Best Mac Pro Setup for Photoshop CS5

I've read around that it's not needed to have the fastest (and costliest) Mac Pro to run Photoshop CS5 at it's best.
However, there doesn't seem to exist any discussions involving the latest models (Feb 2012).
Which would be the optimal Mac Pro available today for running large files (1GB and up) in Photoshop CS5?

LOTs of RAM, fast 6-core 3.33GHz for starters.
Mac Pro Photoshop CS5 and Lightroom 3
Optimize Photoshop CS5
Optimize CS5 CS4 Mac OS X
http://www.macperformanceguide.com

Similar Messages

Best PC to buy for Photoshop CS5, Premiere Elements and Proshow Producer

I am looking for a new PC to replace my 10 year old one.
This would be used primarily for Photoshop CS5, Lightroom, Premiere Elements and Proshow Producer.
I am thinking of going to Digital Storm to get one of their top line gaming machines with Sandybridge cpu, high end video card and at least 16 to 32 gb Ram
(although I do not play games on the pc}.
Is this overkill, or would a different kind of PC be better?
what do you recommend?
jaslu1

I'm definitely going to look into it. Thanks. Have a great holiday.
From: TLL... <[email protected]>
Subject: Best PC to buy for Photoshop CS5, Premiere Elements and Proshow Producer
To: "Jay Slutzky" <[email protected]>
Date: Friday, July 1, 2011, 11:38 AM
Dell Precisions are great machines, you could look into their Studio or Studio XPS too. Not quite workstation qualtiy but I'm beating the snot outta one @home and it's holding up well for a 600 buck eBay chassis...

Best Mac Pro Configuration for LR?

For various reasons I'm planning on migrating from my home desktop pc ( 4 year old core2 2.4 ghz xp pro sp 3 32bit accessing 2.93 out of 4 gb ram) to a new or (lightly used recent) Mac Pro desktop. The Mac Pro is available in a lot of different configurations and I would appreciate advice on how many cores and how much ram I actually need to comfortably run LR3x and its eventual upgrades (within reason) and PS3 for now and later probably whatever is current. I'm a reasonably advanced amateur photographer; I shoot what interests me and now use LR for 90-95% of my post processing of my raw Leica and Canon image files. I do use some add-ons (SilverEfex Pro2 and such).
I understand from reading some articles that too much muscle in the Mac Pro can actually slow down LR, so if this is true I'd like to stay svelte; also economic issues are somewhat a concern.
I have already considered a laptop or an iMac and decided the Mac Pro is what I want. The question is just 'what will work best for me'?
Thanks in advance, and if you need more information just let me know.
--Bob
p.s. Is the Search Function disabled in this Forum? I couldn't get it to work.

