[ASIMO]

Hi, folks,

It's time to upgrade.

Which should I get? A Mac Pro single for $2199 or a dual for $2549 at Amazon (after rebate and gift certs)? Aside from the single vs. dual, all other specs are identical. So there's a $350 difference, which I suppose can be used to add RAM more immediately on the single quad.

My usage is as follows:
1) Fairly heavy use of Adobe apps (will be CS3 upon getting the mac pro)
2) Will be fairly heavy use of Aperture or Lightroom
3) Website dev and management
4) Windows running in either Parallels or VMware
...among the usual tasks of email, web, itunes, etc., which are probably negligible factors at best.

Should I splurge or should I save $350? Essentially, would I see notable benefits of the extra 4 quads among the various apps listed or even by OS X itself?

Thank you.

[MarkLT1]

For today, for the apps you have listed, I would guess you would see little difference between the quad and the octo-mac.

In the future, however, this may not be the case- a version of Aperture or Photoshop may come out that can readily take advantage of 8 cores. So that $350.00 would be giving you some future-proofing.

Also, and this is simply from a value POV, that second processor is worth much more than $350.00. So Apple is charging you more for the 1 processor model. (I.e.- if each processor is worth $750.00, apple is only dropping $350 off the total price to go down to one processor, so they are 'overcharging' by $400.00). To some this is important.

[mduell]

It sounds like you'll be doing enough to use the cores, I'd go with the dual.

[glideslope]

Dual.

[ASIMO]

I like how you gentlemen think, especially mark. Bastard Apple overcharging me by $400. Who do they think they are?

Thank you, gents. Dualie it is. Kinda nice to be back in the neighborhood after all this while.

[ninahagen]

Re: CS3

If "fairly heavy use" means you will work lots of single files, one at a time within a single app like photoshop, the 4 core will be plenty.

If it means you will do batching of heavy multiple files, working across several apps at once and/or work on monster multi-layered files, the extra $350 is well spent.

Since you are planning heavy use Aperture, I suggest getting the optional 8800 video card.

Nina

[ASIMO]

In terms of the graphic designing use, it will be mostly single files at a time with all main CS3 apps open (ID, Ill, Acrobat, PS). Not much batching will be done in this area, but 100+ meg PS files are not uncommon.

Photography use will certainly involve lots of batch processing, and I haven't yet determined if I will change my current workflow of Adobe Bridge-ACR-PS to mainly Aperture 2 (or Lightroom) - PS (in probably some 90/10 ratio, with batching). The adoption of a plug-in architecture in Aperture 2.1 is really appealing, so there may be even less PS need in this area. As for the 8800GT video card, it wasn't an option from Amazon; everything is standard configuration. Is the card that much better than the standard ATI? I can add that later, no?

Also, is OS X smart enough to assign apps and tasks to the "unused" cores as needed even if the individual apps aren't necessarily multi-core aware themselves?

Should be getting the puppy next Friday!

[toobiloo]

Alright, I'm in a similar boat as the OP, except my work flow is different. I use Vectorworks (CAD) and Renderworks to draw and render buildings, and some light photoshop for touch up. Currently, my old box (G4 AGP) is highly unworkable for this. A macPro for me is overkill, but I need the multiple monitors, and I like the internal storage flexibility, but I think 8 cores is way overkill. So I'm stuggling with getting a Refurb 2.8 8-core w/ the ATI 2600, the just f*** it it's only $ optio of the BTO 2.8 8-core w/ the Nvidia 8800 GT or, currently where I'm leaning, the 4-core 2.8 ghz with the 8800 GT. The video card is a bigger deal for me at this point because my CAD program isn't multi core aware, but the rendering program is, so I will benefit more from the better open GL performance of the 8800 than 4 more cores.
Does any one know if the 2.8 quad core is upgradeable to 8 cores?

[ninahagen]

Originally Posted by ASIMO 

100+ meg PS files are not uncommon.

Photography use will certainly involve lots of batch processing.

Those two points settle it. You made the right decision.

In fact, you might even consider some extra HDs in a RAID configuration. What is you HD configuration as it stands now?

Originally Posted by ASIMO 

and I haven't yet determined if I will change my current workflow of Adobe Bridge-ACR-PS to mainly Aperture 2 (or Lightroom) - PS (in probably some 90/10 ratio, with batching). The adoption of a plug-in architecture in Aperture 2.1 is really appealing, so there may be even less PS need in this area. As for the 8800GT video card, it wasn't an option from Amazon; everything is standard configuration. Is the card that much better than the standard ATI? I can add that later, no?

We only use Adobe in our office, but friends who use Aperture find the quicker video card worth it. Yes you can add it, but I would wait and see how much you actually use aperture, and whether you actually experience delays.

Originally Posted by ASIMO 

Should be getting the puppy next Friday!

You must be delerious with joy... how long have you had your old machine, and what was it?

[ASIMO]

Originally Posted by ninahagen 

Those two points settle it. You made the right decision.

In fact, you might even consider some extra HDs in a RAID configuration. What is you HD configuration as it stands now?

We only use Adobe in our office, but friends who use Aperture find the quicker video card worth it. Yes you can add it, but I would wait and see how much you actually use aperture, and whether you actually experience delays.

You must be delerious with joy... how long have you had your old machine, and what was it?

I'm pretty stoic about computers these days, though still much preferring Mac OS X to most things in Windows. I do admit a little bit of giddiness about finally streamlining my operations to a large degree. My current Macs are a 12" PB G4 1Ghz/768MB and eMac 1.25Ghz/768MB. I used to have a G5 tower but sold it due to not enough of me and too many computers (add to this a few PCs, too, at the time). Basically, with this new Mac Pro, I will sell off all but 1 PC (a newish, cheapish Dell) and bring the number of computers down to 3. I'll give away my emac to a relative or take it to the office for duties.

As for my current HD/storage strategy, there isn't any. It's an array of mostly externals of all stripes. And I'm not talking RAID. But yeah, there will indeed be a strategy when I upgrade -- just learning and taking in all that there is out there so I don't have a mess as I do now. I'm approaching my computers the way I've learned to approach things in photography -- think at least a step ahead so as to avoid doing patchwork purchases after purchases.

I tried out Aperture 2 on a Mac Pro 2.8Ghz 2 quad with 4GB and the standard ATI card. I found it more than adequate, but the 8800GT was definitely notably faster, rendering instantaneously and just about in real time. I'll see if it's worth it later. My more immediate task is the storage/backup strategy.

Cheers.