Scratch Disk Recommendation

I have until recently been using a seagate goflex, with a firewire 800 adapter, as a scratch disk for FCE. Yesterday whilst editing the hard drive started ticking. I quickly removed it, though after contacting seagate it didnt look hopeful. Therefore i have lost the last three weeks of render files, unless i pay hundreds to get it recovered.
As everyone knows hard drives fail, so i was thinking of investing in a couple of hard drives in a RAID. However after browsing the internet i am very confused as to which option to choose; some seem extremely expensive, and some fairly cheap.
As i have the older MBP it has a Express card port, so i would like to upgrade from firewire to SATA, as before i was experiencing dropped frames.
If anyone has any advice, or knows of a product that would fit the bill, it would be extremely helpful.
Thankyou

First, losing render files is not the end of the world.  You can always re-create them by re-rendering.
Regarding external drives, and since you have an ExpressCard port, I would suggest:
1 - G-Tech:  GDrive, GRAID, GSafe or GSpeed
2 - OWC : Guardian Maximus or similar drive depending on your needs.  OWC also carry RAID enclosures if you prefer to 'build your own'
3 - Lacie RAID or d2 Quadra/Quadra Enterprise drives
Regarding RAID, a few tips -
1 - RAID is not backup.  Raid-1 provides mirroring (duplication) on 2 drives, but it is not backup.  Most lost file/folder problems occur as a result of user error or software error, not because a drive failed.  Make sure you have adequate backup capabilities before investing in RAID.
2 - It is better to use hardware RAID than software RAID.  If you go the RAID route, get an external drive (or enclosure) that provides hardware RAID.  Don't try to get by with Disk Utility or any other app that support software RAID of multiple external hard drives - you would only be asking for trouble in the long term.

Similar Messages

  • Scratch disk recommendations

    Hi all. Wading into FCE with my 3.5 version purchased a year or so ago. I am shopping for a good scratch disk to work on a project that will begin with about 16 or so hours of footage that I will boil down to maybe an hour or more. I have always used LaCie drives, though I have an open mind. I have been looking at 800 firewire drives by LaCie, specifically the 500 GB Rugged mobile drive and the significantly cheaper d2 Quadra Hard Drive. The Quadra also has an eSATA interface, which I guess I can make use of through my card slot on my MacBook Pro. Any recommendations? Is 800 firewire good enough? Any problems with a mobile versus a desktop? Thanks tons in advance.

    First off, FW400 is good enough for most video, esp. when coupled with a decent 7200 rpm hard drive. FW800 is 'better' aka faster but you won't necessarily be able to take advantage of the higher spec depending on what kind of video work you are doing and what hard drive it is coupled with.
    I'd stay away from the Rugged Mobile and any other drive that's bus powered and has a 5400rpm drive inside. Neither is great for video work. Let me put that another way - it's asking for problems.
    The d2 Quadra is a great drive, it would be hard to go wrong with it. I have some and they are workhorses.
    Regarding your footage - 16 hours of DV will require about 210 GB. And if you're doing HD you may need as much as 800GB @ 1080i. Take that into consideration in your purchase.
    AND, don't forget about backup storage. 16 hours of video takes, well, 16 hours to capture ... and recapture ... so having a duplicate copy on a backup disk can be awfully handy.

  • If you have an SSD system drive, is a second dedicated scratch disk recommended?

    Looking to buy a new MacBook Pro which has one PCIe-based 512gb SSD system drive. Unlike earlier MacBook Pro models, there is no internal DVD drive to replace w. a second disk drive.
    I know that with HDD's a dedicated scratch disk that run's at least as fast as your application drive enhances performance of Photoshop. Is this also true with SSD's?  Thanks.

