The older 6400 uses hd 530 graphics. Max frequency of the 630 igpu is 1.1ghz vs 950mhz for 530 graphics. The newer i5 supports a few more data security and features like vpro, tsx-ni and others.

In terms of difference, the biggest difference is going to be the 500mhz faster clock speeds. That puts the 7500 around 18-20% faster. You could add an ssd in the future and could also add ram in the future. It's usually best to get ram as matched sets for compatibility, even if a stick of ram has the same speed and timings it may or may not play well with the stick you get now if you add more later on. Not trying to scare you away from upgrading down the road, just trying to let you know what you may or may not run into.

Ok do you think the price/preformance is worth it for the CPU and will the 1050 allow me to play games?

 

[nantucketbob]

Great set of questions and answers. Thanks to all.