thewhitedog wrote:
@ Bob: I think you may be have acquired some misinformation somewhere. There is no such thing as "too much muscle" in a Mac Pro in relationship to Lightroom - or any other program. OS X allocates resources to applications as they need them. Unused resources remain idle or are utilized by other applications.
Adobe posts the minimum system requirements for their applications, but these should just be taken as a starting point. In my opinion you should buy the best Mac Pro your budget can handle - and maybe a little bit more. The computer is an investment, after all, not a luxury. That said, what you need to run Lightroom efficiently and what Jay needs to do video editing are not necessarily the same. For video rendering more cores are better. For Lightroom the question of the number of CPU cores is less critical. Whereas, CPU speed is more relevant. For both, the amount of RAM can make a big difference.
I recommend as a starting point, at least a quad-core Mac Pro with 4GB of RAM. That would do if you were looking at an iMac as well.
I can understand, though, how looking at the current line-up of Mac Pros can be confusing. The older Nehalem powered Mac Pros look faster for less money, but this is now old technology. The new Intel Westmere CPUs offer significant improvements in performance. Unfortunately, they are also much more expensive than any previous Mac CPU upgrade. But if you want to "future proof" your new Mac, one with a Westmere CPU is the better way to go. The 8 core model Jay went with seems to be the best value, with two quad-core 2.4GHz Westmere CPUs. However, for just $200 more you can get the 6 core 3.33GHz Westmere CPU. For the purposes of Lightroom, the faster CPUs in the 6 core model will make more of a difference than the two extra cores in the 8 core version. And the 6 core version will handle just about any multi-tasking job you throw at it; that it, using Lightroom in conjunction with Adobe Photoshop, for example.
To confuse the issue a bit more, however, if using Lightroom is your primary concern, a Mac Pro may be overkill. The new iMacs, which came out since you started this thread, are excellent machines. You could get a lot more for your money with a 27" iMac, BTO with a quad-core 3.3GHz Intel Sandy Bridge CPU, 8GB of RAM and a 2TB hard drive for roughly $1,000 less than the Mac Pros you're looking at. Along with a capable computer you get a beautiful 27" screen on the iMac. I'm not sure why you think you need the Mac Pro. The iMac can now take up to 16GB of RAM. If you were to get one with 8GB factory installed by Apple - as a BTO option - there would still be two empty RAM slots available for a future upgrade. You could add an SSD to the iMac and still pay less than you would for the Mac Pro.
And the new iMacs have a Thunderbolt port; in fact, the 27" models have two Thunderbolt ports. These offer much better throughput and greater flexibility than any previous I/O connection. With an appropriate adaptor you can use almost any external device, including eSATA, FireWire 400 and 800, USB 1, 2 and 3 and even Ethernet and an external monitor. Of course the iMac still has a Firewire 800 port and four USB 2 ports, and an SDXC memory card slot. For what it may be worth, I suggest you give the iMac another look. Your budget will thank you.
TheWhiteDog,
Kinda, Sorta, Maybe... :-) The cost differential between the 8 and 6 cores is $200 when comparing new to new. I picked up the 8 Core Westmere 2.4 for under $3000 because it comes up on the Refurbished side... So now we're talking $700 difference. the difference in price can be used for memory (I got 4GB for $50 at OtherWorldCmputing's "Garage Sale), a drive.. any number of things. Since Apple treat refurbs as new for warranty purposes (including AppleCare), I didn't see any reason not to go with the refurbished model..
I agree a higher clock speed is better, but as you said, I also do video so more cores helps (amazingly helps).. Yes, for LR 6 3.33 cores may outperform 8 2.4s, but the 8 core machine flies with LR.
As for iMacs vs. Mac Pro.. the biggest difference is that you find with any desk top vs. a "fixed" machine like the iMac. The upgrade as far a internal (and external) drives on a Mac Pro is so much better as well as to upgrade video if I want to in the future as well. As for Thunderbolt, clearly a lot of potential, but it is a daisy chain design and the slowest device in the chain can slow down everything if not done right. There's also not a lot out there for Thunderbolt yet.. and I'm not 100% sure that there won't be an PCI card for Mac Pros for Thunderbolt (although it could be a system board feature only).
At under $3000 with 6GB of memory and a 1TB 7200 drive, combined with growrh potential and the Mac Pro I think has a longer shelf life vs. the iMac. Without those Thunderbolt adapters in the market place, you're stuck with FW800, which is a lot slower than even eSATA for external drives. Since most all the LR recommendations are to split the catalog away from the cache and away from the images themselves, it's a trickier and more costly venture on the iMac.. The 27" screen in nice, but I'm not a big fan of glossy screens. I don't think any of those allow you a matte finish option like on the Macbook Pro.
Bottom line Bob is there are different choices for different budgets... Heck I went with a 17" Macbook Pro for a long time, using an inexpensive Expresscard 34 to hook up external eSATA drives and a second 24" Dell monitor.. Great combo and I always had the portability aspect of the 17" for client work, being tethered, etc..
Jay

What's the best Mac Pro config for Fireworks?

What's the best Mac config for Fireworks?
I can pretty much get whatever Mac I want at work... My boss is sick and tired of watching Fireworks crash all the time... I figure a hefty processor and lots of RAM and maybe a SSD will help…
I should get a Mac Pro right? Which processor?
• Two 2.40GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon processors (12 cores)
• Two 2.66GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon processor (12 cores)
• Two 3.06GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon (12 cores)
Should I get 24GB RAM?? Or is that overkill?
I'll get a 2TB serial hard drive…
I should get a 512 GB solid state drive offered by Apple right?
Or is it possible to get a larger better 3rd party SSD?
And then maybe two 21" Displays… Two 27s seems a little much… or does it?
Thanks in advance.

Oh and what about video cards? Or is Apple's default ok? (I'm not doing hard core PhotoShop retouching or anything).

