well that is my mistake. i had no idea adobe was limited to the ram before cs3. and if they are using core image that is fantastic. in that case i would say cs3 is a great update.
well that is my mistake. i had no idea adobe was limited to the ram before cs3. and if they are using core image that is fantastic. in that case i would say cs3 is a great update.
Yea the last few versions of PS were only able to use approx 2 gb of ram, thats it, but now since 64bit computing has come into play and the amount of available ram that is put into PC's these days, PS CS3 can now utilize it. Hence faster processing of image data. Also the amount of cores/ cpu's will help too, hopefully the final release (if the beta doesnt do so already) of CS3 will untilize more than 2 cores/ cpu's, that should bode really well with the mac pro users...
Honestly.. I think the major feature in this release besides it being universal is the fact that it taps into the grafx card power to help process images (along with expanding the ram usage), which makes sense these days given the cards that are being developed. This feature should have been developed a few yrs ago by Adobe of all people, leave it to Apple to take the first step. The non destructive filters are nice as well. My 2 cents.
Just for the record, Photoshop CS3 doesn't actually use the graphics card. They wanted to put the feature in, but it never panned out, and they forgot to remove it from the preferences.
Just for the record, Photoshop CS3 doesn't actually use the graphics card. They wanted to put the feature in, but it never panned out, and they forgot to remove it from the preferences.
that may not be entirely true. Lynda's Deke said number of time that this is PS CS3 STANDARD edition and if we're to believe AI info there should also be PRO version that WILL have GFX acceleration.
As for Apple having it first , i'm not so sure. Surely Motion is great, but Aperature doesnt use GFX at all. I upgraded my G5's GFX from 9650 to 6800 Ultra and there isnt any speed improvment at all. You can double check these finding at barefeats , they also didnt see any difference in speed while having faster GFX. Apple sure hyped the app as such but i'd say it's all a lie.
that may not be entirely true. Lynda's Deke said number of time that this is PS CS3 STANDARD edition and if we're to believe AI info there should also be PRO version that WILL have GFX acceleration.
As for Apple having it first , i'm not so sure. Surely Motion is great, but Aperature doesnt use GFX at all. I upgraded my G5's GFX from 9650 to 6800 Ultra and there isnt any speed improvment at all. You can double check these finding at barefeats , they also didnt see any difference in speed while having faster GFX. Apple sure hyped the app as such but i'd say it's all a lie.
Aperture does use the graphics card: up until 1.5, you could find all of the Core Image kernels in the app's resources folder.
Also, the reason why Adobe isn't using the graphics card is because it has to pull the rendered image back through PCI-Express to the CPU. On larger images, this turns out to be slower than just processing everything on the CPU.
You can double check these finding at barefeats , they also didnt see any difference in speed while having faster GFX. Apple sure hyped the app as such but i'd say it's all a lie.
apple hyped up what app? photoshop? did you mean that its a lie that photoshop can take advantage of the GFX for increased performance? thats not a lie. adobe has been given the tools to take advantage of a state of the art OS that will allow them to take advantage of core image and off loading some of the CPU tasks to the GPU as well. if adobe didnt do that it has nothing to do with apple.
i thought adobe tapped into core image with this one?
Just for the record, Photoshop CS3 doesn't actually use the graphics card. They wanted to put the feature in, but it never panned out, and they forgot to remove it from the preferences.
I have to disagree, as the sys req's to run the app taken from the Adobe Labs site
The minimum system requirements for the Photoshop CS3 beta are
Macintosh
PowerPC G4 or G5 or Intel based Macintosh processor
Mac OS X v.10.4.8
320MB of RAM (512MB recommended)
64MB of video RAM
1.5GB of available hard-disk space
1,024x768 monitor resolution with 16-bit video card
DVD-ROM drive
Internet or phone connection required for product activation
QuickTime 7 software required for multimedia features
why would they mention needing a 64 mb grafx card if the app doesnt use it in some way? previous versions never mention needing a particular card, they just mention screen resolution and color array (ie: capable of 16 bit color).
I have to disagree, as the sys req's to run the app taken from the Adobe Labs site
The minimum system requirements for the Photoshop CS3 beta are
Macintosh
PowerPC G4 or G5 or Intel based Macintosh processor
Mac OS X v.10.4.8
320MB of RAM (512MB recommended)
64MB of video RAM
1.5GB of available hard-disk space
1,024x768 monitor resolution with 16-bit video card
DVD-ROM drive
Internet or phone connection required for product activation
QuickTime 7 software required for multimedia features
why would they mention needing a 64 mb grafx card if the app doesnt use it in some way? previous versions never mention needing a particular card, they just mention screen resolution and color array (ie: capable of 16 bit color).
