Originally Posted by GaryLH
Forgot to mention..
if the 900mb is what u noticed before u started do anything.. That size will grow a lot depending on how many ops u are doing to that raw file.
I wonder if there is a big which is not allowing the Ram memory to be fully utilized and the system is going into paging HD instead. This would explain it being slower. Does Windows 10 allow u to tune your paging drive? how much space is there on the drive u designated a your paging drive.
the 900mb is when i have a photo open and i've applied a change. the processor is seeing base-clock usage for a second while a change is made, then drops back to a lower power state.
maybe a gaming cpu would work better than a xeon
Originally Posted by Jamie Pillers
This thread represents what keeps me from moving over to Sigma foveon cameras. I want to give the cameras a go, but I don't want to have to scale a steep computer software/hardware curve to do it. I'm willing to live with the slow processing speed of SPP and an extra step or two to move files through SPP to TIFF to Aperture, but I don't want to be faced with issues like those raised in this thread. I'm surprised that issues like these don't push everyone away from the Sigma foveon camp. Are the foveon image quality benefits really worth all this effort?
Sorry to interject this sidebar into the original thought of the thread. If inappropriate, please ignore.
There really aren't steep computer hardware requirements. I have a souped-up, server-grade, video-editing PC, but it still runs miserably. It's just poorly written/poorly optimized. Hopefully the release of the new SD1 will light a fire under Sigma's ass, but somehow I doubt they'll make improvements. (I seem to remember SPP 5 running more briskly than SPP 6).