New mac pro -config for photo/3D?

Getting ready to pull the trigger on my first new desktop mac in awhile. I need to get this right and am looking for suggestions. I have a medium budget, so can't go for the ultra bling. Just looking for good value, esp. in areas that can't be upgraded later, like the video card. Will probably add more RAM later as needed. I spoke to a very helpful apple sales rep. and his suggested specs are below. I'm pretty tempted to runwith his config.
I'm a photographer but mainly high end PShop retoucher -with large complex images. Also modeling & rendering in 3D (still images -not animation). Will probably be doing more video.
As stated above, I don't have a huge budget. But suggestions are welcome -esp. from anyone who owns one of the new workstations.
Thanks!
- 6 core (3.5ghz)
- 16Gg DDR3
- 512Gb Flash Storage
- Dual AMD Firepro D700 GPUs w/6Gb of GDDR5 VRAM
- Accessory kit
- Apple Care

You are hedging bets that the D700s might someday prove their value, not a given.
I strongly suggest you careful review and read and re-read
www.macperformanceguide.com as he is testing and is also heavy into CS6/CC and a photographer.
A lot of discussion, and some disappointed, at whether the nMP is suitable workstation for CS6 here:
http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay.php?f=1
If you do, then go with 3rd party memory of course to get you to 32GB and above, and t hat will have an impact so I would not put it off; so buy with minimum. Might even go for the 1TB SSD now instead, or plan to later when Samsung and OWC and other vendors offer upgrade kits.
3D - makes the D700 a 'must' and wish there was an upgrade path, especially down the road in two years when hopefully new GPUs and other features are out. If apps can be tuned and optimized like FCP-X 10.1+ is then dual GPU will be strong selling points.
Your budget for Thunderbolt storage.

Similar Messages

New Mac Pro - Config for graphics?

Looking to purchase a new 6-Core Mac Pro for high end photo retouching & 3D modeling/rendering. I would love to be able to afford the la$t of each option for CPU, memory, storage, graphics, etc. But this would immediately push the price tag over $10K -which is way beyond my intended general price point.
I've been using Macs professionally since 1987, and tradionally options like ram and displays are more economically purchased from other vendors. I know from my last Macbook Pro purchase that some options are permanent and can't be upgraded. I'm tempted to go with the stock config here, with the intention of adding ram and a new display as needed.
Can the flash storage be upgraded later? 256Gb seems like barely enough for OS and a few apps. I currently keep my itunes library on my boot drive, but that won't fly with 256Gb. Can the itunes library reside on the non boot drive or would that have to be iCloud?
$1500 for the next bump up in CPU is steep. You can never have enough raw power for 3D rendering, but this is another option I would like to upgrade later as needed. Is this possible?
I would like to keep the purchase price close to the base cost, but would be prepared to pay upgrades that offer major productivity boosts, or any components that can't be upgraded later (but perhaps the latter is a moot qhestion)
I know I can get answers to these questions from Apple sales, but am hoping to get suggestions from tech savvy users who employ a similar workflow, and preferably have experience with the NEW HARDWARE.
thanks

The expectation is that the Built-in SSD is the Boot Drive, and that User files and work files will go into Thunderbolt-to-something external enclosure(s), the number of which, and specifications of which, are your choice.
The 6-core is a sweet spot, giving you more cores with a still fast base CPU speed for less than half the price of an additional complete unit.
There is a knee in the RAM upgrade curve. Using today's modules, the 16GB modules are RDIMMs, and do not play nice with ANY other sizes.There are four independent memory channels, that can be locked into pairs. I have not read anything definitive about why/why not to upgrade DIMMs by the each (except that by example Apple has demonstrated that three modules in the four slots works fine).

New Mac Pro overkill for Logic Pro X?

Hi all,
Is the new Mac Pro overkill for audio work? I use Logic Pro X and mainly use huge sample libraries with Kontakt, so I would get 64gb memory, a Lacie 10tb Thunderbolt drive to store the samples and 2 Apple Thunderbolt displays. Or would an iMac suffice?
I don't want to upgrade my old 8-core, dont want a previous gen 12-core, and the price doesnt matter.
Thank you.

