Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

ninahagen · Apr 5, 2007, 11:41 AM

Hi friends,

I had another thread about optimizing for photoshop, my primary use for an upgraded system. I have assimilated all I heard and came up with a tentative system. Could a few senior mac users just take a look at this and give me a heads up if they see any area where I could take a hit in speed or performance for high end Photoshop work? The biggest files I generally process are 1.5 GB, maybe 4-5 layers, with Illustrator, Dreamweaver, Safari, Word & several specialized Japanese font applications often open at the same time.

8-core 3.0 Clovertowns
8 GB RAM
nVIDIA 7300GT
2 x 10,000 rpm 150GB Raptor HDs (for scratch disc & system disc)
2 x 7,200 rpm 1TB HDs (for storage, from which manufacturer I don't know who yet)

Remaining concerns include:
- noise/reliability in the Raptors
- whether to get 4 x 2GB units of RAM or 2 x 4GB units
- understanding just how the video card impacts speed in Photoshop.
- which 1TB drives to buy. Hitachi?

Any comments would be much appreciated!

Thanks,

John

himself · Apr 5, 2007, 12:38 PM

I'd say drop 8 cores and go for the regular four-core systems. With the cash you save you can load up on more ram (which is what will really help performance in photoshop, even more so than 8 cores when compared to 4) and the x1900 graphics card. It just sounds weird pairing the 8-core MacPro with the NV 7300... kinda like "jumbo shrimp." The 2.66 quad should be plenty for that type of photoshop work, especially now that it has gone universal.

mac128k-1984 · Apr 5, 2007, 12:58 PM

I'd also vote against the quad core upgrade, while it may be great to brag at geek parties and such, I don't think photoshop is written in such a way where it could parse out enough work across 8 cores,i.e., you're wasting your money..

also based upon Apple's tech spec's it only supports drives up to 750gig Macpro Specs so you're wasting your money there.

How much experience do you have using photoshop and graphic design? You're looking to do some serious work with photoshop (multi-layer/large files) yet you seem to be asking some very basic questions.

ninahagen · Apr 5, 2007, 01:29 PM

Well, I only do basic things in Photoshop myself, but they still take 30 seconds and I wish they could be half that or better... my graphic designer is the one whose time I really want to save, so I am trying to learn how to do that here.

Thanks for the heads up on the 750GB HD size limit. That is exactly the kind of thing I need to know. Sure, I am just a business owner, without a lot of understanding of things like scratch drive vs. system drive demands of Photoshop, or how to really get a speedy machine. That is why I am so in need of your help.

John

mac128k-1984 · Apr 5, 2007, 01:53 PM

That make sense, i thought you were looking to buy this for yourself, i.e., diving into the deep end of graphic design w/o any real experience. Don't get me wrong, I'm only a light to medium user myself.

As for the ram, I'm not sure you'd see any appreciable speed difference by going with the higher density and more expensive modules versus the the lower density and you may actually see a better throughput by fully using the dual channel memory architecture

ninahagen · Apr 5, 2007, 02:01 PM

OK, so maybe modify as follows:

MacPro 2 x dual core 3.0Ghz
2 Raptor 10k rpm 150GB HD (scratch & system disc)
2 Stock 7200rpm 750GB HDs (storage)
ati1900 vid-card

See any ways I could improve this setup, anyone?

mac128k-1984 · Apr 5, 2007, 02:16 PM

that looks pretty stout and will be a blazin machine.

brokenjago · Apr 5, 2007, 07:47 PM

I HIGHLY doubt apple would arbitrarily limit the capacity of each bay to 750 GB. As a matter of fact, I'd be willing to bet money that they don't. Just because they say you can't put a 160GB drive in the bay doesn't mean it isn't supported. Are you saying that because they only list 500 and 750 GB drives in the places for bays 2, 3, and 4 that you can only put those capacities in? Of course not. Don't be daft. It's simply that 1 TB drives are probably not in high enough supply to satisfy Apple at this current point in time.

1 TB drives will work fine.

As for the question regarding 2x4GB chips as opposed to 4X2 GB chips, I'd go with the 4X2 for two large reasons:

1) 4GB chips are insanely expensive. You'll be spending god knows what on them.

2) With 4x2GB chips installed, you'll get Quad channel mode, which increases memory performance quite a bit

And-

I don't see why you need to spring for the X1900XT. It will do nothing to improve performance under Photoshop or Illustrator.

Glenn Wolsey · Apr 5, 2007, 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by brokenjago

I don't see why you need to spring for the X1900XT. It will do nothing to improve performance under Photoshop or Illustrator.

When does the X1900XT card become useful then? Which applications would you need to be using?

mac128k-1984 · Apr 5, 2007, 10:18 PM

Originally Posted by Glenn Wolsey

When does the X1900XT card become useful then? Which applications would you need to be using?

For me its apps that really heavily on the GPU, such Aperture.

brokenjago · Apr 5, 2007, 10:50 PM

Originally Posted by Glenn Wolsey

When does the X1900XT card become useful then? Which applications would you need to be using?