Because a 32 MB graphics card hasn't been made in 5 or 10 years, and would literally fall apart on any heavy image editing?
apple hyped up what app? photoshop? did you mean that its a lie that photoshop can take advantage of the GFX for increased performance? thats not a lie. adobe has been given the tools to take advantage of a state of the art OS that will allow them to take advantage of core image and off loading some of the CPU tasks to the GPU as well. if adobe didnt do that it has nothing to do with apple.
i thought adobe tapped into core image with this one?
I think it usually takes a while for companies to take advantage of new OS technologies. Especially an app like Photoshop that is full of legacy shit, and needs feature parity on the Windows side.
apple hyped up what app? photoshop? did you mean that its a lie that photoshop can take advantage of the GFX for increased performance?
No, he meant Aperture. I don't think Aperture uses all that much GPU either except maybe the daft menus that do that genie effect. I hate that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregmightdothat
Because a 32 MB graphics card hasn't been made in 5 or 10 years, and would literally fall apart on any heavy image editing?
They are minimum requirements though and I would hope CS3 could still be usable on an older 32MB G4 Mini. 64MB seems a bit high considering that is often the minimum for a lot of games that are doing heavy 3D graphics constantly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hypolua
that really really sux. PS should use the grfx card in some fashion...it would help I would think.
I don't know about that. It accelerates image processing sure but often at the expense of accuracy. Plus, once you start dealing with huge resolution images, you run out of texture memory so the GPU won't help much. I think it also limits the color accuracy too doesn't it? Images rendered by OpenGL sometimes look different from CPU rendered ones.
No, he meant Aperture. I don't think Aperture uses all that much GPU either except maybe the daft menus that do that genie effect. I hate that.
Ironically, the genie effect's the only thing that doesn't happen on the graphics card, Everything else if fully accelerated (which is a big part of the reason why Red Eye and Spot Removal suck).
Comments
well that is my mistake. i had no idea adobe was limited to the ram before cs3. and if they are using core image that is fantastic. in that case i would say cs3 is a great update.
Yea the last few versions of PS were only able to use approx 2 gb of ram, thats it, but now since 64bit computing has come into play and the amount of available ram that is put into PC's these days, PS CS3 can now utilize it. Hence faster processing of image data. Also the amount of cores/ cpu's will help too, hopefully the final release (if the beta doesnt do so already) of CS3 will untilize more than 2 cores/ cpu's, that should bode really well with the mac pro users...
Honestly.. I think the major feature in this release besides it being universal is the fact that it taps into the grafx card power to help process images (along with expanding the ram usage), which makes sense these days given the cards that are being developed. This feature should have been developed a few yrs ago by Adobe of all people, leave it to Apple to take the first step. The non destructive filters are nice as well. My 2 cents.
Just for the record, Photoshop CS3 doesn't actually use the graphics card. They wanted to put the feature in, but it never panned out, and they forgot to remove it from the preferences.
Just for the record, Photoshop CS3 doesn't actually use the graphics card. They wanted to put the feature in, but it never panned out, and they forgot to remove it from the preferences.
that may not be entirely true. Lynda's Deke said number of time that this is PS CS3 STANDARD edition and if we're to believe AI info there should also be PRO version that WILL have GFX acceleration.
As for Apple having it first , i'm not so sure. Surely Motion is great, but Aperature doesnt use GFX at all. I upgraded my G5's GFX from 9650 to 6800 Ultra and there isnt any speed improvment at all. You can double check these finding at barefeats , they also didnt see any difference in speed while having faster GFX. Apple sure hyped the app as such but i'd say it's all a lie.
that may not be entirely true. Lynda's Deke said number of time that this is PS CS3 STANDARD edition and if we're to believe AI info there should also be PRO version that WILL have GFX acceleration.
As for Apple having it first , i'm not so sure. Surely Motion is great, but Aperature doesnt use GFX at all. I upgraded my G5's GFX from 9650 to 6800 Ultra and there isnt any speed improvment at all. You can double check these finding at barefeats , they also didnt see any difference in speed while having faster GFX. Apple sure hyped the app as such but i'd say it's all a lie.
Aperture does use the graphics card: up until 1.5, you could find all of the Core Image kernels in the app's resources folder.
Also, the reason why Adobe isn't using the graphics card is because it has to pull the rendered image back through PCI-Express to the CPU. On larger images, this turns out to be slower than just processing everything on the CPU.
