Configuring Your System for CS4, Part 1

Over the last few issues, I''ve focused my attention on configuring your system for Adobe Creative Suite 4 (CS4). First, we looked at the benefit that 64-bit Windows can provide over 32-bit versions, and then we evaluated how Nvidia''s Quadro CX can accelerate certain functions in Photoshop, After Effects, and Premiere Pro. This month, I''ll review how the number of processors and the amount of RAM impact encoding performance, and then find other, non-CS4-related fish to fry.

Related Links

Configuring Your System for CS4, Part 2 In the last installment, I described buying considerations and costs for system RAM and CPUs for Apple''s Mac Pro and HP''s xw8600 workstation. In this installment, I''ll present the results of a series of benchmark tests with the two systems... CS4 and 64-bit Systems, Part 1 So there I was, testing Adobe Creative Suite 4 (CS4)''s AVCHD compatibility. I created a simple project, about 4 minutes long, two picture-in-picture overlays with simple rotation and color correction... Test Drive: Nvidia Quadro CX and Adobe CS4, Part 1 This month, in our quest to identify the optimal CS4 configuration, we look at graphic chip manufacturer Nvidia''s Quadro CX technology...

In this first installment, I''ll discuss general configuration options for RAM and CPU, and overall system pricing for the Apple Mac Pro and HP xw8600 workstations that I used in my tests. Next time, using projects with DV, HDV, AVCHD, DVCPRO HD, and Red source footage, I benchmark performance using single and dual quad-core processors and RAM configurations from 2GB to 16GB.

Let''s start with some theory about RAM and CPUs.

Table 1: Rendering Red source footage to MPEG-2 Blu-ray at various RAM configurations and a single-processor (four-core) HP xw8600 system.

RAM stands for random-access memory, and it provides the working space for your computer''s CPU and application programs such as CS4. Both test systems used 64-bit operating systems—OS X 10.5.5 for the Mac and Windows Vista Business, Service Pack 1, on the HP workstation. The 64-bit operating system allows both system''s memory capacity to go far beyond the 4GB maximum available with 32-bit operating systems, which reserves 1GB for Windows exclusive use, leaving only 3GB for applications. For example, you can install up to 32GB of RAM in the Mac Pro and up to 128GB in the xw8600.

All CS4 applications except for a 64-bit Windows-only version of Photoshop are 32-bit applications that can run on a 64-bit OS, but can only address a maximum of 2GB of RAM each. In contrast, the 64-bit version of Photoshop can address far more, theoretically close to all RAM available in the Windows 64-bit system. Still, on a 64-bit system with lots of RAM, applications such as Premiere Pro, After Effects, and Adobe Media Encoder can use up to 2GB of RAM each, rather than fighting for a maximum of 3GB of RAM in a 32-bit Windows system.

Why does this boost performance? Because if the program can''t store data that it needs for processing in RAM, it has to store the data to disc, which is much slower than RAM. In a suite application such as CS4—where a single function like rendering a Premiere Pro sequence to MPEG-2 could involve Premiere Pro, the Adobe Media Encoder, After Effects, and other applications—forcing all involved programs to “page” data back and forth to the hard disk can really slow things down.

Here''s an analogy. Imagine you had to collate pages from four three-ring binders into a fifth binder. On your dining room table, you''d open them all up, grab the pages that you needed as you needed them, and insert them into another open binder. No sweat. Now suppose you had to perform the same task in seat 14B (definitely coach) on your next flight to LaGuardia. You''d pick up the source binder, find the page, click it open, close the binder, return it to the floor (or wherever), pick up the target binder, click it open, insert the page, click it shut, return it to the floor, and move to the next page. It would easily take five or six times longer than working on your living-room table. Working with insufficient system RAM can have the same effect.

Four points to consider when choosing the amount of RAM to buy with your system. First, memory is like closet space: You can never have enough, and more is almost always better. That said, many functions have a memory-related tipping point. Work below that level, and progress will be glacial. Increasing RAM to that tipping point will deliver significant cost benefits, while adding RAM beyond that point will deliver vastly diminishing returns.

Consider Table 1. With 4GB of RAM, it took Adobe Premiere Pro 81:09 (min:sec) to render a 1-minute Red video source file to Blu-ray-compatible MPEG-2 on a single-processor, four-core HP xw8600. Note that this test sequence included a bluescreen segment produced in After Effects imported into Premiere Pro via Dynamic Link, which significantly increased the memory requirements of the operation. Adding 4GB of memory increased RAM beyond the tipping point and shaved 69 percent off the rendering time at a cost of only $150. Even Ebenezer Scrooge would approve that purchase-order request (before his epiphany). On the other hand, spending an additional $1,050 over the 4GB price shaves rendering time by an additional 5 percent, which is clearly on the wrong side of diminishing returns.

