[Elliot_N]

Hi

I'm wondering if anyone can help choose a new G5?

I'm a photographer and the machine will be used primarily for Photoshop work (CS2, and maybe Aperture when it is released). (Apart from Photoshop, just internet, email and itunes.)

I have recently started to work with very high resolution 16 bit film scans (200Mb to 400Mb). In Photoshop, when layers and masks are added, these files mushroom to between 400Mb and 800Mb. (I'm a fairly basic Photoshop user - a few adjustment layers (some with layer masks), a couple of retouch layers, remove dust spots with the healing brush, rotate, resize, USM, print, save etc...)

I currently have an 800Mhz eMac with 750Mb RAM - and, of course, it's not up to the job! I took some of my files to the Apple Store here in London and played with them in Photoshop CS2 on a Dual 2.7Ghz (3.5Gb RAM) - blazing fast, about 10 times faster than my eMac!

The Dual 2.7Ghz was connected to a 30" Cinema Display and I fell in love with the size of it. It's way out of my budget, so I've ordered a Dell 2405 instead (rotated, it's taller than the 30", and a lot of my pictures are in 'portrait' format).

I'm going to order a G5 online and I'm perplexed by the different configurations. The guy in the Apple Store reckoned that the dualcore 2.3Ghz would offer a similar performance to the dual 2.7Ghz, and the dualcore 2Ghz would be about 20% slower.

I think I could live with 20% slower. The 2Ghz is much cheaper than the 2.3Ghz. For the price difference I could buy 3Gb of RAM from Crucial.

So that's the first question: 2Ghz or 2.3Ghz?

(Oh, my budget - I don't want to spend more than I have to, but I do want a machine that will keep me happy for the next 3 years. Currently I shoot film and work with very big files. When I switch to digital (soon) the files will get smaller, but there will be many more of them...)

Here are the other questions I have as I look at the various options at the online Apple store:


MEMORY

I know I should get a lot, but at what point will I see diminishing returns - 2GB, 3Gb, 4Gb?

I don't understand the pricing at the Apple Store. 2Gb (2x1Gb) = £210, 4Gb (4x1Gb) = £490, 8Gb (8x1Gb) = £1,050. How does that work? The more chips you buy, the more each one costs? And how about the original 2 x 256Mb chips that are in the base model - do they occupy two of the eight slots, and do they take them out if you order say 2GB? (Oh, I see, maybe that explains the weird pricing...)

It's best to order extra RAM from somewhere like crucial.com, right? (I guess I then get to keep (and use) the 512Mb that ships with the base machine?) I have to buy chips in pairs, yes? So if I decide I want a total of 3.5Gb RAM, I buy a 2Gb kit (2x1Gb) and a 1Gb kit (2x512Mb) from Crucial?

I think I don't need ECC RAM, but Crucial lists two types of 1GB Non ECC RAM.

Either: DDR2 PC2-4200 • CL=4 • UNBUFFERED • NON-ECC • DDR2-533 • 1.8V • 128Meg x 64'

Or: 'DDR2 PC2-5300 • CL=5 • UNBUFFERED • NON-ECC • DDR2-667 • 1.8V • 128Meg x 6'

Which type is best?



HARD DRIVE

The 160 Gb drive that comes with the 2GHz is plenty big enough for me. I have several external FW hard drives for storing and backing up my image files. (The hard drive (60Gb) of the eMac that I've been using for last 3 years is only half full). But what about a second internal drive to use solely as a Photoshop scratch disk? I understand that for this I should go for the fastest drive possible. What would that be?



GRAPHICS SUPPORT

I'm hoping that the Nvidia GeForce 6600 LE 128Mb with be able to drive the Dell 2405 monitor that I have just ordered (and allow it to be rotated into 'portrait' mode). Is it worth paying the small premium to upgrade to the 256Mb version? Will I see any advantage when using Photoshop (and possibly Aperture in the future)?


WIRELESS OPTIONS

I already have one of those Bluetooth things that you plug into a USB port. And I use a wired Netgear broadband modem/router for internet access. I'm not sure exactly what Airport Extreme is - but that probably means that I don't need it!



