video card to help image processing.

[raverx3m]

well im just begining.
i bought the rebel xs 6 months ago.
and the CR2 images are ranging from 8mb-16mb
but i will definitely be upgrading to a step or two above this camera in a year or two to get the video capability.
if i open it in windows live photo gallery
it takes about 2-3 seconds to load it shrunk to fit
and if i blow it up it takesabout 15 seconds to process it same in photoshop.
so i was overreacting a bit.

but i do know that the pc is slower than me at the moment and i loose track of what im doing if i have to wait. im somewhat ADD.

 

[Trotter]

Even if you could find another 6600GT is would not be worth it to put them in SLI. Check out the http://www.techist.com/forums/f76/graphics-performance-list-212331/ thread... the 6600GT ranks #99. A $50 card today would run circles around it, and it only gets better from there.

Your best bet for upgrading without replacing everything would be the quad and a couple more gigs of RAM unless you are running XP or 32-bit Vista/7... in that case got with a 2 x 512 kit of RAM. The 6600GT is more than enough unless you want to game.

 

[raverx3m]

i am running 32bit xp at the moment. its the leftover from my old system.

i didnt really see a point in upgrading to vista and learning how to use it when the windows 7 was coming out.

 

[Trotter]

Win7 has been out for a while now. And it is awesome. No joke on that one at all.

if you are running 32-bit then the max RAM it can address is 3.5GB and that includes the RAM on your graphics card. Anything over that is wasted. If you go with Win7, go with 64-bit.

 

[raverx3m]

thanks for the tip
im thinking of getting that cpu that you suggested and of course windows 7 later on
i actually had it open from day before and had a lil brainfart when i clicked on your link and same page opened i was gonna compare them lol

the only problem is my ram is 800mhz to match the current cpu. im gonna have to upgrade all ram as well. DONKEY!!!!!!!!!
and then i kinda have my eye set on a quadro nvidia for 150 would that help at all?

i am not planning to play any games on this at all.
i do want to improve my movie playing capability as well.

and especially multitasking.

like i said earlier i usually have 2 IE windows with about 8 tabs open, webcam recording at 2mp resolution,firewall,winamp,few folders, photoshop, etc...

 

[Trotter]

Honestly, for rendering images, movies, and such, your current card is all you need. As Switch said, everything you want to do is CPU/RAM intensive. The more muscle and memory you have the better/faster is will happen.

My wife's computer, an old Athlon XP 2000+, was used as our media center while running a MX4000. It played movies just fine with only that. She is currently running a 6600GT herself, but she no longer uses it as a media center. She uses a laptop for that that has a FX5200 in it. That is still more than enough for movies.

With everything you are telling us I will still have to recommend the quad and additional RAM. RAM does not have to match the CPU speed, by the way. My CPU is a 2.something GHz (AMD 4200+ X2) but my RAM is 800 (DDR). My mobo can only handle 4GB or I would be running more since I am on Win7 Ultimate 64-bit.

 

[Mr. Switch]

Yeah, blow the money on CPU, RAM, accurate monitors and fast HD's.

the video card can be whatever.

for the HD, go with at least 7200RPM, 10000 if you can, or ideally SSD.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

the only problem is my ram is 800mhz to match the current cpu. im gonna have to upgrade all ram as well. DONKEY!!!!!!!!!
and then i kinda have my eye set on a quadro nvidia for 150 would that help at all?

You ram would work perfectly fine with the cpu Trotter suggested.