Okay folks it's here. Get the pocket change ready
This looks pretty darn hot , okay i am NOT looking any more. Repeat after me . I have enough processing power. Say that 100 times fast
Hell Terry I'm already breaking down. LOL
But I know Jack is ordering it, he has been waiting for it
I am ordering it, but there are a few stick points...
1) The only way you can get the quad 3.0 or 3.2 processor is to buy the full 8-core machine; they don't sell the 3.0 or 3.2 as single processors. You can a single quad 2.8, and it is very reasonably priced. Overclock?
2) The RAM is DDR2 ECC 6400 fully Buffered --- REALLY tough to find aftermarket in 1G sticks and harder still in 2G sticks. I found some 1G sticks, but no heat sinks on them. Cheap enough, so may be worth a try. Of course as usual, Apple wants a TON for their RAM at $500 for a pair of 1G sticks!
I want at least the 3.0, still reqiuires I pay for two processors to get 8-cores when I only want 4 for Photoshop... So I am waiting a bit until I get it all figured out.
I to want to order one, but the Chief Financial Officer (my wife) told me to save up for it. We'll see what happens with tax time and actual scrimping. The 2.8MHz model is more than enough for what I need.
You guys need someone to teach classes on the east coast?
YeeeHa! I found the RAM, so now to configure my new baby!
I'd be interested to know which Video card you choose.
Also, there was some discussion over on the Apple forum about RAM for the new machines. I didn't track with every bit of it but my perception was that the RAM is unique enough at this point to warrant some caution. For instance, as of this afternoon, high end RAM suppliers like Crucial and Micron weren't offering RAM for the new MPs. No doubt they will eventually. But there was some suggestion that it might be best to wait for them to do so or else go with Apple's own (overpriced) RAM.
I'm going with the NVIDIA 8800, just cause I could then run 2 30" displays off it for our classrooms
The RAM is very specific and high end, but I did find some 1 and 2 G sticks at macsales.com, so I ordered 8G --- with the 2G the machine comes with, I'll have 10G total which is way overkill, at least until Photoshop upgrades to utilize more.
Update on my Mac Pro. It is ordered.
Video: Turned out the NVIDIA 8800 card is a 4-5 WEEK delay on shipping, while the ATI 2600 is right now. I went with the 2600 and figure this way I can use it a few weeks and maybe find it's good enough for what I do --- and if not, put an 8800 or alternate in when available.
RAM: www.macsales.com has 4G sets (2 x 2G matched pairs, Apple qualified) at $200 each. I bought 8G to add to the 2G it comes with for a total of 10.
Processors: At the end of the day, I bit the bullet and went with the 3.2's.... Probably way overkill, but hey, I plan on keeping this one a while
Drives: I sprung for the 500g drive just for convenience, so I wouldn't have to re-load the OS. Buying a 500 aftermarket and doing this yourself will save you $100 or so and you could use the standard 320 for scratch or data in another bay. I have 2 500G SATA's sitting around, so will mount them inside the box, one for Time Machine and one for misc data storage. Once I get a feeling for how much space Time Machine really needs for my uses, I may need to upgrade that bay to a larger drive. I'll buy a fast SATA for scratch and another 1T for an empty external box I have and use it for more back-up image storage. Ordering the drives from www.macsales.com too.
Oh, the total cost? All the aftermarket stuff included, about the same as a new M8 body.
I'll keep you posted!
I pitched the Mac Pro to my Chief Financial Officer and she said only if I save up the cash. I plan on the base model (2.8GHz, 8-cores, 2GB of RAM, ATI 2600) as I can upgrade later with aftermarket parts. Gotta start socking the cash away!
Excellent! Rock and Roll!
I've built mine and stashed it in the "save for later" section of the checkout. I'll sleep on it and probably push the one-click button tomorrow. Since I'm not in a hurry, I'm going to put up with the delay on the 8800 card.
Congratulations! I'll be interested to hear you first impressions once you uncrate it and plug it in.
Keep on buying Apple computers guys; I'll keep buying Apple stock !
We all should --- it's only going to keep going up as photographers leave the PC platform. I have yet to talk to a photographer that had anything positive to say about VISTA.
However, I doubt this will affect MS much, and they probably won't even notice the market share loss since VISTA is probably perfect for 90% of their current user base. But for sure, Mac market share will increase significantly...
I did a whitepaper for Microsoft on using Vista as the basis of a digital darkroom. It can be done, but the weakness in the driver arena is hampering things. This situation is similar to what happened when XP was introduced 6 years ago. Service Pack 1 for Vista is about to be released which will help corporate acceptance a lot (most IT managers won't deploy a Microsoft OS until the first Service Pack).
The design decisions made in Vista take some getting used to but they get to you after a while. I have found however that the overall level of integration in the OS is not quite as polished as Mac OS X. One of my peers found 65 UI inconsistencies in Vista prior to launch. Stuff stemming back to Windows 95.