Dear Mac Pro upgrade hardware & Photoshop CS5 64 bit speed experts...

I'm an illustrator that works w/ brushes(can they ever get fast enough ?) in PS CS5 and, at times, some very large files:
Mac Pro 2 x 3 GHz Quad-core Intel Xeon ("early 2008"), 20 GB or RAM
OS 10.6.6 Running in 64bit
Boot(system only) drive: 60 GB OWC Mercury Extreme SSD
Data drive(user folder): 860 GB Striped RAID - from 3 partitions of 3 7200 RPM drives
Scratch drive: 96 GB Striped RAID - from 3 partitions of 3 7200 RPM drives
Storage drive: 1 TB (includes time machine partition)
What is my next "biggest bang for the buck" hardware move for speed of PS CS5 (done lots of reading on the software prefs/settings)?:
Is it still more memory - 24 GB?
Or a single OWC SSD drive for data(120 GB -- I can dump a lot more items in data to storage HD)?
Or a smaller OWC SSD for scratch?
Thank you!
T

Mac Pro 2 x 3 GHz Quad-core Intel Xeon ("early 2008"), 20 GB or RAM
3GHz in 2006 is not the 2.8GHz 2010. But if 20GB works for you, adding an SSD boot drive, and an SSD for scratch might be good investments for now instead. 5365 (Woodcrest 8-core) are still a little expensive.
DDR3 is of course faster, more bandwidth, and not having to deal with FBDIMMs.
$3100 for 3.33 4-core / 3-4 x 8GB for 24-32GB RAM might not be best investment.
Booting in 64-bit mode pays a dividend.
Barefeats has gone head to head with 2008s 2.8/3.0/3.2 vs the newest Mac Pro 2009/2010s.
The nice thing is that CS5 has only lately begun to catch up to Snow Leopard, and there will be another round of catch-up if you want a year with Lion and whenever CS6 (which will be better optimized).
You can't add 5870 and gain much (not the PCIe 2.0 bandwidth) or Quadro 4000 (wrong EFI firmware). PCIe 3.0 is probably another year plus away.
People that went from 2006 to 2008 felt the difference even though that too was "small" it was 2.8GHz but 8-core.

What's the best mac configuration setup for Logic?

I think that I didn't configure my Mac good enough to work with Logic and I hear that there is a special configuration that should be used to have everhything work together as best as possible in terems of memory use etc. But what are the best settings? And where do i configure them?

Are you talking about within logic or the actual system?
as far as logic is concerned, the preferences / audio tab will offer you most of the controls to optimize logic for your system.
as far as the actual mac, the best would obviously be a 12 core mac pro, speced till it would spec no more LOL.
but a I5 imac and that much ram is still a reasonable beast in the home studio stakes.
the best way to use all the RAM is to run logic in 64 bit,
find logics icon in the finder, and either right/ctrl click and click get info or press cmd-I.
this will bring up the get info dialog, and uncheck run in 32bit.
hey presto, logic can get to 16gb of RAM (in theory).

Best Mac Pro Configuration for Editing

Hey guys. I'm looking to upgrade my editing capabilities from a iMac G5 to a Mac Pro computer system. I pretty much want to go all out on this thing, as I don't look to upgrade again anytime soon. I will be working with a fresh copy of Final Cut Studio 2.
I was wondering, however, about what would be a good configuration for the hardware itself, more specifically the video cards that are available now.
Which video card would be the best for HD video editing and manipulation? I was thinking about just getting the most expensive one, but I have heard some video cards are made for one thing more than another, and I want to make sure that I get the right configuration the first time.
Again, money is not too much of an issue as this will be an expense for my business.
Any help would be appreciated.
Message was edited by: Troy Minassian

