Aperture frozen up Mac Pro

Newish to mac and this is first time I have complete screen freeze. I am working in aperture and about to print, and print page is locked up and can't close aperture or machine or anything.  How do I clear it.
New Mac Pro aug 2012

I'm experiencing exactly the same problem. I looked for a help on various forums with no luck. I sent a question to Apple. No response. I've just upgraded RAM to 2GB but this didn't help. And RAM is definitely not an issue as system (with Aperture and other apps running) uses maximum 1.5 GB. As soon as I touch Highlights&Shadows the application becomes extremely slow. It also slows down when using other tools (sharpening, lift&stamp) but the Highlights&Shadows seems to be the biggest problem. My iMac is equipped with ATI Radeon x1600. Does it mean that I need to get rid of my 1-year-old machine and shell out £3k for MacPro in order to make Aperture fully usable? Apple! Please do something about it. If competition can create speedy RAW applications, why can’t you? Aperture could be a really amazing app if not this issue.

Similar Messages

  • How can I install Aperture on my new Macbook Pro. I am up to date with my Mac Pro, I have the Aperture 1 and installation disks but cant remember how I got to 3. Can anyone help?  Many thanks regards Alf

    I have an up to date version of Aperture on my Mac Pro, and I would like to install it on my new Mac book Pro. I have the original installation disks for Aperture 1 and 2. I cant remember how I got to Aperture 3, I think it was via a web download but not sure. I have checked my purchases in the App Store but there is no indication of me buying an upgrade to Aperture 3.
    Ive tried to download it from the App Store but it wants me to pay again.
    Can anyone help on how to install Aperture 3 on my new Macbook .
    Many thanks regards  Alf

    Then you can download the Trial version of Aperture 3 and unlock it with your serial numbers - you will need all three for all three versions: A current link to the Trial version is in this support document, also instructions on how to reinstall on different systems:
    Aperture 3.4: May quit unexpectedly on launch after updating
    Regards
    Léonie
    BTW: Your Aperture 3 serial number will be displayed in the "About" panel - the panel you see, when you use the command "About Aperture" from the Aperture menu in the main menu bar.

  • Using Aperture on 2 networked MACs (Macbook and Mac Pro)

    Hope someone can help answer any of the 3 questions we have on Aperture:
    We have Aperture on the MAC Pro. Now I am hoping to be able to do some work flow stuff on pictures in the library on the MAC Pro HDD. The Macbook connects over wifi (could easily be LAN) to a wifi/LAN router that connects over the LAN to the MAC HDD.
    Qs:
    1) Is accessing the main Aperture library from Aperture on the Macbook possible and the best way to do this?
    2) Can I synchronize select Projects/Albums between the two computers?
    3) When on the move, I am assuming that the best way to transfer the pictures with all the EXIF data and ratings in tact by transferring the pictures as part of a Project.... Is that the right way to do this?
    Many thanks!

    It is possible to access your main library but would not advise this - there is no support for concurrent access and you have to trick Aperture into thinking that the library is not on a networked drive. That being said you are on the right track to dealing with your multiple libraries. Here is some more info:
    [Aperture 2 Multiple Libraries|http://photo.rwboyer.com/2008/09/managing-aperture-2-on-multiple-comp uters>
    RB

  • PS stopped syncing on Mac Pro

    i have the following settings in PhotoStream on the Mac Pro and i have PhotoStream sync turned on in my iPhone settings. is there another setting on the mac pro i should check?
    my iphone is connected to my home network and it has been for the last four hours.
    i have started and quit and started and quite aperture on my mac pro.
    i have disconnected and reconnected iCloud sync on my mac pro.
    is there anything else i can try if i can see an April 2014 Photo Stream folder on the mac pro in aperture but i can also see about 200 photos that are on my iPhone in PhotoStream that are not in this month on the Mac Pro?
    i just opened the macbook pro and opened aperture and these images from my phone are now syncing to this device.
    i run mountain lion on the mac pro and mavericks on the MBP.
    what am i missing other than PhotoStream is not working very well...?

    i have the following settings in PhotoStream on the Mac Pro
    With these settings you should see "My Photo Stream" in the "Shared > iCloud" section in Aperture on your Mac Pro, but the monthly projects will not import new photos from the stream. If you want monthly projects automatically imported, enable "Automatic Import" in your settings.
    Did you not say, that you only want to import the Photo Stream to one of your Macs, if I remember correctly?

