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

Similar Messages

  • Which new Mac Pro for Logic?

    Well, they're out and on the AppleStore and I have about £2800 burning a hole in my pocket...
    My question is, for that money I can configure either an 8-core machine running at 2.26GHz, or a quad-core running at 2.93GHz. Can anyone tell me which route is likely to be better for running Logic with lots of tasty plug-ins? I've budgeted for 8Gb of RAM and a second hard drive for sample data, so it's just the processor(s) left to decide on.
    At the moment I'm running it on a 1.83GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro, where it limps along painfully, so I don't really have any experience of how well it utilises extra processing cores. I'd welcome any advice.

    Hey MIke I agree that some thought should given to technology 5 years down the road but you are making my point about chasing technology. Its all a guessing game. Look at TVs. Look at phones. Etc.
    Technology is moving so fast that you have to just use your gear in the moment and hope for the best.
    It is not realistic in 2009 to predict 5 years down the road. Its just a big guess. What about the Mac pros that come out in 2 years. Will they make this years new Mac Pro obsolete? People will be having this same discussion in 2 years? They might not even make a desktop in 5 years. Look at the power of laptops now. Desktop sales are very weak and if this trend continues they will fade. I bought my 8 core almost a year ago and I would have had to wait a year if I chose to chase technolgy. When I bought my Apogee Ensemble I did think to myself that great they will probably release a new Ensemble with more Mic inputs. But I am glad I got it and use it and no worries. We are at the mercy of Apple so they will dictate the future and they arent going to tell consumers their 5 year plan anyway. Ok I will shut up.

  • Which new Mac Pro for Logic Studio?

    Hi everyone,
    I'm on the verge of ordering a new Mac Pro, but am tossed up over the quad 2.93 or the Octa 2.26. I'll be using it mainly for composing with Logic Studio. I find its a bit of a pain to record the sounds from my Motif ES8, so I'm going to start using software instruments more.
    Does anyone know if Logic uses multiple cores? I googled this and couldn't find much on it.
    If I get the quad, I'm going to load it to the max of 8G RAM. If I get the Octa 2.26, I will get 12G RAM. Will Logic take advantage of the extra RAM?
    Right now, I'm leaning towards the quad 2.26. I keep my Macs for a long time. I currently have a 4 year old G5 iMac with 2G RAM.
    Thanks for any opinions.

    I'm With Dual G5 PowerPC version 3.1 (90nm thecnology)
    Logic works fine, but when I need to recording with Omnisphere or Kontakt 3... or any Live Instruments... (anyway I'm able to use the Maximum power request patches of all 3rd party plugs that are installed in My G5)
    I need MORE SINGLE THREAD POWER... because Logic and most of 3rdparty plugs allow you to use ONLY ONE CORE (or processor).
    The ability to overclocking of the Nehalem processor is very interesting...
    you will be able to have up to 3.3Ghz in a single thread operation!
    So... I'm not sure to buy a new Mac before Snow Leopard... because I can use my G5 smoothly and if needed I have my Black Macbook for adding power (I have 2X Motu interface (828 MK3 and Mk2).
    But if hypothetically I were to buy now...: the best Mac value for money semms to be the Quad 2.93 with full Ram set 8GB!
    I don't believe about Multitrhead is needed for Live Audio performances
    The power on the single core is very important...
    I love to export as Audio the tracks
    when I use 3rd party Instruments the ammount of crash risk during the Mix down the percentage are:
    with Instruments in Live mode about 80% during professional mixdown
    With Audio tracks 0% of crash diring professional Mixdown
    Logic Pro is a rock solid DAW if used only with Audio tracks and Logic native instruments!
    I'm able to MIX more than 160 Stereo tracks with My System...
    I can wait for Snow Leopard Machines.
    G

  • Which New MacBook Pro for Aperture...?