Well I'll try not to be too vague here but I think it's going to be easier for me to give you a few hints but mostly talk about where to do more research.
First: Formats -
With good ol' DV, any off-the-shelf, completely stock, Mac Pro will handle it - absolutley NO sweat. Just add 1 (or more) iternal SATA drives for capturing media, and you're off to the races. HDV...this could go either way. In theory, again, a basic Mac Pro can handle this. The format's total throughput is no more than DV. However, my thought is that using straight HDV in it's "native" format can be a real pain in the butt. Cruise over the Final Cut forum and do a search for a phrase like "HDV" & "Yuck" and you'll end up with a big long list of issues. I'll not go too far into detail, but HDV is a highly compressed format with a GOP-structure. Dealing with GOP-structured media in an NLE is not pretty.
The good news is if you're even considering something like an Io HD then the HDV issues can be conquered with it. You would use the Io HD to transcode the HDV to Apple's ProRes codec on the fly. That's what the IoHD does. It's an external capture card whose form factor makes it nice and portable. So you'd come out of your camera or deck - into the Io HD - and out via firewire to your computer. The one "trick" is: you're married to ProRes. That's the one & only codec this box does. (To the best of my knowledge, that is.) Anyway, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Just good to know going into it. Here's a review of the Io HD over at the creativecow.net. And by the way, if you've never hung out over there, note that it's a great resource for help. Tons of in-the-know pros hang out there.
As far as AVCHD, I'm personally not too familiar with it. I know that it too is not very intensive to deal with - per se. But the whole tapeless concept is still somewhat new and as such has it's share of "gotchas". For that I'd do a search over there on Apple's Final Cut forum. I know a search for AVCHD is going to turn up many many posts.
Regarding the RED. Again, it's so new it's got it share of workflow bumps to be aware of. (Personally, I love the concept of what this camera is all about. I checked it out and NAB and was really impressed with where they're going with it.) But for better info on that, I'd steer over to the Final Cut forum here and the Final Cut form over at the COW. Further, the camera has it's own forum over at the COW. And another great source of info is reduser.net. This camera is sweeping the industry. But it's changing the workflow quite a bit too.
Second: Processing -
As far as overall CPU power goes....Sure! A higher clock speed is basically going to be a faster machine. Here's some stats. But what's the cost? The 3.2 is faster than the 2.8. Is this worth $1600 to you? Only you can answer that question. For me: I just spent a month vacillating over a new machine purchase. I had originally "decided" months ago to get a new Mac Pro Eight 2.8. Then I thought I might save some loot and buy a G5. Then I thought, No! That's a dumb idea.... I could spend only about $600 more and get a refurb'ed 2.66 Quad core. Then I figured I could spend $800 more than that and end up - right back where I started - with a new 2.8 8-Core. So for me, the $1400 more, to go from a used G5 to a new 2.8 Octo, just made sense. But the point is: it's a completely personal decision. For me, that overall margin of money/performance made a lot of sense! On the other hand, did it make sense for me to spend $1600 more and get the 3.2 instead of the 2.8? Not at all! So only you are going to be able to decide if $1600 buys you enough of a performance hike.
Then, Extras -
Too, you're going to want to add as much RAM as you can afford. The other big question is storage. You've mentioned a spectrum of formats. On the one hand you've got your DV. Again a single SATA drive will be more than enough to capture to and playback from. But with ProRes HQ you're getting more demanding on the drives. For this, you'd want to now add, let's say, 3 more internal drives and stripe them together into a capture RAID. But you could even go up a few steps and get something like the CalDigit HD Pro and get multiple streams of HD playback with the security of a hardware-controlled RAID 5 scenario. So there's a couple of different ways to go here....However, if you start with very very fast, reliable drives, you're setting yourself to handle higher-end formats. Drive speed can be a killer. But if you start at the top you can basically head off any format woes for the future. (For a while....Nothing's completely future-proof in this game.)
Finally, Monitoring -
You've got to figure out how to look at/hear the media outside-of-the-computer. Meaning - you're going to need external monitoring equipment: Video and Audio. Again this will open more questions for you. But these items are key to your knowing what you're REALLY working with. So you really need a NTSC monitor, an audio mixer/control surface of some sort and some powered speakers. The Final Cut forums will be good places to research what others are using in these arenas.
Anyway, good luck with it all! You've already discovered a great resource: this forum. If I were you, I'd start to spend more time on the Final Cut forums. These types of queries will get solid answers over there. I'd recommend establishing the habit of performing a search when you've over there though. The chances of someone else, already asking the same thing that you're investigating, is quite high. Almost guaranteed. Enjoy!

