Bridge CS4 Functionality 8gb Ram, quad-core, vista 64

Just a workflow observation.
On my Workstation (8gb, 2 dual-core processors, Vista 64-bit) I loaded last weekends wedding. Only thing running in the background is Photoshop with just one test image to learn the new program on.
I fired up the Bridge, the way it downloaded, no changes, and loaded up the wedding folder.
There are 5427 images from the entire day over 3 cameras (Mark III, 5D, Mark II) Total size is 64.4 gb.
For adobe to load up the thumbs, sort and finish it's extractions and wheel-turning, it has so far taken over 50 minutes and we aren't finished.... The preview extractions are still counting down with somewhere around 2000 images to go, at a rate of 2/second.
I'm no math wiz or PS guru, but when it's done thinking, I'll repost the time.
If there is a better way to help the Bridge think, please enlighten me?
I have a trial version of PM that is lightning-fast responsive. I was just hoping the new Bridge would be efficient for filtering the weddings down quickly. CS3 crashed so much that I was forced to get PM last week.
...and no, that's not a plug for PM. Believe me, i WANT Adobe to be the only program. I can't stand having to float between programs just to do my job.

> I looked at the app Russell posted, and it apparently installs in the memory card. That means every time I erase the card and/or reformat it, the app has to be reloaded?
No way Lawrence!
'Preview Extractor' is a stand alone app that does what many other similar utilities do -> extracts the JPG that's embedded in every RAW file whether you ask your camera to do so or not. It does not even need to be installed as the little app just runs as a standalone utility. Nothing to install or uninstall. Not sure that you were looking at??
I once salvaged a bunch of NEFs that were damaged via a bad hard disk write and I was able to recover usable (full size) JPGs from the damaged NEFs even though the NEFs themselves would not open.
This app certainly does not need to be installed on memory cards...
Russell

Similar Messages

  • Seconds() function issue on Quad Core CPU

    Hello,
    I am noticing some timing issues using Seconds() function on a Quad Core computer. The optional boolean in Seconds() is True (by default). 
    With Core 2 Duo CPUs, the seconds() function is reporting elapsed time (since TestStand startup) correctly. However, I noticed on a Quad Core CPU that the seconds(True) function reports ~0.5s every 1 second. In other words, seconds() elapsed is incorrectly reported. Has anyone observed such issue?
    When the boolean parameter is set to False [i.e. Seconds(False)], there is no problem observed on Quad Core CPU.

    Howdy Troy,
    I don't have a quad core to duplicate your issue, but it sounds plausible. Since this is an older version of TestStand that was developed before multicores went mainstream, this very well may be expected behavior.
    You might instead call directly into the Windows API using kernel32.dll--particularly one of these functions:
    GetSystemTime
    GetSystemTimes (for multicore)
    GetTickCount
    External Link: MSDN: Time Functions (Windows)
    Judging from the nature of your question, I think GetTickCount would suit you best.
    I hope this helps!
    Warm regards,
    pBerg

  • My new iMac 27 i7 quad core (early 2011) is slower than the iMac 21 core duo  3,06 ghz (late 2009).

    hello i've just bouth my new imac 27" ( spring 2011) with  quad core i7 3,4ghz  4gb ram and 2gb ati radeon graphics..
    I've proceded with the migration assistent and just copied my old configurations, programs and datas from the old one ( imac late 2009 27" 8gb ram intel core duo 3,06 ghz, 256mb ati radeon graphics) to the new one...now they are twins with boot lion 10,7,2..what i've just discovered? that the old one is a litttle faster than the new one.
    photoshop is opening faster
    and more or less all the adobe suite..
    is that a joke? how is that possible? i can think that the  issue is all about the RAM (4gb new imac, 8gb old imac)..
    could someone help me please?
    thankyou.
    Andre

    As far as I am aware iMacs do not have upgradeable CPUs.

  • Question about Quad Core 2.93 and Octo-Core 2.66

    OK, so forgive me cause I am asking a question that has been asked a zillion times. I have read and searched and read and searched, however, I still don't quite understand a few things.
    I am a huge Aperture user. I shoot the Canon 1Ds Mark III and use photoshop a lot as well.
    I am still confused. What is the difference in performance between a
    loaded 8 GIGs ram Quad Core 2.93 or
    a middle 8-Core 2.66 12 gigs RAM
    I read benchmarks after benchmarks, but most use games for their stats and that does not help me. I read the boards, but it is all so confusing what people think. I went to the Apple store, and of course, they immediately said 8-core! hahaha.
    I hear an 8-core can be slower at single core apps than a quad core and so on and on.
    please help me!