Anything in 3D benefits greatly from a better graphics card. Anything that relies heavily on Core Image also benefits from a much better graphics card.

That's about it.

ninahagen · Apr 6, 2007, 05:21 AM

Thanks brokenjago...

Everytime you post on my thread, I have an A-HAAAA! moment. So grateful about he quad-mode RAM bit. I owe you a beer if you are ever in Kyoto.

So, do you agree on the 8GB RAM & 2 x dual Clovertwown 3.0 Ghz as well? (instead of the 8-core?) And which 1TB drives do you like?

Best,

John

brokenjago · 11:25 PM

I'll make sure you take you up on the beer if I'm ever there.

8GB RAM (two sticks in the top riser nearest to the Logic Board, two sticks in the bottom riser near the logic board,) should do great. I am personally a fan of the 3.0GHz processors, because I like the number and (marginally) added performance. But, for a business machine, they don't make much sense for $800. It is, of course, your choice, but you're spending a whole lot of money or very little in Mhz. I'll leave it up to you. As for the 8 Core, it might be nice if there was insane multitasking between Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and stuff, but other than that, it's not worth the money. However, you would be buying some serious last-ability.

As for the 1TB drives, there are two companies who have currently announced and/or are shipping such drives: Seagate and Hitachi.

Seagate drives are composed of four platters of 250GB each. It comes with a Five Year warranty. Hitachi has an HDD with 5 platters of 200GB, so it MAY increase reliability, However, I think they may only offer a 2 year warranty as opposed to Seagate's, 5, so the point is moot. Just remember to back up! Also, Seagate drives are known for silence.

himself · Apr 7, 2007, 12:26 AM

Originally Posted by mac128k-1984

also based upon Apple's tech spec's it only supports drives up to 750gig Macpro Specs so you're wasting your money there.

Those specs are based only on what is available from Apple, and what they officially support. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple soon started offering the 1TB drives as a BTO option.

Originally Posted by brokenjago

I don't see why you need to spring for the X1900XT. It will do nothing to improve performance under Photoshop or Illustrator.

It may do nothing [for PS and Il] now, but it will last much further into the future than the default graphics card, especially considering Apple's measly graphics card options, Mac OS 10's increasing reliance on powerful graphics, and the likelihood that the designer who will be using this machine may use an app that will take advantage of a powerful graphics card (which I think is a pretty good likelihood). I think that the X1900XT is a much better investment than the 8-cores.

As for ram, 4 x 2GB sounds just right. It will be plenty for a very long time and it gives you plenty of space to upgrade to 12-16GB if you ever need to.

brokenjago · 05:20 AM

Originally Posted by himself

It may do nothing [for PS and Il] now, but it will last much further into the future than the default graphics card, especially considering Apple's measly graphics card options, Mac OS 10's increasing reliance on powerful graphics, and the likelihood that the designer who will be using this machine may use an app that will take advantage of a powerful graphics card (which I think is a pretty good likelihood).

He has specifically stated that Photoshop and Illustrator are all he'll be doing on the machine. No 3D work. No Core Image work. Even if he were to use something like Aperture, which relies on Core Image, the 7300GT is still a fine Core Image card.

Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that Adobe DOES end up adopting Core Image for use in it's many products. That would be, at the very earliest, CS4, which is at least 18 to 24 months away. In that span, there will be a ton more choice as far as graphics card for the Mac Pro go, which means one can upgrade later to something much, much better than the X1900XT.

Originally Posted by ninahagen

So, do you agree on the 8GB RAM & 2 x dual Clovertown 3.0 Ghz as well? (instead of the 8-core?) And which 1TB drives do you like?

Dual Clovertowns would be 8 cores. Dual Woodcrests would be 4 cores

mduell · Apr 7, 2007, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by ninahagen

Remaining concerns include:
- noise/reliability in the Raptors
- whether to get 4 x 2GB units of RAM or 2 x 4GB units
- understanding just how the video card impacts speed in Photoshop.
- which 1TB drives to buy. Hitachi?

- They're louder due to the higher spindle speed, but not dramatically so. Reliability is no different than any other drive.
- Mac Pro doesn't support 4GB modules, so 4x2G is the way to go.
- It doesn't.
- They're the only game in town at the moment.

schalliol · Apr 9, 2007, 12:02 AM

I wouldn't buy 1TB HDs, they're really expensive. You can stack two drives in the second optical bay if you need to. Perhaps just go for 2 or 3 Seagate ST3750640NS 750GB drives instead for your storage.

Also, rather than using two crazy fast drives for scratch and otherwise, go for a Striped Array (RAID 0) on more reasonably priced/sized drives. They'll be cooler and larger, with better speed. There are some real-world tests out there for these units too.

Also, what's your backup strategy? If you can't lose your data, you might consider a RAID 1 with the onboard controller or a NAS (like the Infrant ReadyNAS NV+ I have). That might allow you to get your storage out of the unit with more reliability. Then you could have a couple of RAID 0s on board easily, plus more room, etc.