  • MAC PRO 2.66, XT1900 & 3GB RAM for Aperture?

    Hi,
    I have read a lot of post about the performance of Aperture and CS2 and budget-wise I am thinking in buying a MAC PRO 2.66, XT1900 & 3GB RAM.
    Will this configuration be OK to work with Aperture and CS2?
    I shoot primary weedings using 8MP Canon RAW files.
    Thanks

    I have this exact same setup, powering a 24" Dell and a 23" apple monitor - but with 4 gigs of RAM as the previous post suggests. It's awesome (I'm opening 10 mp Nikon NEFs on mine, FWIW).
    I initially started with 2 gigs of RAM, and that was miserable in more ways than one. After 4 gigs of RAM, Aperture ran much better...but still not snappy. Following the advice of others in this forum, I got the ATI card you are considering, and it has made a world of difference.
    This speed is addicting, however. Now I'm pondering, incredibly, "What ELSE can I add to the mix to make it even FASTER." I've read that some have success with faster drives. Others recommend even more RAM. I might try more RAM down the road, but then again I push the machine in other ways (lots of Rosetta apps, a Parallels instance of XP, etc). Still, nothing really ever feels slow.

  • Transferring Aperture from my Macbook Pro 5,5 to a new MacBook looks complicated.  If I purchasea new, updated Aperture, can I open my old vault on an external disk in the new Mac?

    Transferring Aperture from my Macbook Pro 5,5 to a new MacBook looks complicated.  If I purchasea new, updated Aperture, can I open my old vault on an external disk in the new Mac?

    Mac OS X 10.7 Help: Troubleshoot a network printer

  • New Mac Pro 2.8 and Problems with Aperture

    Hi,
    I just bought a new Mac Pro 2.8 with the standard 2GB of RAM. My main application is Aperture. Since I loaded it and pointed to my library, the system runs *very* slow when I am in Aperture. I get a lot of spinning wheels for everything I do ... including just switching between pictures. My library is ~130GB and when I tried importing my iPhoto 8 library, it crashed. Now when I try to delete the import project, Aperture hangs. I am very surprised by all of this. Any thoughts or suggestions?
    An interesting side note, iPhoto with 140GB library works great.
    Mac Pro 2.8, 2GB, 320GB Drive, 130GB Aperture Library, Leopard 10.5.1
    Thanks,
    -chris

    Chris-
    Unfortunately Apple reps are seldom good counselors as regards application performance. They are after all retail sales people, not users. Better advice is available from user forums typically populated by folks with years of real-world usage experience as well as education beyond that typically found in retail sales.
    RAM is inexpensive now, so IMO MPs should have more RAM, adding two 2-GB sized DIMMs as a minimum add. For heavy apps like Adobe CS or Aperture I recommend adding 8 GB RAM, always minimum 2-GB sized DIMMs to avoid wasting limited slots. IMO RAM is the cheapest performance enhancer and most of us handling heavy graphics will want even more RAM, all slots, over the life of a new MP.
    I would recommend buying 4-GB sized DIMMs except that they currently cost much more per GB.
    Aperture has always required an advanced graphics card for good performance, even with MP towers. Do not be surprised if adding RAM does not provide a magic bullet. If you use Aperture professionally you will want to add an 8800 GT card.
    All that said, Aperture ran adequately on my MBP even with the stock 2 GB RAM. Odds are very high that the slowdown you observe is not simply hardware based. I strongly recommend that you carefully pursue every one of the points discussed in the excellent Bagleturf speed discussion, and especially get fully conversant with Previews alternative settings.
    Please describe your hard drive(s) configuration, including how full, since mass storage also bears heavily on performance.
    Good luck!
    -Allen Wicks

  • Will Graphics Card Help Aperture on Mac Pro?