    Here's a suggestion (not aimed at anyone in particular, and I realize it may not be possible in all systems)...
    If you're going to set up a system to access a certain amount of storage interactively - and what I mean is storage that's used all the time in the normal operation of the computer - consider making one big system partition out of a RAID array of SSDs.
    With I/O operations averaging larger than the bare minimum (e.g., 4K bytes), RAID 0 effectively adds together the performance of the drives.  This is because there's effectively no seek time with an SSD.  It essentially randomly accesses stored data by address (it's quite complicated internally, but externally it works out that latency is almost negligible - literally measured as a few millionths of a second on a modern drive).
    So...
    Consider building your next system with multiple SSDs on task, making up an array of, say, a few terabytes.  This yields the following:
    Everything done by the system is done at the speed that's the sum of the drive speeds.  With a modern system using SATA III, that's essentially about half a gigabyte per second per drive.  Imagine throughput of more than a gigabyte a second - that's real.  Forget about dedicating drives to tasks - EVERYTHING gets the benefit of the entire RAID array speed.
    Since latency is virtually nonexistent, a great deal of multitasking can be done on the same volume without introducing any thrashing.  Photoshop can be writing to scratch, the system swapping like crazy, and you just keep working without notice.
    Everything's consolidated on one volume, which simplifies a lot of things (e.g., backup is simpler, applications install where they like on the C: volume).
    All the free space pools together, so what's available as transient storage for whatever you're doing at the time is maximized.  This tends to offset the extra cost of SSDs some.
    SSDs themselves are fairly new tech, and it's not been widely known that they RAID together EXTREMELY well.  They really do.
    People sometimes worry that using multiple drives to make up a single volume increases the chances for failure, but consider that SSDs are solid state, and so by nature have a good bit higher reliability (higher MTBF; often 2 million hours), and they don't generate nearly as much heat (they consume just a few watts).  Having SSDs in your system can actually increase the reliability of everything somewhat, because when everything is cooler it lasts longer.  Plus they don't make any vibration.
    This is not fantasy, I've done it.
    My current Dell workstation has a nearly 2 TB C: volume made up of four 480 GB SSDs.  My sustainable disk throughput is literally around 1.7 gigabytes per second (that's 15 times faster than a typical single hard drive).  I do also have some HDDs in the system, but they normally spend all day spun down.  They're for backup and very low access storage (e.g., downloads I've accumulated over time).
    I wait for NOTHING on this system.
    Oh, and it's been 100.0% reliable with this setup for 2-1/2 years now.  ZERO glitches.
    -Noel

  • What is the recommended set up for Final Cut Pro re: Scratch Disks etc

    What is the recommended set up for Final Cut Pro with regards to Scratch Disk etc.
    I have a lot of projects and at the moment they are all over the place on various external HDDs etc.
    I just bought a new Firewire 800 External HDD and want to get everything straight but I'm not quite sure where to start...
    Any advice would be appreciated.
    Thank You

    Media Manager (available from the File menu bar item) will consolidate all elements of your project together with a linked copy of the project file to a single folder in a location of your choice. There are various options to leave out unused footage, include handles etc. Safest way is to copy the files. Delete the originals when you are sure the copy works.
    The user manual has a detailed description of how MM works.

  • Laptop users: Any recommendations for a scratch disk for Illustrator CC?

    Hello everyone.
    I have been reading into scratch disks and their use with Illustrator, Photoshop, etc. It seems most of the discussions have been about desktop systems though. I am currently using just a 13" late 2013 Macbook Pro w/retina. 256GB SSD and 8GB of RAM.
    I actually have a new 1 TB external USB 3.0 WD drive, but I believe it's a 5400rpm and might not be fast enough to be used as a scratch disk? If not, I was thinking of either getting a 7200rpm USB 3.0 external drive, or a USB 3.0 external SSD. Perhaps something like these?
    Amazon.com: U32 Shadow™ 240GB External USB 3.0 Portable Solid State Hard Drive SSD: Computers & Accessories
    Amazon.com: HGST Touro Mobile Pro 1TB USB 3.0 Portable External Hard Drive, Black (0S03559): Computers &
    Illustrator CC is currently just set to use my startup disk as the scratch disk. I don't believe I have run into any problems yet, that might have involved Illustrator needing more than my 8GB ram, and needing to use the scratch disk, but I am not totally sure, and I just want to get one setup anyways, for future use. I am also looking into using this with some light Photoshop use in the future also.
    Those of you who use a laptop for Illustrator and other Adobe programs, what do you use for your scratch disk?
    Also, where does Illustrator store these scratch disk temp files on a Mac? I have not been able to find any useful information through Google searching so far. Mostly just stuff related to Photoshop scratch disks. I would like to check the location these files are supposed to be stored to see if there's anything taking up HD space that I could take back, and also as a guide to see how much scratch disk space I should look into getting.
    Thanks!!!

