me@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>>>> photoshop doesn't benefit from 64 bit as much as people think it
>>>> does, and i assume lightroom is reasonably similar.
>>>
>>> It can use 50% more ram, 3GB vs 2GB and then use what is leftover
>>> for it's scratch space. That isn't significant?
>>
>> Just a hint, it aint happening since Photoshop isn't optimized for
>> 64-bit. You can have 10GB of memory and it aint making any
>> difference. The only thing significant here is you are in total
>> bliss with thinking the placebo of having extra memory is actually
>> helping when it is not. Anything past
>> 1.5GB of RAM is a waste for Photoshop.
>
> Wrong again. Look at
> http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/pdfs/photoshop_overview.pdf
>
> High-capacity RAM compatibility.
> Make the most of systems running 64-bit processors. Photoshop CS2 can
> address approximately 3.5 GB of RAM on a Power Macintosh G5 running
> Mac OS X, a Windows XP 64-bit Edition system running an Intel® Xeon
> processor with EM64T, or an AMD Athlon 64 or Opteron processor"
Yep, just as I suspected, you are beyond placebo bliss. That reads like a
late night infomercial. I think once you start seeking out unbiased
sources
of information you might find out the real deal. But hey, if it makes you
feel good throwing more sticks of memory in the old box, by all
means......
It's not going to hurt, but it isn't buying you any real world benefits
either. It gets worse with CS3 and 64-bit. Photoshop CS3 gets its best
performance gains from disk I/O and SMP upgrades, not memory.
Rita
|