Since Mac OS X is based on UNIX, the OS is inherently more stable than Vista.
I run several PC platform only programs, like Autocad, for example. I realize the Mac's are dual platfrom, but can anyone verify how well this works?
And since we seem to be in the MAC question mode... does anyone have any experience using the FAX feature with a MAC? I have a dedicated FAX machine and phone line for it, but would love to eliminate it since it's a power hog. Plus, since most of my clients are sending me edits (previously the big reason for a dedicated fax) vie e-fax which comes in thru my email, the volume of actual faxed info is now very small.
My IT guru told me that if I load Win XP on a separate bootable partition on my drive (aka Bootcamp), it behaves exactly as a PC, albeit with a few extra and one or two missing keys on the keyboard
The other option is to run Fusion (or Parallels) on Leopard, and then run XP virtually through that -- however, I understand this option is where you can run into driver conflicts.
I run Pro/Engineer Wildfire 3 on a MacBook Pro 2.2 Ghz using Bootcamp. Works like a charm. A Mac is essentially a PC under Bootcamp, no real difference.
Last edited by DougDolde; 10th January 2008 at 07:48.
In my opinion, the hardest part of running Windows on Apple’s hardware is getting drivers for Apple’s hardware. My understanding is Apple doesn't support x64 support for Bootcamp, but not everyone views that as an issue.
My experience of Windows XP and bootcamp on a MacBook Pro has been very good. Rock solid, no issues at all (other than the different keyboard). Parallels was very clever, very convenient, but not quite 100% solid; e.g., it managed to screw up XP's recognition of files, so Office files didn't show as Office files. I deleted it at the end of the trail period....
Have you tried Fusion? I hear good things.
I am having VERY good luck with VMWare's Fusion.
Haven't tried Fusion, but I do use their PC/Linux based products (server and player), and I've always had good results with those.
Fusion works very well - so well I have a it runnning my work network whilst I have my mac stuff running int he background - no hitches except for key board differences..
New Mac Pro update...
Here's some interesting info for anybody contemplating the base system --- pay special attention to the drive comment. FWIW mine should arrive tomorrow and I ordered the 500G upgrade. It appears the base 320 drive may be a Seagate 7200.10 with 16MB buffer (or possibly even an older .9 with an 8MB buffer). I'm hoping the 500 upgrade is the latest 7200.11 or .ES with 32MB buffer which would explain some of the rather expensive upgrade cost since the .11/ES is a lot faster than the .10. I'll be opening mine up and checking before I even fire it up, so stay tuned... If it's a .10, I'll be pissed.
Here's the link: http://www.macworld.com/article/1315...cprobench.html
Hey bud , issue is they will throw anything available on the line in it. I would consider this that backup OS drive or some non essential part of the total package maybe even scratch.
I need to look at the new sata 3 drives myself
Okay there is two drives which i am thinking maybe faster than my 10 k raptor
Question is which one is better
These are 105 sustained compared to my 85 sustained on my Raptor
If you google 7200.11 you'll find a few benchmark tests that show the rather significant performance gains with the .11's (same as ES in the enterprise line). Anyway, the .11 apparently can maintain around 90MB/s sustained write times! Guy, this is significantly faster than your 10,000 RPM raptors. Burst speed is almost as good as the 10K raptor, but IMO the bigger advantage is these drives are a lot quieter than your Raptors and run almost 10 degrees cooler, so a lot less box heat (and hence fan noise).
TRSmith: Well my new MacPro arrived, and the short version is I'm mildly pissed...
THe 500G drive is a Seagate 7200.10 with 16MB buffer. I am moving the OS to the faster 7200.11 32MB buffer drive as I write this from my notebook. I will use the 7200.10 for Time Machine and get another 7200.11 for scratch and critical back-up. Heck, I may even stripe a pair of them, one partition for scratch and the other for faster reads and writes of current working images...
On the plus side, the 7200.10 is no slouch, easily faster than any of my earlier SATA drives, so I guess I shouldn't complain too much. Also, I read several online reports claiming the 7200.10 was quite a bit noisier than the 7200.11 -- it is a tiny bit noisier on the head seek clicks, but nothing even remotely offensive. So if you're not anal like i am, you may be happy with the 7200.10's --- just be aware they are on the floor at my local Fry's right now for $99 each, so I would not pay Apple's price for one...
Jack: Thanks for the info on the drive. I can understand being somewhat disappointed that it's not what you hoped. I'm not sure I would necessarily notice the difference unless it was obviously slower than what I'm running now. Still... it is nice to have the best when you pay top dollar for something.
Since I made my purchase through my business account manager and ordered the box with 2 of the 500s in it, it might be worth calling him and asking if the elevens are even an option from Apple.
