Computer recommendations...

[sauvignon]

Hi, this is actually my first thread and the best place I could think of to put it. I'm basically planning to invest in a new PC and was wondering about some minimum specs I should look for. I don't do any 3D work, and I basically use Painter and Photoshop. I have had several brushes lag considerably on me in Painter (off the top of my head, the Liquid Ink ones), and even files in general as I progress in a painting.

I'm not a professional, so I don't need a system of that caliber, but when I start an illustration I try to take it pretty seriously. The problem is with a system that can't run Painter well is that I find myself constantly feeling like I'm hampered. I'm hoping I can spend ~$500 max and get a something that allows me to run Winamp and Painter at the same time :).

Just an example (http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/sauvi/?action=view&current=gunmen3_2_25.jpg) of the last work that caused my ancient computer to nearly pass out.

[Darasen]

There was an article recently from Toms Hardware on building a $500 PC (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-graphic-game,1810.html). I would suggest taking a look at that. I would not suggest getting a cheap PC from Wal-Mart or the like as though they may work the time they have a short life span using cheaper components and typically have very little upgradibility.

[sauvignon]

I guess I should assume whatever processor/RAM/video card requirements for gaming would apply equally well for illustration. Thanks for the link, Darasen! I appreciate it :)

[Flake]

I guess I should assume whatever processor/RAM/video card requirements for gaming would apply equally well for illustration.

If you're not doing 3d then yep, pretty much.

Anything capable of running modern games will be fine for PS etc, if in doubt, go for more ram or cpu at the expense of fancy video cards as they'll have the least impact on performance in PS/Painter.

[VulgarDragon]

My PC is an old Athlon XP 3200 (2.2 ghz) with 2 gig memory. Photoshop performs super on it, but Painter was having some lagging problems especially on larger pictures when I only had 1 gig memory on it. I added another 1 gig to it and it seemed to help some. If you work with Painter a lot, consider minimum of 2 gig memory. A $500 computer probably would outperform mine, so yeah, that would be good enough. Also, make sure you get Windows XP instead of Vista, because Vista is a resources hog (needs 4 gig memory for it to run properly!!!)

[sauvignon]

Thanks Flake and MCross, that was just what I was looking for, especially the Painter specific info. I will consider RAM then processor, then video card in order of priority then.

Painter is a scary resource monster :/...Anyone have a system that runs it smoothly (or close to it)?

[Jie Kageshinzo]

I am using Painter IX and I haven't had any problems with it yet except for when I go the whole 2000x3000 canvas and apply an 800 pt. Artist Oil brush over it, in which case the whole thing just kicks me out of the system. I have to stress, though, that I have already added my main artwork in when that happened (if you're curious as to what details I already had when that happened, it's this finished work (http://jie-kageshinzo.deviantart.com/art/We-Were-SOLDIERS-86640779)).

My specs are: a 2.0 Ghz Intel C2D with 2 GB RAM. My video card is just a 256 MB GeForce 7600. I'm running Windows XP. If you're using Vista, you might want to up the RAM more.

[Max Challie]

If I was planning to do 3D as well, what would you recommend?

[Funkyskull]

macintosh

[tmbritton]

For 3d the only difference between is the video card. If you want it to be a dedicated workstation, ie no games, a low end quadro workstation video card will do the trick. Also, high end gaming cards perform fairly well also.

The hardware forum on cgtalk has about a billion threads discussing this. I'd check that out if I were you.