You can double check these finding at barefeats , they also didnt see any difference in speed while having faster GFX. Apple sure hyped the app as such but i'd say it's all a lie.
apple hyped up what app? photoshop? did you mean that its a lie that photoshop can take advantage of the GFX for increased performance? thats not a lie. adobe has been given the tools to take advantage of a state of the art OS that will allow them to take advantage of core image and off loading some of the CPU tasks to the GPU as well. if adobe didnt do that it has nothing to do with apple.
i thought adobe tapped into core image with this one?
Just for the record, Photoshop CS3 doesn't actually use the graphics card. They wanted to put the feature in, but it never panned out, and they forgot to remove it from the preferences.
I have to disagree, as the sys req's to run the app taken from the Adobe Labs site
The minimum system requirements for the Photoshop CS3 beta are
Macintosh
PowerPC G4 or G5 or Intel based Macintosh processor
Mac OS X v.10.4.8
320MB of RAM (512MB recommended)
64MB of video RAM
1.5GB of available hard-disk space
1,024x768 monitor resolution with 16-bit video card
DVD-ROM drive
Internet or phone connection required for product activation
QuickTime 7 software required for multimedia features
why would they mention needing a 64 mb grafx card if the app doesnt use it in some way? previous versions never mention needing a particular card, they just mention screen resolution and color array (ie: capable of 16 bit color).
I have to disagree, as the sys req's to run the app taken from the Adobe Labs site
The minimum system requirements for the Photoshop CS3 beta are
Macintosh
PowerPC G4 or G5 or Intel based Macintosh processor
Mac OS X v.10.4.8
320MB of RAM (512MB recommended)
64MB of video RAM
1.5GB of available hard-disk space
1,024x768 monitor resolution with 16-bit video card
DVD-ROM drive
Internet or phone connection required for product activation
QuickTime 7 software required for multimedia features
why would they mention needing a 64 mb grafx card if the app doesnt use it in some way? previous versions never mention needing a particular card, they just mention screen resolution and color array (ie: capable of 16 bit color).
Because a 32 MB graphics card hasn't been made in 5 or 10 years, and would literally fall apart on any heavy image editing?
Anyway, http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/webforu...y&keyword1=gpu
GPUs aren't being used in CS3.
We are continually working with the GPU makers to improve their cards and drivers to address the needs of applications like Photoshop.
...the back channel from the display card isn't big
enough yet in shipping systems to allow for the use of the GPU as a
compute resource. The preference just didn't get removed in time for
the beta.
Its pretty nice, the palettes are a little funky, .
I thought the same thing. Notice that the close/minimize buttons are very windowsesque (_x) on the layers pallete. Hope this changes.
Because a 32 MB graphics card hasn't been made in 5 or 10 years, and would literally fall apart on any heavy image editing?
Maybe in the P.C. market - but not for the Mac. I had a Powerbook in 2002 with a 16mb card - never had trouble with large files.
apple hyped up what app? photoshop? did you mean that its a lie that photoshop can take advantage of the GFX for increased performance? thats not a lie. adobe has been given the tools to take advantage of a state of the art OS that will allow them to take advantage of core image and off loading some of the CPU tasks to the GPU as well. if adobe didnt do that it has nothing to do with apple.
i thought adobe tapped into core image with this one?
I think it usually takes a while for companies to take advantage of new OS technologies. Especially an app like Photoshop that is full of legacy shit, and needs feature parity on the Windows side.
apple hyped up what app? photoshop? did you mean that its a lie that photoshop can take advantage of the GFX for increased performance?
No, he meant Aperture. I don't think Aperture uses all that much GPU either except maybe the daft menus that do that genie effect. I hate that.
Because a 32 MB graphics card hasn't been made in 5 or 10 years, and would literally fall apart on any heavy image editing?
They are minimum requirements though and I would hope CS3 could still be usable on an older 32MB G4 Mini. 64MB seems a bit high considering that is often the minimum for a lot of games that are doing heavy 3D graphics constantly.
that really really sux. PS should use the grfx card in some fashion...it would help I would think.
I don't know about that. It accelerates image processing sure but often at the expense of accuracy. Plus, once you start dealing with huge resolution images, you run out of texture memory so the GPU won't help much. I think it also limits the color accuracy too doesn't it? Images rendered by OpenGL sometimes look different from CPU rendered ones.
I thought the same thing. Notice that the close/minimize buttons are very windowsesque (_x) on the layers pallete. Hope this changes.
the more Ive played around with it the more I like the minimized palettes feature.
No, he meant Aperture. I don't think Aperture uses all that much GPU either except maybe the daft menus that do that genie effect. I hate that.
Ironically, the genie effect's the only thing that doesn't happen on the graphics card, Everything else if fully accelerated (which is a big part of the reason why Red Eye and Spot Removal suck).