Does anyone know how much RAM adobe photoshop CS5 will use when running on a MAC?
Does anyone know how much RAM adobe photoshop CS5 will use when running on a MAC?
I dunno but one thing for sure, I won't be paying these jerks $199 just to upgrade.
Why not tell us all how you really feel Doug ?
Well, I for one will be upgrading, no question. Only question is do I upgrade to the regular, or the extended, or just buy the whole darn suite!
Not sure anybody yet knows how CS5 will be optimally configured to run on a Mac in its newer version. In the past, because PS for the Mac was multi-processor blind, and was not configured for 64-bit throughputs, etc., one built a machine that stressed disk speeds and RAM. But it really depended upon what you were doing. If you were doing lots of layers and small adjustments to images, you could get by with less RAM if you had a separate fast scratch disk for the file swapping. Or, you could beef up the RAM to handle that swapping. As files got bigger, but the processing did not change, fast drives for swapping became more and more important.
Now, with true multiprocessor and multithread awareness, plus the ability to better utilize GPUs, and not just CPUs, the configuration needs could be changed again. With the advent of the faster bus in the newer Macs, and their fine-tuning, stuff may be able to move into and out of processor and RAM a lot faster, so huge amounts of RAM may not be quite as important. Handling large files is still a horsepower issue, so faster an more CPU power is the name of that game, plus having the right amount of RAM to support those throughputs.
I discovered something quite interesting today using a new 15" MBP with 2.66GHz i7 core chips and only 4GB of stock RAM. I ran a huge file set through Aperture (yes, that is NOT PS CS5) in a batch process to resize RAW and PSD files ranging in size from 17MB to 250MB in size, convert them to sRGB and apply a watermark. During that process, my CPUs were at 90% or more the entire time. However, I never maxed out the 4GB of RAM, and had few page outs, plus the swap files were never very large. That really surprised me, as it suggested that even that heavy load was well within "stock specs" of the machine, and adding more RAM probably would not make much difference, and neither would a faster HD, since I was pulling stuff from a RAID5 storage, and placing the finished stuff onto an external FW800 drive, so the internal drive did almost no work once the app got loaded. Quite a surprise about what may NOT be needed. Bigger file handling will probably benefit from a bit more RAM for most things, but it may be worth waiting to see just how things run before tweaking the machine more than it may need.
While some folks have been talking about CS5, and it is coming very soon, there does not seem to be much data or tests over its performance on different Macs at this point. I am sure just running it in 64-bit on Snow Leopard with a normal 7200rpm HDD and 4GB of RAM will probably work quite nicely. Sorry not to have more concrete data, but just suggesting we may have to start rethinking things and figuring out what apps are more drive intensive or RAM intensive, or that can truly take advantage of both, as not all can or do, and how things pass into and out of the CPU will matter also.
I had a very similar reaction as yours to Doug's comment, but you beat me to the reply.....and then you retracted it!! LOL
Trials are now available and you can purchase the version online at Adobe...
I've been a loyal fan and immediate upgrader of all the various iterations of the Creative Suite. I use InDesign and Illustrator at least as much (if not more) than PS. The one drawback to immediate upgrades to the suite is that not everyone I work with makes the transition as soon as the new suites are available. Not a huge deal, but somewhat annoying if I forget to send a copy of the file to a commercial printer saved as a ".inx" formatted file. That's not an issue for PS.
As a Beta tester for PS5, I learned to really like some of the new features and feel that the upgrade is worth it. However, since some of my clients and vendors are still using CS3, I'll probably wait for a few months (or until I can't stand it anymore) to make the upgrade to the full suite.
CS5 i will upgrade to but Indesign 5 i will wait also since I have to deal with press houses. They always seem to be at least one generation behind. CS5 is 64 bit that alone is worth it.
200 dollars is nothing to upgrade and have no issue to do that. My one bitch with Adobe is there upgrade structure when you have 3 qualifying products to get into a Suite package. Cs5, Indesign and Acrobat Pro 9 only count as one unit so upgrading to a Creative suite makes it a little tough. I wish they actually counted 3 products instead of one. Now maybe things changed and need to check but I would rather upgrade to a suite and be done with it. If anyone has any idea's how I can do that let me know. I just may have to call them and see what can be done.