KEYBOARD LANGUAGE AND MOUSE OPTIONS

'Apple wireless keyboard and mouse' - Hmm, maybe I need that; I'm planning on keeping the G5 under my desk and the cable for Apple keyboard isn't that long, is it? The Dell monitor has USB ports, but I think they're on the side of the screen, and I'm planning on rotating the screen quite often, so that wouldn't work. So maybe wireless is the answer then? But that means no mighty mouse. Is the mighty mouse any good?


Sorry for the long question. Thanks for any tips.

Elliot

[mduell]

CPU: 2.0 Ghz
I can't see paying 300 quid for a video card you don't need or a 15% CPU speed boost. The money is better spent elsewhere.

Memory: 4.5 GB
Take the stock RAM from Apple and throw in 4 1GB modules from Crucial. That still leaves room to add 2 2GB modules if you need them when they come down in price. Go for the PC2-4200 / DDR2-533, as the faster RAM won't do anything for you.

Hard drive: 74GB Western Digital Raptor or 300GB Seagate 7200.somenumber
The WD Raptor is the fastest drive on the market, but you really pay out the nose for the marginal increase in speed. You can get 4 times the storage space for the same price (actually, slightly cheaper here in the states), and I would advise going with the 300GB for storage. Hopefully with enough RAM you won't be hiting your scratch disk ever.

Graphics: 6600LE
The 6600LE will work great with the 2405FPW. When you get to Aperature think about upgrading to the 7800GT if all the realtime effects aren't fast enough for you.

Wireless: Skip
Airport Extreme is Apple's name for a 802.11g (Wifi) card. You don't need it.

Keyboard: Wired works
The 2405FPW has ports on the left (which rotates down if I recall) and the back, so plugging it in shouldn't be a problem. If for some reason you can't plug it into the LCD, USB extension cables are cheap.

A word of advice on rotating the LCD: My 1904FP looked "weird" when I had it rotated. The red-green-blue pixels are vertical instead of horizontal and it just looked odd to me. Things may be different on the 2405FPW, or it may not bother you.

[Elliot_N]

Mark, many thanks for the detailed answers to all my questions.

I've just ordered 4Gb of RAM (4 x 1Gb) from Crucial.

I'll probably get the basic 2Ghz G5. And if there's no point upgrading the video card, then I don't have to order online and wait 8 days - I can just go down to the Apple Store on Regent St and pick one up.

At first I'll designate one of my external FW drives as a Photoshop scratch disk. If I find that Photoshop is accessing it a lot then I'll consider buying the 74Gb Raptor as a dedicated internal scratch disk.

Your remark that LCDs can look weird when rotated worries me a bit - I hadn't heard of that before.

I await the delivery of my Dell 2405FPW with some apprehension!

My main concern is that it will be too bright for photo editing work. If it's not up to the job I'll send it back, and buy a 20" ACD instead. Trouble is to get a 3 year warranty on the ACD I need to put it on the same invoice as the G5. But I want the G5 to test the Dell. Hmmm, Apple make things very complicated!

I guess I can do a basic test of the Dell using the VGA socket on my eMac, though presumably I won't get full screen resolution. Will I need a special lead?

Thanks

Elliot

[Eug Wanker]

If you're running Aperture, from the initial reviews it sounds like the ideal situation is the Quad 2.5 with 7800 GT. Yes, I'm serious, but I do realize that's a lot of money. Anyways, that's what Apple was using to demo Aperture IIRC. Aperture reportedly slowed right down on a 1.67 GHz PowerBook with Radeon 9700.

Otherwise I'd get one of the duals... with the 7800 GT, especially if you have lots of very large images to work with.

However, if you're short on cash, you could test it out Aperture at the store with the 6600. I wouldn't get the LE though, since the non-LE is only $50 more, and is supposedly significantly faster. Unfortunately, Aperture won't be available at most places for testing for 2 months.

