Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New Mac Pro - specification  (Read 12592 times)
Rick_Allen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 183


WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 21, 2008, 12:20:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Sorry guys been away on a shoot for the last few days. this what I used to get the Velo's into my mac pro. http://www.maxupgrades.com/istore/index.cf...FTOKEN=18466287
They do run pretty hot so you may want to keep an eye on them.

@Chris My MacPro dual boots and running the retouch artists script yields pretty similar results with CS3 with PS7 however XP shaves a couple seconds. Though in XP I'm running on a single 1TB drive so maybe that is killing me.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2008, 12:33:03 AM by Rick_Allen » Logged

fennario
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 61



« Reply #21 on: August 22, 2008, 12:10:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Have been running a MacPro with two 4 core 2.8ghz, 10gb RAM, RAID Card, and 4 internal Segate Barracuda 1tb drives.  One drive is set as a single boot/program drive (in case RAID controller card fails) and the other 3 are in a RAID 5 set... all linked to an external 1TB Time Machine backup.

System has been up and running LR2 and CS3 for about a month now without issue.

The one thing to bear in mind is that this thing is a space heater... make sure you have a well ventilated room.  Also, If you want to use SAS drives (15K RPM raptor, etc.) then you will need the RAID card.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2008, 12:48:17 PM by fennario » Logged
Edhopkins
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 93


« Reply #22 on: August 24, 2008, 06:43:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Have been running a MacPro with two 4 core 2.8ghz, 10gb RAM, RAID Card, and 4 internal Segate Barracuda 1tb drives.  One drive is set as a single boot/program drive (in case RAID controller card fails) and the other 3 are in a RAID 5 set... all linked to an external 1TB Time Machine backup.

System has been up and running LR2 and CS3 for about a month now without issue.

The one thing to bear in mind is that this thing is a space heater... make sure you have a well ventilated room.  Also, If you want to use SAS drives (15K RPM raptor, etc.) then you will need the RAID card.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=216679\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I am on the verge of getting a system like yours. Can you say more about your configuration?  Why do you have the RAID 5 set up without the SAS drives?  Did you chose it for redundancy or increased performance?  I can find nothing on the Apple site about increased read performance with the RAID set up if you do not have the RAID card.  

And I was thinking that increased read performance was unnecessary--if that was one of your goals--if you had 10 gb of RAM and your main performance goal was to get photoshop actions humming.  

But I am probably confused here.  

Thanks for revealing more of your thinking...

ed
Baltimore
Logged
Rick_Allen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 183


WWW
« Reply #23 on: August 24, 2008, 07:03:15 AM »
ReplyReply

check this out http://barefeats.com/hard105.html
Logged

Edhopkins
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 93


« Reply #24 on: August 24, 2008, 10:27:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
check this out http://barefeats.com/hard105.html
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=216928\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Rick

Huh? How does this address the question as to why you need raid 5 performance if you have 10 gb of memory?  I thought the whole point of 10 gb of memory was to avoid I/O during the processing of a single photo.  What am I missing here?  (I do understand how RAID might be useful if you were building thumbnails for hundreds of images.)

Thanks

Ed
Baltimmore
Logged
Rick_Allen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 183


WWW
« Reply #25 on: August 24, 2008, 05:43:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Hey Ed I wasn't really addressing your question when I replied.

If you are working on a single file in an action with enough ram for PS to keep it in ram then no a raid wont help you. Then its down to how well the on chip memory management works etc. One of the reasons I upgrade my 3.0 clover to a 2.8 harper despite the small ghz decrease my system is running faster than before. see this article http://barefeats.com/harper.html

In regards to sas or not, as you as you can see in the first article I pointed to the Apple raid is limited to 320mb/sec so 4 sata drives will give you that and a bunch more storage for the buck.

Hope that helps
Logged

petermarrek
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 212



« Reply #26 on: August 24, 2008, 06:30:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Have the almost identical set-up. Saved a few bucks by getting a refurbished unit from theApple Store. Level 1 raid opens images much faster. The only disappointment is the 7300 nvidia card, it only lets me profile 1 NEC 2090. Simple solution, a second card is pretty cheap. Reallt like the machine. Peter
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8210



WWW
« Reply #27 on: August 28, 2008, 10:15:56 AM »
ReplyReply

If I were to buy a new one now, I would put 32GB ram instead of 16GB like I did.