Guy - That looks like the Design Standard Suite is what you need - which is what I think I'm going to get. I am taking class at the right time (yeah) and can qualify for the student teacher version. So, my straight Photoshop upgrade would be $199 or the educational price for the Design Standard Suite of PS/ID/Acrobat is $299.
In design is a very useful alternative (to their Booksmart software) in working with Blurb for books as you can use it to make your book for upload.
Yea was looking at Indesign and looks to be able to do mobile devices as well so would like to have it. I got 849 to a suite but maybe doing something wrong. Have to figure this out later.
Being a workshop owner does not seem to qualify for educational. Bummer
$849 is correct....and I have In Design and PS CS4.
Just started the download now....2.4 gb
Downloaded the master suite and the PremierePro content disk images (plus a couple other with goodies). Just those two is over 9GB :-)
Design Standard is PS/ID/Acrobat - the upgrade for Design Standard 4 to 5 is $499 it is just that the website assumes you either have the suite already or only one product and there isn't a price if you already own two or three of the products. I guess unless I'm totally out in left field or naive I would call Adobe Customer Support before paying the $849.
i just loaded 3 betterlight pano's, and photoshop used 9Gb of phys. memory. much better than the 3.7 it used to use. of course this means i'm going to have to spend money and get more memory
Optimizing Photoshop CS5 section that Lloyd Chambers (diglloyd) has just added to his Mac Performance Guide has graphs of memory usage on different Macintosh models. Well worth reading for anyone wondering about whether to upgrade. (Warning: you may need to factor in the price of extra RAM to take full advantage of the upgrade.)
Great addition, Jonathon. Glad that this is now posted for folks to start thinking about what they have, or may need. Looks like there still are some gotchas with how you configure PS CS5, such as Tile Sizes and such.
Personal comment....while many of us need to use PS for lots of things, it is becoming more apparent with every new version that they should really consider rebuilding the app from the ground up, and get past some of the legacy cobwebs that are still part of things. Besides an ever steepening upgrade cost for every new version, the hardware demands seem to be growing at an even more frightening pace. I am sure all of us have 32GB of RAM in those tricked out Mac Pros just waiting to tackle things.....LOL.
That was a really interesting thing that Lloyd Chambers commented on....needing to get the RAM pre-allocated and warmed up before things can begin to rock. I do not ever recall seeing that sort of thing in any app before.
It might not be a big issue if all you are running is PS CS5, but most of us have other things working at the same time also. That is sort of the point about multi-tasking, multi-core, multi-threading on modern computers. I wonder how well CS5 will release that RAM for say C1 or Phocus or Aperture to grab to use for its needs, and then what does that do to the "pre-allocation" configuration in CS5? Does one have to restart CS5 and get it warmed up every time? This seems very strange. Hope somebody that knows what is going on can explain this.
The "Warming up" that he refers to is the usual bit that is seen when items needed for use by a program are initially loaded, and from that point on are cached, or files that have been referenced are available in file system cache rather than on physical disk.
Most of the hit I believe is due to the synthetic nature of the benchmark and will probably not be noticed in typical usage.
I have stopped paying attention to that particular set of synthetic benchmarks since they are so different from what I do on a daily basis.
Although Lloyd mentions that Adobe has some tuning to do, which I agree is probably true especially in the more interactive areas involving the interaction of on-screen graphics in synchrony with pen or mouse events, I think that these benchmarks need to be re-designed to reflect the actual use of most users who routinely do not do massive batch actions on large files, but rather manipulate them at least to some degree with hand and eye at human speeds. If such a benchmark were to be created, I am sure that it might display some of the issues that show up particularly with graphics acceleration turned off or with older graphics cards.
From my own experience with months of use with CS5, I suggest that it is a worthy upgrade, but not based on any particular benchmark.
A simple meaningful benchmark for the large file folks (like me) might be something pretty simple, like the time it takes to save a 4G psb. You will find no particular advantage there; it is as slow as ever.
Anyone tried 3rd party scripts or plugins like Photokit, Nik, Perceptool, etc? I'm guessing they are not 64 bit compatible.
In 64-bit mode none of my plugins (all the PixelGenius, Nik, Imagenomic, etc.) show up. I'm currently undecided whether it will be better to restart CS5 in 32-bit when I need to use one, or better to load the image in CS4 for that step. I thought of that when I was getting ready to uninstall CS4; decided to keep it around a little bit longer.
