Mac or windows based PC??? Hardware in particular.

Ok, I have windows vista at the moment and I am looking to upgrade from my current PC. I am not really that concerned with the idosyncracies of each OS , although I know it plays a big part in performace.

I want to know if the mac hardware is is inferior to the windows based hardware? I believe that gamers usually choose windows based products , but I am no gamer and I will be maily be looking at the new PC for Photoshop and watching some blue-ray movies ect.

I was thinking about getting the new 8 core for mac with 32g of memory.

Cheers.

ashdavid wrote in post #8051124
for Photoshop and watching some blue-ray movies ect.

I was thinking about getting the new 8 core for mac with 32g of memory.

you don't need 32GB RAM to photoshop nor 8 cores for movies no matter which platform.

ashdavid wrote in post #8051124
Ok, I have windows vista at the moment and I am looking to upgrade from my current PC. I am not really that concerned with the idosyncracies of each OS , although I know it plays a big part in performace.

I want to know if the mac hardware is is inferior to the windows based hardware? I believe that gamers usually choose windows based products , but I am no gamer and I will be maily be looking at the new PC for Photoshop and watching some blue-ray movies ect.

I was thinking about getting the new 8 core for mac with 32g of memory.

Cheers.

What spec is your current PC?

Macs and Windows based PC all use the same basic hardware platform.
However, there is a limited choice of configirations with the Macs, but an unlimited one with the Windows based PC's.

Knowing what spec your current PC is, what it could do better, and some more detail about what you want to do with a new one, will help us give you advice.
For your photography work, do you shoot RAW? process lots of photos at once? Do you use the camera once a month, once a day? Shoot hundreds of frames each time, or only 1 or 2?

HyperYagami wrote in post #8051265
you don't need 32GB RAM to photoshop nor 8 cores for movies no matter which platform.

I have 4 gig of memory and a quad core at the moment and it can take a few mins in some cases to carry some functions in PS. Basically PS performs horribly when you have hundreds of layers with various tasks performed on them. Well that is my experience.

I forgot to say I use excell extensively and at the moment some files can take up to a minute or more to open, on top of that when performing simple tasks it can take a while to procces the info. I am trying to streamline the way I set up my books by cutting away unneccessary formulas. So will excell work fine on mac?

And I also forgot to ask whether I can switch my windows photoshop to mac?

Moppie wrote in post #8051345
What spec is your current PC?

Macs and Windows based PC all use the same basic hardware platform.
However, there is a limited choice of configirations with the Macs, but an unlimited one with the Windows based PC's.

Knowing what spec your current PC is, what it could do better, and some more detail about what you want to do with a new one, will help us give you advice.
For your photography work, do you shoot RAW? process lots of photos at once? Do you use the camera once a month, once a day? Shoot hundreds of frames each time, or only 1 or 2?

I usually don't batch proccess , but I can have 200-300 layers in some files at times. I take hundreds of pics in one shoot quite regulary. At the moment the performace of the PC is terrible. I can have PS proccess a command and it literally take 5 mins.

The cpu is a Intel® Core™2 Extreme quad-core processor btw.

Working with hundreds of layers will slow down any computer, even a new dual xeon Mac Pro.

And you must be working with some very large excel spreadsheets.

You can transfer the lisence for photoshop, and you can get MS Office for a Mac.
However, I have had some problems in the past using Excel on OS-X. Mostly with very large spreadsheets and pivot tables created under windows not displaying properly. I don't know if this is a problem with using the different platforms, or if it was a problem with the Mac.


I would look at making some changes to your current system first. Double the ram, and use 64bit Vista with 64bit CS4. This will make a huge improvment to how photoshop works, as it will be able to use a lot more RAM. CS4 does not support 64bit on OS-X, so even with huge amounts of RAM in a Mac Pro, it is limited to how much can actually be used.

Might be an idea to check processor useage etc, while idle. It is possible there are things running that shouldn't be. Although I've never had a problem with this.