If you do want best ideal in performance for audio, then PCIe SSDs are great even now. And may really need TB2 to shine and share bandwidth.
SSDs with near zero seeks and latency and low prices for Samsung 840 EVO 1TB or 750GB are very appealing.
I would wait until - OS X has had two updates to refine drivers; 3-6 months for any needed changes in firmware for EFI and SMC (which seem to be a regular of ALL new Macs and Mac Pro models); even tweaks to production and TB2 chipsets and such, maybe even those new AMD GPUs.
Version "1.0" hardware and OS really, and of course vendors will now begin to really have some hands on and expect apps, Apple no exception - to need updates.

Which Mac Pro config for PShop (and others)

Which processor config is best for Pshop multitaskers? Looking to choose a (new) Mac Pro. I am primarily a photo retoucher & photographer (in that order) But I also push my system doing 3D renderings, and often streaming Pandora while I work. Another forum offered suggestions to get the Quad core -and choose the 3.33Ghz 6 core "Westmere" (+ $1200) --as opposed to my first choice, which was the 8 Core w/two 2.4 Ghz "Westmere" processors. My goal is to keep the total cost under $4K -including additional RAM + ATI Radeon HD 5870. I chose the 8 core unit for the added RAM capability, and I thought that 8 cores would help when running multiple apps. But other posters had opined that since most apps -including Pshop (CS5) DON'T take advantage of multiprocessing the faster single processor w/6 cores would take the lead. I am a pro retoucher, and am often working multiple VERY large layered files. I do NOT do animation or video. I am also thinking of waiting for the next Mac Pro update -which past history suggests a possible late spring (2011) rollout. ( I wouldn't want a laptop as I work exclusively at my own studio, and want as much horsepower + longevity as I can afford)
Opinions appreciated -esp. real world tests using CURRENT Mac Pros. Thanks!

Yes, for best memory bandwidth performance, use 8 DIMMs, and it doesn't matter much what your mix and match is (other than certified of course for Mac Pro).
http://www.barefeats.com/harper3.html
No need to every discard the Apple memory until you get the urge to go to more than 8GB. Buying a full set of same and same time insures that they are less likely to deviate or have enough difference to cause trouble (even Crucial batches vary a bit).
I prefer TechWorks as a cut above, quality is good as it gets, comparable to Micron.
http://eshop.macsales.com/search/MatchedSets:+800Mhz+MacPro
The older Mac Pro was more trouble to get an ideal setup.

"Best" configuration for new Mac Pro used for Aperture?

I'm getting ready to order a new Mac Pro and would like to configure it to optimize Aperture performance.
On CPUs - I have found no benchmarks which show whether Aperture would benefit from 2 quad core processors versus 1. Does anyone know of any benchmarks or have any experience using a single quad core? I don't want to spend $500 on a 2nd processor if Aperture can't use it.
On Graphics cards - I was sold on the GForce 8800, due to it's supposed blazing speed for gaming and it's larger on board memory. However, after reading the following review http://www.barefeats.com/harper10.html , these guys seem to imply that applications such as Aperture actually run faster with the standard Radeon 2600 video card! If anyone has any experience or opinions on this review, I'd love to hear them!
On memory - I know from experience that Aperture will use all of the physical memory you make available to it. I plan on ordering the standard 2GB from Apple, then adding 8GB from 3rd party for total of 10MB.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I can only say that when faced with the same decision last month, I went with a 2.8 8-core/8800GT/10gb RAM/library stored on 2nd internal drive setup and am completely satisfied with Aperture's speed. Beyond satisfied, really, borderline thrilled to be honest. No beach balls, perfectly responsive adjustment sliders, smooth and quick scrolling through images (even with Quick Preview mode turned off). Aperture 2 definitely takes advantage of all 8 cores - I have MenuMeters installed and can watch its CPU usage across all 8 cores. Exporting, for example, is fast and uses all cores for background processing.
I have seen a couple small anomalies though...when moving photos around in a light table, I get some odd flashing artifacts on the right side of screen that could be graphics card related. Visually annoying but it doesn't affect performance. I'm also seeing some weird behavior with keywords not appearing in Tooltips and in the Viewer, but it's intermittent and is most likely a software bug and not my hardware setup.

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).