OTOH, if your only interest is Photoshop and not Aperture, then the base model Power Mac is sufficient. BTW, Photoshop itself has a hard limit of 3 GB RAM support, so I agree with the total 4.5 GB RAM recommendation.

[Elliot_N]

Glad I got it right with the 4.5Gb of RAM!

For some reason the UK Apple online store is not yet offering the 7800GT card as an option.

With my current film workflow I have no need for Aperture. But in 6 months time I will be shooting a lot of jobs digitally (either medium-format digital back or Canon 5D). Initial reports suggest that Aperture will be a must-have piece of software for this type of workflow.

How about I go for the standard video card now, and then buy the most suitable card for Aperture in 6 months time? Does that make financial sense? Or should I really try to get the 7800GT now?

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Elliot_N

Your remark that LCDs can look weird when rotated worries me a bit - I hadn't heard of that before.

I guess I can do a basic test of the Dell using the VGA socket on my eMac, though presumably I won't get full screen resolution. Will I need a special lead?

If you currently own an LCD, try putting it on its side. Or try it at a friends house.

The Mac mini only supports resolutions up to 1920x1080 (120 vertical pixels shy of the 2405FPW), so you can test it but you won't be able to use the whole screen. If I recall, the 2405FPW gives you the choice (in the on-screen controls) of stretching a smaller image to fit, or centering it wiith black bars.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Elliot_N

Glad I got it right with the 4.5Gb of RAM!

For some reason the UK Apple online store is not yet offering the 7800GT card as an option.

With my current film workflow I have no need for Aperture. But in 6 months time I will be shooting a lot of jobs digitally (either medium-format digital back or Canon 5D). Initial reports suggest that Aperture will be a must-have piece of software for this type of workflow.

How about I go for the standard video card now, and then buy the most suitable card for Aperture in 6 months time? Does that make financial sense? Or should I really try to get the 7800GT now?

AFAIK, none of Europe has the 7800 GT listed yet. Canada and Australia do though. Sometimes it pays to be the colonized and not the colonizer.

The thing I'd be worried about is availability of the 7800 GT (or similar GPU) as a retail card in the next few months. It may show up in 6 months, but if you wanted it in say February they may not exist, and even if they do, they may be expensive.

It's up to you though to decide if you need the computer right now or if you need it 2 months from now with the 7800 GT as a configure-to-order add-on.

BTW, the pix from the 5D and/or a medium format digital back are gonna be quite big, so my guess is you need all the processing power you can afford. Are you sure you don't want a quad?

In truth, I don't really know which is more important in this case, CPU or GPU, or how much a quad 2.5 is better than a dual 2.0. My guess though (having not tested Aperture myself) is the difference will be significant for both the 7800 GT over the 6600 and for the quad 2.5 over the dual 2.0. Maybe it's time to check out the photo forums, but I will say that from the little bit I've seen, many of the photographer types are buying quads with uberfast GPUs for Aperture, because Aperture runs very smoothly on that system.

[Elliot_N]

I just called Apple UK, but no-one I spoke to had any idea whether the 7800 GT is going to be offered in Europe.

Re. availability and pricing of the card if bought separately... Is this the card?

http://www.lowestonweb.com/products/...3-DCCB57E59ED3

If so, it's available now and it costs about 460 US Dollars - only slightly more than what Apple charge for swapping out the standard card.

Doesn't that mean that I've got nothing to lose by buying a standard configuration G5 now and upgrading the graphics card later (if/when I buy Aperture)?

Or do you think there's going to be a run on these cards in the months ahead?

Thanks

Elliot

[Eug Wanker]

Usually, Mac video cards cost significantly more than PC video cards. I'd guess by the time the Mac 7800 GT became available as a retail card it'd still be $500ish, and that's probably many moons from now, but that might be OK for you of course.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Elliot_N

I just called Apple UK, but no-one I spoke to had any idea whether the 7800 GT is going to be offered in Europe.

Re. availability and pricing of the card if bought separately... Is this the card?

http://www.lowestonweb.com/products/...3-DCCB57E59ED3

If so, it's available now and it costs about 460 US Dollars - only slightly more than what Apple charge for swapping out the standard card.