If that fails, then a Mac Pro, or requivilant spec i7 based computer running Vista 64bit would be an improvment. But, you need to be running a proper 64bit operating system to see the difference.

I'd like to know why you're using hundreds of layers, and see the image you made with it. That's an exceptional case, i'm surprised it works at all. But Excel taking a minute to open a file really suggests that something else is wrong with your machine. What's in the spreadsheet?

Moppie wrote in post #8051410
Working with hundreds of layers will slow down any computer, even a new dual xeon Mac Pro.

And you must be working with some very large excel spreadsheets.

You can transfer the lisence for photoshop, and you can get MS Office for a Mac.
However, I have had some problems in the past using Excel on OS-X. Mostly with very large spreadsheets and pivot tables created under windows not displaying properly. I don't know if this is a problem with using the different platforms, or if it was a problem with the Mac.


I would look at making some changes to your current system first. Double the ram, and use 64bit Vista with 64bit CS4. This will make a huge improvment to how photoshop works, as it will be able to use a lot more RAM. CS4 does not support 64bit on OS-X, so even with huge amounts of RAM in a Mac Pro, it is limited to how much can actually be used.

Might be an idea to check processor useage etc, while idle. It is possible there are things running that shouldn't be. Although I've never had a problem with this.


If that fails, then a Mac Pro, or requivilant spec i7 based computer running Vista 64bit would be an improvment. But, you need to be running a proper 64bit operating system to see the difference.

I know I should be using 64bit in windows, but I have been waiting for windows 7 to come out before I go and buy the 64 bit platform. There is nothing running that shouldn't be and I make sure of that before I start PS or excell. My thoughts were the new i7 and windows 7 64bit with 16gig of ram (that seems to be the max that windows based MOBO's going around) or go the mac route. A friend of mine swears by Mac and has been trying to convince me for years that it is better for what I am doing. Esspecially the graphics of the Mac is better than windows based products... That is a shame about PS not supporting 64 bit on OS X, but I guess CS5 should be ok. I was also going to upgrade PS from CS3 to CS4 with the new PC. Sigh, I really don't know what I should do????

Have you told Photoshop you utilized all your RAM? it took me a while to dig threw and find that option i have 2 gigs of ram, and i found out PS was only asking for 512mb. I was wondering why it was slow, once i gave it more ram it ran smoother.
Im not a computer buff, i so im not sure if im using the correct terms.,,

ashdavid wrote in post #8051592
I know I should be using 64bit in windows, but I have been waiting for windows 7 to come out before I go and buy the 64 bit platform. There is nothing running that shouldn't be and I make sure of that before I start PS or excell. My thoughts were the new i7 and windows 7 64bit with 16gig of ram (that seems to be the max that windows based MOBO's going around) or go the mac route. A friend of mine swears by Mac and has been trying to convince me for years that it is better for what I am doing. Esspecially the graphics of the Mac is better than windows based products... That is a shame about PS not supporting 64 bit on OS X, but I guess CS5 should be ok. I was also going to upgrade PS from CS3 to CS4 with the new PC. Sigh, I really don't know what I should do????

Why do you think Graphics are better on the mac? That may have been true 20 years ago. There's an Asus i7 board that supports 24GB RAM - remember multiples of 3GB for i7 (ie 3/6/12/24) not the usual 2/4/8/16. Asus P6T Deluxe V2.

tim wrote in post #8051508
I'd like to know why you're using hundreds of layers, and see the image you made with it. That's an exceptional case, i'm surprised it works at all. But Excel taking a minute to open a file really suggests that something else is wrong with your machine. What's in the spreadsheet?

tim wrote in post #8051738
Why do you think Graphics are better on the mac? That may have been true 20 years ago. There's an Asus i7 board that supports 24GB RAM - remember multiples of 3GB for i7 (ie 3/6/12/24) not the usual 2/4/8/16. Asus P6T Deluxe V2.

