DH Photoshop Benchmark Script Database ONLINE!

***Zardon*** · Aug 12, 2005, 06:00 PM

As most of you know, we have our own custom Driverheaven Photoshop script which tests real world system performance. If you have never seen this a tutorial for installing and running along with download information is available over here

Due to the fact our huge forum thread was turning into a bit of a mess we now have opened an online database so everyone can enter and compare their scores. The new database system automatically reads your test results and gives you the final score time.

The fastest scores go to the top of the database so while we all want you to compare your scores, please enter genuine figures so everyone can get a good indication of relative system performance across the board.

Once you submit your figures, the database will calculate your total score and position you accordingly within the table, clicking on each user name gives a full system specification for that entry along with the version of photoshop used.

So please be sure to help us fill this database and head over to here and if you have any questions please discuss in this thread.

***Zardon*** · Aug 12, 2005, 06:00 PM

The_Neon_Cowboy · Aug 13, 2005, 11:50 AM

Brug about by reading carefully I noticed something I know others will notice too asked
or not. In regards to the section for the users with 512 MB to chage the applications
memory settings. Got me thinking...For example I have a gig of ram and by defalt CS2
is set to use 55% of my memory or 499MB . Cache levels setting is defaulted to 6.

My question is this:
I havn't tested yet but won't the amount of memory the application allow it to use alter the enviroment andthe end result? Shouldn't we come up with a value for everyone to use? Or should you add a info box so that people should even the amount thier PS program is set to?

***Zardon*** · Aug 13, 2005, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Neon_Cowboy

Brug about by reading carefully I noticed something I know others will notice too asked
or not. In regards to the section for the users with 512 MB to chage the applications
memory settings. Got me thinking...For example I have a gig of ram and by defalt CS2
is set to use 55% of my memory or 499MB . Cache levels setting is defaulted to 6.

My question is this:
I havn't tested yet but won't the amount of memory the application allow it to use alter the enviroment andthe end result? Shouldn't we come up with a value for everyone to use? Or should you add a info box so that people should even the amount thier PS program is set to?

We dont need to "come up" with a figure for everyone to use... If photoshop has 300 meg of ram available while benchmarking it wont enter the paging file during testing therefore it wont cloud the end results. Its been carefully measured to ensure anyone with 512 meg of ram can effectively run this test. anyone under 512 system memory wont be able to run this test accurately.

As for those over 512 system memory, like yourself Mike you wont need to alter a thing as Photoshop will default to settings in excess of minimum requirements. People with 2gig or 4 gig of ram wont gain any benefits by having more memory for this specific test suite but they would during general photoshop use as they could open larger files and work with more layers etc than those with lower ram installed. That is outside this testing environment however as ive specifically set this benchmark so the file suite used doesnt expand over 300 meg memory usage. Its all explained on the documentation page.

Of course its also worth mentioning that those with better memory and tighter (faster) latency settings will get higher results than those with inexpensive looser memory .....

The_Neon_Cowboy · Aug 13, 2005, 12:13 PM

Cool, thanks for clearing that up. I could of figured it out myself but I figured
I'd ask if not for my self then for off chance others might be haveing have the
same thought.

I'll have my results up after bit

***Zardon*** · Aug 13, 2005, 02:20 PM

decent bench for your system mike.

joeb · Aug 30, 2005, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zardon

As for those over 512 system memory, like yourself Mike you wont need to alter a thing as Photoshop will default to settings in excess of minimum requirements.

I would like to see the effects of multiple disk systems. If you have your os/apps on your PATA system and data on the SATA system does that effect the results? If you had a benchmark that included paging what would the effects of seperating the scratch drive to a third subsystem? It may be that the current benchmark is not effected by these issues. KISS (keep it simple stupid) is the best policy. I may be asking for too many variables.

I was suprised to see CS2 with better speed results. My impression was that CS2 was slower than CS. One reason I have not upgraded was this speed issue. Do the actions in the benchmark benifit from the CS2 upgrade more than most?

My primary use is to convert raw images and edit the images. The current benchmark addresses the editing step. As the camera raw plug-in works outside of the rest of photoshop it would need a seperate benchmark.