    Hi-
    this question si about what the ** is the difference between a Quad 2.93 and a Octo 2.66.
    The question is pretty vague.
    Maybe asking "What benefit do I get from an octo core as opposed to a quad core?" would be better.
    To understand the main difference, and the main benefit of an octo core over a quad core, understanding the concept of multithreading is necessary.
    Basically, Multithreading is the ability of a system to break tasks up into portions (threads), and assign these portions across multiple CPU cores, enabling the calculation, thus the process, to be be completed faster than if the entire process were to be done on a single core.
    Because of this, more cores allows for faster completion of system functions. Yes, it's faster.
    Currently, some software isn't quite up to snuff in supporting/utilizing multithreading abilities of multi core systems.
    But, that is changing, and changing rapidly.
    Soon, all software will be able to utilize the multithreading ability of a multi core system, and greater increases in system performance will be realized.
    In the upcoming OS 10.6 release, further enhancement of multithreading operation will be seen.
    What this all means to the end user, say in Photoshop, is, work will fly, complex enhancements will be almost instantaneous, and productivity can be increased.
    Along with the multi core, multi channel memory will also allow for the use of larger amounts of RAM, with out the bottlenecking that occurs in singe channel systems.
    Again, everything works faster.
    The octo core allows for more physical RAM, which, even now, but more so in the near future, always helps with memory hungry applications like Photoshop.
    Basically, the biggest difference between the two machines, is the octo core is more future proof- that is, it will support future software enhancements better than the quad core.
    And, we are talking +near future+.
    I believe the Quad is limited to 8 gigs RAM, not 16.
    Both machines can use 4GB DIMMs, so the quad core can use 16GB and the octo core can use 32GB.
    Buying RAM from a trusted third party vendor can reduce costs greatly, without affecting the Apple warranty.
    Again, Apple employees are telling you what the book says, what they currently offer, not what can be done.
    Apple store said SDD in a Mac Pro is not a good idea at all. Again, more conflicting suggestions.
    The Apple store will not recommend anything that Apple is not officially selling.
    SSDs work, and they work well.
    Just ask Samsara, or some of the other hot rodders on these forums.
    And because I don't understand scratch disk, SDD disks, raptor drives etc, this all is not getting me anywhere. thus, why i tried the Apple store.
    Ask. Study. Use Wikipedia.
    Educating oneself is paramount to improving decisions, questions, work and life........
    SSD - The future, now. Fast, expensive (but coming down in price), no moving parts (reliable)Solid State Drive
    *Raptor Drives* - A family of 10,000 RPM SATA drives from Western Digital. These drives are high performance. They make systems run faster.
    *Scratch Disks* - These are additional hard drives (in addition to the system drive) that allow for greater utilization of virtual memory- the writing of files, temporarily, to hard drive, to free up physical memory and allow faster calculations of processes.
    Anyone who does work with video or photography software, must have a working knowledge of the benefits of a scratch drive.
    Photoshop runs +way faster+ with a fast scratch disk.
    When seeking advice on any forum, the more specific the question, the easier it will be for contributors to provide advice that is pleasing to your senses.
    I've given you my take on what I feel may be your questions intent.
    Hopefully, it wasn't a waste of time.....

  • New Quad-Core Computer with Vista64, 8gb ram ; Should I install CS3 or CS4?

    Hello Friends,
    I have been reading the forum trying to gain foresight before I spend very limited cash for hardware and software.
    On Black Friday eve, I spent the night waiting at Best Buy to get the door-buster-deal on an HP desktop with AMD 9500 quad-core, 8gb ddr2 800MHz ram, Windows Vista 64 Home Premium, 760gb hard drive (7200rpm, ESATA 3.0gb transfer), second internal capture drive 500gb(7200rpm ESATA 3.0gb transfer), 1 TB external storage. This machine is only for my photography and video editing. I do wedding photography.
    I have photoshop CS3 full version, so I can upgrade to CS4 Creative Suite for $1,100.00. I can also buy a full version copy of CS3 Creative Suite for $500.00 new in the box with all manuals.
    With all the complaints about CS4, would I be better off buying CS3? Is CS4 worth $600 more? Have all the bugs been worked out of CS3?
    I can upgrade 3 months after they release CS 5 for the $600 and skip some of the heart ache?
    Please tell me what you think?
    Jeffrey

    Any option (CS3, CS4 or waiting for CS5 in 16-18 months) are all logical options for various reasons.
    For you though, you might get the best mileage out of CS4, as there are certain advantages when running on Vista 64 (versus CS3, for which very little was done to take advantage of the extra features of Vista 64). In particular, Photoshop will run a 64-bit app on Vista 64. Premiere Pro also has some additional functionality on Vista 64.
    CS5 should probably bring more full-fledged 64-bit apps, and better features in general (or at least one would hope). but it's not likely to be released or announced even until Q1 2010.

  • 13'' dual-core with 16gb ram vs 15'' quad-core 8gb ram -- ram vs cores?

    Hello.  I am at a point between choosing a 13'' dual-core i5 with 16gb ram vs the 15'' quad-core with 8gb ram - both retinas.
    I will be using photoshop and illustrator while uploading/downloading large files constantly.  After much headscratching I almost decided on the 13'' i5 because from my experience, RAM limitations is where I usually run into problems, and don't see the extra price of i7 worth it when it is still a dual-core.  For the same price I can get a 15'' quad, but will be stuck with 8gb ram.
    I don't care about the screen size, I have good eyes and the weigth trade-off makes this a non-issue.
    I'm thinking about down the road, as either of these I'm sure will be fine solutions.  I'm just wondering where does the edge really come in this case?  Ram or processor / cores?
    Thanks.

    Thanks for your reply tjk, of course with 16gb on the 15'' for $200 more  I'd have easier time, but in this case I am comparing a refurbished - the lowest 15'' 16gb I could find would cost $500 more, I just can't do it. 
    I should make clear that this particular comparison between 13''w/16 and 15''w/8, they are the same price (the 13 being new) - which is why I'm stuck.
    To rephrase - for the same price - which will I regret less in 4 years?
    As a side note, I can't believe I'm even thinking about paying this much money for something that is not upgradeable, but that's another discussion entirely.

  • I just bought MacPro 15", i7, Quad-Core, upgraded to 8GB RAM. Its responding to slow to poen applications e.g. word, ppt, chrome etc. reboot is too slow. Dont think its working so fast. Dosenot seems to be worth to money paid. What to do?

    I just bought MacPro 15", i7, Quad-Core, upgraded to 8GB RAM. Its responding to slow to poen any applications e.g. word, ppt, chrome etc. reboot is too slow. Dont think its working so fast. Dosenot seems to be worth to money paid. What to do? Not happy with Mac.

    Sandeep Goyal
    Jul 8, 2012 2:26 AM 
    Is is possible to install Win 2007 in MacPro (retina display) with USB (2.0 or 3.0) as new Mac retina display lacks DVD.
    MacBook Pro with Retina display, Windows 7 
    They have been calling their notebook a MacPro for a year. Or is it this?
    https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4463661

  • HT3209 i have a quad core CPU and Radeon HD 6850 Graphics and 8GB of RAM .. and i can't rent HD 1080p Videos ! why ?

    i have a quad core CPU and Radeon HD 6850 Graphics and 8GB of RAM .. and i can't rent HD 1080p Videos ! why ?

    Welcome to the Apple Community.
    Probably because your set up doesn't support HDCP.

  • 8GB Ram Upgrade for 27" iMac (Not Quad Core)

    Hey guys, I have an iMac 27", not the quad core though. I want to know, what is the best UK retailer to buy 8GB of Ram for my iMac. I have 4GB at the moment, and I want to run FCP, and After Effects more efficiently, speed up Render time etc.
    Where can I buy some from a shop that could be found in the Trafford Centre, so Curries/PC World , The Apple Shop, Selfridges, etc.
    Any ideas about how much it would cost?
    Also how much more would 16GB of RAM be?
    Is it easy to install?
    Thanks guys
    -Bob

    Surf to http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/apple/memory/iMac and find the correct memory for your iMac.
    OWC ships worldwide.
    Good prices. Not the lowest, but their service is worth it.

