New iMac 24" or Mac Pro for Aperure

Hi All,
I only can get stock computers in COMPUSA or authorized resellers in PR.
Which one do you recommend for Aperture, the new iMac 24" or the Mac Pro? It looks they both use the same video card...

Sadly I have just asked Apple to take back my mac book pro 17" 2.16 because aperture was just to slow and it became annoying, after any adjustments to a photo the loupe tool would jump and jerk across the screen or the patch tool would do the same after around 3-4 patched dust marks, I came across to a mac purely for aperture, which incidently I think aperture is a great tool, if it would only run faster. If the MBP 17" 100gb 7200rpm HD 2 gb Ram and Radion X1600 with 256 mb memory has problems running this software what hardware setup was this programme actually built for.
I will have to stay with my steam driven dell pc until I can make my mind up what to do, I must admit I am impressed by the mac itself and I found the service from apple outstanding, this laptop is my second machine in 3 weeks, first one had a warped top apple took it back and sent another one immediately, having also explained my problem and dissatisfaction with the second they have taken it back with full refund without any hassle whatsoever.
Dave Hall

Similar Messages

New Mac Mini, iMac, or old Mac Pro for Pro Tools?

I asked this in another thread, but just want to get more input from older Mac Pro users from different years (2008-2010..)
I need to upgrade my Mac and am wondering what experiences everyone has had with different options for running Pro Tools and other professional audio applications.
The FW800 port on my iMac recently broke, and rather than spend a lot on getting it fixed I've decided to just sell it to someone who doesn't need firewire and upgrade.
I'm trying to decide between a newer iMac (3.1 or 3.4 GHz) with thunderbolt and USB 3 (but no FW), a new Mac Mini, also with thunderbolt and USB 3, or a somewhat older Mac Pro (2008-2010) with at least a 2.8GHz processor. Any thoughts from those of you who have used any of these, or who know more about computers in general than I do? Thanks.
Another option a friend recommended was looking for a 2011 iMac as they have both Firewire and Thunderbolt, since my audio interface runs via FW.
Thanks!

Might want to ask this on a ProTools forum as well.
fwiw I have a 4 core MacMini Server w 8GB RAM and a 2008 MacPro 8 core w 16GB.
The Mini is used as a general file and A/V server when not specificially tasked with Final Cut Suite efforts.
Unless I have serious Compressor processes running (e.g. converting h.264 to an editable format) that draws on the full cores, the mini can do a good job keeping up with the MacPro.
What the mini won't do is take 3rd party cards or drive multiple large monitors but for digital audio it ought to be fine with thunderbolt drives.
Good luck.
x

Have new iMac. My Mac Pro went down in a fire...

I had a house fire and my Mac Pro went down. I have all 4 hard drives with Snow Leopard on one of them from the computer. I bought an iMac as a temp stepping stone before I get another Mac Pro. In the meantime all I really need from the Snow Leopard hard drive to import into Mavericks is the address book. Can anyone tell me how to do that? I may need to get Mac Mail also but that is not quite as important really. If I used migration assistant could I get ONLY those 2 things? Its kind of nice I have a clean Mac for a change and don't want to muddy it up too much. Would kind of like all my settings from Dreamweaver but don't think I can get that since I believe I would have had to export them first.
Any help would be appreciated.

Migration Assistant basically has 2 main options…
Import users
Import Applications
The second one will copy all the applications & supporting data - not what you want since it will add a lot of old applications & their background jobs - old gunk for your new Mac
The first option will allow you to just get the user data, and you can select which account's you would like.
There is one thing to consider - make sure you don't have an existing user account on the Mac that has the same shortname as one you want to import (the 'shortname' is what the home folder is called). That way you get user with your old data separate from the current user. You can also delete the user if it appears to slow things up (users files shouldn't break the entire OS).
From there you can open Contacts (was Address book), export the data as an 'archive' from the file menu. Save that into /Users/Shared and then open it inside your other user account. You will have the data without all the other gunk in your account. Calendars (was iCal) also has an export option.
You can also look at Mail's settings, Keychain Access (your passwords), Dreamweaver etc in this migrated user account and decide on what you need to export or make note of. Obviously you will need to get Dreamweaver installed since you are not migrating applications.
For what it is worth I would make a full system backup before beginning, you shouldn't need it, but it's best to be cautious with tools that can move masses of data into your lovely clean operating system.
Post back if you think of other things you need to grab.