Doesn't that mean that I've got nothing to lose by buying a standard configuration G5 now and upgrading the graphics card later (if/when I buy Aperture)?

Or do you think there's going to be a run on these cards in the months ahead?

No, that's the PC version of the card. It will not work in a Mac.

If you want your new PowerMac in less than two months, 6600(LE) is the way to go. Apple's estimating 6-8 weeks before they're shipping the 7800GT equipped Macs, but we all know how that goes.

The 7800GT isn't the top-end chip (7800GTX is), so I'd expect the cards will be plentiful in a few months. Much like the previous 6800GT vs 6800U situation.

[Elliot_N]

Thanks for the clarification.

I'll go for the G5 with standard video card, as I need the computer in the next day or two so I can test it with the Dell 2405 which is arriving the day after tomorrow.

If I don't like the Dell monitor, I will have blown my chance of buying a 20" ACD with a 3 year warranty. Oh well. In that case, I'll probably look at the Lacie LCDs...

Thanks

Elliot

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Elliot_N

If I don't like the Dell monitor, I will have blown my chance of buying a 20" ACD with a 3 year warranty. Oh well. In that case, I'll probably look at the Lacie LCDs...

Or you could exchange it for the 2005FPW, which uses a newer version of the same panel that the 20" ACD has.
The Dell LCDs look fantastic when horizontal; I think they look funny vertical, but other people don't mind.

[OreoCookie]

First of all, get the faster CPU, 2.3 GHz.

Do not get the 6600 LE, upgrade to the non-LE (which is just a few squids more). Especially since you plan on getting Aperture. Obviously the 7800 will be faster, but more expensive. If you need it, you can upgrade later.

The harddrive will almost certainly not be big enough for you. I have an 80 gig drive in my PowerBook and an external 250 gig drive, both filled up to the rim. But you can add harddrives later when you actually need them.

Memory, hmmm, I would start with 2.5 gigs (= stock RAM + 2 1 GB modules you get someplace else) and take a close look at the memory meter in Activity Monitor. If you constantly have less than 1/3 of memory available, you know it's time to upgrade. Obviously, if you can spend more, then do it. More than 4 GB of RAM will probably not be useful as photoshop cannot handle more than that.

[mduell]

I did some reading on the 6600LE and found out that it's really a 6200. Same core and memory clockrate as the 6600, but with half the pipelines (which makes it consistent with the 6200).

If you can upgrade to the 7800GT when you start with Aperature, go with the 6600LE now. If you will use Aperature before you can upgrade to the 7800GT, get the 6600 now.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by mduell

I did some reading on the 6600LE and found out that it's really a 6200. Same core and memory clockrate as the 6600, but with half the pipelines (which makes it consistent with the 6200).

If you can upgrade to the 7800GT when you start with Aperature, go with the 6600LE now. If you will use Aperature before you can upgrade to the 7800GT, get the 6600 now.

It's 50 bucks and it's a lot faster. Maybe he doesn't even need to upgrade with a 6600 in his machine.

[bowwowman]

For 2d work like Photoshop, the 7800 will be a waste of money. For Apeture however, which IIRC, will most likely utilize CoreVideo, it will come in handy.....

and remember, PS works way better with more than one cpu, so any of the dual-core models would be great. But if it were me, I would wait a bit to see if all the kinks have been worked out sucessfully in the quads, as this is an entirely NEW territory for Apple.......

And yes 4.5GB of ram would be the sweet spot right now, giving PS 2-3gb, and the OS & other apps the rest.

You can always add more later, if/when PS is updated to utilize more, and the prices come down

[Elliot_N]

Thanks for the tips.

I think you've persuaded me to go for the 2.3 Ghz with the 256 Mb video card (rather than the 2Ghz with with 128Mb card).

The 4Gb of RAM arrived from Crucial this morning... Dell are sending over the monitor tomorrow morning... So it's time to head into town to pick up a G5.

Thanks for the help.