Installing SSD in new mac pro

hello,
looking into purchasing an ssd for soon arriving mac pro.
already purchased a 16g memory and a 2T HHD upgrade.
i came across the speed tests for ssd on start up and the ssd's seems pretty impressive. (OWC site)
I'm going to be using the new mac pro primarily for processing landscape photograpy.
PS5, LR5, autopan pro and the nik software are the programs that i wil be running most ot the time.
files sizes sometimes reach 1+g.
Question.
If i install a new SSD, probably a 120G Mercury Electra from OWC in one of my bays what should be on it? Just OS?
I have a 1T HHD that came with the MPro and I have another 2T HHD that I purchased for photo storage.
Not quite sure how the two different types of HD's will work together from a speed standpoint
Very new to this so any thoughts or suggestions would be welcome.
Thank you.
Owen

Some folks buy themselves an SSD thinking they are going to get a great a performance boost. But the boost they get by only adding an SSD is that Applications launch faster, and not much else.
If you want a bigger boost, and a boost across the board, move the user files off, leaving only System, Applications, Library, and the hidden unix files behind on the Boot Drive. Mac OS X is hugely over-configured on main memory. It is incessantly going back to the Boot Drive for a little of this, a little of that, and it moves the drive heads away from the data files you want to be reading and writing. Once you are not moving the heads away from your data to pick up system stuff all the time, your data drive will get faster.
The big payback is using a Boot drive. An incremental improvement is using an especially fast spinning drive like a VelociRaptor 10K for your Boot Drive. An additional incremental improvement is using an SSD for your Boot drive.
If you just add an SSD, but do not segregate the System, etc on its own drive, you pay top dollar for launching Applications faster. A big disappointment.
japamac's Blog: Make Space for performance -- Moving the home folder

Performance with the new Mac Pros?

I sold my old Mac Pro (first generation) a few months ago in anticipation of the new line-up. In the meantime, I purchased a i7 iMac and 12GB of RAM. This machine is faster than my old Mac for most Aperture operations (except disk-intensive stuff that I only do occasionally).
I am ready to purchase a "real" Mac, but I'm hesitating because the improvements just don't seem that great. I have two questions:
1. Has anyone evaluated qualitative performance with the new ATI 5870 or 5770? Long ago, Aperture seemed pretty much GPU-constrained. I'm confused about whether that's the case anymore.
2. Has anyone evaluated any of the new Mac Pro chips for general day-to-day use? I'm interested in processing through my images as quickly as possible, so the actual latency to demosaic and render from the raw originals (Canon 1-series) is the most important metric. The second thing is having reasonable performance for multiple brushed-in effect bricks.
I'm mostly curious if anyone has any experience to point to whether it's worth it -- disregarding the other advantages like expandability and nicer (matte) displays.
Thanks.
Ben

Thanks for writing. Please don't mind if I pick apart your statements.
"For an extra $200 the 5870 is a no brainer." I agree on a pure cost basis that it's not a hard decision. But I have a very quiet environment, and I understand this card can make a lot of noise. To pay money, end up with a louder machine, and on top of that realize no significant benefit would be a minor disaster.
So, the more interesting question is: has anyone actually used the 5870 and can compare it to previous cards? A 16-bit 60 megapixel image won't require even .5GB of VRAM if fully tiled into it, for example, so I have no ability, a priori, to prove to myself that it will matter. I guess I'm really hoping for real-world data. Perhaps you speak from this experience, Matthew? (I can't tell.)
Background work and exporting are helpful, but not as critical for my primary daily use. I know the CPU is also used for demosaicing or at least some subset of the render pipeline, because I have two computers that demonstrate vastly different render-from-raw response times with the same graphics card. Indeed, it is this lag that would be the most valuable of all for me to reduce. I want to be able to flip through a large shoot and see each image at 100% as instantaneously as possible. On my 2.8 i7 that process takes about 1 second on average (when Aperture doesn't get confused and mysteriously stop rendering 100% images).
Ben

In need of a new Mac Pro, which one?

In the market for a new Mac Pro, mainly for CS5 apps, an ocassional Final Cut project and some Modo rendering (simple work). My Mac is an early 2008 2.8 GHz 8 core with 10 gigs of RAM, rock solid performance and trouble free and I'm looking to buy a new one within the next week. The 4 core 2.8 appeals to me for the lower price, but inclined for the 8 core, is the $1,000 difference between 4 and 8 core woth it? The 4 core has a faster processor, so I would assume that the difference in speed is basically a non-issue for the work I do, am I right? On the other hand, I rather get the 4 core with at least 12 gigs of ram, since most apps don't take advantage of 8 cores.
Need opinions and suggestions and if someone has a link for performance comparisons test between the two, would be appreciated, can't find any.