The price of 32GB now is exactly the price 16GB were one year ago.

That should pretty much make internal raid units useless in many cases (unless you do a lot of large panos like I do), and will not cost that much more.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1433


WWW
« Reply #28 on: August 29, 2008, 01:30:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ok - which of the following would you reccomend?

Run 2 x 1TB drives in RAID 1 for redundancy
Or.
Run 2 x 1TB drives with the second drive for TM and save the money on the RAID controller
Or.
Run 2 x 1TB drives in RAID 0 for maximum speed with a third 1TB drive for TM

Bearing in mind.. I store my LR catalogue locally - but I store my actual photographs on an external RAID 5 server, which is locally referenced.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215717\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What I do is have a smallish 250 GB as a boot drive, 2x500GB Raid 0 for scratch and image storage, and a 1T drive set to back up the System every Sunday, home folder every day and the RAID every day (6:30 in the morning).
That way I'm free of a lot of cables, connectors and external boxes, but have a little bit faster open and save disc, yet saved out everyday in the case of one disc or  having problems in the RAID.
The only big problem would be if a big power problem fries the back up disc.
Oh I save out the images on optical too , you never know.
Logged
teddillard
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 664


WWW
« Reply #29 on: August 30, 2008, 07:11:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Just about to place the order for a new mac pro for my photo editing and thought I would just double check the proposed spec here as I have never ordered a mac pro before.

First off it will be running CS3 and LR2.

was thinking as follows:
3.0Ghz 8 Core
8 Gig Ram
2 x 1TB drives in RAID 1 for O/S and apps.
Secondary drive for Time machine
Third drive for CS3 scratch disc.
Standard video card that comes with the base unit. [any reason to upgrade this? - It will be paired with an NEC Wuxi 2690 SpectraView II monitor].

Will be mostly working with 1DSMK3 RAW and TIFF files and stitched 1DSMK3 files and probably next year some Phase 1 files if I can pick up a pre-loved P25+ or 45+ for the right price.

I think the above spec. should be adequete - any thoughts?

ta.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215138\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ted's 3rd Rule of Horsepower:  "If you can't double it, don't bother..."

This is what I decided, back when I was into building motors, after spending an entire winter blueprinting and porting a Yamaha RD350.  I got a measured 15-20% HP increase, (absolutely a miracle, if you know anything about building motors) enough to give me a total thrill for about a month.  After that, I was back to being bored.  

That said, the same applies to workstations, processor speed and all.  

I work with an Apple "partner", configuring workstations for design, video and photo studios, and, in spite of what most photographers "want", what you "need" is covered more than adequately by a baseline MacPro, even with the 2GB RAM.  Honestly, we've built quite a few 24" iMacs with fairly baseline specs, and had rave reviews from photographers throwing around huge files, who thought they needed a MacPro.

I just put together 2 MacPro systems for a guy shooting with the Hassey H3D...   we put 4GB RAM and hung a simple 2TB RAID off the thing and he's delighted.

Don't get me wrong...  there are certainly applications that need "big-block" horsepower.  We've built $10K systems for video production, and those bad boys need the speed.  I just don't see that desperate need in any photo production application, nor the ROI for that kind of money.  

Yes, RAM and hard drives from Apple are stupid expensive, but then there's the warranty issue.  If you do get Applecare and have non-Apple parts in the thing, you'll have to yank them before the tech will service it, and will thus remove them from the troubleshooting "matrix".  I would, at least, get the RAM and HD's "built" by an approved Apple service guy...

But, my point: whatever system, Apple/Vista, increased processor, amped-up RAM, internal or external RAID, even MacPro or iMac...  it will be more than sufficient to do what you need, and probably kick-ass faster than what you're running now.  

