- Joined
- Dec 7, 2007
- Messages
- 3,070
- Location
- Puget Sound
- Lightroom Experience
- Intermediate
- Lightroom Version
- Classic
I have been using my Thinkpad T420 as my primary machine since around 2011, and was initially thinking about upgrading its drive and OS (W7-64 Pro), but after learning that Lenovo does not support W10 for this model, I have been looking at other options since I do not want the hassle of finding drivers that work properly. I may still upgrade the Thinkpad''s drive to an SSD and leave W7-64 installed, but I could use a bit of a performance boost, especially since the only ports on the machine are USB 2.0.
My budget is a bit limited, and I know that a desktop will most likely provide me with the best performance for my money. I also know that a quad core i5 or i7 CPU is going to help improve my performance for certain actions and the i7-4790 chip, despite being two generations old, is still a favorite for its performance to cost. Both HP and Dell have basic boxes with this chip, or Skylake i5 or i7 chips, in the range of $700-900 USD. Custom PC's from boutique manufacturers run almost double that price, and I have yet to find any middle ground as I just cannot see paying that premium for my level of use.
Alternately, I can assemble an Intel NUC with a 3.1 GHz Core i7-5557U Dual-Core chip and add memory and an SSD (M.2 or SATA) as well as free up some space on my desk and in our office (something my wife would probably appreciate). This outfitted kit would run about the same price as one of the Dell or HP boxes, but I would be taking a big hit in performance for the gain in space. What I am trying to understand is how much performance I would be giving up if I chose a NUC. Right now, my biggest waits are associated with converting to DNG in ImageIngester, copying backup files from an external drive to an external drive and rendering 1:1 previews for imports. I know that USB 3.0 should help with the second issue, but I believe that the first and last would best be addressed by a quad core CPU, something that the NUC cannot offer. I know that either the NUC or a traditional desktop should be faster than my Thinkpad as it is running a second generation i5 chip (with 8GB of RAM), but I would like to understand the gain or loss of performance between the newer chips so I can determine if the loss is acceptable if I choose a NUC.
Any thoughts?
--Ken
My budget is a bit limited, and I know that a desktop will most likely provide me with the best performance for my money. I also know that a quad core i5 or i7 CPU is going to help improve my performance for certain actions and the i7-4790 chip, despite being two generations old, is still a favorite for its performance to cost. Both HP and Dell have basic boxes with this chip, or Skylake i5 or i7 chips, in the range of $700-900 USD. Custom PC's from boutique manufacturers run almost double that price, and I have yet to find any middle ground as I just cannot see paying that premium for my level of use.
Alternately, I can assemble an Intel NUC with a 3.1 GHz Core i7-5557U Dual-Core chip and add memory and an SSD (M.2 or SATA) as well as free up some space on my desk and in our office (something my wife would probably appreciate). This outfitted kit would run about the same price as one of the Dell or HP boxes, but I would be taking a big hit in performance for the gain in space. What I am trying to understand is how much performance I would be giving up if I chose a NUC. Right now, my biggest waits are associated with converting to DNG in ImageIngester, copying backup files from an external drive to an external drive and rendering 1:1 previews for imports. I know that USB 3.0 should help with the second issue, but I believe that the first and last would best be addressed by a quad core CPU, something that the NUC cannot offer. I know that either the NUC or a traditional desktop should be faster than my Thinkpad as it is running a second generation i5 chip (with 8GB of RAM), but I would like to understand the gain or loss of performance between the newer chips so I can determine if the loss is acceptable if I choose a NUC.
Any thoughts?
--Ken