  • Installing ram upgrade on Slimline s5150t quad core

    I have a quad core s5150. I recently tried to add two additional RAM modules. I verified that I had purchased the correct RAM on curcial.com and by speaking with their reps. The computer would not take the RAM in any configuration. We tried seating the new RAM into the old modules one at a time and it still would not work. At last, the crucial rep told me to try and update the BIOS. Hard as I tried, for three hours, I was unable to find the BIOS update on the HP website despite looking where the HP video told me to look. There were lots of update options but no BIOS heading. The auto detect tool could not identify my computer for some reason. The HP Update tool installed with the machine said no updates were available.
    I am wondering a few things, 1) Where can I find the BIOS update on the HP site? It is not in the list of updates on this page, where it is supposed to be:
    http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/softwareCategory?os=4063&lc=en&cc=us&dlc=en&sw_lang=&product=4002...
    2. Is it possible there is a problem or conflict beacuse the machine shipped with Windows Vista and I updated it to Windows 7? Looking in the BIOS, the last update was May of 2009, long befoe Windows 7 was updated from the old VISTA files.
    3. Any other reason you might know for the modules to not be working? We exchagned them for a fresh set already and still the same problem. They are clicking into place. Not sure what to try.

    Hey cosmos64000,
    Here is the memory upgrade information as it pertains to your motherboard. Each RAM slot supports a maximum of 2GB DDR3 DIMMs. The supported speeds are PC3-8500 @ 1066 MHz PC3-6400 @ 800 MHz. Depending on your processor, a 64 bit operating system will support up to 8GB of RAM. A 32 bit version of Windows with support a maximum of 4GB. (Motherboard Specifications, IPIEL-LA3 (Eureka3))
    What RAM (size and speed) are you trying to install? How much RAM was in the computer before the upgrade? Are you using 64 or 32 bit Windows? Of the four RAM slots, two are blue, and two are black. Which slots did you fill the new RAM in?
    Thank you.
    I worked on behalf of HP

  • Is iMac Quad Core Good Enough for AVCHD In Premiere Pro CS4

    Hi there.
    I have a quick question....
    I'm thinking about buying a new 27" iMac so that I can edit my AVCHD files in Premiere Pro CS4. I'm presently using a Macbook Pro with a Dual Core and the video playback in Premiere Pro is choppy.
    I also read that Premiere Pro doesn't support AVCHD without an expensive plugin.
    Does anyone know if the iMac, with the specs below, will playback AVCHD in PP smoothly?
    2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
    8GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4x2GB
    1TB Serial ATA Drive
    ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB
    Thanks,
    David

    Hello again.
    I have now upgraded to an iMac, quad core i7 with 8GB of RAM. I have my AVCHD footage on a striped RAID hard drive connected via FW800 and the scratch disks on a separate 1TB hard drive that is not striped and that is connected via USB. I am using Premiere Pro CS4 to edit the footage.
    When I play the video in PP, it warps on and off. It's better than when I was using my Macbook Pro dual core 4GB RAM, but it's still not playing smoothly. I have the presets set to 1080i30(60i), which is correct for this footage.
    I would prefer to not have to convert the AVCHD footage, unless there is a clear advantage to doing this.I have tried converting to a P2 file, but it increases the file size from 284MB to 2.8GB.
    Any suggestions?
    Thanks,
    David

  • Mac Pro 2.66 Quad-Core 1GBRAM, how much more RAM and HOW?

    I just got my Mac Pro 2.66 Quad-Core, and I had a budget so I left the RAM down @ only 1GB because I knew I could upgrade it later. Well later is here & I want to put more in it, but I hear it is a little more complicated than the sensless shoving of big ram chips into empty slots...
    I am a heavy user of Logic 7, soon to be of Logic Studio, and hopefully I will be using AutoCAD at home soon (for school). How much RAM would be optimal for me to eventually have? Right now I think I can afford to purchase 2GB more, but I dont know how exactly to put it into my machine. Right now it has a 512MB per xeon.
    Can anyone help me out?

    I just pulled out 1GB (2 x 512MB) simms in replaced them with 4GB (2 x 2GB) simms.
    I had added more memory as 2 GB (1x2GB) and ran out of space. Now I have a total of 11GB RAM:
    1GB = 2 x 512MB
    2GB = 2 x 1GB
    8GB = 4 x 2GB
    Leaving me with 2x512MB simms sitting in the box on the self. Sure wish I knew someone local I could give these things to for a reasonable price. Anyway, I wouldn't go any higher than 2GB simms (4GB) as that seems to currently have the best price/space ratio. Crucial is good enough and order it from NewEgg.com or MacConnection.com and you'll get a good price (I got mine at MacConnection.com).

  • HT1270 Will  a Mid 2011 15" 17 core macbook pro run on 2 8GB 1666mhz memory? Told quad core MB Pro runs on 16GB at 1066 or 1666???