...now, if you just want to amp-up a system 'cause you have fun doing that, well then...  that's a different discussion.  
Logged

Ted Dillard
bjanes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2825



« Reply #30 on: August 30, 2008, 07:59:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I really don't want to start a mac vs pc debate here. I love to work on both. The only thing I wanted to add is that if you have a tight budget a PC will always be faster.

My current workstation is a PC
Intel Q6600 @ 3ghz
8GB memory
2*160 Raptor harddrives
2*500 normal harddrives
Vista 64
PS CS3

I have run the that time test and I got a time of 21 second.

Now the point is that for this system I would sepnd today around $1500.

I'm certain that some highend Mac pro for double the money is 2-3 seconds faster, but that's just to much money for a few seconds.

Now back to topic, as many said buy the memory not from apple and sorry but the 3.0ghz and 3.2 ghz are just overpriced.

Chris
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215748\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My first computer was an Apple II, but I've been using PCs since the original IBM PC came out and have a lot of legacy 32 bit apps. The Mac OS X is likely a simpler and better OS than Windows; I understand it runs 32 and 64 bit programs seamlessly, whereas some 32 bit programs won't run under Vista 64. What is your experience in that regard with Vista 64?

On the other hand, PSCS4 will be 64 bit for Windows while the 64 bit version for the Mac will probably be delayed until the release of PSCS5. That is a real bummer for those working with large files having multiple layers.

Bill
Logged
Edhopkins
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 93


« Reply #31 on: September 19, 2008, 07:03:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If I were to buy a new one now, I would put 32GB ram instead of 16GB like I did.

The price of 32GB now is exactly the price 16GB were one year ago.

That should pretty much make internal raid units useless in many cases (unless you do a lot of large panos like I do), and will not cost that much more.

Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217840\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Bernard


We have the new 21 megapixel Canon and will be getting a new MacPro soon.  We need some computing power.  

I don't know of any way to use more than 8 GB of memory for photoshop. I was thinking of having 8 GB for Photoshop (and plug ins) and maybe another 4 gig for the system, etc. How could you make use of more memory if you have it?  What am I missing here?

Do you mind saying what your exact MacPro configuration is?

thanks

ed
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886



WWW
« Reply #32 on: September 20, 2008, 12:55:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Bernard
We have the new 21 megapixel Canon and will be getting a new MacPro soon. We need some computing power.

I don't know of any way to use more than 8 GB of memory for photoshop. I was thinking of having 8 GB for Photoshop (and plug ins) and maybe another 4 gig for the system, etc. How could you make use of more memory if you have it? What am I missing here?

Do you mind saying what your exact MacPro configuration is?

thanks

ed
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sounds like 8 gigs is the limit to me as well.  A quote from this article

[a href=\"http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=kb401089]http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewConten...rnalId=kb401089[/url]



Allocating Memory above 2 GB with 64-bit Processors

When you run Photoshop CS3 on a 64-bit operating system, such as Mac OS X v10.4 and later, Photoshop can access up to 8 GB of RAM. You can see the actual amount of RAM Photoshop can use in the Let Photoshop Use number when you set the Let Photoshop Use slider in the Performance preference to 100%. The RAM above the 100% used by Photoshop, which is from approximately 3 GB to 3.7 GB, can be used directly by Photoshop plug-ins (some plug-ins need large chunks of contiguous RAM), filters, and actions. If you have more than 4 GB (to 8 GB), the RAM above 4 GB is used by the operating system as a cache for the Photoshop scratch disk data. Data that previously was written directly to the hard disk by Photoshop is now cached in this high RAM before being written to the hard disk by the operating system
« Last Edit: September 20, 2008, 12:57:23 PM by Wayne Fox » Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8210



WWW
« Reply #33 on: September 20, 2008, 09:30:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Sounds like 8 gigs is the limit to me as well.  A quote from this article

http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewConten...rnalId=kb401089
Allocating Memory above 2 GB with 64-bit Processors
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222898\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That is probably correct. As far as I am concerned I typically run in parallel Capture One and/or Raw Developper, Photoshop, PTgui and Autopano pro...

I often run in situations where some of these processes end up having to use the swap because all of the physical 16 GB are used...

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad