View Full Version : Which mac pro?
I am a web/graphic designer and developer working from home. I am glued to my computer 10 hours per day 6 days per week. Currently a PC!!!! :(
I always have my email client open, a few web browsers (safari, firefox, Netscape, Opera, chrome etc...), my code editor, photoshop and maybe a couple of other programs. My photoshop files can be hundreds of layers.
I intend to buy a mac pro and the mac adobe master collection cs4 (or cs5 if it is out in time), coda and a couple of 30" cinema displays. Originally I was looking at the 8-core but I will probably hang on for the 6 or 12 core.
I don't fancy spending much more than £9000.00 (mac £5500 + £1000 adobe suite + coda £99 + 2 displays £2400) but I was wondering, for my needs, are more cores imporant? or the fastest processor? i.e. would I be better getting a 4-core with it's fastes processor or the 8-core with it's slowest processor? RAM - will any of my programs utilise more than 8GB RAM? If photoshop can only use 8GB will more RAM help with the fact I have other programs running?
Lot's of questions but I think you get my predicament. I am opting for the mac pro for the fact it doesn't have a screen built in to it, I can add hardware easily and it seems like a workhorse! I also want a few graphics cards as I intend to run the 2 30" displays and a couple of dvi's I currently have. I hope this purchase will last a long time too - I don't fancy needing an upgrade next year.
Any advice is appreciated.
I can see the argument of having a free choice of displays and all, but even so, the Mac Pro is way, way overspecced for your needs. I don't see at all what you want to do with "the 6 or 12 core". I'd say invest the most into the RAM, not the processor. And if you really want to treat yourself, add an SSD.
The 6 or 12 core is just because I would feel like I had been done if I bought the 4 or 8 and then they were replaced for a similar price a week later.
How would extra cores affect the likes of photoshop? Or several programs open at the same time constantly switching between them? Still a bit confused with the core thing and don't want to end up wasting money on something out of fear that it might have been needed.
I'd go for the lowest end Mac Pro with as much RAM as you can afford. Get an SSD and use it as a boot drive, like chucker says - they're incredibly fast and they will give you a better overall experience.
Also, I would recommend at least considering non-Apple displays.
The 6 or 12 core is just because I would feel like I had been done if I bought the 4 or 8 and then they were replaced for a similar price a week later.
How would extra cores affect the likes of photoshop? Or several programs open at the same time constantly switching between them? Still a bit confused with the core thing and don't want to end up wasting money on something out of fear that it might have been needed.
:confused:
I'm having difficulty understanding what you're trying to say. Do you mean you are considering waiting a bit to see if Apple releases updates to the Mac Pro? The general rule of thumb is to buy when you need, wait when you can. If you can get by on your current setup, you may as well wait. It has been a year since the Mac Pros were last updated, and it's likely they will be refreshed soon.
How would extra cores affect the likes of photoshop?
They'll speed up parallelized tasks.
Or several programs open at the same time constantly switching between them?
Having tons of RAM will help with that.
How does is likes of photoshop affected by the number of cores? And why are processor speeds or cores not important for me?
I read somewhere that photoshop can't use any more than 8GB RAM, would there be any point in getting more than that?
And what is wrong with the apple displays?
They'll speed up parallelized tasks.
Having tons of RAM will help with that.
I don't know where that post went - it disappeared after I posted it. Thanks for responding to it though. ;)
I don't know where that post went - it disappeared after I posted it. Thanks for responding to it though. ;)
It triggered the automatic anti-spam controls. They automatically hide some posts made by new members. A moderator can go in and decide whether to approve the post or delete it as spam. It'll stop happening once you have a few posts.
Oh, and welcome to AN!
And what is wrong with the apple displays?
They're good quality, but tend to be very highly priced. Plus, your only two choices are a 24-inch one that's glossy (which is probably a terrible idea for your line of work) and 30-inch one that hasn't been updated since 2004. As a graphics designer, you probably want to look into brands like Eizo instead.
They're good quality, but tend to be very highly priced. Plus, your only two choices are a 24-inch one that's glossy (which is probably a terrible idea for your line of work) and 30-inch one that hasn't been updated since 2004. As a graphics designer, you probably want to look into brands like Eizo instead.
Really??? For a 6 year old monitor it has held it's design appeal very well. I plan on having a look at the 30" in the apple shop before making any hasty decisions though.
Ahh! Another post gone missing! EDIT: woohoo - they are all back now!
I don't mind the fact the 30" is old so long as it does it's job. I am happy for it to not be on a mini display port as this means I only need 2 graphcs cards to run them and I can get a couple of mini-vga or mini-dvi adaptors to run my current monitors.
I had a quick look for a Eizo 30" and it was nearing £2000!
Really??? For a 6 year old monitor it has held it's design appeal very well.
Agreed — but it's not LED-backlit, for example, so its color gamut isn't that great by today's standards.
Really??? For a 6 year old monitor it has held it's design appeal very well. I plan on having a look at the 30" in the apple shop before making any hasty decisions though.
Casing design is one thing, but the panel itself hasn't really changed as far as I know.
http://www.macrumors.com/2006/03/28/30-inch-apple-cinema-display-quietly-updated/
So in March of 2006, almost exactly 4 years ago, the 30" Cinema was upgraded to 400 cd/m2 brightness and 700:1 contrast ratio. Those figures are still listed on Apple's site, so it seems unlikely that they have changed the panel at all.
Stats aren't everything with displays, and I don't claim to be an expert, but I wouldn't buy a 4-year-old LCD when I could get a brand new one for the same price or less. There are cheaper ones available. There are also some high-end ones that may cost as much as or more than the Apple, but they'll give you better quality as well.
If you're not as concerned with quality, pick up a monitor from Dell or HP or something... they are still better on paper than Apple's display and they cost a lot less. Incidentally, where are you? Prices and availability is very different in the US compared with other countries.
Incidentally, where are you? Prices and availability is very different in the US compared with other countries.
Random guess from the currency tiddles keeps using: UK. ;)
I probably do 99% web work so the 30" displays are mainly for space. I like to test my sites final colours on a few bog standard screens as most of the site visitors will not be using high end calibrated displays. If anyone can suggest a better or equal cheaper alternative it would be appreciated. Preferably using the dual link dvi ports so I don't need adaptors.
And it is UK ;)
I notice when configuring a mac pro on the apple store site you have the option of adding an airport extreme wi-fi card. Is this an optional upgrade from a built in wireless card or will I have no wireless conectivity without it? I assumed that these days, every computer would come wireless ready.
The Mac Pro does not come with a wireless card standard, you must add it if you want it.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.