    I'm need to get another Mac laptop and would like to get one of the new 15" MacBook Pro models. It seems like the entry-level model is the sweet spot this time. I would have to pay $500 more to get more VRAM and 50GB more disk space and a slightly faster processor. For Aperture it's all about the graphics card and both of the 15" models have the same card except the cheaper one has 256mb VRAM and the other has 512.
    Would I notice the difference (with Aperture) between 256 and 512 on the VRAM? I think this is the deciding factor.
    Thanks,
    Robert

    I'm not so sure about the need for 512 MB as opposed to 256. I'm running Aperture on a two year old iMac with 128 MB of GPU RAM and it works just fine. A 512 MB card is not inherently faster than a 256 card; in fact, unless those extra 256 MB are used, they are just as fast.
    On the other hand you will most certainly benefit from the larger L2 cache. There is no question that the 2.5 model is a faster computer when running Aperture but I personally think that the $500 price difference between the 2.4 and 2.5 model is just a little too much. I will probably order the cheaper model and save that $500 towards a D300 instead!
    /Martin

  • New Mac Pro for Photoshop

    Hi,
    I currently have a 2008 Mac Pro 2 x 2.8 Quad Core Intel Xeon that I am thinking of upgrading.
    My questions are as follows.
    Which set up would be best for photography based work, mainly Photoshops CS6 and Lightroom 4
    I use a Drobo as my main working raid style hard drive.
    I'm happy to spend money on a quality system but want to know it will be optimum for what I am using and dont want to just go for the 'top of the range' if it is pointless for the type of work I am doing (I never use video software at all)
    Would there be a 3rd party company that would be better suited to set it up exactly for photography based work.
    Am I right in saying the current Mac Pro's do not have thunderbolt or USB 3.0, so with that in mind, how long do people speculate that the new Mac Pro's will be available.
    Thanks in advance.
    Jason

    YOU can see what Intel says (said?) at the Intel Conference this fall where they lay out for their vendors and everyonne what they plan and have in the oven for the next year.
    Intel fell behind last year's plans with the complexity and issues they ran into, plus changes in the landscape. So did Nvidia with their new line. Hence everyone's plans went bonkers. And any IvyBridge Xeon? doesn't look like anything until this time next year, end of 2013. 2014 does have the next tic-toc and improved chips and memory architecture. DDR4 may get out of the labs.
    That much is knowable.
    But what you can do today: 2010 6-core 3.33 w/ 4x8GB and GTX 670 plus some nice storage hardware.
    See this guy's articles and advice, a heavy graphics perspective:
    www.macperformanceguide.com
    Oh, and just my own personal.... a lot of 2008 owners are not happy campers for various reasons with power, stabilty, sleep/wake/freezes and maybe that 'first Mac Pro w/ EFI64" is showing crack in seams.
    2010 for $1800 and up to around $3k - and your system is worth over a grand still once you can move over.

  • I recently purchased a Go pro Hero 4 Black which included a voucher for Adobe Photoshop Elements 12. Is elements 12 discontinued if so, will I be able to downloadAdobe Photoshop Elements 13?

    I recently purchased a Go pro Hero 4 Black which included a voucher for Adobe Photoshop Elements 12. Is elements 12 discontinued if so, will I be able to downloadAdobe Photoshop Elements 13?

    LAdyshopgirl
    Premiere Elements 12 is no longer the current version of Premiere Elements. Premiere Elements 13 is. Probably Premiere Elements 12 is still in stock
    at online vendors. Whether these online vendors accept "vouchers" is questionable.
    You need to go by whatever the voucher says. It may be very specific for version 12 and be outdated at that. Is there an expiration date on the voucher.
    Is there an installation disc included with the camera? If so, does it give a redemption code or serial number that you are supposed to use to install the
    program?
    This is not Adobe. Rather a user to user forum.
    My first impression is that you may have an outdated voucher. And, the details of that voucher need to be read carefully.
    Please supply more information unless you opt to contact the seller of the camera for more details, especially if this "voucher" was a sales
    incentive for the selling of the camera.
    ATR

  • 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

  • Premiere Pro CS5.5 incompatible with current Mac Pros?

