I have a six year old Mac Pro that I am looking at replacing soon. I use it for Photoshop CS6 and Lightroom plus various plugins and accessory software like Nik Color Efex, Topaz deNoise, etc. I often work with large files (500MB to 1500MB). I plan to install either 16 or 24 RAM. How much faster would the 3.33 hz six core ($500 extra) be than the 3.2 hz four core? Same question for upgrading from the Radion HD 5770 1GB to the HD 5870 graphics card ($200 extra)? I would like it to be sufficient for running Photoshop for another five or six years.
Posted by David Bostedo on October 15, 2012 at 10:17 PM
Tony - Photoshop won't really make use of that many cores (not right now anyway) so the six core version will not be noticeably faster, as the clock speed (3.2 GHz versus 3.33 GHz in this case) is almost the same. If you're running lots of other intensive programs, you may see a difference, but if it's primarily PS/Lightroom, stick with the quad core.
As far as the graphics card goes, if you aren't doing any video or gaming, it won't make any difference. The amount of graphics card speed needed for PS (and associated) is pretty minimal. The video memory may be helpful, but those cards are the same there.
Note that either way, the iMac will be faster with the i7 processor than any Mac Pro. The Mac Pro line is actually out of date, and there are rumors about a refresh coming in sometime soon (but I have no idea how soon...). One of the vagaries of how Apple updates product lines (or doesn't keep them up to date in this case).
And for any of these - particularly the Mac Pro - you can save quite a lot of money (hundreds of dollars) by buying a base configuration and upgrading the memory and hard drives yourself. Apple charges a LOT for upgrades typically.
Posted by Tony Siciliano on October 15, 2012 at 10:23 PM
Thanks for the response! I didn't know about the possible refresh. I'm in no hurry, so I'll wait....
I have a PC with an i5 quad core, 16GB RAM, and a 1GB nVidia video card. I also run CS5, which is not that much different in terms of resource use from CS6. I can easily work on 2 GB psd files at 100% efficiency. So, I agree with David that a six core CPU and the video card you spec'd are likely overkill.
That said, there are two things that will give better performance. First, add as much RAM as you can afford. The maximum amount you can install will be dependent on the mother board. Second, use a SSD for your primary drive (OS and most used programs). RAM and the SSD can be purchased and installed after you buy the basic box, as David says.
I installed an Intel SSD and I can open Photoshop in about 2 seconds. I can open a 2GB psd file ready for editing in about 13 seconds when the file is stored on the SSD. Prices are coming down on SSD's, and even though they are more expensive than HD's, the performance boost is worth it.
--P
Posted by David Bostedo on October 16, 2012 at 12:09 AM
FYI Tony... a little googling shows that the most recent rumors (just RUMORS, absolutely nothing concrete) seem to indicate a Mac Pro refresh sometime in 2013. If you don't want to wait, you could always go with an iMac, or even possibly a PC!
Posted by Mark Seaver on October 16, 2012 at 9:57 PM
Tony, I have a 2011 Macbook Pro with a dual core i5, 4GB RAM and a 320 GB hard drive. Right now it's choking when LR4 and PS5 are both open. That's at least partly due to only 30 GB of hard drive space left, but also driven by the 4 GB or RAM. My desktop is a iMac 27" that was also choking with 4 GB of RAM, but runs sweetly since I increased the RAM to 12 GB. LR is a huge memory hog. I sure wish Adobe would do something about that.
Posted by David Bostedo on October 16, 2012 at 10:01 PM
Agreed on the memory hog part Mark to an extent.... BUT...On the other hand, 4GB of RAM is really a small amount in a computer anymore for any serious application, especially one dealing with lots of large files. Hardware and software are always trying to play leapfrog, and they have to in order to stay competitive and ultimately enable all of the great stuff we have now (large amounts of multi-tasking, stitching, HDR, large numbers of layers, video, etc.) So I'd say just always plan on doing some upgrading every couple of years (drives, memory, maybe video card depending on needs). Or buy more machine than you currently need if you can afford it.
Tony,
I was in a similar situation to yours (I had MacPro 1,1 2006 with same upgraded video card) until the summer. The cost and underwhelming tech specs of the latest Mac Pro drove me to seek alternatives. Though the current iMacs had enough power to meet my photography processing requirements, I just don't like working with external drives except for backup and archiving purposes. Those internal drive bays of the MacPro just spoiled me.
After much research I ended up building a Hackintosh, I had never built a computer before--I've been using Macs since 1984, but this was one enjoyable project. My i7 Sandy Bridge at 3.5GHz is super stable (more stable than my Mac Pro was), runs the latest version of Lion (though Mountain Lion is very doable), and gives me far more configuration options. Though Apple's industrial design is in its own crowning universe, I've very happy with the flexibility of my solution. I even purchased a quiet case (the MacPro spoiled my standards forever in some things) that can hold nine internal hard drives and eight SSDs. My total cost came to under $1500.
Most of the components are commodity-type and they fit and work together very well. I thought getting the hardware together would be the most intimidating part, but it ended up being the most satisfying.
CS6 and LR4 run many times faster than on the old MacPro. I think the key here is moving the OS, key applications, and the LR catalog to a top notch SSD. Having 16Gb RAM helps too.
Your existing videocard should work fine if you stay with a kosher Mac. While I now have a very strong Radeon HD 6870, all that power is really needed for video production (which I more-than-dabble in) and 3D modeling. Quite a few fellow Hackintoshers get by quite well using the integral graphics capabilities of the Intel i7 chip. Yup, things have improved.
