Advice for offline image analysis computer

[lechristophe]

Dear listers,

I have to buy a new computer for our team that will be used as for offline
image analysis. The software required (ImageJ, Metamorph, Matlab) require to
build a Windows/Vista machine. The cost would be around $5,000 / 5000€. The
job would be processing (a lot) and rendering. My questions are :
- Should I go for a "traditionnal" computer, I mean a 32-bits, dual core, XP
computer with maxed RAM (I guess it is 3GB or so) ? Is it usefull to go to
more fancy stuff like 64 bits, 4 or 8 core, 8 to 16GB RAM machine ? Would
ImageJ really benefit from it on a Windows computer ? Related question : if
I go 64bits, should I use Vista 64 or XP 64 (What is the best for ImageJ and
Java) ?
- What about graphic cards and GPU ? What is the best choice ? I've heard
about new strategies to speed up processing by making the GPU churn data as
well as graphics, but I don't think it is really commercially available now
or implemented yet in Java.

Thanks for your advices !

Christophe

[Stephan Saalfeld]

Hi Christophe,

regardless what exactly you buy at the end, let it be a 64bit machine
with a lot of RAM.  Image processing tends to be expensive in terms of
memory and with a 32bit system you are limited to 4GB (in Java 2GB!).
Java can use more memory on a 64bit system and so ImageJ.  People here
in the lab are happy with Windows XP 64bit.  It seems to make it easy to
run both 64bit and 32bit applications at will.

Best regards,
Stephan



On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 10:34 +0200, Christophe Leterrier wrote:

> Dear listers,
>
> I have to buy a new computer for our team that will be used as for offline
> image analysis. The software required (ImageJ, Metamorph, Matlab) require to
> build a Windows/Vista machine. The cost would be around $5,000 / 5000€. The
> job would be processing (a lot) and rendering. My questions are :
> - Should I go for a "traditionnal" computer, I mean a 32-bits, dual core, XP
> computer with maxed RAM (I guess it is 3GB or so) ? Is it usefull to go to
> more fancy stuff like 64 bits, 4 or 8 core, 8 to 16GB RAM machine ? Would
> ImageJ really benefit from it on a Windows computer ? Related question : if
> I go 64bits, should I use Vista 64 or XP 64 (What is the best for ImageJ and
> Java) ?
> - What about graphic cards and GPU ? What is the best choice ? I've heard
> about new strategies to speed up processing by making the GPU churn data as
> well as graphics, but I don't think it is really commercially available now
> or implemented yet in Java.
>
> Thanks for your advices !
>
> Christophe

[Justin Walker-3]

I'm running a dual-Xeon E5410 (That's 8 cores at 2.33GHz per core)
64-bit system with 8 GB of RAM under WinXP-x64 almost exclusively for
image processing and video rendering.  It really rips through things
compared to our old single-core system.  It only ran about $2200, too,
so for your budget you could easily step up to 8x3GHz and 16GB RAM with
room to spare.  Definitely worth it.  Since ImageJ can use all 8 threads
and I have it set to use 6 GB of memory, it's extremely efficient.

I highly recommend sticking with XP.  The overhead for Vista is
unnecessary for a processing rig.  As for video, we went with a fairly
middle of the road nVidia 8600GT, enough to support my dual-monitor
setup, but not overkill.  Since there are no real ways to use the
massive parallel cell processors of the Graphics cards for this sort of
calculations, there's no reason to go overboard on the GPU.  If you were
to write custom code for cell processing, then you'd want to build
something with a bunch of high-end video cards in SLI/Crossfire.

- Justin Walker
University of Maryland

Christophe Leterrier wrote:

> Dear listers,
>
> I have to buy a new computer for our team that will be used as for offline
> image analysis. The software required (ImageJ, Metamorph, Matlab) require to
> build a Windows/Vista machine. The cost would be around $5,000 / 5000€. The
> job would be processing (a lot) and rendering. My questions are :
> - Should I go for a "traditionnal" computer, I mean a 32-bits, dual core, XP
> computer with maxed RAM (I guess it is 3GB or so) ? Is it usefull to go to
> more fancy stuff like 64 bits, 4 or 8 core, 8 to 16GB RAM machine ? Would
> ImageJ really benefit from it on a Windows computer ? Related question : if
> I go 64bits, should I use Vista 64 or XP 64 (What is the best for ImageJ and
> Java) ?
> - What about graphic cards and GPU ? What is the best choice ? I've heard
> about new strategies to speed up processing by making the GPU churn data as
> well as graphics, but I don't think it is really commercially available now
> or implemented yet in Java.
>
> Thanks for your advices !
>
> Christophe
>  

[Michael Schell]

I echo the other comments about XP64 versus Vista64.  We have an XP64  
system with 10GB RAM, an it runs very fast with ImageJ64, Volocity64,  
and Autoquant64.   The extra RAM is mainly useful for huge data  
stacks or deconvolution.  Does anybody know if Microsoft will  
continue to sell/support XP64?  I think I read someplace that they  
wanted everybody to migrate to Vista.