    I've been using Aperture for many years on a variety of Mac hardware. I have 5 or 6 image libraries, ranging in size from 50gb to 250gb. I have no referenced images, do not use "faces" or other CPU-intensive features, and often perform tasks which reportedly improve Aperture performance (deleting caches, repairing/rebuilding libraries, defragging hard drives. deleting prefs). While these tricks often result in a snappy experience on relaunch, Aperture returns to its sluggish ways after a few minutes of work.
    My workflow is very simple -- I plug in my camera, download photos to the HD, and then edit them, which consists of adjustments such as exposure, white balance, sharpening, rotating, cropping. I don't do much retouching, red eye, or other fancy editing. Occasionally I use the "external" edit feature to retouch in Photoshop. I shot for many years with a Canon Rebel, 14MP I believe, and recently got a Nikon D800. I am finding the performance going through D800 raw files (not even editing, just flipping through them) unacceptable. For example, if I go to hybrid list/preview view, and press the "down" key 10 or 15 times, by the 5th image, there is a very noticeable lag, and often the display beachballs for 10 seconds or more before it gets to the bottom of the list. Basic tasks such as cropping or rotating often lock the display for long periods of time.
    For many years, I blamed Aperture's awful performance on my hardware. I worked on a series of Mac laptops. Although I usually had the latest hardware, they were no desktop. Recently, I bought a Mac Pro with a 3.2GHz Quad-Core Xeon processor, 16GB of ram, an OWC SSD (for the system -- the libraries are on a 7200RPM drive), and a ATI Radeon HD 5770 graphics card. I was dismayed to find out that Aperture is STILL unbearably slow. If I can't simply flip through some photos on a top of the line Mac Pro, what is this program good for?
    My question now is, would I see a significant performance gain if I were to upgrade yet again to a faster graphics card, such as the Radeon 7950? I've been reading up on these cards, and it seems like native support is coming in 10.8.3. While I hesitate to pour more money into my quest for a useable Aperture system, I wonder if this would finally show some significant performance gains. I've read conflicting reports from other users who've upgraded the graphics card. Is the advantage mainly for 3D or gaming applications or would this help Aperture too?
    Thanks in advance for any replies!

    In the past Aperture has been very GPU-dependent. The very best G5 tower would bog on Aperture unless the stock GPU card had been upgraded. I expect current Aperture also to benefit from a stronger GPU but I do not have absolute info on that. And your existing 5770 is not a lame card.
    I know 16 GB RAM seems like a lot, but with D800 files and an Aperture/Photoshop workflow you may still be paging out to disk. My Aperture/Photoshop workflow paged out at 8 GB RAM with files 1/3 the size of the D800 files.
    You should evaluate whether or not you have adequate RAM:
    Look at the Page Outs number under System Memory on the Activity Monitor app before starting a typical Aperture/Photoshop work session and write the number down. Recheck the Page Outs count after working for a few hours and write the number down again. If the page outs change (manual calculation of ending page outs number minus starting page outs number) is not zero your workflow is RAM-starved.
    Ignore the pie charts and other info in Activity Monitor because they are often misleading regarding RAM usage. For RAM analysis, count page outs.
    If your test shows that page outs increase at all during operation you should add RAM. RAM is dirt cheap and use of additional RAM a very desirable characteristic for an Aperture/Photoshop workflow. If it was me I would double to 32 GB RAM and set PS (PS Preferences/Performance/Memory) to use 16 GB of RAM.
    Hard drives slow as they fill so make sure none of your hard drives are overfilled. I suggest 70% full as an arbitrary maximum but even less full is preferable for speed. If your Library drive exceeds 60% full I suggest setting a RAID 0 array on two or more identical drives to get extra capacity and speed. Of course pay careful attention to frequent Library backup.
    Some apps like browsers are notorious for "leaking" memory so when doing serious images work keep non-essential applications closed. A SSD drive for boot helps because when apps open in just 3 seconds there is no reason to keep extraneous apps open.
    HTH
    -Allen
    P.S. I strongly recommend that original images be fully backed up before importing into Aperture or any other images management application.
    P.P.S. Makhe sure you have a properly set PS Scratch Disk assigned on a fast underfilled drive, and empty the scratch disk routinely.

