Graphics cards and Photoshop.

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by andyjamesnelson, Sep 29, 2006.

  1. andyjamesnelson macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Jacob's house
    #1
    I have been reading all over the place about this and it seems that people differ in opinion!!!

    Some people say that Photoshop will only see improvments in more ram, cpu, Hd etc.

    Others say that the better the cards the better the overall performance of many aspects of the system including running PS.

    Others say that gaming cards are no good for 2d graphics and that Ps cannot use many features of the cards and that more basic cards are better suited.

    I really want my new system to be kcik ass for PS and Final cut. I know I will have to wait for Adobe to get there ass in gear.. but I am sure the mac pro will still crap all over my Powerbook g4 1.25 1gig ram for Ps so i dont mind waitting for the software to catch up.


    I am pretty confused by all of this. Please let me know what you know on the subject.
     
  2. eva01 macrumors 601

    eva01

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Location:
    Gah! Plymouth
    #2
    well by final cut, do you mean the program or the studio?

    Motion is the program that really takes a really good graphics card.

    Photoshop uses HD, RAM, and CPU, along with final cut is the same i believe
     
  3. andyjamesnelson thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Jacob's house
    #3
    I dont use any 3d programs like motion as of now.. maybe I will in the future but who knows..

    What I want a a great com for PS and rendering video.

    I also noticed that the Ati card has a large fan on the back of it. Is it loud?
     
  4. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #4
    Photoshop uses their own CPU routines for their filters, which are more CPU dependent.

    However, 2d stuff that takes advantage of Quartz Extreme uses some of Apple methods for using the 3d engines to render faster.

    Otherwise video work, 3d and Core Image are the more likely stuff for upgrading cards past integrated video.
     
  5. iGary Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #5
    Photoshop can only take advantage of 3GB of RAM max - do what you like there - more helps.

    The rendering programs I use make no use of the GPU at all.

    What kind of machine do you have?
     
  6. Fearless Leader macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Location:
    Hoosiertown
    #6
    the mac pro is faster than the quad g5 in photoshop.
     
  7. andyjamesnelson thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Jacob's house
    #7
    This is for use with a mac pro that I am going to order when I have worked out hwo I should spec the thing. andy
     
  8. zwida macrumors 6502a

    zwida

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2001
    Location:
    NYC
    #8
    It's true. I get some weird little bugs running PS in Rosetta, but it's plenty fast once the application launches. (Launch itself IS a bit slower...).
     
  9. andyjamesnelson thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Jacob's house
    #9
    wow so this machine is going to blow my powerbook away. great. so borred of waitting for it.. andy
     
  10. technicolor macrumors 68000

    technicolor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2005
    Location:
    ><><><><
    #10
    Really.

    My Macpro opens Photoshop in one bounce, and the credits just scream by!
     
  11. zwida macrumors 6502a

    zwida

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2001
    Location:
    NYC
    #11
    Depends who you ask. I don't find my x1900 to be too loud, but some have complained about the noise and there are possible mods that will quiet it down.

    It may be a card to card issue, or (more likely) an office noise to office noise issue...

    I'd recommend the x1900 in any case. I think it's a reasonable choice for this machine.
     
  12. iGary Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #12
    Really?

    [​IMG]
     

    Attached Files:

    • 1.gif
      1.gif
      File size:
      9.6 KB
      Views:
      304
  13. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #13
    Depends on how you plan on using screens...

    The ATI Radeon X1900 XT card if you plan on 2 monitors.

    The GeForce 7300 GT card if you plan of more than 3 or more monitors, since some people have experienced problems mixing these cards.

    Of course this is worth looking into, since some said they did work -- but I don't know if that was swapping monitors and running a card at a time or running 4 screens.
     
  14. Fearless Leader macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Location:
    Hoosiertown
    #14
    it runs ok on my mbp. In most areas its the same as my dual 1.8 g5, but luanch takes a bit, and a guassian blur 95px, on 3000x3000 sized image take a long time.
     
  15. andyjamesnelson thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Jacob's house
    #15
    yeah but I really dont want a loud machine.. i would prefer a silent machine thats a bit slower then a fast machine thats loud. of course i still want a well fast machine.hahah.
     
  16. zwida macrumors 6502a

    zwida

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2001
    Location:
    NYC
    #16
    ***jealous***
     
  17. Fearless Leader macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Location:
    Hoosiertown
    #17
    ohh be quite...

    their is real world experiance a couple post back. and those arent real world test.
     
  18. andyjamesnelson thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Jacob's house
    #18
    Ps on my g4 powerbook takes ages to load and then is fine untill one trys to do anything with filters...slow. and some times i have to wait for the spinning ball of death.. and building histograms for levels etc etc...borring.. andy.
     
  19. iGary Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #19
    So you are telling me Barefeats is bunk? :confused:
     
  20. Fearless Leader macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Location:
    Hoosiertown
    #20
    no, but their is real world experiance which i would rank above barefeats.

    sidenote: what is your current setup igary? all the links in the official thread are broken, except the one of your wires under the desk.
     
  21. andyjamesnelson thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Jacob's house
    #21
    still ti looks like the mac pro is well fast and when adobe change things it will be like having a new com for all those people who allready have mac pro.
     
  22. andyjamesnelson thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Jacob's house
    #22
    still the topic is is a better graphics card worth it if your not gaming or doing 3d?????
     
  23. Fearless Leader macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Location:
    Hoosiertown
    #23
    my opion is that an upgraded graphics card wont speed up photoshop unless your current gpahics card is hindering performance on the system itself. More memory would be much better until the 3gb barrier, and most of the actions, if not all, are done on the cpu.
     
  24. andyjamesnelson thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Jacob's house
    #24
    I think I am leanign towards not getting the ati card.. its doesnt seem that people think its realy worth it unless you are doing 3d..
     
  25. andyjamesnelson thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Location:
    Jacob's house
    #25
    Also I think I will spend the money on more ram ..get 1gig from apple and then 2x 1gig from crucial. that way I will have 3gigs ram and i think that will make up for any graphics cards.. andy.
     

Share This Page