On Sep 22, 2008, at 2:05 PM, Justin Walker wrote:

> I'm running a dual-Xeon E5410 (That's 8 cores at 2.33GHz per core)  
> 64-bit system with 8 GB of RAM under WinXP-x64 almost exclusively  
> for image processing and video rendering.  It really rips through  
> things compared to our old single-core system.  It only ran about  
> $2200, too, so for your budget you could easily step up to 8x3GHz  
> and 16GB RAM with room to spare.  Definitely worth it.  Since  
> ImageJ can use all 8 threads and I have it set to use 6 GB of  
> memory, it's extremely efficient.
> I highly recommend sticking with XP.  The overhead for Vista is  
> unnecessary for a processing rig.  As for video, we went with a  
> fairly middle of the road nVidia 8600GT, enough to support my dual-
> monitor setup, but not overkill.  Since there are no real ways to  
> use the massive parallel cell processors of the Graphics cards for  
> this sort of calculations, there's no reason to go overboard on the  
> GPU.  If you were to write custom code for cell processing, then  
> you'd want to build something with a bunch of high-end video cards  
> in SLI/Crossfire.
>
> - Justin Walker
> University of Maryland
>
> Christophe Leterrier wrote:
>> Dear listers,
>>
>> I have to buy a new computer for our team that will be used as for  
>> offline
>> image analysis. The software required (ImageJ, Metamorph, Matlab)  
>> require to
>> build a Windows/Vista machine. The cost would be around $5,000 /  
>> 5000€. The
>> job would be processing (a lot) and rendering. My questions are :
>> - Should I go for a "traditionnal" computer, I mean a 32-bits,  
>> dual core, XP
>> computer with maxed RAM (I guess it is 3GB or so) ? Is it usefull  
>> to go to
>> more fancy stuff like 64 bits, 4 or 8 core, 8 to 16GB RAM  
>> machine ? Would
>> ImageJ really benefit from it on a Windows computer ? Related  
>> question : if
>> I go 64bits, should I use Vista 64 or XP 64 (What is the best for  
>> ImageJ and
>> Java) ?
>> - What about graphic cards and GPU ? What is the best choice ?  
>> I've heard
>> about new strategies to speed up processing by making the GPU  
>> churn data as
>> well as graphics, but I don't think it is really commercially  
>> available now
>> or implemented yet in Java.
>>
>> Thanks for your advices !
>>
>> Christophe
>>

Michael J. Schell,
Assist. Professor
Dept. of Pharmacology
Uniformed Services University

[Justin Walker-3]

They're continuing to sell XP as a 'downgrade' from Vista for the
foreseeable future.  They make you buy a license to Vista Business, but
you can use that license to install XP Pro.  Similarly with the home
user versions of Vista, they are 'downgradeable' to either XP Home or XP
Pro, depending on the version.  Most vendors will actually do this for
you, so your new machine with arrive with a Vista CoA on the side, but
winXP installed.

It's all very silly, in my opinion.

- Justin Walker
University of Maryland.

Michael Schell wrote:

> I echo the other comments about XP64 versus Vista64.  We have an XP64
> system with 10GB RAM, an it runs very fast with ImageJ64, Volocity64,
> and Autoquant64.   The extra RAM is mainly useful for huge data stacks
> or deconvolution.  Does anybody know if Microsoft will continue to
> sell/support XP64?  I think I read someplace that they wanted
> everybody to migrate to Vista.
>
>
> On Sep 22, 2008, at 2:05 PM, Justin Walker wrote:
>
>> I'm running a dual-Xeon E5410 (That's 8 cores at 2.33GHz per core)
>> 64-bit system with 8 GB of RAM under WinXP-x64 almost exclusively for
>> image processing and video rendering.  It really rips through things
>> compared to our old single-core system.  It only ran about $2200,
>> too, so for your budget you could easily step up to 8x3GHz and 16GB
>> RAM with room to spare.  Definitely worth it.  Since ImageJ can use
>> all 8 threads and I have it set to use 6 GB of memory, it's extremely
>> efficient.
>> I highly recommend sticking with XP.  The overhead for Vista is
>> unnecessary for a processing rig.  As for video, we went with a
>> fairly middle of the road nVidia 8600GT, enough to support my
>> dual-monitor setup, but not overkill.  Since there are no real ways
>> to use the massive parallel cell processors of the Graphics cards for
>> this sort of calculations, there's no reason to go overboard on the
>> GPU.  If you were to write custom code for cell processing, then
>> you'd want to build something with a bunch of high-end video cards in
>> SLI/Crossfire.
>>
>> - Justin Walker
>> University of Maryland
>>
>> Christophe Leterrier wrote:
>>> Dear listers,
>>>
>>> I have to buy a new computer for our team that will be used as for
>>> offline
>>> image analysis. The software required (ImageJ, Metamorph, Matlab)
>>> require to
>>> build a Windows/Vista machine. The cost would be around $5,000 /
>>> 5000€. The
>>> job would be processing (a lot) and rendering. My questions are :
>>> - Should I go for a "traditionnal" computer, I mean a 32-bits, dual
>>> core, XP
>>> computer with maxed RAM (I guess it is 3GB or so) ? Is it usefull to
>>> go to
>>> more fancy stuff like 64 bits, 4 or 8 core, 8 to 16GB RAM machine ?
>>> Would
>>> ImageJ really benefit from it on a Windows computer ? Related
>>> question : if
>>> I go 64bits, should I use Vista 64 or XP 64 (What is the best for
>>> ImageJ and
>>> Java) ?
>>> - What about graphic cards and GPU ? What is the best choice ? I've
>>> heard
>>> about new strategies to speed up processing by making the GPU churn
>>> data as
>>> well as graphics, but I don't think it is really commercially
>>> available now
>>> or implemented yet in Java.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your advices !
>>>
>>> Christophe
>>>
>
> Michael J. Schell,
> Assist. Professor
> Dept. of Pharmacology
> Uniformed Services University