I am tending to agree with you about the somewhat less realistic tests in the benchmarking, which is designed more to show overall speeds and handling of larger stresses, and not so much actual use. What I have been wondering about is if PS CS5 is just a slow start from not being open already. So if you were working on something in say C1 or Aperture or whatever else, and needed to shell out to PS for some finish work and maybe saving to PSD or PSB files, you would be better off having opened PS before and just let it sit open and ready to run. When in a long working session, that is not much of a problem, but I have many times needed to open PS from some other app just to do one or two things, and that start-up is just slow, and then the file writing you mentioned is also slow. (This is my gripe about the legacy cobwebs still in the app.)
Not trying to run it down, as I think there are some really nice new features, and am glad to see it 64-bit capable, but it still looks like there are speedbumps, inefficiencies, and other issues still lingering after many, many generations of this app. The tests from Lloyd Chambers suggest it does well, but they also suggest that there are some glitchy things that are harder to explain, like working speeds from first start. The way I process, I try not to have more things open and running than I really need, as my systems were always a bit RAM lean, but other apps, as I mentioned about Aperture, are more than capable of doing quite well under those conditions. I still think many of the Adobe apps need rebuilding from the ground up to get rid of so much of the legacy sludge.
As for the concerns about the plug-ins....Bill, that was my worry also. Until those plug-ins and PS CS5 get coordinated to truly operate in a 64-bit environment, there is not much gained yet, so CS4 or even CS3 with most plug-ins will get the job done about as fast.
I use CS5 in 32 bit for some time now to have all plugins. Using it seems about as fast as CS4 before (don't have P65+ images though).
Last edited by ustein; 1st May 2010 at 13:06.
The interesting scratch behavior of CS5 might be worth noting.
Despite its capability for using large memory, it still allocates scratch whether it actually needs it or not. For example, when one loads a 346M file, for example, PS12 allocates a 2.24 G scratch file before anything has been done at all. The information panels at this point displays 346M/346M. At this point PS 12 is using only 847 M of real and 1.06G of virtual memory.
Performing a stamp visible, increases the information panel sizes to 346/692, and gratifyingly memory usage increases to 12.5GR/1.51GV and the scratch file did not grow remaining at 2.24G.
Duplicating layers to grow the image to 346M/3.38G caused the scratch to grow to 3.37G and memory usage to 2.85GR/3.09GV.
Next, closing the file but leaving PS12 running... behold scratch. It remains at 3.37G. The file remains allocated even though there is no present demand. PS12 also held on to its real memory allocations with no change there either.
Re-opening the original file caused no change in memory or scratch allocation. to demonstrate that this behavior is really static, and that there is no time based garbage collection, I allowed PS to continue running over night. The next morning, there was no change in memory usage or scratch file allocation.
When PSCS5 was finally quit, the scratch file was deallocated.
While looking at the usage of scratch, I also noticed an interesting tidbit.
Although scratch had been allocated, the file was nowhere to be found!.
the usual place "/Volumes/Scratch/.TemporaryItems/folders.501/Cleanup\ At\ Startup/ was empty even though activity monitor as well as the "du" command indicated that 3.37G had been used. So the file had been allocated, but where was it? More on this mystery later when I research the details of the new "Disable VM Buffering" plugin when it is released.
Last edited by Bob; 3rd May 2010 at 00:47.
On actions and synthetic benchmarks...
I noticed an interesting footnote concerning actions in the writeup adobe provides at http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/404/kb40444...ram%2064%20cs5
in that article it notes thatPhotoshop writes data to the hard disk incrementally while you pause in Photoshop. When you run actions, there are no pauses for Photoshop to write to the disk, so Photoshop writes to the disk while the action runs.So what that means is that benchmarks that consist of a series of operations in one unbroken action do not provide the opportunity of photoshop to perform its disk operations during user think-time. In other words, a blur might be complete, but its results might not be written to disk until later, so it is not really that meaningful to perform one action in an action several times then to divide to determine the time that the individual operation takes since the factor of i/o overlap will have been not considered. Of course, the i/o operations are necessary, but humans tend to take time to move their arms and think about what to do between operations, so the system is "released" to the user sooner then the total timed of the effects of the user's input.