    Does anyone know if the new version of CS5.5 Premiere pro is compatible with the current line of Mac Pros?
    At present, CS5 Premiere pro is not. After nearly six months I know they have been unable to correct a problem which causes a complete system freeze under repeatable circumstances and the problem is tied to current Mac Pros standard configuration with ATI cards.

    Tom,
    I wish I better understood your reply. I don't know what MPE refers to, nor do I know what text file hack you have mentioned.
    What I do see is that the system requirements for Premiere Pro 5.5's GPU is listed as follows:
    - Adobe-certified GPU card for GPU–accelerated performance; visit www.adobe.com/go/premiere_systemreqs for the latest list of supported cards
    Interestingly, it posts this link on the page it is sending you to, which does not inspire great confidence regarding accuracy.
    Lower down on the page there is only a list of Nvidia cards. If Adobe no longer supports ATI(or AMD cards) cards for GPU acceleration, they are not supporting any of the standard configurations on any Macintosh currently offered.
    Regardless, if the product is hard crashing the system with all standard current configurations under common and repeatable circumstances, there is a serious issue consumers need to be made aware of before purchase.

  • IMac or Mac Pro for iPhoto albums and home movie editing?

    I have a Mac Pro OS X 10.6.8 with iPhoto 7.1.5. This system is now obsolete for ordering iPhoto albums. I need to upgrade to iPhoto 9.5.1 to buy a Mac produced photo album. To upgrade iPhoto I need to buy a new Mac as my 2004 Mac Pro with 2008 Snow Leopard can't be upgraded. I will use the new Mac for email, web surfing, iPhoto, and weekend video editing. I use Final Cut Express on my current Mac Pro. I will also need to transfer videos and about 20,000 photos from my current Mac to a new one.
    So, here's the question: For my needs (listed above) which is better,
    (1) iMac 27" or (2) new Mac Pro? Then, with the one chosen, how should it be configured to do my basic video editing? I have 100 hours of family video on Hi8 and VCR tapes and will edit these on Final Cut and burn them to DVD's. (I understand both iMac or Mac Pro now require an external DVD set-up.) So, which computer and how should it be configured. Looking to pay between $2500-$3500. Thanks for your help!

    What video formats are you talking about? DV, HDV, etc?
    Mac Pro is a better solution, regardless. Here's why: Simply upgrading an iMac HD is not enough. You do not want to capture your video to the boot drive. It's too much to ask the drive to manage the OS, your editing software, AND your media. This scenario might work - but is certainly prone to dropping frames. Ideally, you want one drive for OS + editing software & a separate drive to capture media to.
    Now, since you can only have a single HD in the iMac, you're demoted to using external capture drives. So let's say you get yourself a FW800 drive for capture and then hook up your camera/deck to an available FW400 port. You'd think you're safe - and again, you may be. But the problem now is that the iMac has ONE and only ONE FireWire bus. So in theory these 2 devices: HD & Camera are battling for the same bandwidth. So you've still got a bottleneck happening.
    So DV only would probably work. But it may have issues that the expandability of the Mac Pro can conquer. Hope this helps.

  • Building the ultimate Mac Pro for Lightroom

    I am looking at upgrading my current Mac Pro or buying a new Mac Pro with the specific goal of making Lightroom faster.
    My problem is that I use a PhaseOne P45+ back and rendering each file at 100% takes approximately 12 seconds. I could do a blanket 1:1 render but then my catalogue would be huge.
    Here's my question; which part of my Mac Pro is most involved with the rendering?
    Processors
    RAM
    Graphics card
    Hard disk
    I currently have a first generation Mac Pro and was thinking of either doing the following upgrade:
    Increase ram from 7GB to 16GB.
    Create a RAID 0 hard disk from 2 of the Intel X25M solid state drives (new G2 models) and have the catalogue and cache on that drive (obviously it will be backed up frequently)
    Replace my graphics card with a Radeon 4870.
    If I bought a new Mac Pro then I would still carryout the above modification but I would have the benefit of 8 cores instead of 4 and the RAM is faster. However, I am reluctant to spend the additional capital if the increase in performance is minimal.
    My second question therefore is; does Lightroom 2.4 take full advantage of a new Mac Pro's 8 cores?
    Thanks!