    Yes, you could do it. Remember to follow licensing restrictions. Here's an article on how to import after installing the operating system:
    http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=25773
    Keep around locked in your office an external Firewire hard drive with partitions formatted for both Intel and PowerPC Macs containing all the applications and the operating systems and default user documents you want to keep. These can serve as the basis for the migration assistent import.

  • Question about Photoshop scratch disk and specific setup

    Hi Folks
    Thanks for the help in advance.
    I'm a novice and need help finding a solution to a new PC Build. (Windows 7 Pro 64bit with Photoshop CS6)
    I only recently found out about having a scratch disk dedicated for photoshop (very novice i know ), and was wondering if a 120-128GB SSD would be enough? (Please bear in mind I can't fit large SSD raid configs to my budget, plus I live in New Zealand, so prices are higher for SSD at the moment). 
    I only edit single camera RAW files at a time around 25mb per file, with no large amount of layers and very rarely do large images i.e. Panorama etc.  I have searched the forums but could not find a concrete answer.
    My setup was originally meant for a HTPC (I don't intend to overclock), but I will also be using it for light photography projects. Specs below:
    CPU: Intel i7 3770
    Mobo: Asrock B75 Pro3-M (or Asus P8H77m Pro, depending on budget)
    16gb Ram (maybe bump up to 32gb later)
    120-128gb SSD for OS and apps
    120-128gb SSD scratch disk
    2 TB HDD for storage
    If anyone knows, the motherboards I've listed have 3x Sata3 ports, Asrock has one Intel chip and two Asmedia controlled Sata3 ports, while Asus has 2x Intel controlled and 1x Marvell controlled Sata3 port.  If I went with the Asrock, would it be okay to connect the OS/Apps SSD to the intel controlled sata3 port and have the scratch disk and storage HDD to the Asmedia sata3 ports?
    And one more novice question, when I begin to edit my images, is it best to transfer my photos from memory card to storage HDD then work from there? Or would it be quicker opening images direct from a USB 3.0 card reader / USB 3.0 external hard drive?
    Thanks again everyone, really appreciate it

    priddye wrote:
    Just to clarify, if/when I get one 256gb SSD for my main C: drive, I can load the OS/Apps and store some data for the time being (until I get another SSD) and use the 2TB HDD for scratch disk only?
    Yes, that's what I meant.  You could try putting Photoshop scratch on C: at least temporarily, and watch your free space carefully.  If you don't work on big documents or set your history states to be very large, it might be workable.  But be careful.  The safe "set it and forget it" configuration is to make your HDD the one and only Photoshop scratch drive.
    When I do get around to getting the second 256gb, I will look at installing the two SSD's in RAID configuration.  If i were to do this, can I load the OS/Apps to the RAID SSD's as well as using them for scratch disks and have the 2TB HDD for storage? I hope that makes sense.
    Sounds about right; with 512GB on tap you should be able to run just about everything from C:, as long as you don't keep your entire photo library on there.  Realistically, on a big system that's got a lot of apps installed and has been used for some time, Windows and your apps may end up consuming 100 to 150 GB, so that would still leave you a lot of breathing room.
    Keep in mind that what you describe may require 3rd party re-partitioning software and/or backup and restoral, or a complete reinstallation of Windows and everything (usually the latter is what is recommended when moving up to a RAID system volume).
    By the way, SSDs stay in best working order if you overprovision - i.e., maintain a fair amount of free space.  The internal controllers need the free space to keep the data organized well and maintain top performance.
    -Noel