I have no inside information, but I believe that the forthcoming computers labeled MacPros will be vastly different--closer to a larger Mac Mini in appearance and the box will only contain a high-powered CPU. Modular add-ons will contain high-end video cards, audio cards, touch-screen iPad-like surfaces, and external storage--all linked by Thunderbolt. I'm sure it will be a beautiful, Zeus powerful integrated system, but one whose cost I'm not willing to bear.
ME
Posted by David Bostedo on October 17, 2012 at 4:43 PM
Tony - Please note, per Michael's note above, that installing OS-X on a "Hackintosh" or any non-Apple hardware is actually illegal because it violates the End-User License Agreement (EULA) for the operating system. Whether you choose to pursue that path or not is, of course, up to you. But it is definitely EULA violation.
"installing OS-X on a "Hackintosh" or any non-Apple hardware is actually illegal because it violates the End-User License Agreement (EULA) for the operating system."
This a true statement. Also, doing such 'hacks' would invalidate the warranty. If the machine crashed, you'd be hosed. As David says, Tony, the path you choose is up to you, but you need to aware of potential pitfalls.
I don't want this to degenerate into a Mac vs. PC argument; that's not my goal. There are very good PC's out there that will fill your need at a lower cost. As with any puchase of this kind, you have to diligent in your research so that, in the end, you get a machine that meets your needs and is well constructed with high quality parts.
Discussion
9 repliesAs far as the graphics card goes, if you aren't doing any video or gaming, it won't make any difference. The amount of graphics card speed needed for PS (and associated) is pretty minimal. The video memory may be helpful, but those cards are the same there.
Note that either way, the iMac will be faster with the i7 processor than any Mac Pro. The Mac Pro line is actually out of date, and there are rumors about a refresh coming in sometime soon (but I have no idea how soon...). One of the vagaries of how Apple updates product lines (or doesn't keep them up to date in this case).
And for any of these - particularly the Mac Pro - you can save quite a lot of money (hundreds of dollars) by buying a base configuration and upgrading the memory and hard drives yourself. Apple charges a LOT for upgrades typically.
I have a PC with an i5 quad core, 16GB RAM, and a 1GB nVidia video card. I also run CS5, which is not that much different in terms of resource use from CS6. I can easily work on 2 GB psd files at 100% efficiency. So, I agree with David that a six core CPU and the video card you spec'd are likely overkill.
That said, there are two things that will give better performance. First, add as much RAM as you can afford. The maximum amount you can install will be dependent on the mother board. Second, use a SSD for your primary drive (OS and most used programs). RAM and the SSD can be purchased and installed after you buy the basic box, as David says.
I installed an Intel SSD and I can open Photoshop in about 2 seconds. I can open a 2GB psd file ready for editing in about 13 seconds when the file is stored on the SSD. Prices are coming down on SSD's, and even though they are more expensive than HD's, the performance boost is worth it.
--P
I was in a similar situation to yours (I had MacPro 1,1 2006 with same upgraded video card) until the summer. The cost and underwhelming tech specs of the latest Mac Pro drove me to seek alternatives. Though the current iMacs had enough power to meet my photography processing requirements, I just don't like working with external drives except for backup and archiving purposes. Those internal drive bays of the MacPro just spoiled me.
After much research I ended up building a Hackintosh, I had never built a computer before--I've been using Macs since 1984, but this was one enjoyable project. My i7 Sandy Bridge at 3.5GHz is super stable (more stable than my Mac Pro was), runs the latest version of Lion (though Mountain Lion is very doable), and gives me far more configuration options. Though Apple's industrial design is in its own crowning universe, I've very happy with the flexibility of my solution. I even purchased a quiet case (the MacPro spoiled my standards forever in some things) that can hold nine internal hard drives and eight SSDs. My total cost came to under $1500.
Most of the components are commodity-type and they fit and work together very well. I thought getting the hardware together would be the most intimidating part, but it ended up being the most satisfying.
CS6 and LR4 run many times faster than on the old MacPro. I think the key here is moving the OS, key applications, and the LR catalog to a top notch SSD. Having 16Gb RAM helps too.
Your existing videocard should work fine if you stay with a kosher Mac. While I now have a very strong Radeon HD 6870, all that power is really needed for video production (which I more-than-dabble in) and 3D modeling. Quite a few fellow Hackintoshers get by quite well using the integral graphics capabilities of the Intel i7 chip. Yup, things have improved.
I have no inside information, but I believe that the forthcoming computers labeled MacPros will be vastly different--closer to a larger Mac Mini in appearance and the box will only contain a high-powered CPU. Modular add-ons will contain high-end video cards, audio cards, touch-screen iPad-like surfaces, and external storage--all linked by Thunderbolt. I'm sure it will be a beautiful, Zeus powerful integrated system, but one whose cost I'm not willing to bear.
ME
This a true statement. Also, doing such 'hacks' would invalidate the warranty. If the machine crashed, you'd be hosed. As David says, Tony, the path you choose is up to you, but you need to aware of potential pitfalls.
I don't want this to degenerate into a Mac vs. PC argument; that's not my goal. There are very good PC's out there that will fill your need at a lower cost. As with any puchase of this kind, you have to diligent in your research so that, in the end, you get a machine that meets your needs and is well constructed with high quality parts.
--P