New iMac vs older Mac Pro

Hi Guys
I currently have a Mac Pro (not the latest model, one back from that). It's a 2 x 3 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon machine with 5GB RAM. I do a lot of Final Cut Pro work and multitasking (Photoshop etc) and it seems to handle all of this fine. It's on a lease, and the upgrade to a much cheaper iMac looks enticing. Assuming I pimped out the iMac 27" with 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 and 8GB RAM, would the performance of the iMac match or better my old Mac Pro? My dealer seems to think so, but he just wants to sell me a Mac. is 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 > 2 x 3 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon?
Cheers
Lucas

Considering the Mac Pro has faster clock speed and twice the number of real processing cores, if you make the RAM equal, I think the Mac Pro would be faster (although the relative performance of the graphics card will have impact as well). Also, the Mac Pro has the advantage of being able to accept up to FOUR internal SATA drive. If you separate the OS/apps (startup drive) from the drive where the user data is stored and manipulated, that will make the Mac run more efficiently and increase performance. You can't do that with an iMac; FireWire 800 to an external drive is decently fast, but not nearly as fast as an internal SATA connection.

From iMac to Mac Pro for the good of my Pro Tools 10...

hey guys,
here's the deal : it seems I'm at a turning point with my iMac (27", 3.1 Ghz i5, 4GB memory, 1TB hard drive, lion, PT10) and I'm thinking of buying a mac pro. Problem is, I'm not sure which model is best for my needs. I do postproduction work for television and I often have to work with pretty heavy projects.
My pro tools 10 keeps giving me the same 2 errors --
1- DAE can't get audio from the drive(s) fast enough. Your drive may be too slow, or fragmented, or a firewire drive could be having trouble due to the extra firewire bandwidth or cpu load. (-9073)
2- A CPU overload error occurred. If this happens often, try increasing the "H/W Buffer Size" in the Playback Engine Dialog, or removing some plug-ins. (-6101)
I might add, my Playback Engine's maxed out and I'm barely running any plugins (some 5 or 6 EQ3s, maybe 1 or 2 L2 and a Dorrough).
I have a MOTU Audio Express which is plugged in firewire and I'm running an external drive with my SFX on it, which is also plugged in firewire. The iMac having only one firewire plug (downsizing from the earlier iMac, for some obscure reason), I have a firewire hub.
I get the first error whenever I get too deep into a project and I start having a lot of SFX and I'm looking to add more and I get the second error whenever I try to run Dolby Media Meter.
I'm pretty aware I'm overrunning my iMac, so I'm willing to pay big bucks to get a computer that's best fitted to my needs and which I'll be able to upgrade every once in a while. Now, I'm just wondering what I actually need in a computer.
It's either the 3.2 GHz quad-core intel xeon, 6GB memory, 1TB HD or the two 2.4GHz 6-core intel zeon, 12GB memory, 1TB HD. I gotta say the second one seems kind of a lot... but I don't want to spend so much money and get a tiny upgrade from where I'm at right now.
So please! All of you mac wizards and other knowledgeable folks, HELP!

