The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Specs for a new Mac Pro

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Just to play devil's advocate, but are you sure you need all that power? What types of files are you editing and in what volumes? Do you use lots and lots of layers when you edit (like more than 5, not including adjustment layers)?
I use a quad core mac pro from early 2008, I believe with 4 or 6gb of RAM and the stock video card, no RAID and I have never for one moment felt like I had to wait an unreasonable amount of time for any given task. Things open extremely quickly, filters are very quick. I would never dream to say that you can't make it much faster, but the question is whether it will matter for you. I mostly work with 22mp digital files and several hundred meg Imacon scans. My volumes are fairly modest. But anyway, just laying that out there. I am not sure if you are a professional or an amateur, but if you are not coming home from work with 300 39mp files every evening, the stock systems go a long way.


Then a caveat to my caveat ;), my power mac system before this lasted me six years, mostly because I bought one of the highest end models. Right until I replaced it, it chugged along quite well. One of the nice things about the Mac Pro's is that they have so much room for expansion, you can buy a good processor set, and then add components as you see the need.
 

popum

New member
Stuart's comment raises a question for me. I use Lightroom, CS4 and increasingly Autopan Pro. I'm currently running an iMac with 2 gig of Ram, 667mHz. Things get real slow (especially in CS4) when I do panos. If I spend the approx. $5k to go MacPro will I see a significant speed up? Can I speed things up with my current setup plus some additions?

I'm not a pro, just an impatient type A amateur.

Thanks for all you time and help.

Mike
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Mike,

Well... My box assembles a 4 frame pano of full sized, 16-bit P45+ files (roughly 240 megs each) using AutoPano Giga in about 3 minutes, and even faster in CS4. Note that AP Giga DEFINITELY utilizes multi cores, and also note that the newest Helicon Focus utilizes multiple cores, and of course C1 does too.

Timing CS4 for you now (a program that currently only utilizes a single core) on that 4-frame pano... Got 1:14, but it doesn't do nearly as good a job as APG (;)). However, at least now you have something to benchmark against -- uprez four frames to 7393 x 5545 px and make them 16-bit, run them through CS4 photomerge and compare the times to your box. Or tell me your file sizes and I'll downrez mine to that and re-run it.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Mike right now a quick fix is get that to at least 4gb of Ram . All CS4 programs are really more than anything else Ram hungry the more the merrier is really the key. a 7200 rpm 32mg cache hard drive also. Get away from any 5400 rpm drive. Your also looking at a slower processor as my MacPro was but I made that a rocket by adding Ram and very fast 10k drives and than Raid 0 scratch. The new MPB 2.66 with at least 6gb of Ram would also be a big improvement with a good fast drive than hook your monitor to that for home use . Depends on what you are after but the new IMacs are very compelling as well and the speed is up there plus they will take 8gbs of ram.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I think the key here is knowing what programs are core hungry and what programs are more Ram hungry . All Adobe stuff is more in the Ram hungry area. C1 and other programs like that are more core hungry. Having a fast processor and fast Hard drives help in both cases. So knowing what you use you can balance your choices out some. 8 cores will not help you much with CS4 sure it will help but I am beating my old box with less cores because of better Ram, Faster Processors and Fast SSD drives and this is coming from a laptop which BTW is basically a IMAC
 

popum

New member
I guess the decision comes down to:

....Do I spend about $2500 for a loaded iMac now knowing that it will be a big improvement now, but essentially a dead-end going forward. Or, do I spend more than double that for a MacPro 8 core with the expectation that it will be upgradeable and ready for OSX6 and CS5...

Mike
 

jonoslack

Active member
Faster Processors and Fast SSD drives and this is coming from a laptop which BTW is basically a IMAC
HI Guy
I have one of the new unibody MBP 15" 2.53 with a 7200 rpm drive and 4gb RAM

I also have a year old imac 24" 2.66 with a 5400 rpm drive and 4gb RAM

There is absolutely no comparison between the two.
The Imac is at least twice as fast in Aperture and Photoshop.
My son is using an Imac and a 17MBP, (both fully loaded with ram) and he says exactly the same thing.

In fact, the iMac is sooooo much faster at everything.

This doesn't make much sense to me, but the laptop is certainly not 'basically a IMAC' . . or if it is, something is slowing it down drastically.

P.S. - we do have a macPro as well (16gb, 7200), it's faster than the imac, but not by as much of a margin as the imac is faster than the MBP.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
The fix was completely removing all C1 files from your machine and reloading -- and you have to go into the system and manually remove some of these -- did you try that before installing 4.7?
Oh yes! More than once

But it seems fine now and hasn't crashed once, even tethered, since 4.7 went on. It's really a very fine piece of software now.
 

jonoslack

Active member
I guess the decision comes down to:

....Do I spend about $2500 for a loaded iMac now knowing that it will be a big improvement now, but essentially a dead-end going forward. Or, do I spend more than double that for a MacPro 8 core with the expectation that it will be upgradeable and ready for OSX6 and CS5...