The_Neon_Cowboy · Aug 30, 2005, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zardon

decent bench for your system mike.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeb

I would like to see the effects of multiple disk systems. If you have your os/apps on your PATA system and data on the SATA system does that effect the results? If you had a benchmark that included paging what would the effects of seperating the scratch drive to a third subsystem? It may be that the current benchmark is not effected by these issues. KISS (keep it simple stupid) is the best policy. I may be asking for too many variables.

Well If you have enough memory, nothing is paged out, on a very low memory
system yes it'd have probubly an effect. Obviously have the scratch on anther
drive would be benifical. Especally since sich a system wuld be useing the system
page file freqently.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeb

I was suprised to see CS2 with better speed results. My impression was that CS2 was slower than CS. One reason I have not upgraded was this speed issue. Do the actions in the benchmark benifit from the CS2 upgrade more than most?

For one I understand CS2 supports multi-threading and takes advatage
of some things CS1 doesn't , but then again I'm a little fuzzy on the topic

pr0digal jenius · Sep 2, 2005, 12:11 AM

just how much does RAM affect this test....cuz I have 4x512 DDR333......would DDR400, or even 2x1024 improve it a lot you think?

The_Neon_Cowboy · Sep 2, 2005, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0digal jenius

just how much does RAM affect this test....cuz I have 4x512 DDR333......would DDR400, or even 2x1024 improve it a lot you think?

BANDWITH AND TIMEINGS SHURELY WOULD HAVE AN EFFECT

Scargo · Oct 17, 2005, 12:21 PM

I was hoping to find discussions or information about why the differences in scores. Which ones test what part of your system? Can I tweak anything, using what I have. For instance, my Underpainting (12) score is poor @ 30.1 and so are 5 and 6. Why these scores? Even some AMD processors with significantly lower scores didn't do as good (or much better) than I did with the extrude and smart blur (10 & 11).
I am running my 15K RPM SCSI drive solely for the scratch disc.In PS I'm at 75%memory allocation. I have 2 Gig allocated in Windows for page filing and have the minimum page file allocation size Windows allows me to have (in the normal page file allocation area, on the slower main drive/OS). I read that you do not want page filing to be zero on the main drive.
On the other hand, I read in this thread that the benchmark does not get into pagefiling and doesn't even use much of the 2 (max usable by PS) Gig of RAM. I assume there is some use of the scratch disc during the benchmark?
Any comments/explanations?
Thanks

[color=Navy]Follow-up:[/color][color=Navy]After further tweaking today I found that going from a cache level of 4 to 2 significantly improved my overall score. A cache level of 1decreased performance somewhat. How can the slight boost in my overall CPU speed from 2645 to 2657 explain a 57% decrease in my texturizer times...if not for the cache change??[/color]

[color=darkred][color=darkred][color=black]
[/color] Asus A8N-E nForce4 Ultra Athlon 64 (FX) Skt939 DDR ATX, w/Audio, Gigabit LAN, RAID/Serial ATA
AMD Athlon 64 4000+ cooled by CPUCOOL ZALMAN CNPS7000B-CU LED
[/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] OCZ4002048ELDCPE-K _DDRAM 2x1028MB (“Platinum”, matched pair-low latency 2-3-2-5)[/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] OCZ4001024ELDCPER2-K _DDRAM 2x512MB (“Platinum”, matched pair-low latency 2-2-2-5)
[/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] VGA MSI NX6600-TD256E RT [/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred]
[/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] Western Digital Caviar RE WD2500SD 250GB Serial ATA 7200RPM w/8MB Buffer [/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred]
Fujitsu MAU Series MAU3036NP 36.7GB 68pin U320-SCSI 15,000RPM Hard Drive w/8MB Buffer
ADAPTEC|29320A-R SCSI RAID CARD
[/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred]OS: Windows XP Professional, SP2+ and[/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] Photoshop CS2[/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=blue]Running @ 2.65Ghz on air---very cool![/color][/color]

altimas · Apr 18, 2006, 01:04 AM

Any idea how to improve my scores?
Some of them seem real good but others stink.
Setup is an A64 winchester@ 242x4- 2420 mhz and 1GB of ram- 2x 512.. at cas 3,3,3,8 ram at 201 mhz
Is my memory timings hurting some of the scores a lot?
heres all my scores..

