PC Computer choice (early 2013)

TaoTeJared

How do you guys keep up with having a desktop and laptop, sharing images between them?

Still figuring this one out - but usually I just dump the files on the laptop for quick edits/proofs and just re-do what little work done on my desktop.  I do so little work in that manner - maybe 30sec - that it doesn't matter much.  I hear there is a way with Lightroom to work on two machines and transfer the edits from a mobile laptop back to a desktop, but I have yet to find the instruction how to set it up.  

If anyone knows of any resources to move Lightroom edits from a laptop to a desktop, please share.

studio460

Well, I was all set to buy the ThinkPad X230, but then I thought maybe the X230T (the tablet version of the X230) might be more fun to use with WIndows8. But, the X230T priced out nearly $500 more, fully equipped [Note: If choosing the X230T, I would opt for the "outdoor" premium (IPS) screen, since that's the one with Gorilla glass (glossy) rather than the standard (matte) screen which some report is harder to read (the Gorilla glass option is not available on the normal X230)].

Happily, I found a Lenovo/Barnes & Noble educational portal where standard ThinkPads are now selling at a 25% discount (through Jan. 9), making the Core i7 X230 only $982 in my desired configuration. Here are my planned upgrades:

Crucial 16GB (8GB x2) 1600MHz DDR3 PC3-12800 SODIMM RAM: $82

Crucial 256GB m4 6GB/s mSATA SSD: $207

The X230 comes with a single 4GB stick, which I'll immediately replace with the two 8GB Crucial sticks for a total of 16GB of RAM. The X230 also comes with a 16GB mSATA SSD, again, which I'll replace with the 256GB Crucial SSD instead (where I'll install the OS and my primary applications).

Recall that this is an mSATA SSD which inserts into an accessory slot inside the X230--the main 2.5" HDD sits in its own bay, and is easily user-replaceable by a second, standard-sized SSD (if so desired), or a larger/faster HDD. Crucial sells a full-sized (2.5" x 7mm in height, which the X230 requires--"standard" 9.5mm SSD drives won't fit) 512GB SSD for $437, including a data transfer kit (OEM-version of Acronis and a cloning cable). If you don't need the software and cable, the drive sells for a bit less, $425 (and, at least in this case, I won't need it, since I'll be cloning from the main internal HDD).

Here's how I configured the X230 on Lenovo's site (note that for many items, there is only a single option):

Lenovo ThinkPad X230 12.5" laptop $982 (with educational discount):

• Intel Core i7-3520M Processor (4M Cache, up to 3.60 GHz)

• Windows 8 64

• Windows 8 64 English

• 12.5" Premium HD (1366x768) LED Backlit Display, 2x2 Antenna, Mini SSD Capable

• Intel HD 4000 Graphics in Intel Core i7-3520M Processor

• 4 GB DDR3 - 1600MHz (1 DIMM)

• Keyboard (Backlit) US English  

• UltrNav with FingerPrint Reader

• 720p HD Camera

• 500GB Hard Disk Drive, 7200rpm

• 16GB mSATA Solid State Cache Drive

• 6 Cell ThinkPad Battery X44+

• 65W AC Adapter - US (2pin)

• Bluetooth 4.0 with Antenna

• Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6205 AGN

• Language Pack Win8 US English

PB_PM

Intel graphics, yikes.

studio460

Yeah, I know. Well, the integrated-graphics, Intel HD 4000 is reportedly not that bad (at least a decent performance boost from the HD 3000). Can't have everything!

studio460

So, to sum it up, that's:

ThinkPad X230 12.5" IPS w/Core i7-3520M w/16GB RAM/256 SSD/512GB 7,200 RPM HDD = $1,271

or

ThinkPad X230 12.5" IPS w/Core i7-3520M w/16GB RAM/256 SSD/512GB SSD = $1,696

KnockKnock

@swame_sp. Possible issues with the 2010 MBP: 1) its standard (5400RPM) hard drive 2) it max's out at 8GB RAM and 3) it runs the older Intel Core 2 Duo chips.