Aside from the drive, is it behaving/performing as you expected?
Tomorrow I'll be adding the external eSATA extender from the extra two SATA ports on the MB and figuring out the rest of my drive strategy. I am considering striping two more of the .11 drives for faster reads and writes on my current image files, of course mirrored to an external for redundant back-up. My RAM should be here on Thursday, so that's when I'm going to load it up on processes and see if anything breaks.
FWIW I did pull the cover and feel each drive after an extended read off the .10 and write to the .11. The .10 felt pretty darn cool --- just warm to the touch --- yet I had expected it to be much warmer after reading some online reports about heat. Chalk up another plus for the .10. However, the real surprise was when I touched the .11 --- it was barely warmer than room temp, so it really does run cool! In either case, neither drive heated up to the point where the fans kicked on high.
Oh, here's a 10 page review of some drives, including a 1TB .11 and 500G .10 --- take it with a grain of salt unless the actual tests replicate things you do, but the sustained read and write times are what got my attention --- note that the seagate ES2 is the same as a .11, while ES is a .10 : http://www.storagereview.com/1000.sr?page=0%2C2
The hard fact is, Hitachi 1TB DESKSTAR continues to be the drive to beat on most performance fronts, while the WD 1TB GREEN is Queen of quiet, low power consumption and low heat.
Conclusion: If money isn't a concern, stripe (RAID0) a pair of Hitachi 1TB DESKSTARS for image read write, and back them up to a 1TB WD Green in an external enclosure. Then stripe another pair of Hitachis and partition the top 200G off for OS and use the rest as expensive (but fast) back-up... Those 5 drives and an external enclosure will cost you about $1500 at today's prices. Personally, I'll just live with the slightly slower read and writes and store my images on a single drive, mirrored (RAID1) to a back-up
Tom's Hardware has the new Samsung F1 1TB drive as the new performance leader. 118MB/sec throughput.
Yes, I found yet another report showing the Seagate on top in comparing Hitachi, WD and Seagate 1TB drives, in conflict with the report above, though it wa scomparing a 500G drvie to the Hitachi 1TB drive. At least this one is all 1TB drives: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2206630,00.asp
It appears ANY of these newer 1TB drives are pretty impressive performers. However, since Fry's just put the Seagate 1TB's on the floor at $269...
Bottom line is I have the WD inside my machine now and I can't hear it at all. It's definitely a bit slower than the others, but as the article above says, it's kind of the Prius of hard drives; I may suffer with the lesser performance for no heat and no noise
UPDATE on the the Seagate 7200.10 drive:
I installed that yesterday as my Time Machine drive. I noticed today as it "updates" on the hour, I can hear this drive. It isn't that the drive is particularly noisy, in fact it isn't very noisy at all. The issue is that the rest of the drives are virtually silent, so even the soft clicking noise the .10 drive makes catches your attention.
I like my harddrives noisy, let's me know they are working hard
The Samsung F1 is fastest on sustained throughput, doesn't mean it's the best allround performer. Important for scratch disk - but who needs a 1TB scratch disk?
It'll be a few years before I can get myself to trust Seagate again, I've had a few 120GB laptop drives fail (found out later that there was a recall) plus the current spectacle that I am trying to recover from. Seagate just seems to fail often. But there is of course a lot of variation, all manufacturers have their good and bad runs.
The best drives in my experience have been Hitachi/IBM TravelStar laptop drives. Never ever a problem. Fujitsu laptop drives are also impressive, they run very cool.
I think Seagate had a bad run for a while, but things seem to have improved. Hard to say, I know folks who swear by WD's and others that swear at them... I've always liked Hitachi drives.
Update on the 1TB WD Green drives: I am currently copying all the files from one of these drives to a new one, one internal and the second connected via eSATA to an external box. First off, the sustained read/write transfer rates are hovering around 60 MB/s, which isn't too shabby. However, the really interesting thing is the entire process is dead silent --- no noises whatsoever. Lastly, the external non-cooled box is maybe three or four degrees warmer than room temp, and fans running on slow in the MacPro.
Well I went all Seagate .11 bought a 500 for my OS and ordered 2 1tb last night one for my LR catalog and raw files and the other I will do something with . Taking Time Machine to a external to start but my externals are noisy. Have to figure out what i am going to do there
Just wanted to supply an update with some corrections. First, it appears CS3 uses all processors, though it divides the load across them all evenly, so they aren't actually being stressed very much even during heavy lifting. I set up a benchmark test, taking a 1MB tiff up to 1Gig in size, rotating it 90 degrees, then applying USM, then downsizing a bit so you can see it display and know when to stop your timing.