Elliot

[Elliot_N]

Something just crossed my mind:

When I ordered my 4Gb of RAM from Crucial, I selected it by following the path to RAM upgrades for the 2Ghz dualcore G5.

If I buy a 2.3Ghz dualcore G5 instead, will the same RAM work?

(I'm seeing different part numbers coming up on the Crucial website, for what looks like the same thing (re. price and specs))

[Eug Wanker]

Which memory did you buy? If you got DDR2 533 DIMMs from Crucial they should work.

And most definitely do not get the 6600LE.

[Elliot_N]

....

[Elliot_N]

Yes, that's what I got... after posting here I emailed Crucial's customer support and they emailed back within a minute to say my RAM would work on either machine...

You've persuaded me... I'll be getting the 2.3GHz G5 with the 256MB video card...

Thanks

[Elliot_N]

Hi

I've just set up my new G5 with my new Dell 2405FPW, and I'm shocked to discover that there is no option in the displays preferences for screen rotation.

A quick google and I discover that NONE OF THE NEW G5 POWERMACS SUPPORT SCREEN ROTATION (apparently nvidia video cards do not support this feature).

This is really disappointing!

Is there a solution? Can I replace the Nvidia video card with a card that does support rotation?

Thanks

Elliot

[Eug Wanker]

For Aperture, Apple recommends a dual G5 (not quad) with fast video card:

For heavier duty image processing, faster GPUs and multiple processors are of huge benefit. Aperture does make extensive use of dual processors, but you do not need a Quad [a new model from Apple that has two dual-core processors].

Originally Posted by Elliot_N

Is there a solution? Can I replace the Nvidia video card with a card that does support rotation?

Dunno if there is any solution or not, but ALL PCIe Power Mac video cards are made by nVidia.

[Al G]

ATI will probably add Mac PCIe cards sometime later. Until then, you'll have to do without rotation.

It's also possible that Apple will add rotation to nVidia card drivers in the future.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Elliot_N

I've just set up my new G5 with my new Dell 2405FPW, and I'm shocked to discover that there is no option in the displays preferences for screen rotation.

A quick google and I discover that NONE OF THE NEW G5 POWERMACS SUPPORT SCREEN ROTATION (apparently nvidia video cards do not support this feature).

This is really disappointing!

Is there a solution? Can I replace the Nvidia video card with a card that does support rotation?

nVidia fully supports rotating your monitor 90, 180, or 270 degrees with NVRotate. The limitation you are facing is from the Mac drivers, not from the nVidia card.

[Elliot_N]

Thanks for the replies.

To get an idea of whether I would even use screen rotation, I've spent the last hour with my screen flipped vertical, and with my images in Photoshop rotated 90 degrees - if I hold my mouse at 90 degrees I can just about navigate the menus!

Unfortunately, I love this vertical view. (All the images I'm currently working on are in portrait format. I'm printing them on an Epson 2400 for an 11"x14" portfolio. With the screen flipped I can get a life-size match to my 11x14 prints.)

Just to be clear... It would be impossible to fit an ATI card from a previous generations G5 because the card would not be compatible with dualcore technology?

Thanks

Elliot

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Elliot_N

Just to be clear... It would be impossible to fit an ATI card from a previous generations G5 because the card would not be compatible with dualcore technology?

The incompatability has nothing to do with the CPUs and everything to do with the way the video card connects to your system. Until ATi produces some updated cards, you can only use one of the 3 nVidia PCIe cards.

[Apfhex]

Originally Posted by mduell

The Mac mini only supports resolutions up to 1920x1080 (120 vertical pixels shy of the 2405FPW), so you can test it but you won't be able to use the whole screen. If I recall, the 2405FPW gives you the choice (in the on-screen controls) of stretching a smaller image to fit, or centering it wiith black bars.

You sure? Apple's product page says "DVI video output for digital resolutions up to 1920 x 1200 pixels." Well, the 2405FPW does have DVI does it not? I do see that the mini supports VGA analog resolutions (using adapter) up to 1920 x 1080 pixels, were you talking about that?

