Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Best Mac Pro for Adobe AI and PS work

J

jpmoran

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Apr 29, 2010
29
0
Looking for a new Mac Pro. What is the best processor configuration for heavy use (large format trade show displays) of adobe illustrator and photoshop?

How many cores, which chip set?

Or is the top of the line iMac i7 with maxed out ram the best bet?

Thanks for your comments
 
with an imac your internal hdd is basically not accessible so if it dies your imac is dead in the water until you bring it into a repair shop. I fail to see how that can be good for a trade show. if you hdd dies in a macpro you the user can replace it in about 60 seconds.
 
iMac would be a better bang for buck but you have to decide do you need the upgradeability what Mac Pro offers (multiple internal HDs, PCIe slots, multiple monitors). Many people dislike the iMac because of its screen, it's not that great for photography due to its glossiness.

If you're getting the Mac Pro, I would stick with quad core because PS and AI can't take advantage of more cores. If you got the $, you can go for the 3.2GHz quad. In future, you can upgrade the CPU to 6-core if you want.
 
For your needs, a quad is fine. I use my 2009 2.93Ghz Quad (8GB RAM) for Creative Suite work, and it's perfect. More cores are a waste of money, and you don't need 12GB of RAM or more.

The choice between 2.8 and 3.2 is down to money, but even the 2.8 is going to be fast.
 
I also use my 2.93 Quad mainly for Photoshop/Lightroom work. I often work on 1.5 - 3GB 16bit files so RAM was important for me. I had 6GB RAM but kept maxing out, upgraded to 12GB ind its fine now. Recently got into more 3D stuff using Maya which runs fine. Renders would be faster with more cores but i couldn't justify the extra £1000.
 
thanks for the advice. I usually have a desktop for about thee years, so I have a few follow up questions.

1. should I spring for the new Westmere processor or stick with the Nehalem.
2. Are there plans in the near future for Creative Suite to take advantage of more cores?
 
jpmoran said:
thanks for the advice. I usually have a desktop for about thee years, so I have a few follow up questions.

1. should I spring for the new Westmere processor or stick with the Nehalem.
2. Are there plans in the near future for Creative Suite to take advantage of more cores?
Click to expand...

1. Are you willing to spend a lot more for a very modest speed improvement......... given the current state of the SW? If so, then order the Westie.
2. "Near future" ................ depends on what you call "near". If it's 12 months then the answer is likely, yes.

good luck with whatever you order
johnG
 
jpmoran said:
thanks for the advice. I usually have a desktop for about thee years, so I have a few follow up questions.

1. should I spring for the new Westmere processor or stick with the Nehalem.
2. Are there plans in the near future for Creative Suite to take advantage of more cores?
Click to expand...

Id go with the Westmere. As Hellhammer pointed out, you can buy the quad, and upgrade to the 6 core later. You can't do that with the 2009 models.

There are alot of us waiting for software that takes advantage of more cores (IM LOOKING AT YOU FINAL CUT PRO). Right now the software is lagging behind the hardware, as often is the case.
 
Just a thought... The CS5 Apps dont take advantage of multiple cores, so when CS6 comes out it may only use up to 4 cores. Then CS7 6 or 8 cores...

This could be a long time to wait to really utilise a 6/8 core machine.
 
mjsmke said:
Just a thought... The CS5 Apps dont take advantage of multiple cores, so when CS6 comes out it may only use up to 4 cores. Then CS7 6 or 8 cores...

This could be a long time to wait to really utilise a 6/8 core machine.
Click to expand...

CS5 can use 4 cores, just not very efficiently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back