Ok, please forgive me if I'm bringing up old questions here, I searched a little but didn't see what I was looking for.

I'm about to upgrade my wife's PC which is a production machine. She's a photographer, digital artist and photoshop instructor, runs huge batch processes on very large RAW files (sometimes batching hundreds of images at a time that total 50+g of data) and we need something pretty beefy.

The machine she's using now I built about 3 years ago and its still a fairly sturdy machine with a 3.0GHz intel CPU that supports Hyperthreaded apps, 3G of RAM, etc.....but after 3 years of heavy use having blown through 3 hard drives in that time and now starting to see some real latency issues we need to upgrade.

In upgrading I've run into the 32 bit vs 64 bit OS delimma as well as the Dual vs Quad core argument and just can't figure out the best thing to do.

I'd like this PC to be able to run the new CS4 when it comes out later this year which will be 64-bit application. I'd like to not have a lot of major compatability issues with older 32 bit periphials that dont have 64 bit drivers (CF card readers, printers, etc).

My questions are this:
1) Is it jumping the gun designing this new system around 64 bit applications and technology since its still so new?
2) Since we're running a 3.0GHz CPU now, would I have to get a 3.0 Dual or Quad CPU to see similar processing speed without overclocking? Since she typically runs her maching 8-10 hours a day doing CPU intensive processing I dont like to overclock due to heat problems.
3) How much of a performance increase would we see in the time it takes to batch process 30+G of 12 megapixel RAW files? Comparing a 64 bit Vista system with 8G of RAM and a 3.0GHz Quad Core Processor vs a 32 Bit Vista system maxed out at 4G of RAM and an E8400 Dual 3.0GHz CPU?

64 bit has been around for a long time for the big buisness computers. 64bit was first used by AMD to boost desktop performance by using existing technology several years back. if you'll be able to use more than 3 gigs of ram go with a 64 OS.

new CPUs get much more done per clock cycle than the old ones.

I think you will see a phenominal performance boost by going to even a slow quad and 8 gigs of ram.

you may also want to consider a high quality RAID card and a big Raid 5 or 1+0

Video and pix encoding IS the app that the extra cores pay off. Most are multithreaded, and getting more so with each new upgrade of code in those apps.

Go to Tom's charts here and compare the P4 3.0 vs a quad in the photoshop or encoding benchs, not even in the same sphere!

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts [...] 316%2C1311

Photoshop comparo above

you'll see a massive improvement in productivity... but how much do you have to spend... cause if you have some money you can get a q9450, 8 gigs, and vista 64-bit for about 600 dollars... that 2.6 ghz quad will out perform your 3 ghz pentium 4 like mad...

I went from a p4 @ 3 ghz to a pentium d at 2.4 ish... and then a core 2 duo at 1.8... each time the speed was noticeably faster... so if you got a 2.6 ghz quad core... it would be a huge improvement.... so yeah it should work fine

^Agreed. A quad will be a significant improment for you, even the Q6600 at 2.4 will be a major upgrade; a simple BIOS switch gives you 3.0ghz without voltage changes. With multicore coded software, speed isn't nearly as important as being able to effectively use the additional cores. Make sure you drop in at LEAST 4gig of ram (you are currently used to 3GB) and 8 would work very well in a 64bit environment. A RAID5 config might be a better use of 4 drives than 0+1/1+0; if you are getting that many drives anyway...better speed and scaling, plus parity. Only 2-3 drives, RAID0 with a data backup. 3+ (OS drives) RAID5.

You can avoid over heating on a quad by getting a $40-$50 heatsink instead of the boxed coolers they come with.

You should make sure that your version of Photoshop is multithreaded i.e. can take advantage of multiple core CPU's. That's not to say your upgrade will be wasted if it isn't as modern CPU's even in single threaded apps leave the old P4's in the dust but it is something your should be aware off.

Thanks for the responses so far.

I've given myself a budget of $1400 for this new system.

the Q9450 is $350 on Newegg
the MB I was looking at is the ASUS Rampage @ $290
8800GT 512MB Video Card - $190
I figure 8G of good RAM is going to run $250
A good new case is going to run $200
750-1000W Power Supply @ $150
2 x 500G HD @ $160

not including additional cooling equipment which I will probably need thats $1,590 not including taxes or shipping. Any suggestions on how to get that price down a bit without sacrificing?

a non crossfire board might save you some coin.

the 8800 gt is cheaper than that, and prices will continue to drop with ATIs 4 series releasing later this month.

a good case is less than that
I've got the mini version of this one.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6811129025
it's very quiet and generaly good quality

if your a fan fanatic, the antec 900 is virtualy being given away now.

750 watts seams sort of high to me for a single GPU system.

Yes, get a ga-p35-ds3r motherboard, it has built in raid, and is only $120. You honestly do not need ANY of the advantages of the Rampage. Your power supply is also way overkill, with that system you won't need more than a 550-600w unit. Look at the corsairs, the 550w version can be bought for 90. So thats -170 for the mobo, and -60 for the psu.

You don't need a 750w-1000w PSU. Look for a less expensive motherboard, like the p35-ds3l(r). Coolermaster cases are very good for the money. The centurion 5 is only like $50, and their bigger "gamer" model is like $70 ($200 for a case is way excessive and somehow I don't think your wife will appreciate windows and lights). The Q6750 should be at a good price since the price was dropped.

Change the HD to the WD 640, smae price as the 500, but that drive is as fast as the Raptor X is, for 1/2 price and triple the storage space.

The 9600 is the card to go with, if she is not doing RTS or FPS games atgreater than 1600x1200.

Or the ATI 3870 is a good deal these days, and do have a slightly better image quality.

The gigabyte D series boards gets good reviews, and runs $150ish.

And a GOOD 500 - 550 watt psu will handle this system, as my Thermaltake Purepower 500 handled my Q9450 and a 8800 GTX with all the added stuff just fine. It never pulled more than 370 or so at load.

$65 dollars brand new these days.

^ agreed you don't need that much for a motherboard...

you can get a 8800 gt for as little as 135 now... http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814121224

psu can stay the same

hdds are fine

case... a tad expensive... most good cases run at about the 100 dollar mark... maybe the case groo posted

ram you could get 2 of these http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 0146731...

I personally love mushkin because they are highly stable even at extreme speeds... and in the bios you drop the cas to 4 instead of being 5/4

^ wow in the time it took to write ^ that post 3 people posted lol

The last one I built (the one she is currently using) is a coolermaster case that was a little cheaper and has been fine. I'm a little infatuated with the Cooler Master Cosmos 1000 full-time ATX case that is $199, it's supposed to be extremely quiet and has lots of room. I'm definitely open to suggestion though.

On the power supply I think I've got a 650W in our current machine. Figure a little beefier PS wouldn't be a bad thing if I ever wanted to add a 2nd GPU or a liquid cooling system (not sure if the liquid cooling requires much power).

Watercooling, depends on the pump. If you want a 12v DD pump, look to draw a decent amount of power:

Nominal voltage: 12 V DC
Operating voltage range: 6 to 14 VDC
Nominal power (@ 12 V): 24 W
Nominal current (@ 12 V): 2 amps

Agree on the P35 chipset board, you would be better served to go with this and just get a single good card instead of 2 in SLI/Crossfire.