Not sure what this has to do with the rest of the discussion but I wanted to check up on this point.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Apfhex

You sure? Apple's product page says "DVI video output for digital resolutions up to 1920 x 1200 pixels." Well, the 2405FPW does have DVI does it not? I do see that the mini supports VGA analog resolutions (using adapter) up to 1920 x 1080 pixels, were you talking about that?

Not sure what this has to do with the rest of the discussion but I wanted to check up on this point.

Yes, I was certainly thinking VGA, and I have no idea why.
The OP wanted to test his new monitor in the vertical orientation before his G5 arrived.

[Elliot_N]

Update:

During my trial period with the Dell 2405 I picked up a 20" Apple Cinema Display and decided that the latter was a much better monitor for Photoshop work. The Dell is going back.

The main issue was viewing angles.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Elliot_N

Update:

During my trial period with the Dell 2405 I picked up a 20" Apple Cinema Display and decided that the latter was a much better monitor for Photoshop work. The Dell is going back.

The main issue was viewing angles.

Have you compared the 20" ACD to the Dell 2005FPW? Last I saw, the Dell is using a newer revision of the same panel that Apple uses, so the viewing angle should be the same or better. Like the 2405FPW, the 2005FPW lets you rotate it for your portrait photographs.

[Elliot_N]

Oh, I have another question....

I bought the 2.3 Ghz Dualcore because the guy in the Apple Store said that in Photoshop it would perform at a similar speed to the 2.7 Ghz Dual.

Turns out he was dead right.

The test - a bunch of Photoshop actions - that I performed on the Apple Store's 2.7Ghz Dual is completed in exactly the same time on my 2.3Ghz Dualcore: 50 seconds.

However, there was another part of the test wherer my computer seems significantly slower:

- Firstly, dropping a 400Mb tif on the Photoshop icon in the dock and waiting for Photoshop to fire up and open the file.

2.7 Ghz Dual: 18 seconds
2.3Ghz Dualcore: 33 seconds

- Secondly, saving a 400Mb psd to the desktop?

2.7 Ghz Dual: 10 seconds
2.3Ghz Dualcore: 17 seconds

Can anyone explain this?

(2.7 Ghz had 3.5 Gb RAM, my 2.3 Ghz has 4.5Gb RAM - 2.7Ghz had standard hard drive)

Cheers

Elliot

[OreoCookie]

Yes, that's rather easy to explain. It seems the dual 2.7 has a faster harddrive. The other tests say that the rest of the speed is in the same ballpark, or if you take the slower harddrive into account, the dualcore 2.3 might even be faster.

[Elliot_N]

Originally Posted by mduell

Have you compared the 20" ACD to the Dell 2005FPW? Last I saw, the Dell is using a newer revision of the same panel that Apple uses, so the viewing angle should be the same or better. Like the 2405FPW, the 2005FPW lets you rotate it for your portrait photographs.

No, but i think it would be a better bet for photoshop work as the panel uses the same LCD technology as the cinema displays (i.e. S-IPS, rather than MVA/PVA (Dell 2405)).

Anyway, I'm well shot of Dell - the little buttons and menus were driving me nuts...

That said, the brightness control on the Cinema Display is pretty annoying as well - no specific numbers, just little blocks that adjust in quarter steps.

I want numbers, and I want to lock them down when I've finished adjusting them.

OK, you can lock the display's brightness control in the display preferences, but this doesn't lock f14 and f15 (the keyboard brightness keys).

I would also like a quicker way to select a monitor profile.

Basically I want a bright-working-in-daylight-setting-with-corresponding-profile and a less-bright-working-at-night-setting-with-corresponding-profile - and I want each set-up to be selectable with a single keystroke, with an option of then locking down the set-up.

But it's no big deal!

Elliot

[Elliot_N]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Yes, that's rather easy to explain. It seems the dual 2.7 has a faster harddrive. The other tests say that the rest of the speed is in the same ballpark, or if you take the slower harddrive into account, the dualcore 2.3 might even be faster.

Yeah, that's what I figured. But I asked one of the guys in the Apple Store yesterday and he said their 2.7Ghz is standard configuration. (Maybe the standard configuartion includes a superfast HD?)