  • Internal hard drive for use as scratch disk

    Am running OS 10.4.11 on a dual core 2.3 Ghz PowerPC G5. Want to install a 2nd internal hard drive for use as a scratch disk w/ FCP and for my media files, etc. Given that I can only accomodate an SATA I drive w/ 150 Gbps transfer rate what might some decent choices be for a 500 Gb to 1 TB drive suited for video (and a PowerPC G5)? I'll also be adding an external drive for backup if anyone has any suggestions.

    Thanks for the recommendations. I had been looking at the Hitachi CinemaStar series but you have to reset the drive to SATA 1 for use w/ a G5 PowerMac. Resetting the drive, according to Hitachi, can only be done on a PC which I don't have access to. And I think that holds true for all their drives that are not strictly SATA 1.

  • Work stoppage because of scratch disk error.  The torture continues!  Please help!

    Hi, everyone:
    I would greatly appreciate help.
    In December, I began receiving the error message Could not initialize Photoshop because the scratch disks are full. I deleted all the large files from my hard drive, and the problem went away.
    Now, I am working on a large Photoshop file (i.e., 585,155kb). I am working at 300 ppi for print reproduction, using multiple layers. I am opening each new image to be added to the master document in a separate Photoshop window. I set the resolution of each at 300 ppi, then crop and transfer to its new layer in the master file (using drag and drop). After I crop and transfer, I close the open window of the file I just cropped and transferred. No other programs are running. This seems to be fairly standard stuff.
    All was fine (although very slow) until two nights ago. When cropping, I received the error Could not complete your request because the scratch disks are full.
    Once again, I researched scratch disk error messages, and I came to the conclusion I had no choice but to increase my RAM. So, I upgraded from 512MB to 2 GIG. (I successfully opened my PC and installed the RAM myself, confirming it on the Properties window. A major success, as the RAM was costly, and difficult to find, so I saved some money and time by installing it myself!)
    With great enthusiasm and excitement, I opened the master Photoshop file again and the next image to be set to 300 ppi, cropped, and transferred over to a layer. But, when I tried to crop, I received the SAME sickening message, Could not complete your request because the scratch disks are full.
    How can this be? I have four times the RAM I had before, which was costly, and I expected Photoshop to work swift and smooth with this new, more efficient increase in RAM. I am simply bewildered.
    I tried changing my Scratch Disks to C: rather than Startup, but then I received the error message You currently have Adobe Photoshops primary Scratch and Windows primary paging file on the same volume, which can result in reduced performance. It is recommended that you set Adobe Photoshops primary Scratch volume to be on a different volume, preferably on a different physical drive.
    More scratch disk torture.
    None of this makes any sense, and, while Photoshop error messages are upsetting, they dont explain what you should do. I am not a programmer, and I am totally stumped.
    I know that someone somewhere upgraded their RAM and still received a Scratch disk error too, so I hope someone can advise me on what I need to do next. I cannot continue my work and just spent a lot of money on RAM.
    Thank you!