  • New Mac Pro - Aperture and a massive new project - help me be smart!

    I am receiving a Mac Pro 2.66 Friday and adding in 4 GB RAM and 2 500GB HDS, Aperture and Final Cut Studio and a lot of music software. Moving up from a G4 450 DP.
    I received a very nice fellowship and will officially begin the project on June 1, continuing until August, 2008. I will be filming in all 92 Indiana counties - mainly nature and historic sites for a few DVD programs for schools in my county. I expect to end up with 30,000 + images when it is all said and done.
    Before I begin, do any of you experienced digital photographers have any advice for someone in my position? You know, "what I wish I had known when I started using Aperture" kind of advice.
    I use a Nikon D70, 5 various lenses and will shoot RAW. I am an experienced photographer, so I am not looking for shooting tips, etc.
    Thanks for any tips.
    G4 450DP   Mac OS X (10.4.6)  

    That sounds like a great project.
    People have already emphasized the importance of backing up. I can't pile on with any more emphasis. Backup, backup, and backup some more. I have five copies of every RAW file I've ever made across four different disks and DVD's. The DVD's are located in a remote location. I had an issue with my hard drives about three months ago that caused all my hard drives to loose their data--complete loss. If not for my DVD's, I would've lost 30,000 RAW files let alone all the processed images.
    I'm working an article on my backup strategy that should be published in the next week or so. If you want, send me an e-mail and I'll give you a link to my site when it's done.
    This next article is about file naming. I've been using this same convention for 8 years. It works as well as anything. The other recommendations are also excellent especially the ones about adjusting your convention when sending to clients.
    http://www.keiko-ni.com/keikosite/equiptech/digital/filenaming/filename1.html
    This final article is about my initial workflow. I am not a "copy the CF card prior to import" kind of guy. Call me gutsy. Metadata and keywords will be your most important friend during a project this size. Being able to quickly get to images for various purposes will be extremely important. To be a high end, high capacity photographer also means being a data manager. It's a fact of life. Secondly, start early and don't get behind keywording. That will only slow you down later. The key to this in Aperture is using the keyboard shortcuts. Learn those. It'll help lost later.
    http://www.keiko-ni.com/wordpress/?p=13
    Cheers
    1.67ghz PB, 2.66 MP   Mac OS X (10.4.9)  

  • Large Aperture 2 Library Migration to Aperture 3, on a new Mac Pro

    Hello,
    I am upgrading from a PowerMac G5 to a Mac Pro and so I am going to also upgrade Aperture to version 3 at the same time. I am currently using a managed library on a 1.5TB RAID-1 array in my PowerMac. I am hoping to convert that to a referenced library during the same process.
    My current plan is to do this:
    1) Install and Update Aperture 2 on the Mac Pro.
    2) Configure a new RAID-1 array on the Mac Pro for the referenced images
    3) Copy Aperture library from PowerMac to Mac Pro
    4) Before upgrading to Aperture 3, use the "Relocate Masters for Library" option to move every single master for the entire library to the new RAID-1 array on the Mac Pro
    5) Install Aperture 3
    6) Upgrade library on the Mac Pro
    7) Turn on Faces and let it hammer away at that for a few days.
    Anyway, that's the general idea on my idea. So here are my questions. Other insight is also very welcome.
    1) My library is about 1TB and a little over 100,000 RAW images. Can I get a ball park estimate on how long this whole process (or at least the conversion part) might take?
    2) Has anyone used the "Relocate Masters for Library" function before in Aperture 2 or 3? Does the function still exist in Aperture 3? Does it work better in one version or another? Is there a better way of migrating to a referenced library from a managed one?
    3) Should I just go straight to version 3, upgrade, and migrate after that?
    Anyways, that's about all I've come up with for questions so far. I'm sure I will have more as I move along with this process. Thanks for any help you all can provide.

