Photoshop CS2 with Integrated Graphics

[thomasp]

How well does CS2 run on the Integrated Graphics-equipped intelMacs? Working with a half-decent file size (30Mb+)?

My dad is considering buying a new laptop for location work (photographer), and we're not sure what CS2 will be like on the Integrated-Graphics macs - basically that's one of the things which will swing us either to the MacBook or the MacBook Pro.

 

[Squareball]

The issue really is that CS2 on Intel Macs runs under Roestta and not native. So I don't think the graphics are the real speed issue here

 

[thomasp]

The issue really is that CS2 on Intel Macs runs under Roestta and not native. So I don't think the graphics are the real speed issue here

We've "played" with CS2 on one of the Intel iMacs in an Apple Store, and it seemed marginally faster than on our Dual 867MHz G4, and about a thousand times faster than PS7 on our 500MHz G3 iBook!

 

[Voidness]

How well does CS2 run on the Integrated Graphics-equipped intelMacs? Working with a half-decent file size (30Mb+)?

My dad is considering buying a new laptop for location work (photographer), and we're not sure what CS2 will be like on the Integrated-Graphics macs - basically that's one of the things which will swing us either to the MacBook or the MacBook Pro.

Integrated graphics has no affect on performance in Photoshop. Photoshop completely relies on the CPU and RAM for everything it does. This only holds for the current version of Photoshop, this might change in the future.

 

[milo]

Integrated graphics has no affect on performance in Photoshop. Photoshop completely relies on the CPU and RAM for everything it does. This only holds for the current version of Photoshop, this might change in the future.

Yep. A faster processor helps a little, but the real speed will come from a universal version of the software. Integrated graphics will make zero difference on an app like photoshop.

 

[tchorta]

Integrated graphics has no affect on performance in Photoshop. Photoshop completely relies on the CPU and RAM for everything it does. This only holds for the current version of Photoshop, this might change in the future.

Is this also true for the Dreamweaver and Macromedia's other apps? Thanks

 

[thomasp]

Integrated graphics has no affect on performance in Photoshop. Photoshop completely relies on the CPU and RAM for everything it does. This only holds for the current version of Photoshop, this might change in the future.

If Photoshop relies on RAM, then surely a 2GHz MacBook would run Photoshop "worse" than a 2GHz MacBook Pro (assuming all performance related things are equal, aside from the graphics), both with identical memory, since the integrated graphics removes at least 85Mb RAM from use by the OS? So, with 512Mb RAM, that means that only 427Mb is available for the OS and Photoshop.


I believe Adobe say that you should have at least three times the RAM as the image size you are working with, so at least 90Mb for a 30Mb file, and 270Mb if you're working with three 30Mb files (not uncommon - in fact, a regular occurance). When dealing with the file sizes that pro photographers do, every kilobyte of RAM is useful

 

[Voidness]

Is this also true for the Dreamweaver and Macromedia's other apps? Thanks

Yes, they're all CPU dependent, the GPU has no affect on performance in those apps. On the other hand, some of Apple's own apps are affected by the graphics card, such as Aperture, Motion, Final Cut Pro, and others.

 

[tchorta]

Yes, they're all CPU dependent, the GPU has no affect on performance in those apps. On the other hand, some of Apple's own apps are affected by the graphics card, such as Aperture, Motion, Final Cut Pro, and others.

Thanks so much for the info!

 

[giganten]

So Photoshop and Dreamweaver will work great on integrated graphics.
But how will cad program like solidworks in bootcamp run on the integrated graphics.