    Hi, everyone: Thank you for your help with my problem. I appreciate everyones time and feedback, as well as the openness to help and explain (and further explain) what I do not fully understand. I learned a lot more, as Photoshop always introduces new things to learn and figure out. (One has to be part programmer to make PS work!) I appreciated the clear instructions and simple analogies too (for example, the head vs. suitcase was great).
    Good news: The Scratch disk error has subsided for now!
    I believe (although I am not certain) that the problem was something very simple after all, and I am embarassed. Only time will tell if this was really the culprit, for, if the Scratch disk error reappears later, it may be something else all together that is lurking in the background.
    For now, it seems to have been a problem that Peter K.s advice helped me discover...
    Peter's advice was to check the crop settings in the option bar for the common mistake of specifying pixels/cm rather than pixels/inch. My setting was correct (pixels/inch). However, I inadvertently used my pixel width number as inches in the Width setting, causing a MUCH bigger file than intended. When I changed the number, the Scratch disk error disappeared, putting me back in business! Thanks, Peter, for pointing me the direction that eventually revealed the problem.
    Could it be this simple?
    I kept working most of the night to test drive, free of the Scratch disk error for now! I hope the good fortune continues.
    The lesson for others may be to check simple settings carefully first, before diving into the deep end of Photoshop.
    Meanwhile, the new RAM is speeding up Photoshop considerably, so I feel like it was a good investment and will probably help safeguard against further Scratch disk errors, which I have had in the past. Also, Ive taken everyones advice to consider a dedicated, separate HD for Photoshop Scratch disk use. Ill plan that as a future/next investment. However, technical notes say an external HD isnt a good idea, but I dont have capacity for an internal HD, so it will have to be an external one. I would appreciate any words of wisdom here. Also, I still have to research SATA-II drives too (which are new to me) and ascertain if I can utilize one on my system. It may simply be too old for this technology, if it is new?
    If interested, I also tried several things:
    (1) Checking the space available on my HD again The pie chart indicated it was approximately half full (there was 46% free space, or 34.38 GB free space). I'll look for more to remove, but it seems reasonable to have 46 percent available, I think.
    (2) Checking the need to DEFRAG The Analyzer said a DEFRAG was not needed, and, indeed, the color chart that plotted the files showed only a thin red line or two (red indicates fragmentation).
    (3) Searching for more TEMP files to delete. I found 750 MB in TEMP files to delete, so, while not a lot, there were some still there. Previously I followed these directions to safely delete temporary Internet files: Ctrl Panel > Internet Options > General > Delete Files > Delete all offline content. But, when I navigated to C:\Windows\Temp, sure enough, I found more. Directly opening C:\Windows\Temp seems to be more effective. (I have done it that way in the past too, but lately I was trying to follow the "safe" way I had stumbled across recently.)
    (4) Checking my Photoshop Memory Allocation, which was already set at 85% (which may be too high, so I may back it down later, but I did not change it for now). I remembered adjusting it some time ago, but I had forgotten by how much!
    I also read the links that everyone recommended, as well as numerous other documents I found across the Web. Some introduced still more to learn/understand, of course.
    Thank you once again. Ill resurrect or repost if the Scratch disk error haunts me again later, but, for now, a happy ending.

  • Where is the scratch disk for Garageband ?

    Hi there,
    1) Can I know when we record vocals in garageband, where does the recorded file copied to ? What is the path of the scratch disk ?
    2) If I copy my project files in my macbook pro to my iMac, how does iMac locate all the recordings that I done in the macbook pro ?
    Thanks

    HangTime wrote:
    http://www.bulletsandbones.com/GB/GBFAQ.html#recordingsstored
    (Let the page FULLY load. The link to your answer is at the top of your screen)
    Thanks HangTime,
    It says:
    +"A. The recordings that you make are stored within the project that you created. It is recommended that you do not mess with the project package (and if you don't know what an OS X package is, or how to open one, it's even MORE strongly recommended that you do not mess with it)"+
    what does +stored within project+ means ? so where is the file ?
    don't i have to copy them when I want to use a project file from macbook pro to iMac ?
    thks