    I have a what is said mid 2011 macbook pro quad core i7 with 4GB at 1333 Mhz, and read this is upgradeable to 8GB but also it will accept and run great on 2X8GB-16GB at either 1066 or 1666MHz-Can anyone shed light? I'm hoping fpor fastest I can get-I use as interface for recording and for photo work now and then. I usually put a 7200rpm HDD in but this came w/a 750GB/5400 and I wonder if the FSB/RAM speed and upgrading the RAM max will make up?
    I'm thinking rather than always use ext 7200rpm hdd top record buy 2nd hdd at 7200 and use external open enclosure I can pop in and out use only for recording-I am starting back to school and have MS2011 Ofc but want to add Win 7 no virtual hdd's please, second question-can I add this w/o wiping all clean to reformat? Is this required to add partition for Win 7 or are these newer models designed to simply ADD-ON such MS software?
    DO I EVEN NEED WIN 7 OR IS THIS A LUXURY? I would think my WORD, EXCEL, POWERPOINT is all I'll need for college classes requiring MS/Windows-am I correrct? I can eliminate problem #2.
    MAINLY I WANT TP UPGRADE RAM-I FOUND CORSAIR MADE FOR THIS MODEL, 2X8GBAT 1666MHZ, AND A WEB PAGE THAT SAID THEY HAD A FLAWLESS UPGRADE AND IT RA EVEN FASTER AND SMOOTHER-This is the best Mac I've owned and I've had 100, including 27" iMac I sold-too much for my needs-I'm a prtable person-HELP!!! I get YES answers from my IT professional and others tell me only *GB at 1333, so WHICH?  Thanks, madthomii.

    Hey,
    Perhaps this is relevant ..........
    (1) I have a very late 17" macbook Pro.  (It is actually the somewhat rare 2.5 quad model.)  One of the very last ones made.
    (2) It comes with 1333 ram
    (3) I swapped in 1600 ram
    (4) IT IS ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN, THAT, THE MACHINE RUNS MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, MUCH FASTER when you have 1600 speed ram.
    (Indeed, it runs 1600 / 1333 = 1.20x faster on all memory operations - it's just that simple and obvious.)
    I did many tests back-and-fore swapping the slow and fast ram, and it is very, very obvious, the speed difference.  Most operations on computers are just memory bound - everything from startup to rendering and the like is quicker - obviously and clearly quicker - with faster ram.
    (5) I have had utterly no problems running the faster ram. It reports and runs the ram utterly normally, no problem.
    (6) These machines cost thousands, and ram cost a few dollars - there seems very little reason you wouldn't do this.
    (7) I do have one of the very last 17" mbp.  (It was "old new stock" - I bought it unused in March 2013.)  So, it's possible that OLDER 17" mbp will not run 1600 speed RAM.  But, I mean it costs like $100 to try, on a fantastic machine worth $1000s, so it's a huge win at low cost if it works.
    I hope this helps future readers!!!  Cheers

  • MacPro Quad Core 32g Ram running slow Logic using only 9g in Activity Monitor

    Well its taken a while, but this is my first foray into the world of forums! I'm so hacked off with this regular problem and havent been able to find anything anywhere to solve it i thought i'd see if anyone has any similiar issues and maybe even a solve to it.
    So.... im an orchestrator and producer and after my mid 2008 Macbook Pro with 8g ram started freezing up i invested in this 3 years ago -
    Mac Pro 2x 2.4ghz Quad Core intel Xeon and stuck in 32gb of lovely Crucial RAM and 3 seperate internal 1TB drives with one for operating system (10.6.8), one for Audio recording/saving and one for all my sample libraries.
    32gb ram - should be enough i thought!
    So i regularly run at least 30 VI's - Ni The giant, Spitfire Orchestral librabies (say 12 string instruments up to 0.69g per load) LASS strings, plus perc STYLUS, ABBEY road drums, Trillian basses (acoustic/electric), ominisphere etc etc. So pretty hefty sample instruments. But theyre sooo nice!!
    In addition, the 32 bit server will come alive (NOT! So unstable i find) with my Waves plugs etc.
    Looking at ACTIVITY MONITOR however i might be not touching 9 gig (and sometimes even less) of usage for Logic, and only say 800MB for 32 bit server and have NOTHING else open - and what do i find .....
    - Mouse lag and cant really do anything with the mouse whilst playing the track - cant adjust volume - too slow, zooming problems
    - Takes a good 2-3 seconds for track to stop playing
    Dont get System OVERLOADS so much, its just that the system goes REALLLLLY slow.
    What ive tried- - -
    - Running Mountain Lion off another drive (havent had time to install it and wanted to be sure everything worked etc)
    - Tried all audio prefs - large/small buffers/threads etc and yes i am on 1024.
    in a nutshell how come with 32g RAM everything is so slow when barely using 10g of that???????
    I dread getting to the end of a project cos i know im gonna be freezing so much, but with so much editing all the time for the orchestral parts i need everything unfrozen and working.
    Sorry if this is long winded but wanted to describe what im experiencing.
    Any feedback most welcome! Thankyou in advance.
    Mac Pro 2x 2.4ghz Quad Core intel Xeon 32g RAM, 3TB storage
    10.6.8
    Logic Pro 9.1.8