The second point to consider about RAM is that it''s extremely easy to upgrade after the initial purchase, even if you''ve never opened a computer case in your life— and it''s almost always cheaper to do so. For example, Other World Computing, a reputable Mac vendor (in business since 1998) sells 32GB of RAM for $1,249. In contrast, Apple charges $9,100. One strategy for purchasing a workstation most affordably is to buy the base system with the processors that you need and minimal RAM, then upgrade RAM via third-party sources—either at the time of purchase or later. Now understand that all RAM is not created equal, and buying inexpensive RAM or RAM with insufficient heat spreaders can impact performance and system stability. So scan those user reviews to make sure that the RAM you select has worked well for previous buyers in the same target system.

Finally, as you''ll see next week, the more CPUs that you have installed, the more RAM you need to run smoothly. Where 4GB might suffice for a single processor, four-core system, 6GB to 8GB is probably the minimum for a dual processor, eight-core system.

Table 2: Processor specifications.

As you undoubtedly know, CPU stands for central processing unit, and it''s the brains behind all activities on your computer. Both the HP and Apple units shipped with two quad-core Intel Xeon processors, the Mac Pros running at 3.2GHz while the HPs ran at 3.33GHz. You have any number of choices when it comes to processors, but in this article, I''ll discuss buying a system with either one or two quad-core Xeon processors, since these are the test systems I have in front of me.

Some things you should know about CPUs. First, comparing processors is a tricky business because you have to consider several factors. For example, the HP xw8600 came with two Intel Xeon 5470 processors, while the Mac Pro came with two Intel Xeon 5482 processors. Table 2 contains their basic specs.

From a pure processing standpoint, the HP enjoys a 4 percent speed advantage over the Apple processor (3.33GHz vs 3.2GHz). However, Apple''s front-side bus speed—which controls how fast data can get to the processor from memory—is 20 percent faster than that of the HP, as is the system memory (800GHz compared to 667GHz). Which processor will render more quickly? In a memory-intensive process where the bottleneck is getting data to the processor, the Apple's 5482 might very well be faster. If memory isn''t a bottleneck, it could be the 5470. Either way, while these theories are nice, it''s impossible to tell—which makes an apples-to-apples comparison of the systems unachievable.

Note that you can configure your HP system with the 5482 processor, so Apple has no inherent processor-related advantage. Still, because the systems came with different processors, I used different projects and test techniques to benchmark the two systems. You''ll learn more about that in the next installment.

The second thing to know about CPUs is that except in extremely rare circumstances, adding a second processor doesn''t double performance, and you shouldn''t expect it to. In fact, my tests revealed several instances where a single-processor system outperformed a dual-processor system, almost always when the system had insufficient RAM.

Third, like RAM, you can generally add a second processor in the field—though it''s much easier with the HP than the Mac Pro, from both a pricing and access perspective. That is, you have to strip away most system components to access the Mac Pro''s CPU, while with the HP, you just have to open the case.

From a pricing perspective, Apple makes a 2.8GHz dual-processor system standard, with upgrades to dual-processor 3.0GHz ($800) and 3.2GHz ($1,600) systems, or you can save $500 and choose a single 2.8GHz processor. Since the second processor always has to match the speed of the first processor, buying a single-processor system locks you into the slowest configuration.

In contrast, HP presents more options, with the base unit shipping with a single 2.0GHz CPU, with downgrades to a 1.86GHz unit (save $26) or upgrade to a 3.4GHz CPU (add $2,394). Base pricing is very different, so don''t draw any conclusions on total price based upon CPU prices.

Just to get it out of the way, using each vendor''s website, I priced out a 3.2GHz dual-processor, quad-core system with 16GB of RAM and equivalent graphics, hard disk, and other options, and the Mac Pro system cost $7,899, while the HP costs $7,798. Not a significant difference. You won''t have to spend nearly as much to get started, but dual-processor systems with enough RAM for high end formats get pricey fast.

If you do initially buy a single-processor system and later decide to add a second processor, you should buy the second processor from the same vendor. Though you can buy an Intel Xeon processor from a third-party source at lower cost, each processor needs a system-specific heat sink to ensure sufficiently cool operation. Both HP and Apple design these heat sinks specifically for each system, and though third-party knock-offs may exist, there could be warranty implications if the system overheats.

OK, that''s enough pithy information for one issue; in the next installment, I''ll divulge the results of my tests on both platforms using DV, HDV, AVCHD, DVCPRO HD, and Red input.