Code:

1 Texturiser Test (1)
2.0 (1)
2 CYMK Colour Conversion
5.3
3 RGB Colour Conversion
6
4 Dust and Scratches
4.5
5 Water Color
17.9
6: Texturiser Test (2)
2.9
7: Stained Glass
8.6
8: Lighting Effect
10.9
9: Mosiac Tiles
17.9
10: Extrude
58.9
11: Smart Blur
54.4
12. Underpainting
21.7

Scargo · Apr 19, 2006, 08:33 AM

RAM is the #1 priority for you. #2 would be a dedicated fast, small drive for PS cache memory.
I have 4Gb and run in "3Gb bridge" mode when doing intense PS. Microsoft has instructions about this mod.
Normally Windows on utilizes 2Gb of RAM for cache (PS calls its cache memory "scratch disk"). Both want you to have this temporary storage allocation be on a seperate drive. There are tweaks to be made in PS preferences and in PS and Windows cache and pagefile appropriations. Read up about that.

Judas · Apr 19, 2006, 12:30 PM

you know, perhaps setting timing mode and marking down the time it takes to load that image should be incorporated, as it's indeed part of the real world test. I mean graphic artists are constantly moving around things, opening and transfering and copying images and portions from one place to the next.

so enabling timing mode and then including the time it takes to open the document.... should be included?

altimas · Apr 19, 2006, 05:31 PM

Well I did happen to come upon 100 dollers (that can be used for whatever I want) but I'm not too sure I want to spend money on DDR1 when I should be switching to DDR2 with conroe

I do play elder scrolls- oblivion which needs uses about a gig of ram total at the settings i play at.
stutters...
On the postive side I could include that memory when I sell off my athlonxp 250+ mobo and 6600GT combo.

***Zardon*** · Apr 20, 2006, 03:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judas

you know, perhaps setting timing mode and marking down the time it takes to load that image should be incorporated, as it's indeed part of the real world test. I mean graphic artists are constantly moving around things, opening and transfering and copying images and portions from one place to the next.

so enabling timing mode and then including the time it takes to open the document.... should be included?

No, then hard drive comes into play. something intentionally avoided in this test and noted on the photoshop page information text. If i had wanted to incorporate the hard drive into this performance test the image would have also been larger to use the PS scratch disk but this will cloud the results the test is aimed at - CPU, Memory/bandwidth etc

Judas · Apr 20, 2006, 11:55 AM

oh ok. Been awhile since i read though everything on there since it was first posted, was checking out a few machines that i had ran it on and wonder if perhaps the preformance messurement would include HD at all...

understand now.

*ocztony* · Jun 6, 2006, 09:03 PM

Hey guys i just wanted to show what the new Conroe is like at the DH bench for CS2, seem you have a new leader at the top

This with a 2.16 overclocked to 3143mhz all on air.

***Zardon*** · Jun 23, 2006, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ocztony

Hey guys i just wanted to show what the new Conroe is like at the DH bench for CS2, seem you have a new leader at the top

This with a 2.16 overclocked to 3143mhz all on air.

yeah they pretty much smoke everything else........

swimtech · Jul 30, 2006, 01:07 AM

...and a Macbook Pro running Windows ties a Dual 2.5Ghz G5 PowerMac running OSX.

tastyweat · Aug 16, 2006, 06:07 PM

Hehe... first run with new processor and I get 9th on the leaderboard with 110.3 seconds

Happy

tastyweat · Aug 16, 2006, 06:22 PM

Fresh Restart and I jumped to 8th with 106 seconds.... 0.5s off 7th place!!! lol

Wwhat · Sep 22, 2006, 05:44 AM

After getting the test and musing on the results a bit I found a way to significantly improve them, I realised that PS keeps a history, and with the huge alterations done the historybuffer gets really big, so I went to options and changed history from its default 20 to 1 and here's some of the differences:

test - was - became
5 - 20.6 - 16.2
6 - 4.7 - 1.6
7 - 10.4 - 6.7
9 - 19.1 - 14.4
12 - 32.1 - 21.4

So there you have it, sloppy of you guys to not realise the history would hugely influence this test.

Go ahead and try it yourself and post the differences.

***Zardon*** · Sep 24, 2006, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wwhat

So there you have it, sloppy of you guys to not realise the history would hugely influence this test.

Go ahead and try it yourself and post the differences.

Nothing sloppy about it and your findings are hardly groundbreaking, there are loads of ways to get increased scores and to optimise a particular system, this isnt 3dmark via the orb type testing - this is a real world test, thats why I said in the instruction to run the bench on a fresh load. There are even huge differences between versions of photoshop and the code changes they make.

pr0digal jenius · Sep 25, 2006, 01:12 AM

yea, and in real life you would likely much rather have those extra undo steps then a few seconds render time

Wwhat · Sep 26, 2006, 05:30 PM

You make a benchmark, you make a page on which you specify versions of PS etc.
You also make a database of results people get, yet you ignore an obvious influencing factor that can skew the results by 30%. and you call that not sloppy
There is only one conclusion, you are afraid to admit you did something daft.
Perhaps you can get a job at the government or army then eh.

How about a simple 'Oops, silly we didn't think of that, we'll add it to the instructionspage' instead of this nonsense huh.

tastyweat · Sep 26, 2006, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wwhat

You make a benchmark, you make a page on which you specify versions of PS etc.
You also make a database of results people get, yet you ignore an obvious influencing factor that can skew the results by 30%. and you call that not sloppy
There is only one conclusion, you are afraid to admit you did something daft.
Perhaps you can get a job at the government or army then eh.

How about a simple 'Oops, silly we didn't think of that, we'll add it to the instructionspage' instead of this nonsense huh.

If you had bothered to read the instructions page then you would have seen that it's already there.

Quote:

load photoshop fresh into memory, you will see some quite large variations if not. Those of you with 1024 or more of system memory can skip the next memory optimisation section, but those with 512 should follow my guidelines.

If you're going to accuse people of negligence... make sure you get your facts straight in the first place.

***Zardon*** · Sep 29, 2006, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wwhat

You make a benchmark, you make a page on which you specify versions of PS etc.
You also make a database of results people get, yet you ignore an obvious influencing factor that can skew the results by 30%. and you call that not sloppy
There is only one conclusion, you are afraid to admit you did something daft.
Perhaps you can get a job at the government or army then eh.

How about a simple 'Oops, silly we didn't think of that, we'll add it to the instructionspage' instead of this nonsense huh.

Hi again, no offense here but I think it is time for a bit of education on the subject.

Firstly I didn't "make" a benchmark, you like some are under the impression that this is a futuremark style test. There are many differences so I feel it is best to perhaps explain why people like yourself are interpreting key issues incorrectly.

The DH Photoshop benchmark is basically a set of instructions gathered together into an action"script" which runs and displays the time to perform these functions. These are all already built into the program, I have coded nothing nor am I using any influential third party addons. Everyone can run these, even macintosh users.

Now that is clear let me explain further. A program like futuremark's 3dmark is a synthetic application built by in house coders to test specific functions under strictly controlled userbase environments. Futuremark do not let you open up their code and start optimising it for your specific hardware configuration as it defeats the purpose of that specific application - you can do nothing with 3dmark except run a predefined set of parameters.

Adobe Photoshop is a real world professional graphics application that allows the end user with knowledge the opportunity to adapt, optimise and increase performance for a specific task or hardware/software configuration. Equally in the wrong hands these tweaks could cause huge issues depending on ram, hard drive size, speed and other key factors. This is why Adobe with each version of Photoshop have a preset and safe installation configuration which will work in the majority of end user scenarios. This ensures the program will run well under all conditions (as long as the hardware in question meets the application minimum requirements).

Between each version of Photoshop from 4 right through to 7, CS (8) and CS2 (9) adobe have the benefit of years of code optimisations to increase performance, this renders comparisons of a user running the benchmark with the same hardware configuration on V7 then CS2 (for example) incomparible. Version 9 (CS2) has some major code overhauls and users with quad chips or for example the intel 965EE with 2 core and 2HT see huge gains with specific filters that make requests to all the threads.

It is therefore with some common sense that we already know, comparing scores between versions is impossible, but we also know that for an experienced end user to tweak configurations between benchmarks that he is going to notice changes, this is a part of the benchmark's usefulness. Not only can a user go online to our database and find another user with a similar system to compare against but he can also tweak his own system, either in the bios or in the program itself to see gains, depending on the amount of ram installed, the speed. the stratch discs and whether it is running on an OS drive, a raid partition, a 15,000 SCSI drive.

The benchmark has a myriad of uses on many levels, but it certainly is not intended to be an online comparision directly between users running different versions of the program with perhaps 2 gigahertz differentials in processor speed and those who have tweaked the program to the hilt for their own specific configuration. Perhaps I could write a guide on how to optimise the program for a variety of end user, however our benchmark page is not the place, and hopefully i've explained why.

likewhoa · Sep 28, 2007, 04:03 PM

anybody know why http://www.driverheaven.net/photoshop gets redirected to http://www.driverheaven.net instead? I'm trying to download the benchmark tool. I was able to dig the direct link which is located at http://www.driverheaven.net/photoshop/dhpsbench2.zip
eitherway, link should be looked at.

woodinville dave · Oct 3, 2007, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by likewhoa

anybody know why http://www.driverheaven.net/photoshop gets redirected to http://www.driverheaven.net instead? I'm trying to download the benchmark tool. I was able to dig the direct link which is located at http://www.driverheaven.net/photoshop/dhpsbench2.zip
eitherway, link should be looked at.

Thanks for the link, I was having the same issue. Do you know the link to the instructions? I've managed to figure out how to run the action but I can't find the timing window. I'm trying to test CS3 with the action.

Aug 13, 2005, 11:50 AM	#3
The_Neon_Cowboy DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 16,135 Rep Power: 76 System Specs	Brug about by reading carefully I noticed something I know others will notice too asked or not. In regards to the section for the users with 512 MB to chage the applications memory settings. Got me thinking...For example I have a gig of ram and by defalt CS2 is set to use 55% of my memory or 499MB . Cache levels setting is defaulted to 6. My question is this: I havn't tested yet but won't the amount of memory the application allow it to use alter the enviroment andthe end result? Shouldn't we come up with a value for everyone to use? Or should you add a info box so that people should even the amount thier PS program is set to? __________________

Aug 13, 2005, 12:13 PM	#5
The_Neon_Cowboy DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 16,135 Rep Power: 76 System Specs	Cool, thanks for clearing that up. I could of figured it out myself but I figured I'd ask if not for my self then for off chance others might be haveing have the same thought. I'll have my results up after bit __________________

Oct 17, 2005, 12:21 PM	#11
Scargo DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: May 2005 Location: Connecticut Posts: 100 Rep Power: 0	Analyzing the results I was hoping to find discussions or information about why the differences in scores. Which ones test what part of your system? Can I tweak anything, using what I have. For instance, my Underpainting (12) score is poor @ 30.1 and so are 5 and 6. Why these scores? Even some AMD processors with significantly lower scores didn't do as good (or much better) than I did with the extrude and smart blur (10 & 11). I am running my 15K RPM SCSI drive solely for the scratch disc.In PS I'm at 75%memory allocation. I have 2 Gig allocated in Windows for page filing and have the minimum page file allocation size Windows allows me to have (in the normal page file allocation area, on the slower main drive/OS). I read that you do not want page filing to be zero on the main drive. On the other hand, I read in this thread that the benchmark does not get into pagefiling and doesn't even use much of the 2 (max usable by PS) Gig of RAM. I assume there is some use of the scratch disc during the benchmark? Any comments/explanations? Thanks [color=Navy]Follow-up:[/color][color=Navy]After further tweaking today I found that going from a cache level of 4 to 2 significantly improved my overall score. A cache level of 1decreased performance somewhat. How can the slight boost in my overall CPU speed from 2645 to 2657 explain a 57% decrease in my texturizer times...if not for the cache change??[/color] [color=darkred][color=darkred][color=black] [/color] Asus A8N-E nForce4 Ultra Athlon 64 (FX) Skt939 DDR ATX, w/Audio, Gigabit LAN, RAID/Serial ATA AMD Athlon 64 4000+ cooled by CPUCOOL ZALMAN CNPS7000B-CU LED [/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] OCZ4002048ELDCPE-K _DDRAM 2x1028MB (“Platinum”, matched pair-low latency 2-3-2-5)[/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] OCZ4001024ELDCPER2-K _DDRAM 2x512MB (“Platinum”, matched pair-low latency 2-2-2-5) [/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] VGA MSI NX6600-TD256E RT [/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] [/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] Western Digital Caviar RE WD2500SD 250GB Serial ATA 7200RPM w/8MB Buffer [/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] Fujitsu MAU Series MAU3036NP 36.7GB 68pin U320-SCSI 15,000RPM Hard Drive w/8MB Buffer ADAPTEC\|29320A-R SCSI RAID CARD [/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred]OS: Windows XP Professional, SP2+ and[/color][/color][color=darkred][color=darkred] Photoshop CS2[/color][/color] [color=blue][color=blue]Running @ 2.65Ghz on air---very cool![/color][/color] Last edited by Scargo; Oct 17, 2005 at 02:36 PM. Reason: Additional info...

Apr 18, 2006, 01:04 AM	#12
altimas DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: ... Posts: 2 Rep Power: 0	Any idea how to improve my scores? Some of them seem real good but others stink. Setup is an A64 winchester@ 242x4- 2420 mhz and 1GB of ram- 2x 512.. at cas 3,3,3,8 ram at 201 mhz Is my memory timings hurting some of the scores a lot? heres all my scores.. Code: 1 Texturiser Test (1) 2.0 (1) 2 CYMK Colour Conversion 5.3 3 RGB Colour Conversion 6 4 Dust and Scratches 4.5 5 Water Color 17.9 6: Texturiser Test (2) 2.9 7: Stained Glass 8.6 8: Lighting Effect 10.9 9: Mosiac Tiles 17.9 10: Extrude 58.9 11: Smart Blur 54.4 12. Underpainting 21.7

Apr 19, 2006, 08:33 AM	#13
Scargo DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: May 2005 Location: Connecticut Posts: 100 Rep Power: 0	RAM is the #1 priority for you. #2 would be a dedicated fast, small drive for PS cache memory. I have 4Gb and run in "3Gb bridge" mode when doing intense PS. Microsoft has instructions about this mod. Normally Windows on utilizes 2Gb of RAM for cache (PS calls its cache memory "scratch disk"). Both want you to have this temporary storage allocation be on a seperate drive. There are tweaks to be made in PS preferences and in PS and Windows cache and pagefile appropriations. Read up about that. __________________ ASUS A8N32-SLI Deluxe motherboard AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ Toledo: 2,600+ Mhz on air- Thermalright XP-90C with 92MM Thermoflow temperature sensing fan 4 Gig of OCZ Titanium DDR400 (PC3200) dual channel, unbuffered RAM MSI NX6600-TD256E video card & dual 21” CRT screen setup 2X - WD 250Gb 7200RPM SATA main drive, w. 16Mb cache 2X - Fujitsu MAU3036NP (15K RPM drives running SCSI 0 [striped]) in their own (optional) bay Lian 7077A - full tower case with optional 120mm fan in top and 120mm added in side, facing MB Antec TP2 550 (watt) power supply Windows XP Pro/Windows X64 Pro MS Digital Media Pro Keyboard Wacom Intuos II Tablet Last edited by Scargo; Apr 20, 2006 at 11:00 AM. Reason: correction/expanding on idea

Aug 12, 2005, 06:00 PM	#1
*Zardon* lifeless Join Date: May 2002 Location: Driverheaven Posts: 31,957 Rep Power: 3148	DH Photoshop Benchmark Script Database ONLINE! As most of you know, we have our own custom Driverheaven Photoshop script which tests real world system performance. If you have never seen this a tutorial for installing and running along with download information is available over here Due to the fact our huge forum thread was turning into a bit of a mess we now have opened an online database so everyone can enter and compare their scores. *The new database system automatically reads your test results and gives you the final score time.* The fastest scores go to the top of the database so while we all want you to compare your scores, please enter genuine figures so everyone can get a good indication of relative system performance across the board. Once you submit your figures, the database will calculate your total score and position you accordingly within the table, clicking on each user name gives a full system specification for that entry along with the version of photoshop used. So please be sure to help us fill this database and head over to here and if you have any questions please discuss in this thread. Attached Images Last edited by Vikingod; Jun 6, 2008 at 09:24 PM.

Aug 12, 2005, 06:00 PM	#2
*Zardon* lifeless Join Date: May 2002 Location: Driverheaven Posts: 31,957 Rep Power: 3148	example entry

Aug 13, 2005, 02:20 PM	#6
*Zardon* lifeless Join Date: May 2002 Location: Driverheaven Posts: 31,957 Rep Power: 3148	decent bench for your system mike.

Sep 2, 2005, 12:11 AM	#9
pr0digal jenius Delete Me Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 14,672 Rep Power: 0	just how much does RAM affect this test....cuz I have 4x512 DDR333......would DDR400, or even 2x1024 improve it a lot you think?

Apr 19, 2006, 05:31 PM	#15
altimas DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: ... Posts: 2 Rep Power: 0	Well I did happen to come upon 100 dollers (that can be used for whatever I want) but I'm not too sure I want to spend money on DDR1 when I should be switching to DDR2 with conroe I do play elder scrolls- oblivion which needs uses about a gig of ram total at the settings i play at. stutters... On the postive side I could include that memory when I sell off my athlonxp 250+ mobo and 6600GT combo.

Jun 6, 2006, 09:03 PM	#18
ocztony OCZ Technology Guru Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 21 Rep Power: 0	Hey guys i just wanted to show what the new Conroe is like at the DH bench for CS2, seem you have a new leader at the top This with a 2.16 overclocked to 3143mhz all on air.

Jul 30, 2006, 01:07 AM	#20
swimtech At Your Service... Join Date: May 2002 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,989 Rep Power: 100 System Specs	...and a Macbook Pro running Windows ties a Dual 2.5Ghz G5 PowerMac running OSX. __________________ It's not so much getting your way that matters or not - what matters is how you go about getting it.

Aug 16, 2006, 06:07 PM	#21
tastyweat Lurking Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: The void Posts: 4,776 Rep Power: 57 System Specs	Hehe... first run with new processor and I get 9th on the leaderboard with 110.3 seconds Happy __________________

Aug 16, 2006, 06:22 PM	#22
tastyweat Lurking Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: The void Posts: 4,776 Rep Power: 57 System Specs	Fresh Restart and I jumped to 8th with 106 seconds.... 0.5s off 7th place!!! lol __________________

Sep 22, 2006, 05:44 AM	#23
Wwhat DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 2 Rep Power: 0	After getting the test and musing on the results a bit I found a way to significantly improve them, I realised that PS keeps a history, and with the huge alterations done the historybuffer gets really big, so I went to options and changed history from its default 20 to 1 and here's some of the differences: test - was - became 5 - 20.6 - 16.2 6 - 4.7 - 1.6 7 - 10.4 - 6.7 9 - 19.1 - 14.4 12 - 32.1 - 21.4 So there you have it, sloppy of you guys to not realise the history would hugely influence this test. Go ahead and try it yourself and post the differences.

Sep 25, 2006, 01:12 AM	#25
pr0digal jenius Delete Me Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 14,672 Rep Power: 0	yea, and in real life you would likely much rather have those extra undo steps then a few seconds render time

Sep 26, 2006, 05:30 PM	#26
Wwhat DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 2 Rep Power: 0	hrmpf You make a benchmark, you make a page on which you specify versions of PS etc. You also make a database of results people get, yet you ignore an obvious influencing factor that can skew the results by 30%. and you call that not sloppy There is only one conclusion, you are afraid to admit you did something daft. Perhaps you can get a job at the government or army then eh. How about a simple 'Oops, silly we didn't think of that, we'll add it to the instructionspage' instead of this nonsense huh.

Sep 28, 2007, 04:03 PM	#29
likewhoa DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 1 Rep Power: 0	anybody know why http://www.driverheaven.net/photoshop gets redirected to http://www.driverheaven.net instead? I'm trying to download the benchmark tool. I was able to dig the direct link which is located at http://www.driverheaven.net/photoshop/dhpsbench2.zip eitherway, link should be looked at. Last edited by likewhoa; Sep 28, 2007 at 05:22 PM.