  • Canon camcorder + scratch disk questions

    I have a Canon Optura 50 (I now know that was not the best choice!). But, given what I have and I can't buy a new camcorder for a while, I would like some advice and clarification.
    I have been following the thread on dropped frames and the do's and don'ts of internal vs external hard drives (http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?forumID=936&threadID=680582). The consensus seems to be that (a) it is not a good idea to use the internal drive as the scratch disc, and (b) best to use an external FW drive and daisy chain the camera to FW drive to computer.
    With the Canon I take it I cannot daisy chain it due to it's FW hardware quirks of not liking anything else on the FW bus at the same time as video capture, correct?
    Am I going to run into major problems with my internal drive, since I use it as the scratch disk? I capture to the internal, and then move all the files to the external for editing in FCE.
    Is there anything else I should know or do? I have created several projects in FCE, with success. I am slowly learning more as I go, and this forum has been a great help.
    Lisa
    iMac 20" Intel Core Duo 2Ghz 1.5gb RAM   Mac OS X (10.4.7)   FCE 3.5; Seagate 250 GB FW external

    With the Canon I take it I cannot daisy chain it due to it's FW hardware quirks of not liking anything else on the FW bus at the same time as video capture, correct?
    I have my Canon daisy chained through my external HD with no problems. Ever. So I am forced to believe either I have been blessed with enternal luck (knock on woodcrest) or convince myself the consensus that there is a specific problem with Canon cameras being daisy-chained has been the direct effect of pure coincidence and speculation. One will truly never know if a specific set-up will work until they try it out for themselves so go ahead and daisy chain that Canon away and see if you have problems.
    And as far as using an external disk as your HD goes...
    If you have the FC Express User Maual, take a look at Chapter 12 titled "Determining Your Hard Disk Storage Options" starting on page 153. If you don't have the manual feel free to check it out online here on Apple's website. Be aware it's a 26.5 MB link so it might take awhile to load but I'll highlight the juicy stuff for ya:
    The manual states:
    "By default, Final Cut Express HD uses the hard disk on which the application is installed
    as your scratch disk to store captured and render files. Ideally, you should use a hard
    disk other than your main system disk as your scratch disk."
    It goes on to mention:
    "The data rate of the video you capture depends on the format of the source video and
    the codec you use for capture. The data rate for DV and HDV is 3.6 MB/sec.: Whatever
    disk drive technology you decide to use, your storage disk’s sustained transfer speed
    must be fast enough to keep up with the data rate."
    The MBP can have a 7200 drive installed in it and that's not really the point. The point is it's just not reasonable to think that ONE HD, even if it's a 10,000 Raptor, can read the information to run the Operating System, Application, AND read your video/audio data all at once without expecting hiccups. You need your System drive to run your OS and Apps. and your seperate Scratch Disk for your Media (not a partition of your System Drive). Simple as that.
    Not saying the other way isn't possible, it's just not recommended. If Apple doesn't recommend it then I won't regardless of status.

  • Can Memory Setting be made in LR, similar to Scratch disks in Photoshop ?

    System Settings in LR are as follows:   CAn these be Adjusted and HOW ?
    Lightroom version: 2.7
    Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition Service Pack 3 (Build 2600)
    Version: 5.1
    Application architecture: x86
    System architecture: x86
    Physical processor count: 2
    Processor speed: 2.1 GHz
    Built-in memory: 3326.1 MB
    Real memory available to Lightroom: 716.8 MB
    Real memory used by Lightroom: 473.1 MB (66.0%)
    Virtual memory used by Lightroom: 481.8 MB

    There is no scratch disk for Lr but you can set the cache size in >Edit >Preferences >File Handling tab - see screen shot.
    As you can see I have set mine to 75 GB; Adobe recommends 25 GB, although the Lr default is 1 GB.