    Here is one more thing to consider - Do you want to re-process the RAW images to use all the new adjustments? If you do that will take a lot of time - more than upgrading the library but less than the Faces. I just completed the move from PPC to intel on the iMac scale. I don't plan to use faces - I have already keyworded all my images and I just didn't see how Faces would add anything as everyone says the accuracy is limited. But I did re-process all my RAW files - depending on the camera, they may look different so some choose not to re-process. Converting the library does not re-process. If you have used a lot of adjustments in the RAW files the re-processing can be very slow. Generally for any picture of mine that needed a lot of post-processing, I went right to PS. So I had little outside of a few of the standard sliders used on any of my RAW files.
    My library is about 250 GB with 20,000 images - about 1/2 RAW. It took about 4 h to just move the files from an old FW 400 disk to the iMac, it took about 2 hours to upgrade the library, and it took another 4 to reprocess the 10,000 RAW. I am keeping a managed library until I outgrow the 2 TB disk in the iMac.

  • Mac Pro with Aperture - very slow

    Why, why couldn't it be faster?
    I've been reading about the Mac Pros since they were announced last week. The local Apple store finally got one and I went to go see it. And there it was -- 42 lb glory, standard configuration, driving a 30" screen.
    I launched Aperture... and it's slow. I mean really slow, spinning pizza wheel slow. Granted I'm trying to bring up full size raw images that are ~16-18 meg each. But come on -- this is a workstation class machine! The "fastest Mac ever"!!!
    Showed it to the guy working there. He said they installed the box today with a brand new disk image and sometimes the image is bad. "Ben" promised he'll call their engineers to see what's up.
    So what's going on here? Some ideas:
    * Aperture is very Core Image intensive, and the standard GeForce 7300 card isn't that fast. I plan to upgrade to Radeon X1900XT - people say that will likely make Aperture faster.
    * The photo files were huge, 16 to 18 mb each. Raw images my camera takes are 6 meg. At least until I upgrade my camera.
    * The box had 1gb of memory - standard configuration. Would more help?
    * Maybe there really is something wrong with the box or the disk image.
    Disappointing...
    Mac Mini   Mac OS X (10.4.7)  

    I dont really post very often here but i think it is yet time to give again out a few pointers about Mac performance ...
    1) Whatever the configuration ... Ram is essential and shall never be ignored .
    2) Whatever the hardware platform your machine is running on check your software version and keep up to date , that goes 20 times for anything Universal Binary.
    3) When treating high volume files Hard drive space is ESSENTIAL and not only necessary and frankly setting up a raid from a Mac is still seamless and fast.
    If you all made it through to this point then your mac is becoming a powerhouse never slows down and really smiles and keeps on coming ... i have been running G5 machines for a long time on mac os X servers since the G5s came out and before that were yet G4s . First thing you need when dealing with large files is RAM second drives and third software versions.
    I would not dream running anything with 512 mb of ram at all that is a constant on all macs , you have a memory expansion capability to 16GB mmm that shall really help .
    Further you have 4 bays for drives ... may i dare think they are here for some reason such as treating high volumes files ?
    Third and foremost when using nvidia cards dont expect superb performance on a 30" screen when using the FX4500 card since nvidia cards have a really bad record on that matter with the G5 .. would you deal with massive 3D open GL etc etc etc ... ATI is it plain simple and really outperforming it has always been the case for macs .
    Yes, ATI X1900XT are rare now because of delays but the cards are no slugs on a mac and they mean business when running on 30" screens . A pci-x X800xt radeon card running on a previous dual processor machine kept kicking the Quadro running off a PCI-e on a quad machine ... we then tested with a X1900xt prototype and again the world changed .. all the things the nvidia card could not deal with the X1900xt just smiled at and kept on chomping non stop .
    I did not still get aperture since i have yet little need for it but my educated guess would be that with a little ram a nice set of raid array (you dont need 15k rpm drives unless you treat live HD solely on a internal array) and or an Xraid setup the machine would just scream in performance. If you use the machine for production processing power of the chip is just a tiny part of the whole performance equation thinking about streamlining your pipelines and data flow takes your setup to whole new grounds.
    A quad running 4D server Maya some data backups mysql and about 103 processes is occupied about 10 percent load averages .....
    secondly regarding disk images and apple installs errr please take the time to install everything from scratch i am guessing aperture you just have seen running might be using rosetta and is just a transfer from a G5 that would explain performance issues . 18 Mb a picture is not huge ... we use about 100Mg images on PS maya strata etc etc etc and frankly image size with a bit of ram never has been an issue.
    G5 Quad 2.5 7TB xraid 16GB of ram.   Mac OS X (10.4.7)   Mac os X server 10.4.7