An i7 3.9GHz would do if you had 32GB RAM, an SSD boot drive, and 2TB hdd.
The sweet spot today on Mac Pro is $1800 4-core special and DIY to W3690 or W3680 6-core 3.33 or higher with 32-48GB RAM. And lots of SSDs and disk drives.
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/mac_pro
Refurbished 27-inch iMac 3.4GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/imac/27
The Mac Pro line is at a - not ready to ship the new 2013 6,1 model / not ready with 10.9 that it will need / and current configuration is really 2010 3 yrs old (but also how well they hold up and mature).
You do not want to give up GHz for more cores. MHz still rules. Only reason would be if you planned to replace the processors for the fastest expensive (use to be, though changing) 4 or 6-core 3.4GHz for total of 8 or 12-cores, but never the 2.4GHz, no way.
The 2009 4,1 used is cheaper and can be found for $1000 and upgraded to 6-core and everything else (dual core upgrades are harder and not good to plan for.
And http://www.barefeats.com has done some tests on iMac and Mac Pro.
Graphics on Mac Pro, RAM and PCIe and SSD, hdd are easy upgrades.
This site has some great tips
http://www.macperformanceguide.com

Just transferred data to iMac from working Mac Pro that is using Parallels and Windows 7 and the Biblesoft 5 and it will not open on the iMac the only change is the my new iPhone number is OS. Any ideas?

Just transferred data to iMac from working Mac Pro that is using Parallels and Windows 7 and the Biblesoft 5 and it will not open on the iMac the only change is the new Maverick OS from the macpro Lion OS. Any ideas?
<Personal Information Edited by Host>

Setup Assistant and Migration Assistant do not restore MS Windows, it only does the OS X partition. All of your Windows stuff must be backed up and restore using a MS Windows application. If no one on this forum is able to answer your question then I'd repost it on a Parallels forum to see how other Windows users approach this.

Nvidia CUDA for 27" iMac and the Mac Pro

I want to use Adobe Premier CS5.5 and it's Mercury Playback engine. What Nvidia CUDA-enabled card should I get for the 27" iMac and the Mac Pro to use this feature in Premier CS5?

No. Open the App Store on one computer running Snow Leopard. Purchase and download Lion. On the other computer open the App Store, log on using the same Apple ID, re-download Lion at no extra charge.
Alternatively, see Burning A Lion Boot Disc

My daughter wants a new Mac Pro; however, she will be living in London, England for several months, does she require a "special" Mac Pro for her needs in London?

My daughter wants a new Mac Pro; however, she will be living in London, England (we live in New Mexico). My question is...Must she buy a "special" Mac Pro for her needs in London, or can she use an adaptor for power?

Your welcome. Most electronics have universal power supplies that can deal with overseas power standards - before she starts getting lots of adaptors with transformers, check the manual or specifications online for her equipment. Often a simple adaptor that just adapts the physical US style plug to the UK style, or even better and cleaner, a new power cord, is all that is required. Found this out when I went overseas myself last year. And it can be overwhelming at first!
Even though it's PC world, after doing a quick google search for you it's a pretty comprehensive and easy to read article:
http://pcworld.about.net/news/Aug222002id103293.htm

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

Mac benchmarks: iMacs vs older Mac Pro towers

I've been having a great discussion in a PPro Facebook group regarding new editing systems; I have a limited budget for 3 new Macs in our company and I feel confident about purchasing a new Mac Pro (for PPro, AE, color correction and finishing work) and 2 iMacs with Thunderbolt RAIDs (just for editing with PPro).
I'm curious though: when I look at the Geekbench scores for the latest Mac models there are older Mac Pros (2009 - 2013) that seem to outperform the newest iMacs in 64-bit multicore performance. The single core performance has the iMacs coming out on top (I'm only looking at the 27" retina, not the new 5K model). So which score is more indicative of performance while editing with Premiere Pro? I've heard from editors who say their new iMacs run circles around the older towers they replaced so I'm inclined to believe that a new iMac would feel faster than even the last silver Mac Pro tower (2012); but a 12-core beast with a beefy GPU has got to be a serious contender when it comes to intense multiprocessing tasks.
I know that there a lot of factors that determine overall "speed" (GPU, RAM, storage speed) so it won't always be an easy 1:1 comparison with these models. I just want to make sure I'm investing in the right hardware and very curious as to how these benchmarks translate into real world Premiere Pro performance.
TIA,
JVK