Have you checked the Activity Monitor to see if you're running out of System Memory, if your Disk Activity is getting hammered when you experience slowdowns, or if it's your CPU?

I've never pushed Aperture that far.  My library and retouching is pretty minimal compared to most here probably.  If it's disk activity, upgrading it to an SSD will help.  But you'll probably need a Firewire external disk for capacity.

When it comes to performance, Mac's use the same Intel chips, video cards and hard drives as any other computer, so it'll go obsolete just as quickly.  I think the lore about Macs lasting longer comes from viruses or OS/software rot that earlier PC's suffered more from.

studio460

@swame_sp:

I have an even older, early-2008, 3.06GHz Core2Duo iMac (8,1), and it runs Aperture, DxO Elite, Photoshop, etc. just fine with only 6GB of RAM (the un-officially supported maximum in 2008 iMacs, in single-channel mode). I recently wiped the primary HDD clean, and performed a fresh OS X install, and things sped up right away. Try a clean OS X install, and make sure your memory is populated to its maximum supported capacity (8GB, for your particular year-model MBP).

PB_PM

Also make sure Aperture is fully updated to version 3.4.3, there were some serious memory leaks prior to version 3.3.

That being said, I have 12GB of RAM and Aperture can max that out, when using the brush to paint on some effects (doge and burn for example).

heartyfisher

I have been thinking of upgrading my PC as well.

Just curious.. I have 4 GB and I have never found the RAM to be a constraint ?? Why are you guys going for 32GB of ram ?

I am one of those who build my PCs, that way I don't need to pay the M$ tax i just use my old copy of Windows in a VM and use Linux as my main OS(Kubuntu is what I am running now) 

At the moment I am considering a 8 core 4.2 Ghz, 8GB ram and 3TB for about $550 I will probably add a Blue-ray writer for another $75.. I can also get a 27" IPS monitor ( equivalent to the dell ultrasharps ) for about $420 ..

5 years is a long time in tech terms. Its about 3 tech generations.. I think upgrading twice in that period is more reasonable as you don't need to pay as much and end up with better tech at the end of 5 years..

studio460

Hearty, 32-bit versions of Windows only support up to 3.5GB of RAM. You need a 64-bit build of Windows XP, Vista, 7, or 8. (The short version: Windows 7 supports up to 192GB; Windows 8 supports up to 512GB). See this MSDN document for more details:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa366778(v=vs.85).aspx

studio460

For Macs, I go to macsales.com (Other World Computing), because they're a Mac-centric reseller, and offer excellent, machine-specific advice. For PCs, I tend to go to crucial.com, but NewEgg, and many other computer resellers, are equally as good.

PB_PM

@hearty what version of Windows are you using? XP? Under XP 4GB is good enough for most things, newer versions of windows can use 2GB just for the OS operation.

studio460

Hearty, I mis-understood your post . . . nevermind.

heartyfisher

Hearty, I mis-understood your post . . . nevermind.

OK .. :-) .. I use both windows 7 and Linux Kubuntu.64bit and in both cases I have never found that i needed more than 4GB ram.. Thats why My upgrade system is going to be 8GB ram. I was just curious if i was missing out on something, some tool or software that needs more than 8GB ram ..

PB_PM

Interesting, you must you use some very light weight (memory wise) programs. I cannot think of any time in recent years that my system has less than 3-4GB of RAM active at any given times. Do you not run multiple apps at the same time? You should also take note to see if your system is writing to the disk, due to the lack of memory. Modern OS's will use the hard disk a lot, if it feels that there isn't enough physical RAM (leaving some physical RAM empty).

Swame_sp

@swame_sp. Possible issues with the 2010 MBP: 1) its standard (5400RPM) hard drive 2) it max's out at 8GB RAM and 3) it runs the older Intel Core 2 Duo chips.

Have you checked the Activity Monitor to see if you're running out of System Memory, if your Disk Activity is getting hammered when you experience slowdowns, or if it's your CPU?

I've never pushed Aperture that far.  My library and retouching is pretty minimal compared to most here probably.  If it's disk activity, upgrading it to an SSD will help.  But you'll probably need a Firewire external disk for capacity.

