Jump to content

Ultimate Photoshop Pc


D_block

Recommended Posts

ATI do have superior image quality... there's plenty of evidence on the net to prove that. A/B test them yourself, the color calibration is just better for photo/graphics editing. The monitor only displays what the video card tells it to, not the other way around.

You are so very wrong there...

ATI cards may be nice but the control center sucks and is VERY resource hungry.

nVidia cards may have had their issues recently, However their controls\control panel are VERY superior in the controlling of color and quality settings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


There is some truth to the color issue with certain video cards, but since the Nvidia 8xxx series they've been able to reproduce very good color in both static pictures and moving video. However, ATI's Avivo processing UVD chip also makes it pretty much a dead heat. After that, it gets down to drivers and monitor, with the monitor being of utmost importance. I've had great color on a Dell 30", and switched to a Samsung 24" and (with the same settings and video card) gotten not so good color accuracy with the exact same setup. Yes, I can tweak the monitor and drivers for the 24" (and I did, to get the same results), but it just underscores the point that video cards can be equal, and yet not get accurate color due to calibration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had great color on a Dell 30", and switched to a Samsung 24" and (with the same settings and video card) gotten not so good color accuracy with the exact same setup.

The monitor makes a huge difference for sure. Those who do graphics professionally tend to chose their monitors carefully. That 30" Dell Ultrasharp has a IPS panel, which has great colors, from any viewing angle. Most monitors with TN panels (including most 24" models, samsung included) can be problematic, as the colors tend to "shift" when you view it not dead-on (brightness/contrast is also an issue -- just see the bottom pics on this page to see). Obviously there's the gamut and all that too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, well aware, I was just pointing out that calling out the video card (at least nowadays), unless it's some onboard POS, really isn't going to do anything to "upgrade" the photoshop experience like a (very) nice IPS monitor would compared to the very vendor-popular (due to it being cheaper) TN style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, you can stop flaming on me.
There was no flaming.
also, your all rather rude for mods.
Who was rude and how?
/PAE works in XP Pro 32bit, I use it, it works period, I don't care what some book says.
Umm... er... let's see... Windows Internals... written by Microsoft... about Windows... a Microsoft product... so obviously the book's information is completely wrong.

Yes, PAE works in XP Pro 32bit, and yes, you use it. However, you have obviously no understanding whatsoever of what it does and how it works.

By the way, if you don't want to deal with rebuttal that refutes your accusations that "The /3GB switch doesn't do what you think it does" when the poster was dead on, they don't post incorrect statements as such.

Also, "should read the M$ docs a bit more clearly"... well Windows Internals would be considered the Microsoft documentation on the matter and I believe you're the one that needs to re-read the documentation a bit more clearly.

Oh and as a final note, don't expect anyone to take you seriously when you spell Microsoft "M$". QED.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

/PAE works in XP Pro 32bit, I use it, it works period, I don't care what some book says.

also, your all rather rude for mods.

Your idea of a flame and mine are vastly different. Being told (rather forcefully) that you are wrong is not flaming, but I digress. Anyway, school's in session - I told you I'd do it:

/3GB allows for 3GB of VA for processes that are compiled LARGEADDRESSAWARE (not all are) and allows for any LARGEADDRESSAWARE process running on the machine to utilize the full 3GB (non-LARGEADDRESSAWARE processes still can only address 2GB of VA, regardless of the /3GB switch). This however limits the kernel to 1GB, into which it must cram nonpaged pool, paged pool, session view, drivers, kernel services, etc. /3GB does nothing more, nothing less.

All x86 kernels for client OSes, NT4 Pro, 2000 Pro, XP, even Vista x86 are not designed to address more than 4GB of RAM, period. On a client OS kernel, /PAE is used for DEP, and DEP only, and is enabled automatically in OSes that support it when you have a processor that supports hardware DEP. The only OSes from Microsoft that can utilize the AWE APIs are server OSes, and only when the application is built to do so. It works as thus - the AWE "window" is actually mapped into the 2GB or 3GB of VA the process has, and the process itself is responsible for mapping views of RAM above 4GB into it's process-configurable "window" (the window is a process-configurable address range in which the memory allocated by the AWE APIs is made available to the process). Note that this is essentially a hack, and as such you *cannot* run executable code in the AWE window - it can be used for data only, and again, the process itself is responsible for it's own memory management of RAM mapped above the 4GB boundary when PAE is enabled - thus, it has to have it's own memory management code built in (like, say MS SQL does).

Nexus, suffice to say I know what I'm talking about when it comes to memory management, and I'm not going into specifics - I *know* how this stuff works. I'm even certified in this area.

Anyway, I'd love to hear how you're "using" PAE on your XP Pro x86 box, considering the x86 client OS kernels don't make any of the AWE APIs necessary to support PAE available to running processes...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...