Not everyone, but more than a few, swear by SSD making their Mac run smooth and faster all around.
You are rather low on RAM for any real strong CS5 use.
Your Mac can boot into 64-bit kernel, too. Read up on that on MPG and along with 24GB pays 15% dividends.
And you can take advantage of 5870 or 5770 as well as Quadro 4000 ($789 PNY Quadro for Mac on Amazon, versus $1195 on Apple Store). 5770 + 4000 is $1050 investment.
You 'should' be using say 3 x 2-3TB enterprise version drives. And 120-240GB SSD $600.
Intel 3.2GHz Harpertown (Penryn) 5400s are probably not cost effective and seems the highest MHz you can go.
I go with coffee can, create an account to go towards the next system. Put X-amount aside each month and only buy on cash or your business pays for itself in six months.
The real hard part comes when a new model comes out, knowing the first 3 months are often rough and best to hold off, wait, read the reviews and reports. And know that buying that while today you could 'down grade' to Snow Leopard, the next time you can't and it takes time to optimize all the drivers and software that a workstation is more likely to need.
If you have $3.5K burning a hole, then the ref'd 2.8 and optimize "the heck" out of it, with W3680 and everything else, and then sell yours later too for $1500 probably.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC560LL/A
Your 8-core 2,8 is not yet ready to retire!

Premiere Pro CC & New Mac Pro - Audio Line Out Issue

I'm having a few issues with the audio line out on the new Mac Pro. For some reason, Line Out locks into Premiere Pro. When I switch programs, the audio line out device stays locked to Premiere Pro and the only way to get other programs to be able to output audio when Premiere Pro is not current application, is to go into System Preferences > Sound and click onto an alternative output and then click back onto Line Out.
Thanks,
Jon

Thanks.

Downgrading New Mac pro to Mountain Lion

Is it possible to downgrade a New Mac Pro to Mountain Lion?
Apple has removed the Open Transport API from Mavericks and we need it to run a specific medical program.
The software runs on our old Macs. Just wondering if its ok to do this on the new Mac Pro.

Thanks for the thoughts people.
I didn't think it could be possible.
We have a solution - albeit a messy one.
The software component that is incompatible is a DICOM server (medical image server). The actual viewing software used to manipulate the image is compatible - just the image import component is not.
Putting it simply we will set up some folder aliases over the network so the viewing software will just use the image folders on the old Mac as their repository.
We have also contacted the developers to get them to update their software! As technically, it is not compatible with Mac...

I have a new Mac Pro. I want to use my old Mac Pro as a storage drive for photos and old documents, linked to my new Mac Pro. How do I set up the old computer?

I have a new Mac Pro. I want to use my old Mac Pro as a storage drive for photos and old documents, linked to my new Mac Pro. How do I set up the old computer? Both computers have OS X10.9.3. Currently they are connected by a Firewire 800 cable.

You certainly could keep the old Mac Pro in Firewire mode (hold down the T key on its keyboard as you boot) to show its drives on the new MP. This is basically as fast as putting the drives into a Firewire enclosure.
Or you could boot it normally and share its files over the network using the Sharing panel of System Preferences. If you turn on both File and Screen Sharing, you don't even need to have a monitor attached - you can do all administration using screen sharing. However, this method requires that you open all files over the network, which will be slower than the direct-connect method above, and may also not work with all applications.
Matt

I bought a new Mac Pro from an Apple store, it was sold as factory sealed, but it's reconditioned - it has some strangers entire photo,library from 2003 to 2011 in the trash bin.

. I bought a new Mac Pro from an Apple store 2 days ok, it was sold as factory sealed, but it's reconditioned - it has some strangers entire photo,library from 2003 to 2011 in the trash bin.
I was bought a Mac book pro as a birthday gift from the Apple Store in Leicester, after completing the initial set up procedure, I noticed that the trash bin was full of some one's entire photo collection from 2003 to 2011.
This is entirely unacceptable for Apple: How long have Apple been fobbing of consumers who believe they were genuinely purchasing a 'new' Mac book?
How is it that I have someones entire photo collection on my 'branch new Mac Book Pro' - these photos included wedding photo's, birthday celebrations, family celebrations and children. Its a serious breach of data protection, it's an invasion of some poor persons privacy and private photo collection. What concerns me the most, is what could have happened if those photo's had fallen into the wrong hands. We managed to trace, locate and contact the person who the photo's belong to within 10 mins using information taken from their wedding album.
Understandably these people are also very distressed that their personal photos are on my brand new Mac Book pro.
I would like details of who to contact in regards this incident.