  • Performance and scratch disks

    hello!
    i am currently working with the follow:
    Mac Pro 3.5GHz 6-Core intel Xeon E5
    64GB RAM 1867 MHz DDR3
    500GB flash storage
    external
    G RAID 8TB thunderbolt
    my question is regarding my photoshop performance, recently i have been working on some massive files, like huge! 133in x 65in with many layer etc! and I feel like the performace could be a little quicker.
    Can anyone recommend the ultimate in external drives to use as a scratch disk - fast access and reliable.
    thanks in advance

    I use Seagate and Western Digital.. I think they both have USB 3 solid state drives. You might have a look at those.
    Benjamin

  • Elements 2.0 and Windows 7 - Scratch disks full

    I have read the previous post regarding the Scratch Disks full error on starting up Photoshop elements 2.0.  I have started PSE2 holding down the Ctrl/Alt keys and have been given a prompt box where I cna change the scrtach disk locations, but the changes don't "stick".  I continue to get the same error and the scratch disk location does not change.  I started PSE2 holding down the Ctrl/Alt/Shift and got the box where I can delete the setting and have deleted them and still get the same error message.
    Any suggestions?

    Follow the instructions here:  http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-vista/Change-the-size-of-virtual-memory
    I don't know off hand the recommended settings.  I have about 6MB pagefile size (VM) with a Vista 64 machine that also has 6MB RAM.  Elements 2 is running just fine on this machine.  You may want to go to the same relationship VM vs RAM as I have it.  If that is not enough, try to make the VM 150% of RAM.
    Juergen

  • Laptop - Scratch Disk Conundrum

    I have an i7 2760QM XPS L502x laptop and for several reasons it won't be possible for some time to add the SSD I am eying (Samsung 840 Pro 512GB or Crucial M500) .  Therefore I was wondering if I bought a less expensive SSD, lets say around $100 and stuck it in an external eSATA or USB 3.0 caddy if I would see a difference in speed when using it as a scratch disk. If so, would placing the files I am working on on that drive be benificial compared to the slow internal one I have now and do you all have any recommendations on what caddy to buy? If it changes anything I am running Photoshop CS6 64-Bit.
    Thanks ahead!

    You'd probably be much better off with an external FireWire, USB 2 or USB 3 thrive, than with the puny additional space offered by an SSD in that low-price budget.
    For the scratch space, figure on 50 to 100 times or more the size of your largest file multiplied by the number of files you have open.

  • Photoshop RAM versus scratch disk/cache use

    I recently ugraded my Mac to a new (to me) Power Mac G5 Dual 2GHz with 4GB RAM and two HDDs, one with OSX at 500GB and the other with 250GB (currently empty).
    I followed the Adobe recommendations on setting up Photoshop CS2 for performance. I have my cache and scratch disk as the second (250GB) disk and therefore a different volume to the operating system. This disk is currently empty. In the cache settings, Photoshop sees 3072MB of the 4GB memory as available to it, and I have set the amount that PSCS2 can use to 100% (as Adobe states this is OK if you have 4GB or more of RAM).
    With nothing else running on the Mac, when I open a tiff image of around 70MB, I can see in the status line at the bottom of the image window that the Efficiency is sometimes 100% but often drops to below 90% and down to 75% when doing image manipulations, which means that the scratch disk is being used (Adobe states that the Efficiency should be 95-100% when all actions are being done in RAM). However, when I look at the RAM status, there is still 2.5GB free, so PSCS2 has obviously not used all the RAM available to it when it starts using the scratch disk. I can also see that activity on the 250GB drive occurs when I do these manipulations, so the scratch disk is being accessed rather than actions being done in RAM
    The only time I see the available RAM figure reduce is when I open multiple images. If I open ten 70MB tiff files then the RAM usage goes up a lot.
    So my question is, why does PSCS2 use the scratch disk almost immediately when I manipulate an image even when I have told it to use 100% of the available 3072MB of available RAM? Have I missed a setting somewhere?
    Any help or guidance appreciated.

    Hi Buko
    Thank you for your response. I did work through the optimisation guidelines before posting my message. I guess it is more about understanding why PSCS2 used the scratch disk when there is over 2GB of memory available, but I accept that it does what it does for good reason.
    Could you let me know what the partitioning of my scratch disk will achieve? I did not see that in the optimisation guidelines, but I will definitely give it a try. I am interested to now what is actually does.
    Thanks again, much appreciated.
    Simon

Maybe you are looking for