    Hi
    A few thoughts:
    julian6400 wrote:
    In addition, the 32 bit server will come alive (NOT! So unstable i find) with my Waves plugs etc.
    The 32bit server is a pita: Waves v9 are 64bit  compatible (they run fine). 32 bit VI's can be run outside Logic using Vienna Ensemble Pro (see later)
    julian6400 wrote:
    So i regularly run at least 30 VI's - Ni The giant, Spitfire Orchestral librabies (say 12 string instruments up to 0.69g per load) LASS strings, plus perc STYLUS, ABBEY road drums, Trillian basses (acoustic/electric), ominisphere etc etc. So pretty hefty sample instruments. But theyre sooo nice!!
    Some of these VI's are extremely CPU hungry: Abbey Rd drums for example, really do hammer the CPU. What does Logic's Performance meter show in the way of CPU load. What does Activity Monitor show regarding CPU load?
    With 32G of RAM, this should not be the issue, but you might have general CPU problems (see above), and you may also have Sample disk streaming limitations if all the Loibraries you mention are on the same drive. How does Activity Monitor look regarding disk access? You might find it helpful to add a second drive and split the sample libraries across 2 for faster disk access.
    I presume that you have plenty of free space on the System drive?
    Logic can get sluggish if the Undo info gets way too big, and also if there are loads of regions in the Arrange: check Options:Project Information.
    Many are finding some benefits (me included) by running the VI's in Vienna Ensemble Pro:
    Better CPU load distribution than directly in Logic
    "Persistant Samples": they can remain loaded whilst you switch Logic Projects
    Logic is effectively running much less itself, so generally flies.
    32bit Plugs hosted separately in VEP so no 32bit Bridge issues in Logic
    Something to consider,though perhaps not yet, would be setting up a Slave computer using VEP.
    CCT

  • RAM on the new Quad core 2.5ghz G5

    I am thinking about running Logic 7 on one of the new Quad core 2.5ghz G5’s. I am currenty running Logic 7 on an 800mhz G4 iMac. I have 1 GB of RAM on my iMac and I was wondering how much RAM I should get if I purchase the Quad core G5. Since there will be 4 processors, I’m sure I will have TONS of processing power for plug-ins and a high number of edits and lots of automation, but I was wondering how much it would really help me if I loaded the machine to capacity with RAM. For instance, would I ever even need more than 1GB of RAM or is getting 8GB of RAM really going to increase performance that much on a Quad core G5? I’m sure 16GB of RAM is OVERKILL. I’m hoping someone who is competent on this subject will be able to help. I already know the generic “you can never have too much RAM” answer. That’s not the answer I’m looking for. I’m hoping that someone will be able to give some guidance as to what would be overkill and what might be just the right amount. For each session, I will be recording upwards of 30 audio tracks, probably using around 15-20 plug-ins and 3 or 4 of those will be reverbs which use up a lot of computer power. I just want a stable system that will be able to last me for a few years. I’ve outgrown the capabilities of my 800mhz G4 iMac and I’m hoping that my next system will be able to last me for a while.
    Thanks in advance,
    David

    it really depends on how you personally use logic. as a basic minimum I don't think anyone would tell you that under 1GB is a good idea. but if you never use sample based instruments, large reverb impulse responses and so on, then having more than 1GB is not necessarily going to make a difference at all.
    but when you start working with a lot of VIs (particularly ones that load in a lot of sample data) and running mixes that have large numbers of plug ins in use, you will need more RAM. people often make the mistake of thinking more RAM will incrementally improve performance in some general way, which it doesn't - this is what having a faster processor does. performance improvement from RAM is more of an obvious thing, when you have previously hit a wall from working on a huge RAM intensive project.. once you remove the RAM bottleneck so that the OS no longer works with swap files, it's kind of a once-off improvement, ie, it will work as well as it can and that's that.

Maybe you are looking for