Thursday 5 March 2009

Activity 24.2 // Upgrading a digital graphics computer system

Intel Pentium D 'Dual Core X2' CPU (5.3 Ghz)
VIA Chipset 1066 Mhz Motherboard - slots available: AGP8x (1), PCI (3), RAM (2); ports available: LAN (1), USB (6)
512 MB RAM
80 GB HDD (SATA300)
18X DVD+/-RW Dual Layer & Dual Format
onboard UniChrome PRO 3D Graphics with 64 MB shared memory
mouse and keyboard
15" flat screen
cheap inkjet printer (P2)


The following upgrades i would make to the system are as follows -

Intel Pentium D 'Dual Core X2' CPU (5.3 Ghz)
VIA Chipset 1066 Mhz Motherboard - slots available: AGP8x (1), PCI (3), RAM (2); ports available: LAN (1), USB (6)
2GB RAM
320GB 7200RPM SATA-II HARD DRIVE
18X DVD+/-RW Dual Layer & Dual Format
onboard UniChrome PRO 3D Graphics with 64 MB shared memory
mouse and keyboard
15" flat screen
cheap inkjet printer (P2)


First of all i would improve the ram so that the computer will run quicker when executing programs like Adobe Photoshop. Image editing programs usually use up alot of memory ram due the mass amounts of processing that the software does when executed. The RAM is a very important thing which needs updating as without this then certain image editing programs will not work. Especially high end image editing programs like Fireworks which take up alot of memory ram when processing, saving and opening very large image files. Another thing which is important about having enough ram is that the ram has to be powerful enough so that it can cope with the processing of the large hard drive.

Another main thing which would need upgrading when using the chosen computer for image manipulation is the hard drive. The hard drive before was very little and the space would surely decrease over a short amount of time. Improving the hard drive of the computer would mean that the computer would be able to save more image files over a longer period of time.

(2)
There are alot of limitations to the current computer system. Firstly the Intel Pentium D 'Dual Core X2' CPU (5.3 Ghz) is far to powerful for the PC which means 1 it is a waste of money and 2 it will not work with the other computer conponents well enough due to its mass difference in quality. This though is a very fast conponent can when image editing comes into the scene it means that images can be loaded faster and everything done when editing an image runs alot more smoother rather than just having a single core processor, a better option though would be a Intel 3.0GHz 12MB-cache (1333FSB) Processor, this isnt as fast but it will still do the job and make the computer extreemly fast without wasting money unessecery. The cost difference between the two processors is alot. The first processor which was said to be unreasonable would proberbly cost around £500-600 although the one which would be more ideal was found out to cost around £298 which is a massive saving considering the use of the processor and its abilities.

The screen needs to be alot bigger, a 15" screen is not enough for a person who is editing images or working with graphical documents. The optimal screen size for someone working with images is 19" or higher. Dual monitors can also come in handy when editing alot of images and multi-tasking. A poor quality monitor found was a BenQ 15 Wide TFT Monitor which is without a doubt unsuitable for editing images and other types of media processing. This type of monitor is priced at around £35-40 which may seem a good price but it has a poor resolution of just 1280 x 720. The contrast ratio of the monitor research was 400:1 which is also quite poor for the actual monitors purpose.

A more suitable monitor size though is a 19" monitor for instance, whether it be widescreen or not. A resonable priced monitor i found was a BenQ G900D which was priced at £109. The spec though on this monitor was alot more purposeful with the screen size being alot more bigger and more adequete for viewing images in a larger size for instance.

The maximum screen resolution on this monitor appeared to be 1280 x 1024 which was alot more than the previous model, mainly due to its screen size.
the monitor though did have a much greater contrast ratio found to be 800:1 typically and 2000:1 dynamically which is a much more great improvement.