On my machine as currently configured with no real scratch drive, it took 45 seconds. On a friend's Mac Pro quad 3.0, with 16G memory and a striped pair for scratch (really fast I/O), he got 40 seconds. So bottom line is CS3 still isn't using system memory OR processors efficiently and forces you to scratch once you exceed its 3G RAM max. Will update again as soon as my other Seagate 3200.11 for scratch arrives next week --- I suspect I'll knock a few seconds off but NOT match my friend's striped scratch...
Carlos I may just do that. What I am trying to do is get everything inside the box because the noise is much better and it is cooled better so my plan was to take time machine to a external and get my final files inside that way i could switch the 1tb external to a Time machine bocx and can turn it off very easily if I want or get a time capsule and go that route which wouldbe nice to back the family up wireless. That maybe a nice option but first i want to get everything back inside my box that I access fast enough. I been doing a trick lately is when I power up the 3 externals come on and than I just trash there icons and they power down so there not on, than reboot if I need them. There fans in the My Books are noisy and they kick on pretty quick
I just wanted to add my voice here. I finally upgraded to a Mac Pro. I have been using a Dual 2.0 GhZ G5 for 4.5 years. It was the top of the line at the time and it is remarkable how well it has held up. I had 4gb of ram in there and an upgraded video card and it still did things pretty fast.
The new one is just atrociously fast. It is amazing how much they have advanced in that time. I went for the standard model -- the 2.8ghz 8-core with 2gb ram, 320gb drive and the radeon card. I ordered 4gb of 800mHz ram with the heat sinks and everything from Newegg (239, compared to apple which would charge you 1000 bucks), along with 2 western digital 750gb green hard drives. I will use them to back each other up. They were about 150 dollars each, again compared to 400 from apple.
Two things I was particularly impressed with: installing the hard drives and ram was hilariously easy. The design of the case is great. It was good in the G5 tower, but they have made it even better.
The second thing is how quiet it is. I can't even tell it is on! The old G5 was quiet (except in target disk mode, then it sounds like a freaking jet engine), but this one is near silent. It was a pleasant surprise.
Anyway, Newegg sent me the wrong RAM (they sent 667 instead of 800), so I am not experiencing the full beast yet, but already it is amazing. When I installed the 667 RAM and brought it to 6gb, the computer booted up in about 15 seconds. Programs launched nearly instantly and bridge loaded thumbnails of huge scans many multiples faster than the old computer. Anyway, I am very impressed.
The screen I am using is my Eizo CG-210, and you certainly could not ask for a better monitor, so my whole desktop experience has improved dramatically. Time to start printing more portfolio images!
Congrats on the new machine. Sounds like it is hitting the marks for you. I am in the same situation....running a 4.5 year old G5 with dual 2GHz. I upgraded the video card twice and have 6GB of RAM, plus 5 HDs crammed into mine, in addition to a RAID card. Have had the logic board replaced once, but other than that, the G5 has been great. I am very intrigued by the sheer power and speed of the new Mac Pros....even those fitted in a more standard way. I almost pulled the trigger on one late last year, but waited, and see that the new machines are even more impressive.
Looks like I will have to start planning that upgrade again. My G5 is about maxed out, but still runs, and I may just keep it as the printer server and storage machine, while having a blast on a newer faster machine. Folks can argue whatever position they want, but one cannot avoid the obvious....Apple builds some pretty incredible machines, and the G5s/Mac Pros are amazing workhorses.
Which video card did you go with on your new Mac Pro? I am seriously considering the extra cost of that new nVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT card. It is getting some outstanding marks. However, neither of the Radeon card look like they are giving up much either.
I think the fact that the G5 lasted me 4.5 years with ZERO failures of any kind...even the boot hard drive is original...was the strongest argument for sticking with apple. It is still a great machine and the only reason I upgraded is that I have an educational discount right now and I am going to be moving to Iceland more permanently in the summer, so I wanted to buy the computer in the US and save about 100% of the cost versus buying it in Iceland. They have 25% VAT there, their currency is dramatically stronger than ours and every electronic and camera item there costs about double.
So anyway, I have never had a computer last as long as the G5 and remain so viable, so my attitude about the Mac Pro was the same. Buying one expensive, excellent computer that lasts nearly 5 years is better than buying average ones every year or two...if only because it saves you the headache of migrating everything to a new computer.
As for the video card, I stuck with the stock Radeon. Most of the people I talked to said that unless I was doing 3D modeling or video editing, that anything else would be overkill. I only use one 21 inch monitor, as superb as it is, so I am not exactly stressing the card in that sense. I don't use aperture either, so I think that is one application that stresses it a bit more...I do use lightroom, but I have not had any problems yet. From what I have heard, it is actually the programs, not the computer that can often be the weakest link. Evidently photoshop and the adobe programs do not support using all 8 cores yet, but this is hearsay, so don't quote me on it.
ReidReviews has an article about Sean's recent acquisition and the analysis he did during the process. Well worth reading.
If we hassle him, he promises to discuss the dos program he is running.