jvknowles wrote:
I'm inclined to believe that a new iMac would feel faster than even the last silver Mac Pro tower (2012); but a 12-core beast with a beefy GPU has got to be a serious contender when it comes to intense multiprocessing tasks.
There's a lot involved in this comparison, such as:
CPU core count and speed
GPU capacity
Storage speed
The old Mac Pros are excellent rigs, but limited to SATA2 storage speeds, and their Xeons don't have Intel's AVX available, which will speed things up a bit. One advantage they do have is an open catalog of AMD or nVidia GPUs, assuming you can get them powered by the internal connectors. The new Pros are AMD-only, though the advantage is that they have 2 GPUs versus 1.
Comparatively, the new iMac with its desktop Core i7 processor will be able to push faster GHz, and it also has Intel's QuickSync tech available (hardware h.264 encoding). So if you're doing a lot of output with h.264, you'll see a bit of a kick in the *** with those. The limitations? The GPUs aren't as capable as the ones in the nMP now. And you only have access to a single GPU, where the new Pro has 2. But, if you're not doing any work that can be off-loaded to the GPUs, it won't matter.
As Eric mentions: AE is all CPU, all the time. It wants cores and GHz. It'll make your machine cry, regardless of what it is.

An Intel iMac AND a MacBook Pro for Logic Pro?

I am torturing myself over this issue lately so any input you guys could offer would be welcome!
This is the situation:
After 3 months of serious debating whether to purchase a 20" Intel iMac or a MacBook Pro for Logic Pro, I went ahead about 3 weeks ago and got the iMac. My reasoning behind this was that even though I found the portability of the MBP very desirable, the iMac simply represented a better value with the big screen and bigger hard drive. Since getting it, I must say I love this machine and I have not had one single problem with it. Logic 7.2 runs like a dream on it. By the way, aside from maintaing my iTunes Library, occasional iLife stuff and web surfing with Safari, this iMac is for music production only.
But here's the problem:
Still, I can't seem to shake the desire for OCCASSIONAL portability. Keep in mind, I am only a "serious" music hobbyist; I create instrumental hip-hop, trip-hop, electronica style of music mainly with software instruments, loops and breakbeats. So needless to say, I don't tour or do a lot of travelling. But the prospect of being able to compose tracks or make beats in Logic anywhere is DESIRABLE to say the least. I could compose while sitting on the couch watching a game or laying in bed - even though I have no idea of how often I'd actually do that, just having the ability to do it is VERY APPEALING to me. Throw in the fact that the iMac currently shares deskspace with a PC that my wife uses - meaning that I often have to stop what I'm doing to let her use the space. With a laptop, I could move and still continue my flow. Lastly, I unfortunately have bad knees and a bad back so after a couple of hours (or 3 or 4) of sitting at the desk working on Logic, I am seriously hurting. Not comfortable at all. At least owning a MacBook would give me the option to move around to some place more comfortable if I desire.
So...
Even though I recently bought a wonderful iMac that works great, I'm seriously considering getting a 1.83 MBP with at least 1GB of RAM and the 100GB/7200 RPM drive to accompany it just for the portability factor. Sure, I could get a used G4 PowerBook or iBook, but all I own is the Universal Binary of Logic Pro; I would have a hard time accepting the decrease in speed I've gotten use to on the Core Duo. Besides, I inherently have a problem buying something (even used) that I know is old and out of date when the latest and greatest is available.
So here is the $25,000 question: Am I nuts for even considering this? Am I placing too much of a premium on the portability as I would use it?
This could easily be justified if I was a working musician on the road, but that ain't me. And you can believe that I'm definately not rich and thus don't have money lying around.
But I have obsessed over this so much lately, I feel that I almost have to get it just to put my mind at ease! I even briefly considered putting the iMac on eBay and just buying a MBP to replace it, but I love the screen real estate I get with the 20" iMac and I question if I'll be truly satisfied with a 15.4" screen FULL TIME. 17" might be better, but I doubt if I can wait until June for them to arrive. In addition, everything would connected via my wireless LAN and .Mac so file sharing should not be an issue.
Help!!!
What would you do? Sell the iMac or just get a MBP as cheap as I can?
Opinions, Please!
20" iMac Core Duo, 2GHz, 2 GB RAM, 250 GB HD, 128MB VRAM Mac OS X (10.4.4)

