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

which Macpro for digital art?

D

Da.sein

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Apr 28, 2009
5
0
Hi everyone first time here.

I work as an illustrator and it's time for a total hardware upgrade.

Photoshop and Corel Painter pretty much sums up what I use the computer for.
I don't mind being able to edit a video once in a while but to be honest everything else except painting and drawing (I rarely use even filters) isn't a priority. I just need the brush to be snappy in relatively big files (300dpi A3 files area is a common format)

With all that in mind along with the thought of buying something that is going to be able to perform for some time I decided to go for the 2009 Macpro quad@2.93 but I realized that the difference in price from the 8core 2.26 is insignificant.

The question is, if price is not an issue which choice is more appropriate for my needs and the programs I use. Higher clock speed and less cores or the other way around?

Thanx in advance, and I apologize in case this has already been answered, since I didn't have time to look around the forum myself.
 
Adobe's programs are currently not multithreaded, which means that they run on only one core, so having 4 or 8 will make no difference in performance.

Personally, I'd go for the 2.66GHz Quad machine. The increase in price to the next clock speed up is not worth it in my opinion.
 
I am going for the 2.66Ghz. Everyone keeps telling me that even the smallest Macpro is an overkill for this kind of tasks. You all tend to agree with that, and I have absolutely no reason not to believe it. Thanx everyone.
 
Are you going to be using the Mac Pro with a high end 24" or 30" s-ips display? If not then the 24" iMac would be better since it already has a good display and costs $1000 less. A 24" iMac with 4gbs of ram is going to be the same speed as the Mac Pro, because those 2d programs can only be so fast and use up so much power (they run in real-time, they cant go faster even with the worlds most powerful super computer).

The only reason to get a mac pro over the iMac for 2d work would be to upgrade the display to something better than whats in the iMac, the thing is that the 24" iMac already has a really good display (NOT the 20"). You have to have pretty special needs for the Mac Pro to have any value over the other macs.
 
Yes. The plan is to pair it with a really good display. Since most of my work ends up in print, it's crucial to have a good soft proof monitor. I was thinking a 24" display probably Eizo or Lacie. The ones I am looking are not s-ips though. Is that so bad? The S-PVA technology seems to be used in really high end displays, it can't be that bad.

I usually read that the imac displays are not good for color critical work plus they are glossy, which is kind of annoying. Apart from that I wouldn't have a problem working with one. They are surely up to the task.
 
ChrisA said:
Cheaper to buy a 20" iMac and add a second display if all you need is a good display
Click to expand...

Not enough workspace for that. 20" and 24" displays side by side would be a big desk hog for my current setup.
 
Concerning the "which monitor" part of the upgrade, I am a bit confused.

After reading every discussion and reviews I could find on the net concerning high end prepress monitors, I am leaning towards the 24" eizo CE240W.

On the other hand, I can't stop thinking that LCD displays are moving up to the LED technology, which makes me skeptical about investing now +1500$ for a display, that is considered dated as we speak.

Does it make sense, given the transitional period that lcd panels are going through right now to just wait until things move on so I can get a better display at the same price, or should I take the plunge and go with the eizo?
 
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