Mike
Hi Mike
I can't answer that question for you, but surely any imac you buy now will be ready for OSX6 and CS5.

Worth mentioning (with reference to Guy's remarks) that in my experience the iMAC is a great deal faster than the current notebooks, despite what the specs might tell you.
 

LJL

New member
To Guy's point, a trick is trying to figure out what will be most untilized...RAM or cores. I am tending to hedge my bets toward more cores, plus having the ability to load up RAM as needed. Even though apps like PS and LR are not really taking advantage of multiple cores, as some other apps are starting to, they may catch up at some point, or Snow Leopard may find a way to parse things out and "trick" PS. (Not holding breath on that last part, but Apple has been disappointed in how slow Adobe updates things for it fire breathers, so they may have found a way to "help Adobe along". It is in their interest to sell more machines, but if major apps are not able to utilize the power/cores offered, it does not get things out the door as fast.)

I guess a decent compromise is to get a machine that is tuned mainly for the apps and workflow you use most, with some future proofing in the plans, i.e., hoping Snow Leopard and PS CS5 are able to utilize the power. (I am still waiting to see if Apple will be able to deliver a 4-core chip or so for laptops, and maybe tune memory slots to better utilize the DDR3 RAM chips, like three slots, not just two that max out at 8GB.

Ah, we keep wishing and asking, but we must be a very small minority in the overall market, as few of our wishes ever get granted. (Apple DID listen and provide a matte screen on the new 17" MBP, and it would be great if they offered it again on the 15" MBP, but that may render the 17" nearly obsolete, as folks would rather carry the 15".

LJ
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Plus I was able to put 8gbs of Ram in mine when Apple says you can't on the 15 inch. Another marketing trick to get folks to buy the 17 inch.

Jono that is interesting for sure.
 

Dale Allyn

New member
...

Ah, we keep wishing and asking, but we must be a very small minority in the overall market, as few of our wishes ever get granted. (Apple DID listen and provide a matte screen on the new 17" MBP, and it would be great if they offered it again on the 15" MBP, but that may render the 17" nearly obsolete, as folks would rather carry the 15".

LJ
I'm waiting for a matte-screened 15", as are two of my friends. We'll not buy a 17", nor upgrade to the current gloss screen unless our current laptops completely disintegrate. Sure, given enough time we could be shoe-horned into a glossy 15" MBP, but there are three of us waiting and several others in conversation saying the same (which may suggest a larger pool), so maybe Apple will give us this one. I'm hoping so.

:)
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
HI Guy
I have one of the new unibody MBP 15" 2.53 with a 7200 rpm drive and 4gb RAM

I also have a year old imac 24" 2.66 with a 5400 rpm drive and 4gb RAM
Jono, are you sure the iMac has the 5400 rpm drive and the MacBook has the 7200 drive? It has been a long time since 3.5" SATA drives were 5400 RPM unless you specifically bought one, and MacBooks still come with 2.5" 5400's. Your numbers would make perfect sense if the 7200 drive was in the iMac and the 5400 in the MacBook, because drive size and spin speed have significant impact on overall performance...
 

Dale Allyn

New member
Yes, I've seen that, and that would be my approach if I get squeezed into buying a glossy model. I'm not one who likes to buy a brand new Mac and send it off for a Franken-puter mod., but it's an option.

In fact, I'm boxing up one of my laptops this week, to send off to Apple (Apple Care) for a flickering screen. The computer is near the end of its 3-year warranty and I'm glad I'm not having to sort it out between venders.

Hopefully, we'll see an option from Apple, so that we can tweak the rest of the components and not the screen too. ;)
 

charlesphoto

New member
Okay, might I suggest you do as I did which is run (don't walk) and get a brand new 2008 8-core model which works out to be about the same as the 2009 4-core. Deals are out there on them but not for long. And don't forget Live cashback on BIN ebay purchases.
 

carstenw

Active member
Jono, are you sure the iMac has the 5400 rpm drive and the MacBook has the 7200 drive? It has been a long time since 3.5" SATA drives were 5400 RPM unless you specifically bought one, and MacBooks still come with 2.5" 5400's. Your numbers would make perfect sense if the 7200 drive was in the iMac and the 5400 in the MacBook, because drive size and spin speed have significant impact on overall performance...
The new MacBook Pros offer an optional 7200rpm drive, which I also chose for my 15". Unfortunately I bought the 2.4GHz version, mostly for battery life reasons, not price, and I maxed it out at 4GB. Now that the 8GB kits are not available for the 2.4GHz version, I really regret. I wish there were something I could do to change it.

Has anyone succeeded in getting the 8GB kit to work in a 2.4GHz MacBook Pro? Does anyone know why it is not supposed to work? All the relevant specs are identical, that I can see.
 
Top