When I'm back in the Apple Store, I'll check the 2.7Ghz specs.

It probably seems like a trivial issue, but I like to save often in Photoshop, and I'm working with big, layered files so the faster I can save the better.

(The fans on this new machine are super quiet, but the HD makes a bit of a racket - certainly louder than the few external FW drives that I have - is this normal?)

Cheers

Elliot

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Elliot_N

However, there was another part of the test wherer my computer seems significantly slower:

- Firstly, dropping a 400Mb tif on the Photoshop icon in the dock and waiting for Photoshop to fire up and open the file.

2.7 Ghz Dual: 18 seconds
2.3Ghz Dualcore: 33 seconds

- Secondly, saving a 400Mb psd to the desktop?

2.7 Ghz Dual: 10 seconds
2.3Ghz Dualcore: 17 seconds

Can anyone explain this?

Those are hard drive benchmarks, not CPU benchmarks.
The size of the hard drive, number of platters, etc are causing the difference that you are seeing.

[chrisutley]

I am sure a Dual 2.0 would be plenty, and that is Apple's "Recommended" configuration.

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

If you're running Aperture, from the initial reviews it sounds like the ideal situation is the Quad 2.5 with 7800 GT. Yes, I'm serious, but I do realize that's a lot of money. Anyways, that's what Apple was using to demo Aperture IIRC. Aperture reportedly slowed right down on a 1.67 GHz PowerBook with Radeon 9700.

Otherwise I'd get one of the duals... with the 7800 GT, especially if you have lots of very large images to work with.

However, if you're short on cash, you could test it out Aperture at the store with the 6600. I wouldn't get the LE though, since the non-LE is only $50 more, and is supposedly significantly faster. Unfortunately, Aperture won't be available at most places for testing for 2 months.

OTOH, if your only interest is Photoshop and not Aperture, then the base model Power Mac is sufficient. BTW, Photoshop itself has a hard limit of 3 GB RAM support, so I agree with the total 4.5 GB RAM recommendation.

[OreoCookie]

Apple uses harddrives from all kinds of manufacturers to improve supply. I guess you just got unlucky. I once bought an external Lacie with the loudest harddrive I've ever hard, it's louder than the SCSI drive in my parents' server. Anyway, I would just pop in a bigger and faster drive. Depending on your needs, I would say the sweet spot is at around 300 GB right now (I am partial to Hitachi drives for performance and Samsung drives for low noise emission, but that's just me.)

There is one other alternative which is more expensive and offers only on fourth of the capacity, that's Western Digital's Raptor. There are two models with 37.6 and 74 GB. They are clearly faster, but also more expensive. These drives only pay off for specific applications, for most people they are overkill. Or people who like to boast with benchmarks A good `regular' drive will probably serve your needs just fine.

[Elliot_N]

Thanks for the replies.

I recently got a couple of external FW hard drive enclosures with 250Gb Hitachi Deskstars in them. They're for back-up, they're quiet, and they've got nothing on them at the moment.

Could I clone the internal to the external, and then swap the drives over?

-------------

Sorry, I don't understand SATA - is that a special type of drive, or just a means of connecting to the computer?

Elliot

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Elliot_N

Thanks for the replies.

I recently got a couple of external FW hard drive enclosures with 250Gb Hitachi Deskstars in them. They're for back-up, they're quiet, and they've got nothing on them at the moment.

Could I clone the internal to the external, and then swap the drives over?

-------------

Sorry, I don't understand SATA - is that a special type of drive, or just a means of connecting to the computer?

Yes, you can swap drives between internal and external enclosure.
Serial ATA is a bus and connector. Think of it like Firewire or USB. The drives are the same as regular ATA drives, except with a different physical connector.

[Al G]

Your external drives are almost certain to be regular old ATA (or PATA) not SATA (Serial ATA), so no, they're not interchangeable. There are adapters that convert ATA to SATA but they might not physically fit inside the G5 case and even if they do, I don't think you want to go there.