When it comes to performance, Mac's use the same Intel chips, video cards and hard drives as any other computer, so it'll go obsolete just as quickly.  I think the lore about Macs lasting longer comes from viruses or OS/software rot that earlier PC's suffered more from.

I updated RAM to max at 8GB and i have a sweet app installed that shows on the menu bar about Free memory left. Aperture seems to consume about 4GB RAM. Also another thing with OS-x is about memory management. Currently with Chrome (8 tabs), mail and itunes open, i have only 2.2GB ram free and 1.7GB remaining inactive.

Laptop being my main computer, all my photos are in here (partly backed up on e-hdd). I have around 60GB space left on a 250GB stock drive. 

@swame_sp:
I have an even older, 2008 3.06GHz CoreDuo iMac, and it runs Aperture, DxO Elite, Photoshop, etc. just fine with only 6GB of RAM (the un-officially supported maximum in 2008 iMacs, in single-channel mode). I recently wiped the primary HDD clean, and performed a fresh OS X install, and things sped up right away. Try a clean OS X install, and make sure your memory is populated to its maximum supported capacity (8GB).

Sure, let me get that done, at the earliest. I'll plan to do this weekend. Let me see if it helps.

adamz

withe the older iMac, Macbook Pro, Mac Minis - basically, with all of the mac with integrated dvd, You can easily swap it for another hdd and boost the overall performance even more. 

@studio - I would go for the cheaper version, as You can always swap the second hdd to ssd and based on my experience, You don't need large ssd for data (I mean, it's nice, but the speed difference between two ssd and ssd&hdd is not relevant to the price tag You have to pay for it). 

TaoTeJared

OK .. :-) .. I use both windows 7 and Linux Kubuntu.64bit and in both cases I have never found that i needed more than 4GB ram.. Thats why My upgrade system is going to be 8GB ram. I was just curious if i was missing out on something, some tool or software that needs more than 8GB ram ..

4gig!?!?!? You must not have anything else running. I wouldn't consider anything less than 16gb of ram for photos. The D800 is eating my ram for lunch before I have even woken up for the day. With my PC system and all "tray" closed and just the background programs running, (integrated graphics card) I'm running at 25% of ram in use out of 6gig now. If I load Lightroom i'm at 80%+ during editing and usually spike at 100% and I have to wait for the machine to catch up usually 20-30 seconds. Now, I know I have a many background programs running on my machine (all normal stuff, norton, iphone, dropbox, etc.) as it is also my main machine for everything, but what I have noticed with recent MS updates, 4gb of ram is almost too low to multi-task at all.

studio460

Adam: Yeah, I may opt for the HDD to save some bucks. I just searched NewEgg for fast HDDs, and there's only a handful of 7mm-high 2.5" drives. Looks like my choices are limited.

studio460

Maybe Hearty's running only DOS and Unix command-line apps!

kanuck

Excellent topic and one that I will bookmark for when I purchase a new computer later this year. Lots of great information and perspectives here thanks guys. Any concerns with running Windows 8 Tao? 24GB of RAM wow thats insane! That would be a D800 Killer for sure. It looks like there is plenty of support so far for the i7...

adamz

@studio - if You want a fast 2.5" hdd I would recommend You the Seagate Momentus XT, had it before SSD and it works amazingly. Its basically a hdd drive with the addition of fast ssd chip to optimise files access.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/834410-REG/Seagate_ST750LX003_750GB_Momentus_XT_Solid_State.html

adamz

@kanuck - 24GB of RAM was indeed insane 2-3 years ago, today You can get it in reasonable price even for iMac or any other sodimm equipped devices (8gb sodimm ddr3 modules are available on the market)

PB_PM

Indeed, RAM is cheap, so filler up is my theory.

studio460

Thanks, Adam, but most 2.5" drives are 9.5mm in height (including that one). I can only choose from a handful of available 7mm-height drives from Seagate and Western Digital (all, slower and smaller than the factory drive), due to the form-factor constraints of the ThinkPad X230.