Can a TX series vaio handle CS2 with RAW files??

I don't plan on doing any serious many layered photo editing sessions with it at all, but I am hoping to do level adjustments, color, and maybe 2 or 3 layers at most.

I use the RAW file format (a rather large file usually around 7mb). Would I be able to use Adobe Bridge and CS2 and Adobe camera raw with a tx series notebook?

The reason I ask is I am planning on bringing a laptop with me when I go on my 6 month backpacking trip to asia so that I can do minor post processing of photos and burn them onto a dvd so I can send the disk home to have a safe backup of my photos in case my laptop/camera get stolen or fatally exposed to the elements. Since I'll be backpacking, I want my notebook to be as small as possible. Ideally I could use a tx series notebook and really cut down on weight. My other two main options are a 12inch powerbook and the sz series (which I want to avoid because of the dual core processor being slower than a single core processor for CS2 until the release a dualcore ready version....cs3)

so whattaya think? TX series? or do I need to suck it up and carry either a powerbook or equivalent.

Thanks ahead of time!

 

CS2 runs slower on a two processor system? I'd like to see the explanation for that. I just viewed a site showing CS2 running slower on a Mac Core Duo than a Mac G5. I am guessing that is probably because the Mac version of CS2 is optimized for the G5 processor (has Adobe released a CS2 for the Intel Macs?). Now you've got me curious how the G5 version of Photoshop compares to the Windows version running on the Core Duo.

But returning your question, I think the TX would be able to handle Photoshop as well any other Windows laptop. The biggest concern should be whether you can tolerate the small screen. The TX has a decent resolution, but the screen itself is small. Go to a store and check it out.

If you already own CS2 for the Mac, you might want to consider the Powerbook so you could avoid the purchase of the Windows version of CS2. But I can see why you'd prefer the light wieght of the TX for backpacking.

 

yeah I may have been wrong on that. I think the reason i thought that was because a powerbook runs CS2 faster than a macbook pro. But that might be because of the need for rosetta, which (i think) is converting the software from powerPC chip coding to intel coding. I originally thought it was because it was transferring it from software made for single core to that which works on a duocore.

Is my current hypothesis correct?

I'm actually currently a windows guy, and already have the windows software, so I'd be in fact saving money staying with windows. I'm ready to try out mac if it seems like it will fit my needs better right now....but as of yet, the super small vaio is the smallest contender and mac just doesn't have anything like it.




any other thoughts?

 

I think so. The Windows version is compiled specifically for the Intel processors. The Mac version compiled for a Motorola chip needs an emulator to run on an Intel chip which would slow it down quite a bit.

I am a Windows guy too, but the Macs are nice machines. I would want to get a Mac that has an Intel processor (like the MacBook Pro) because that is the future for Macs. Apple has a program called Boot Camp that lets you boot either OSX or Windows XP. And there is another company called Parallels that lets you run both operating systems simultaneously (one dual processor is dedicated to each OS). The day may come when you can run any Windows app directly from OSX, but I don't think you can today.

The MacBook Pro is nice notebook (and its dual core should run CS2 faster), but it's twice as heavy as the Sony TX. For backpacking I'd get the TX and then wait to get a nice 17" MacBook Pro that comes with Leopard (the next version of OSX).

 

Just to let you know.....cs2 is coded to use dualcore processors. So the ulv based TX.... is a no go. Why do you think i chose the SZ. Coreduo, i need it for Cs2

 

Whaaaa?! Of course the single core TX, isn't a no-go. CS2 will run just fine on there. Speed of CS2 on the TX, well yeah, that might not be all too good. Give me a while and I'll fire it up. Heck, if someone can send me a file and an action or whatever, I'll give you the time it took or some way to benchmark it.

 

Lmao!


Run this test.... http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=51334


Please post your results. ill run it as well on my SZ By the way my desktop score 24 sec flat.

If its takes you over minute to render this test. There no point of of even using the TX with cs2. This isnt even the hardest photoshop test out.

 

man, you guys rule! thanks so much. I can't wait to hear the results....and more importantly the difference between the two. also, could you please post what model of tx or sz you have and what the stats are (processor and ram) please?

thanks so much.

 

posted wrong link to the test. Now fixed...clintb feel free.

Thanks

 

I'll, ahem, do the test for pure academic purposes tomorrow at work. On the desktop right now and don't have CS2 on the TX yet.

 

wonderful. thank you sir

 

Check the other thread for results.

 

Your score of 3:18 on your TX-750 is more than 4 times slower than the SZ160 score of 47 seconds. I wouldn't have thought there would be that much difference between a 1.2GHz single processor and the 1.83 dual processor. But there you go.. real world results.

Note some have speculated that there will eventually be a new version of the TX coming out since Intel is starting to deliver low voltage core duo processors.

 

there will be a new coreduo version of the TX coming out later this year. I think the SZ is a better choice overall. Not to mention less expensive.

 

This quote below is all you need to know about your thread question. CS2 is simply a no go with CS2. Look into an SZ

Results from the photoshop test i posted.

 

Well, I have an sz160 on order. I would not be able to deal with the small fonts on the TX. But if you are mostly dealing with images, the TX might work out. And its small size and low weight would be big pluses for backpacking.

On the other hand if speed is important, the SZ will probably always be the better choice. Later this year, they should have the Merom chips which should run Photoshop much better than a core duo TX.

 

I was saying that you cant effeciently do any photoshop work on the TX. Its just not made for that.

 

But in the context of the OP's original question, I think the TX would suffice. It's lightweight, can handle CS2 (not quickly mind you) and has awesome battery life. I'm no fanboi of the TX; if CompUSA got in the 160 I have on order, the TX will probably go back. I'm not doing a 6 month backpacking trip though...

 

I totally understand what you mean, but over 3min in that test can hardly qualify the TX capable of doing what OP wants. Dont you agree?

EDIT: PS if you get the 160 ill hate you...lol