  • I recently purchased a MacBook Pro. I would like to transfer Aperture from my Mac Mini to my new MP. How can I do this?

    I recently purchased a MacBook Pro. I would like to transfer Aperture from my Mac Mini to my new MP. How can I do this?

    Thanks, Sig.  I think I should've been a little clearer.  I've attempted to do the updates on my Mac, but I get a warning that it will erase everything except calenders, email, etc from the iPad.  I've syned the iPad with the Mac with no problem, but get scary messages when I try to do the latest update.

  • When iPad connected to Mac Pro, images from iPad camera auto open Aperture

    Hi, When open Mac Pro with i Pad connected, Aperture opens atomatically with images from i Pad camera. Checked systen prefs for Mac & Aperture + U tunes for iPad prefs, but cannot find way to stop auto open of Aperture. Help!!!

    Look in the application Image Capture on your Mac. In the preferences for Image Capture there will be a setting to choose which, if any, application to open when connecting a camera to your Mac. Change that setting to open nothing.
    If you want Aperture to open when you connect your camera to the Mac and it continues to open when you connect your image then just quit Aperture after it opens and then start iTunes.
    Any time there are photos in your iPad's Camera Roll. Your Mac will assume you'll want to upload those photos to your Mac.

  • Which Mac Pro for Bootcamp / Aperture 2

    Im planning on buying a Mac Pro from apple's refurb store. Was wondering if it is worth it to pay $400 more for the eight core 2.8 vs the quad core 2.8? I'll mainly use the computer for Aperture 2.0 to work with 10-14mb RAW files, Windows Vista on bootcamp and the usual office 2008 / safari / itunes. Will I have an advantage in terms of speed by buying the 8 core model?
    In both cases I plan to have 8GB Ram and a WD 640GB Caviar Blue drive and the ATI 3870 gradually.

    http://www.barefeats.com/octopro3.html - 8 vs 4-core
    http://www.barefeats.com/harper10.html - Motion 3 RAM Preview graphics
    If you wanted to upgrade to 8-core later, it would cost more, not supported, and you might have to buy a pair of cpus, I'd spend the $400.

  • Which  current Mac Pro for Aperture/Photoshop

    After much research and what seems to be chasing my tail, I though I'd ask the forum for some advice on which machine will best suit my needs. I am currently running Aperture and Photoshop CS3 and looking for a fast machine for the job. I sort through around 2500-3000 raw files per week and hope the new Intel Xeons will speed up my workflow. It's the question of "How many cores are better?" that's confusing me as I am unclear on how many Aperture and Photoshop can actually make use of.
    I'm looking to upgrade from my 3.06 iMac to a Mac Pro but having trouble choosing between a new 2.66 quad or a refurbished 2.26 8-core. I understand the drop in processor speed might be noticeable in some instances but the from what I have gathered an upgrade to the ATI HD 4870 is a must as is 6GB ram on the 2.66 and 8GB ram on the 2.26. It's not so much the price difference of the two machines (£2200 for the upgraded 2.66 and roughly £2700 for a refurbished 2.26 plus upgrades) it's will my workflow see any great benefits from the 8-core over the quad. The program I use most is Aperture, followed by Photoshop then FotoMagico, iDVD and Toast Titanium. Does Snow Leopard affect the use of cores in these programs?
    Any feedback is much appreciated or pointing in the direction of some real world tests as all the bench tests of the 8-core are so impressive but I'll not be using it for 3D/Video at all.
    Thanks in advance for your help.

