Re: Hardware recommendations

Posted by Gabriel Lapointe on Mar 17, 2009; 6:05pm
URL: http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/Hardware-recommendations-tp3693269p3693270.html

Personnaly I would build my own Desktop. You will end up paying less for
a machine that is custom build for your needs. Small computer shop will
do it for you, if you are uncomfortable with it. In any case I would
stay away from big brand, they are often using cheap hardware and forces
you to buy stuff you don't want (like being force to buy a big graphic
card if you want more RAM). Beside, you will often get a longer warranty
on the parts than on the whole computer. As for the point you raised, my
response are interleave in your text.


> - fast harddrive (SAS?) since, as I understand it, within a virtual
> stack, images are progressively loaded form the harddrive and not all
> stored in RAM
Go for multiple fast (usually small) Sata II and put them in RAID0.
There is no security here, if one HD fail all the data will be lost.
But, you are keeping backup right? If the workstation will not be used
for long term storage, go for Raptors (Western Digital) they are the
fastest around but they have a small capacity.


> - decent processor but no need to go over the top. one fast processor
> is probably better than 2 slower ones. all of them are multicore
> anyways now.
Go for a processor with  big caches (that's the on processor memory).
Big GHz and gazillion core is often overrated. Remember, ImageJ will
more often work in a serial pattern so multiple core will not help you
there. Also. if the cache is too small, the processor is always waiting
for more data from the RAM, which slows down the whole operation.


> - decent amount of RAM (4GB) but, here again, not over the top, since
> the virtual stacks won't be very demanding in RAM. faster RAM is
> better though.
Get as much RAM as you can get and as fast as possible. RAM is cheap
right now and you will eventually need it. Some plugins make copies of
you image for processing or results and those are not virtual stack. You
can always use the swap but it will impaire the performance
dramatically. Personnaly, I work on big Z stack and often use my swap
partion on top of my 8 Gig of RAM.


> - good 24" display with a resolution > or ~ size of my images (1920x1200)
> - firewire port for fast connection to external storage where the
> images reside
Get eSata (external Sata) too. You will get the speed of an internal
sata drive and the conveniance of an external drive. A lot of external
drive that support eSata also have a USB2 port so it end up being more
compatible with other computers than just firewire.


> - Mac OS X or Linux
Custom build mean Linux, it's also free, takes less resources and is
more secure than Mac-OSX. Peace of mind and better performance come
sometimes at the price of more configuration. But free also means more
money for better hardware.


>
> The part I really don't know what to think about is the graphics card:
> how important is it for ImageJ? Once I get something with dedicated
> RAM would it matter to go for the lastest screamer from nVidia or not?
> I got an idea in the corner of my head that graphics cards really only
> make a difference in 3D stuff but I feel this is now wrong.
With the new plugins that use Java3D a better graphic card *might* be
worth the investment. I haven't played with those yet, so I can't
comment. However, remember that displaying your images and zooming it
requires RAM, you either put it directly on a dedicated card or you
reduce the amount available for the system. Therefore if RAM becomes
limited a dedicated graphic card *could* be a good investment.


>
> I am currently looking at Mac Pros (but a bit over my budget), top of
> the line iMacs, and Lenovo Workstations (S10 or D10).
Personally I don't like the "I know what you want to do with your
computer" philosophy of Macs. Therefore if I was forced to chose between
those I have a very clear bias toward the Lenovo.

I hope it helps,
Gabriel Lapointe