Best Mac Pro Configuration For Motion 3

So the cream of the crop has been the now no-longer-available 1900. Barefeats measures the 2600 above the 8800. So what are you all using and how is it impacting your real-world use of Motion? I've got a big HD project (2 1/2 minutes long at 720p) coming up that's going to require a new Mac Pro to get done and I want to make sure to get the configuration that's going to cause the fewest headaches. Real-time previewing is important to me as well. I know Patrick's got both the 1900 and the 8800. Who else out there has both or what are you using and how is it stacking up in the real world?
Also, how much of a difference is the 8-core 3.0 over the default config of the 8-core 2.8? Worth an $800 upgrade there? I'm assuming RAM is going to make the biggest difference.
Thanks, guys!
Message was edited by: Brent Meyer

Thanks very much gents for the replies. Ray, you are correct in that my original question is more a "less headaches" question than an actual true power question. I'd like to spend as little time as I can RAM previewing and restarting as I can. I know HD is still pretty touch and go in some instances so I'm looking for the path of least possible resistance.
Scott, thanks for reaffirming the thoughts I had that the 3.0 and 3.2 aren't necessarily worth the price difference there for the added horsepower - at least in the application I will be using. RAM is what I was going to spend that cash on (usually get mine from Crucial) as well as some additional hard drives for those beautiful empty bays.
Barefeats was also the site I was looking at with the comparison info saying the 2600 was faster in almost every regard but I didn't know the nitty gritty behind why 8800 is under-performing on these Mac Pro's. Perhaps that's a different discussion.
I guess I'll go with the 2.8Ghz machine with the 2600 in it and load her up with RAM. That was my gut reaction but a PC friend of mine who works in television said "ask for real world advice - not just specs" so that's what I did. Thank you both for responding!

What is the best setup for Photoshop CS5 on a Dual Drive Laptop?

I have a new W701ds with Windows 7, 16 gig of ram, drive C is a 256GB SSD, the second drive is 7200rpm 500GB HDD. I want to use was thinking about partioning the second drive to allow for backup. .

Welcome to the forum.
If the partition is ONLY to be used for backup, you are probably OK, but if you plan on using it for say Scratch Disks, I would hold off on that.
With the fast SSD Drive 0, you will have your OS and programs there. Then you will have your images and your Scratch Disks on Drive 1. Even faster would be to have the Scratch Disks on Drive 2, but you only have the SSD and the one SATA HDD, so the former is as good as it gets.
Good luck,
Hunt

What Is the Best Raid Array Setup for Photoshop?

I'm considering going to a Raid Array both at the Scractch Disk Level 2X Solid State 90GB Drives, and also at the stroage level 3X Hitachi 2TB HDD.
Which Raid Array setups should I use for each?

Something to consider:
An advantage of RAID 0 is that you get all the space of both drives, while multiplying the throughput.
While RAID 0 also multiplies the possibility of failure, you can offset that by buying high-MTBF enterprise class drives. The Western Digital RE4 is an example (and is the model I use in my RAID). Such drives are not really that much more expensive than their consumer-grade counterparts, and the difference is well worth it, IMO.
Do good backups - e.g., to a large external USB drive (e.g., Western Digital MyBook), and you'll be covered against loss of the entire array.
-Noel

How can I get the updates for Photoshop CS5 to download to my new Macbook Pro where I have already installed CS5 from my original disk? I have tried many times over 2 days. I was able to successfully download the current version of Adobe DNG converter.

How can I get updates for Photoshop CS5 to download to my new Mac book pro where CS5 is already installed from my original disk? I have tried many times over 2 days. I get the same error messages re downloading error. I successfully downloaded the current version of Adobe DNG Converter & it installed perfectly. Help please!

The Adobe auto updater is highly unreliable.
You need to look for and download the update yourself and then manually apply it as per the detailed instructions on the download page:
Adobe - Photoshop : For Macintosh
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please note that the Adobe Camera Raw plug-in must be updated separately, after you have updated Photoshop:
Adobe - Adobe Camera Raw and DNG Converter : For Macintosh

How to download pixel bander for photoshop cs5 mac

hi
any one know how to download pixel bander for photoshop cs5 mac please help
Thanks

Hi Eman,
You can download it from : http://www.adobe.com/devnet/pixelbender.html
Regards,
Rave

Best hardware/OS for Photoshop CS5

Hi there,
i want to build a new PC, optimized for Photoshop CS5, with Windows OS.
Can anybody tell me the optimal hardware configuration to make Photoshop as fast as possible?
The program is primarly used for poster design.
how much ram makes sense?
is there a noticeable speed increase using 8GB instead auf 4GB?
is there a noticeable speed increase using quad-core/six-core CPU instead of dual-core?
is there a noticeable speed increase using GTX460 Graphic Card instead of a GTS450?
what is the best hardware for photoshop CS5?
what OS can you suggest me? is win7 64bit the best windows os?
Thank you for your support!