    According to the Adobe blog the delay in offering a 64-bit suite for Mac is because the entire suite has to be rewritten in Cocoa (both previous and current offerings are written in Carbon) CS5 will be written in Cocoa and will utilise the full functionality of the Snow Leopard OS (OpenGL, GCD etc) so memory addressing will be a huge step forward on Photoshop (which I use).
    I used Photoshop CS4 on a 2008 Mac Pro 2 x 2.8GHz 8 core (dual Xeon 5400 series Quad core CPUs) and just recently switched to a 2009 Mac Pro 2 x 2.26GHz 8 core (Xeon 5500 series Quad core CPUs). I used CS3 on the original Mac Pro 2 x 2.66Ghz (Dual Xeon Dual Core CPUs = 4 cores total). It's not a fair reflection as CS3 ran under Rosetta on the original Mac Pro and CS4 has better integration on the Intel based Macs, but in general, I noticed a much better rate of workflow on the 8 core machines over the 4 core machine.
    More importantly, I would point out that running batch process of RAW files in CaptureOne Pro was significantly performing the batch process on the 8 core machines than on the 4 core machine. (250 RAW files {with no corrections] from a Canon EOS 1D MKII into 16-bitt TIFF files). I can't remember the exact figures but the 8 core machines were @ 23 - 25 minutes quicker than the 4 core machine.
    I know it's not scientific and software versions were different which could add to the different results in part, but the 8 core machines both out performed the 4 core machine substantially.
    However, the 2009 Mac Pro Quad Core is capable of running 2 threads per core (in effect a virtual 8 core machine and as many reviewers have pointed out, perform faster than the 8 core Mac Pro in certain applications (which have not been written to utilise the full multi-CPU-multi-core environment.
    The Memory limitation on the Quad Core is 16GB RAM (Apple state 8GB but reviewers have installed 4 x 4GB DIMMs into the Quad Core without issue). Unless you are doing 3D or HD rendering etc you probably won't really need over 16GBs of RAM, however the cost of 4GB memory sticks is expensive. Crucial only offer a 12GB kit for the Quad Core Mac Pro 2009 to make full use of the triple channel memory speeds (DDR3 best performance in multiples of 3) and 12GBs from Crucial is @£771.00 (prices correct at time of writing this. This equates to @ £257 per 4GB.
    Total for Quad Mac Pro with 12GB (3 x 4GB RAM) = £2670
    Total for Octo Core Mac Pro with 12GB (6 x 2GB RAM) =£2731 (New price not refurb)
    Graphics card upgrade etc will be the same on both machines. Memory based on Crucial Memory prices.
    So, for a 2009 Mac Pro with 12GB RAM, it is £61 dearer for an 8 core (virtual 16 cores) machine over the Quad Core Mac Pro. The 8 core system will give you further memory expansion once prices of the 4GB memory sticks come down significantly. The Quad Core will only be able to be upgraded with 8GB RAM sticks over the 4GB sticks available now and will cost a huge amount at time of launch.
    Buying a refurbishment 2.26 GHz with similar memory upgrade would in my opinion be the way to go. I know the CPU clock speed is lower, but in real time non memory intensive applications the difference will be hardly noticeable.
    I went through the same dilemma as you. I opted for the 8 core system with 12GB RAM and the ATI HD4870 graphics (bought as an upgrade kit so was dearer than the build to order option). I am very happy with my purchase.
    The other option is to check out eBay there may be a very well spec'd 2008 Mac Pro for sale with warranty, 16GB RAM and the 8800GT graphics card for less than either of the new systems.
    Over the long term, the 8 core offers more affordable customisation options over the Quad Core, but it depends on how long you plan to use the machine

Maybe you are looking for