Tips: Speed up loading brushes in PSP XI?

I am shopping for a new computer to replace my Dell 4600. I use Paint Shop Pro quite a bit, but I find it takes a long time to switch my tools like custom brushes, erasers, dodge, etc. My current processor is a Pentium 4 running at 2.8G. I thought that adding RAM might help, so I installed 3 Gigabytes, but it still takes a long time to load new tools. (It also takes a long time to apply changes like the mesh warp, however the added memory seems to have helped a little there.)
My question is - which would probably have a bigger impact on reducing the time it takes to load Paint Shop Pro's tools on my new computer , ....buying a processor (like the Intel Core 2 Duo) with the fastest clock speed I can afford ...or buying a new processor with the most L2 Cache I can afford ....or even increasing my RAM to 4 Gig? (I may increase the memory anyway since I work with very large image files).

Right now, I would say the best method is to increase your memory with memory sticks. Dell machines are notorious for not having the ability to be overclocked, so there is no option there.

With that said, there are plenty of cheaper duo core machines that don't have all the bells and whistles, but if you want a faster machine, the newer duo cores will help you out. Oh yeah, get as much memory as you can and a fast hard drive.

Paint Shop Pro in its older versions (not sure of the newer versions) are written for older 16/32 bit platforms. If the newer versions support 64 bit then I would invest in those and get the new Windows Vista so it can help you blaze along.

Unfortunately PSP version XI appears to be 16 bit also. (I was already planning to upgrade to Vista). I got advice elsewhere that 4G of RAM might even be overkill, but I'm still planning to get it due to the very large image files I'm working on. What I'm trying to figure out is whether the various brush selections are stored in "stick" RAM - or whether a microprocessor with a huge amount of cached memory might be able to do a better job of guessing which brushes I use most often and change them for me a little faster.

I don't an answer to that specific question.

All I know is that in general terms speed has always increased when I added more RAM sticks. This includes general operation of Windows itself.

I suspect that anything over 2gig ram would be overkill as PSP won't address it nor will Windows XP.

I would go with the duo core process which is faster in execution.

I would also consider a beefier graphics card. Why?

Because for one the built-in graphics processor borrowing memory from the Rams Sticks of your computer to process the data.

Even low end graphics card do this.

Without going into too much detail about graphics cards I'll just say that the newer graphics card seen on newer computers process faster because of wider data paths.

The bigger the data path (like an 8 bit video card versus a 32 bit data card) would get you the results in processing most data faster. In addition, most cards provide more built in memory (average 256mb) than the built in video processor.

So, if it were me...this is what I would do, buy a new computer with duo core, 2gig ram and a PCI-E type of video adapter on the motherboard so you can buy the much faster video cards (if it doesn't come with the computer.) YOu will need to buy a PCI-E compatible computer, spend the extra coin for the PCI-E graphics card.

The cheap way, more ram.

BTW, Dell 4600 is quite slow now compared to duo cores. The speed difference will amaze you.

Installing the latest update patch should also speed up PSPPXI considerably.
http://www.corel.com/servlet/Satelli...=1156169694605

The graphics card I updgraded to in mid 2004:Nvidea Geoforce xfx 5200 256M already used a PCI bus (standard -not PCI Express) ...and supposedly carried 256Mb of on-board memory -but that didnt seem to help out very much. (The only reason I upgraded my card in the first place was so I could use two monitors simultaneously). I wouldn't have expected my new graphics card to make much of a difference in speed anyway - since with 3G of RAM installed in my Dell 4600, there should have been plenty of memory left over for the original integrated video processor to "borrow" memory from ...at least if I'm understanding how integrated video works.
It sounds encouraging to hear that Core 2 Duos are much faster than my Pentim4 @ 2.8Ghz - the lower Core 2 Duo clock speeds made me suspicious that I'd actually see a significant boost in performance. Combining a faster processor with a beefier graphics card (I'm currently looking at nVidia Geforce 7300LE TurboCache using PCI-E) ...plus 4Gig of RAM will hopefully speed up swapping tools in PSP XI. I won't know for sure until I receive my new Windows Vista desktop - sometime in late February I'd guess. I'll try to post my observations.

Two more comments: PSP won't address memory beyond 2G!?! Is that true? I've never heard that before!

Also: To avoid complicating this particular issue I didn't mention that ....I just received my copy of PSP XI about a week ago and after installing it and also downloading the update patch the program only runs for a couple of minutes and then crashes. (Message: "Runtime Error! R6025 - pure virtual function call"). During those couple of minutes of PSP XI use I determined that the time it takes me to switch tools is about the same as it was in PSP X - no faster and no slower. I emailed Corel directly about this crashing problem 4 days ago, but have yet to hear back from them. PSP XI is the only program I'm having this problem with - but the bottom line is that although I mentioned "PSP XI" in the subject line of this thread, I'm really describing a problem I've been having with PSP X. As far as the crashing problem is concerned, if I don't hear back from Corel soon, I'll just get my money back and go back to using PSP X!

Don't buy any graphics card that has "Turbo-Cache" in its description.

That means if the card is 256mb it is really a 128mb card and will borrow the 128mb needed from your system memory.

Will it make a big difference in overall performance if my graphics card borrows an extra 128M from my main memory? With 4Gig of RAM I assume I'd have plenty of memory to spare. Is the memory in RAM that much slower than the memory on the nVidea card? I could see where this might lead to a rendering problem if I was a gamer - or if I was working with full motion video. In reality, I'm only editing still images ...though in some cases VERY large image files.

Probably not too much of a slowdown. But you never know when you will need that extra graphics ram. I just wouldn't buy it. I know they are cheap, but it may not serve your purpose in a year from now.