octo core for photoshop?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Jebaloo, May 3, 2007.

  1. Jebaloo macrumors 6502

    Sep 12, 2006
    Hey, I'm trying to work my new MacPro out, and am wondeing if I will have any use for the octo core option.

    I use mainly Photoshop and Final Cut Pro.

    What do you think? Or should I just spend the money on extra ram instead?
  2. Kosh66 macrumors 6502

    Jul 15, 2004

    The Octo core likes CPU intensive work but not memory intensive. It'll probably use more of the cores for the Final Cut Pro stuff especially when rendering video and act more like a Quad core for the Photoshop work which is more memory intensive. But I'm not a Final Cut user so I may be a bit off in that assessment.
  3. diehardmacfan macrumors regular

    Mar 12, 2007

    for photoshop the quad core is perfectly fine just make sure that you have lots of ram

    but final cut it really depends on how heavy rendering you need and how fast your need it
    final cut pro is still awsomely fast on a quad core but rendering will be faster with the 8 core
    definently a noticable effect
    if your not using this for professional work i would say just go with the 3 ghz quad
  4. FF_productions macrumors 68030


    Apr 16, 2005
    Mt. Prospect, Illinois
    For Photoshop I think you'd want lots of RAM and fast hard drives.

    It will make things go a lot faster then you'd think.

    8-core is too much $$ anyway, you still need to get other upgrades.
  5. tuartboy macrumors 6502a


    May 10, 2005
    Barefeats registered a 0% speed increase for the octo over the 3Ghz quad in their photoshop benchmarks. (benchmarks)

    You would be much better off investing that money in about 8GB of ram and a raid 0 array for a scratch disk.
  6. SmurfBoxMasta macrumors 65816


    Nov 24, 2005
    I'm only really here at night.

    Agreed ! mAxDaRam :)
  7. Jebaloo thread starter macrumors 6502

    Sep 12, 2006
    Hey, thanks for the advice. I'm not sure I could afford bot the 3ghz, and 8G of Ram...

    I could maybe afford the 2.66, and 5 Gig of Ram?, would that be ok?

    Can someone explain to me, what is a RAID 0, and what's the difference between that and a RAID 1? I've tried wikipedia, but it doesn't explain it in dummies language.
  8. furious macrumors 65816


    Aug 7, 2006
    RAID 0 divides the data over many drives. If you have two HDD RAID 0 will store the data half on each drive. If you have three HDD a third of the data on each drive. So on and so forth.

    If you use RAID 0 and one HDD fails you lose all data. So if you use RAID 0 remember Jesus save only Buddha makes incremental back ups. you would want to be Buddha.
  9. Jebaloo thread starter macrumors 6502

    Sep 12, 2006
    So you'd be suggesting, two 10000pm Raptor drives, 150GB each... in a Raid 0 array?

    So I run the OS, and all my programs off this, and then just have one enormous backup drive for everything else (my backup of the scratch disk, and also my Archive of Files that I'm no longer working on)?

    What, in three words, would be the benefit of this set up, ove just using one 10000rpm raptor as my scratch disk?
  10. Jebaloo thread starter macrumors 6502

    Sep 12, 2006
    I just found this thread about RAID...


    But I'm still a little unsure.

    Really, the point of RAID 0 is purely to increase read and write times, am I right?

    If I've already got a 10000 disk in my drive, and I'm not a pro (yet), then do you think that my money would be better spend on a simple backing up system? I.e. one big drive next to my computer, and one at a friends house?

    I don't have endless resources, tht's all.

Share This Page