I have tried loading both Viveza II and Silver Efex pro into CS 5. Neither seems to work. Does anyone know if CS 5 requires new versions of these products?
"Photoshop CS5 will for the first time, run in 64-bit on Mac OS 10.5 (Leopard) and Mac OS 10.6 (Snow Leopard). Currently all Nik Software products are 32-bit compatible. For this reason, none of our products will work natively in Photoshop CS5 while in the default 64-bit mode. To work around this issue, until the 64-bit version of Nik Software products are released, Photoshop CS5 will need to be forced into 32-bit mode.-bob
Typically the user will need to locate the Photoshop CS5 application file (Macintosh HD | Applications | Photoshop CS5. Once located, select it, press Command + I (apple key + I) to get the Information dialog window. In the information dialog window, midway down there should be a check box that will allow you to select "Run in 32-bit Mode", then close the information window. Once this is done, each time Photoshop CS5 is launched it will automatically be running in 32-bit mode and all Nik Software product will work as they did in previous versions of Photoshop.
Noticed today that TWAIN resources may or may not be supported...
Case in point...my Epson 4990 TWAIN (reinstalled!) will load and preview in
CS5 but when I click SCAN an error message states Scanner not installed.
However it shows in System Preferences and the TWAIN is in Presets:Input/Output. And this is in 32 bit mode...did not even bother with 64 after NIK/OnOne/Imagenomic/Akvis/Photokit do not work.
What a crock...I have been using Photoshop for the past five years to scan with different Epson scanners...in addition to my Nikon 4000 and Hasselblad 343.
Nice to upgrade....get to wait for 64 bit upgrades on the vendors end and Adobe to get its act together....my $849 upgrade may help them get temp help to make this work?
So did anyone upgrade yet?
That would be good news indeed. However, I am just loading CS5 now and I see that it loaded the 32-bit emulator of MS!!!! on 64-bit Windows 7
WTF as they say en France. Is it 64-bit or not. (sorry, since I have a non-graphics business, we need to use MS OS )
So, what is going on. If the 64bit on mac is real but on MS is just 'faked' that is important to know.
Anybody out there know?
Last edited by gogopix; 3rd May 2010 at 17:28.
It seems pretty typical for plugins to lag behind a new release of the suite. For what it's worth, I was running both the CS5 Beta and CS4 concurrently in 64 bit mode. I would switch to CS4 when I wanted to run my plugins and then open the resulting .tif in CS5 to play with its new features. They seemed to play nice together and there's nothing to prevent you from loading the entire CS5 suite into your applications alongside previous versions. Not an ideal solution, but it might help until the upgrades come along.
I installed the trial then uninstalled it. I still think its a rip off to charge 200 bucks for a single release upgrade. It was never that expensive before. They can stick it where the sun don't shine as far as I am concerned.
The hard fact for me is I only use one plug-in regularly --- DFine for noise reduction --- and even at that, I only use it on occasion. So for now, I simply launch CS4 when I have an image that needs it. I can wait until NIK get's their code up to speed or the rest. I like running CS5 in 64 bit.
I'm in a similar situation as Jack; I don't use any plug-ins although NIK does look promising. I was all set to hit the but it now button however I won't be here for the delivery and don't want it sitting on the door step till I return so I'll wait til the end of the month.
Re scanning - that's something else I rarely do now that I've gone completely digital. There are rare moments that I need to use my scanner and when I do I just open CS4 32bit (I have both 64 and 32 shortcuts on my desktop).
I seen the web cast on the new functions and all in all it looks like a much better upgrade than what was between 2 and 3. CS4 was the first to actually offer some sort 64bit and now it looks like 5 has matured that much more.
Scanning is easy -- Buy VueScan, way better than any twain plug...
CS5 just arrived this morning(I prefer physical media). I'll install it later tonight. Anyone else going to the Kelby seminar in SSF on the 17th?
α900+VG|F20|2xF58|16-35,24-70,135Z|STF|70-400G|50,85 1.4|16,20,28,100M,80-200APO f/2.8|28-135|500f/8|1x-3xMacro|2xMFC-1000|Tiltall+RRS, Bellows, etc.