I love the portability my powerbook gives me. You can use a PB in your setup. You can run an external monitor for either PB or MBP. You can node. Universal Binary menas it is an application which has the components written for both PPC and Intel chips-so you don't need to do conversion. Nodes won't require you buy a nother license. so the answer is down to how much the 2 upgrades and 1 crossgrades will set you back vs how much use you'll get out of them. IMO the iMac is inexpensive (I mean that in a good way-worth hooding on to). Maybe just look at a refurb PB unless you really have the extra cash.

Bought my mac pro for 1099. to repair it cost 754, is it worth repairng?, bought my mac pro for 1099. to repair it cost 754, is it worth repairng?

bought my mac pro for 1099. to repair it cost 754, is it worth repairng?, bought my mac pro for 1099. to repair it cost 754, is it worth repairng

It all depends - if you can put that $754 towards a new unit, an you can afford to add a little something to it, then I would go for a new computer. How old is your machine? Only you can make the decision. If your machine is older, you might want to ask the Apple Store or AASP about their 'flat rate pricing' - a scheme by which you pay a little over $300 and they repair everything on the machine. They may stick to their guns and only offer you the $754, but it's worth asking about.
See this concerning the flat rate repair option.
Good luck,
Clinton

What is better a imac or a mac pro

which computer is better a imac or a mac pro?

With Mac Pros you can add fiberoptic PCIe Cards. With iMacs you have to settle for Thunderbolt, which isn't bad, but not quite as fast. With Mac Pros you can have four built-in SATA drives.
With iMacs you are stuck with one, and based on the latest info from http://www.macsales.com/ the internal iMac hard drive is not removable! So if it dies, you are left with external drives and the built-in optical as your only choice. With Mac Pros, you can expand your RAM more.
With Mac Pros the processor is frequently more powerful if your software desires it, and your graphics processor can be too if you desire it. If you don't think you'll need it, after examing the machines at the Apple Store, the iMac is a great machine.

Installing windows 7 on the NEW iMac 21.5inch mac

Hey Guys
im thinking on buying the new iMac 21.5 mac (link Below) but im wondering how would you install windows 7 on there through bootcamp.
The Mac doesnt have a disk drive and Apple USB Super Drive connects via USB which the Mac will not read well trying to install windows.
http://store.apple.com/au/browse/home/shop_mac/family/imac
So what steps do i take?

Well, if Windows isn't going to be used for gaming, just running Windows Apps, I'd highly recommend...
Parallels...
http://www.parallels.com/
VmWare Fusion...
http://www.vmware.com/mac
VirtualBox...
http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads

Upgrading Mac Pro for wireless laptop use

I purchased a Mac Pro 6 months ago and passed on the bluetooth b/c honestly I never saw myself needing wireless capabilities. Low and behold I was just given a new Macbook Pro as a gift from a client (my favorite client). So now I am going to be in need of having wireless capabilities I thought I would never need. My question is what am I going to need to have my laptop go wireless for the internet? I have a new lynksys router I never used but it is wired.

I wouldn't upgrade your Mac Pro for Internet Sharing because the Mac Pro will always have to be on in order for the wireless connection to remain active. I would take back the Linksys wired router and get yourself a router with wireless capabilities. Which router you choose is up to you and most work quite well, but I recently purchased Newer Technology's MAXPower 802.11n/g/b Wireless Router, which is fully OSX supported and works great on my network.
http://newertech.com/products/router.php

New iMac 24" or Mac Pro for Aperure

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for