Katdee22 wrote:
. I bought a new Mac Pro from an Apple store 2 days ok, it was sold as factory sealed, but it's reconditioned - it has some strangers entire photo,library from 2003 to 2011 in the trash bin.
Return to Place of Purchase.
Katdee22 wrote:
I would like details of who to contact in regards this incident.
Contact AppleCare.
Apple Contact USA > http://www.apple.com/contact/

New Mac Pro for photography (raw edition).

Hi,
I want to buy the new Mac Pro in december for use as my main works station. I work mainly with Photoshop CS6 and Capture one, editing/retouching big amounts of RAW and TIFF files from Nikon and Hasselblad.
Im thinking in buy the 6 cores version with 16Gb or 32Gb if I get the money, (I think the 16Gb is the basic configuration for the six core and looks really good). Like this is a big investment for me, I was wondering if this will be the right configuration for my work. I am a photographer and an advanced retoucher. But I'm not sure if the 6 cores are really necessary for what I do (serious photo edition, fashion and publicity.). Maybe the 4 cores with 32Gb (or more) of Ram is just enough or... Maybe, its the 8 cores the right option.
This machine should last at least five years.
Any advice is welcome.
By the way, anyone knows how to solve the Eizo Colornavigator 6 compatibility with the OS X Mavericks issue?.
Thanks a lot!.
Cristóbal.

Hi FatMac and The hatter,
Thanks for yours suggestions, it's been very helpful!.
i'm using a MacBook Pro (6.2) 2.8GHz i7 8Gb Ram (not upgradable) and 500Gb SSD connected to an Eizo monitor. It does his job but lately having heavy overheating and slow down its performance in a notorius way. Its a good machine but is not made for serious editing.
Before that, I was using an imac 27 quad core 16Gb ram that I sold for get some money for the new Mac Pro.
This should be a notorious improvement for me.
Based on what you saying I think with the 6 cores at 32 Gb ram I will be ok. Im thinking on upgrade the Ram in the future. Probably the 8 cores will be too expensive for my budget and don't make a significant improvement for my work compared to the 6 cores.
Thank you very much for your advice and links!!.
Best,
C.

Is a SSD drive for a new Mac Pro "worth it"?

I will be purchasing a new Mac Pro quad-core in the next month or so. My computer usage, other than email and some word processing, consists primarily of editing RAW photo files using Nikon Capture NX2, Photoshop Elements, and iPhoto. I do almost nothing with video. Would a SSD boot drive offer me any significant advantage over a 1 TB hard drive? Would it appreciably speed up photo editing of the RAW files, or simply boot faster? If you do recommend one, what size would I need for a boot drive to contain the OS and all program software? I will be upgrading from my current G5, so I suspect anything will initially seem very fast. Thanks!

It depends on just how dependent on disk I/O your software is. Hard drives are still, by far, the slowest link in the performance chain for a computer. If your software is primarily CPU bound and goes to the hard drive very little, you won't notice the benefits of an SSD that much. I use Apple's Aperture, and Aperture is VERY sensitive to disk speed for the volume where your library file is. There are several key databases in the library package that are extremely sensitive to disk performance and particularly file fragmentation.
I have an OWC Mercury Extreme SSD that I use for my operating system and applications, and then I have a RAID 0 of three Western Digital Hard drives for my Aperture library. RAID 0 is striping with no parity. Since there is no parity and no protection from hardware failure, I back up with TimeMachine, manual copies and I also use Mozy.com for automatic offline backups.
The machine boots nearly instantly, and application launching is extremely fast. Most programs show a definite improvement and overall I am very pleased with the configuration.
However, Aperture's library databases are extremely prone to fragmentation. There is a noticeable and significant increase in performance every time I defrag my aperture volume with iDefrag, and if I have a really long editing session I can notice performance degrading over time.
Right now my workflow with Aperture is pretty sporadic, so defragmenting routinely isn't that big of an issue. However, I anticipate getting into Aperture more as I start photographing more projects. I think if that happens, I will probably get a second SSD and also finally convert my Aperture library from managed to referenced. Apple has added features in Aperture 3 so that referenced libraries aren't that big of a PITA, so I should be able to keep the Aperture databases on the SSD and reference my masters on my RAID drive. Best of all worlds.
Also do not buy the SSD from Apple. Right now the only viable SSD's are ones that do internal garbage collection like the OWC Mercury Extreme. See my other post here for the ups and downs of SSDs:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=11248829&#11248829

New mac pro -config for photo/3D?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for