    A single OWC Mercury Extreme Pro RE SSD will pretty much max out a SATA2 port so any caddy that puts two of those SSDs on one port becomes pointless.
    There are two extra unused SATA ports on the motherboard that could be used with the Trans Intl. DX4 Mounting Station. This is probably your best option for maximizing as many of your internal SATA ports for storage HDs as possible.
    I don't know if its true for the 2009 and later Mac Pros, but in the 2008 and earlier ones the limiting factor for RAID bandwidth was the Enterprise Southbridge Interface which was limited to 1 GB/s.
    http://developer.apple.com/legacy/mac/library/documentation/HardwareDrivers/Conc eptual/MacPro0704/Articles/arch.html
    Message was edited by: Martin Pace

  • Help need my mac pro for school..it has Grey screen..spinning wheel...repaid disk ok...repair disk permission all repaired but one warning...

    Help need my mac pro for school..it has Grey screen..spinning wheel...
    I think I have  mountain lion OS X....I have done I think almost every suggestion I've seen in discussion boards.
    Boot in recovery repaired disk...ok...repair disk permission...all repaired but one warning...I've tried to reinstall lion (without losing data) and it Got all the way to one minute to be done and then the time change back two hours and kept doing this all night long.  I haven't done a back up due to no external for time machine.
    I hope someone can please help me I've been going crazy for a week now trying to figure this out.  I use my computer for school and I'm currently very behind from in my school work  thank you
    Also I've checked my available space  424.91 free of 750 gigs....disk is verified

    Welcome to the Apple Support Communities
    Try holding the Shift key while your Mac is starting to start into safe mode. Then, after starting in safe mode, open Finder, select Go menu (on the menu bar) > Go to Folder, and type /Library/StartupItems. Then, empty this folder and restart the Mac.
    If your Mac starts after doing this, it was a problem with a third-party app that starts automatically when you turn on the computer. It won't start automatically anymore after doing that

  • 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

  • I have the current Mac Pro the entry level with the default specification and i feel some slow performance when applying after effects on my videos using final cut pro and also rendering a video takes long time ? what upgrades do you guys suggest?

    i have the current Mac Pro the entry level with the default configuration   and i feel lack of  performance when applying after effects on my videos using final cut pro and also rendering a video takes long time ? what upgrades do you guys suggest i could do on my Mac Pro ?

    256GB SSD  it shipped with will run low and one of the things to watch.
    Default memory is 12GB  also something to think about.
    D500 and FCP-X 10.1+
    http://macperformanceguide.com/index_topics.html#MacPro2013Performance
    Five models of 2013 Mac Pro running Resolve, FCPX, After Effects, Photoshop, and Aperture

  • 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

  • Ideal Mac Pro for After Effects

    I'm planning on buying a new Mac Pro for use with After Effects CS5.
    Between the single 3.33GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon “Westmere” processor model or the two 2.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Westmere” (8 cores) processor model, which would be faster for working in After Effects CS5?
    Also how much RAM would be ideal? Would more than 16GB be worth it? Would the ATI Radeon HD 5870 1GB upgrade make a considerable difference?
    Thanks.

    Hate to say it but "it depends." But one thing is clear: 2.4GHz is slow and more cores don't make up or help.
    Maybe your work is with huge files or would benefit from a Quadro.
    3 x 8GB of RAM on 3.33GHz is general advice.
    And there are dozens of topics on the subject in
    http://www.macperformanceguide.com - be sure to click on Topics

Maybe you are looking for