Windows 7 64 bit professional.
8 gigs of RAM because it is dirt cheap and Photoshop loves RAM. Most motherboards allow more RAM if you wish to update.
Don't know about Nvidia cards. I use a ATI 5870. Video card drivers play a important part. But the Nvidia card suonds about Right.
4 core is fine. 6 cores I don't own yet but maybe next year.
I use AMD processor 4 core on my main rig. AMD uses motherboards that can be used over and over for most processor updates and just require a bios update. The Newer AMD processors due out soon may need a new AMD3+ board but that is not official so the AMD2 boards may work saving money.
Intel's are nice but everytime Intel comes out with a new processor line the board is always different.
I run a i720 on my laptop and PS runs great.
Buy a good power supply that will have extra power incase you upgrade later. Don't buy cheap power supplies.
At least a 7,200 RPM hard drive. Get 2 internal ones. One for your OS and programs and one for PS scratch disk and storage.
Quality DVD burner.
Motherboard is up to what you want with the processor type. AMD or Intel. Read up on the internet and also the websites you buy from for customer reviews.
Look at SSD's with TRIM support for a boot drive too. These have reallycome down in price. Use a hard drive for a scratch disk. Get a velocity raptor that spins at 10,000 RPM. 600 gigs are offered now at a cheap price.
I am sure others will chime in.

I have license for photoshop CS5 extended for windows , I have switched to mac , can I install the same license copy on mac ?

I have license for photoshop CS5 extended for windows , I have switched to mac , can I install the same license copy on mac ?

Unfortunately, no. the CS programs are platform specific. You have three options. Upgrade to CS6 and request a platform swap, in which case you will give up the Windows serial number. Second, you could buy a second serial number for Mac outright. Third, you can buy the subscription to Photoshop CC, which can be used on both Windows and Macintosh..
Benjamin

Mac Pro setup and expansions for Pro Audio applications? Help please...!

Hello everyone.
I want to buy an 8 core mac pro mainly for professional audio applications (Logic, plugins etc) and I have a few questions about upgrading and expansion.
1. Since Logic is a 32 bit application and can only address up to 4GB of RAM, does it worth upgrading to 16GB or should I spend the money upgrading the processors?
2. I've noticed that the Mac Pro has three (excluding the graphics card slot) full length PCI Express slots. Can I install a PCIe card with the shorter connectors? (like this UAD-2 DSP card: http://www.uaudio.com/products/uad/uad2quadomni/index.html)
3. Can the Mac Pro handle hard disk drives with capacity grater than 1TB and HDDs with speeds grater than 7200 rpm internally? If yes, why Apple doesn't have these options within the Apple Store?
I know that my questions may be a bit silly but since this is a big investment I would like to get everything right.
Any help and advice would be very much appreciated...

Windows 32-bit I have some bookmarked articles, but each app/process has its own 2GB address space and uses page and swap a lot more than Mac.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit
Free memory doesn't sit idle or go to waste, even Vista/7 will cache 3-4GB to improve system performance. And it isn't released until or unless freed, not fixed or locked and someone else requests more. Mac OS and Mac Pro especially need more memory, and it does show benefits.
A lot depends on how well written software is to take full and proper advantage. And that is ongoing.
Snow Leopard takes a step further into 64-bit, the first time that 64-bit drivers have been attempted. Big review of Snow Leo:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars
Memory use: http://www.barefeats.com/nehal04.html
http://macperformanceguide.com/OptimizingPhotoshop-Configuration.html
4 vs 8 core: http://www.barefeats.com/nehal08.html
http://www.barefeats.com/nehal03.html
comprehensive: http://eshop.macsales.com/Reviews/Benchmarks/NehalemTests.html
Ars review 2009 Mac Pro:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/04/266ghz-8-core-mac-pro-review.ars
Keep your eye on this site for news, tips, on hardware and software updates and compatibility, and reader input: http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/

Best Mac Pro Setup for Photoshop CS5

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for