I am not useing excell the most efficient way, but I have hundreds of sheets with hundreds of complex formulas , graphs and tables. When opening a new book or one with only a few formulas ect, it usually only takes a few seconds. I have the PC serviced every month( it is my business PC and I have an IT guy take care of that aspect.) so there is nothing wrong with the PC, the formulas ect just bog it down, like I said before I need to streamline them and not multible formulas where use a single bigger forumla can be substituted.

I use hundreds of layers when I am trying to make a digital photo from scratch, I know illistrator could be better in some cases but I am having fun learning some of the more difficult tasks in PS. I only do this as a hobby, but that doesn't mean I can waste time waiting for the PC to carry out tasks. My business and family take preference so I want it to move as quick as it can. Cost of the PC means nothing to me.

As for graphics on Macs, I always have been under the impression that this is where Macs really shine, maybe I am wrong? I didn't know that i7 has memory in multibles of three and thanks for the info on the Asus board, I will look into it.

Aweitzel wrote in post #8051616
Have you told Photoshop you utilized all your RAM? it took me a while to dig threw and find that option i have 2 gigs of ram, and i found out PS was only asking for 512mb. I was wondering why it was slow, once i gave it more ram it ran smoother.
Im not a computer buff, i so im not sure if im using the correct terms.,,

Yes, I have also allocated 2 gigs. Thanks for the help though.

ashdavid wrote in post #8051124
I was thinking about getting the new 8 core for mac with 32g of memory.

Sha-zam!

ashdavid wrote in post #8052114
I am not useing excell the most efficient way, but I have hundreds of sheets with hundreds of complex formulas , graphs and tables. When opening a new book or one with only a few formulas ect, it usually only takes a few seconds. I have the PC serviced every month( it is my business PC and I have an IT guy take care of that aspect.) so there is nothing wrong with the PC, the formulas ect just bog it down, like I said before I need to streamline them and not multible formulas where use a single bigger forumla can be substituted.

I use hundreds of layers when I am trying to make a digital photo from scratch, I know illistrator could be better in some cases but I am having fun learning some of the more difficult tasks in PS. I only do this as a hobby, but that doesn't mean I can waste time waiting for the PC to carry out tasks. My business and family take preference so I want it to move as quick as it can. Cost of the PC means nothing to me.

As for graphics on Macs, I always have been under the impression that this is where Macs really shine, maybe I am wrong? I didn't know that i7 has memory in multibles of three and thanks for the info on the Asus board, I will look into it.

Yes, I have also allocated 2 gigs. Thanks for the help though.

You sound like a prime candidate for a workstation. Dell & Apple would be what I would recommend. The cost is about the same for workstations so it would come down to which platform you like best.

Yes, Mac's do have a good standing with artists and photographers because of Apple's overall reputation. With diversity comes complexity, it's just a fact of modern physics. PC's can be daunting to non-techie's. My mother hates computers yet, loves the Mac I gave her. She said that it was a joy to work with. If you're not a techie and just want to concentrate on work then Apple's computer model (simple) is typically a good one. If you like computers for computers sake, then PC's would be better for you because there is an edless array of 'tweaking' that can be done. Most artists I know don't care about the PC vs Mac battle, they just want a tool that can serve them and once they start hearing about anti-virus software, firewalls, maleware... they just opt for an Apple and that's the last time they think about it.

That said, PC's can do just about anything Mac's can (on the surface anyway) but the one thing the cannot (legally) is run OS X. So, if you like Mac OS then go buy a Mac Pro base model with an ATI 4870 and 6GB of RAM then go buy a few 1TB hard drives and get to work

If price isn't important get a dual xeon processor, the one based on the Neelham architecture. 8 real cores, 16 virtual cores, 24GB RAM, Windows 7. That'd be one of the fastest workstations available, but it won't be cheap. Even a single i7 processor would fly.

ashdavid wrote in post #8052114
As for graphics on Macs, I always have been under the impression that this is where Macs really shine, maybe I am wrong?

As Tim said, there was some truth to this 20 years ago, when early Macs used dedicated graphics chips.
Now the latest and greatest video cards will only run under windows. But you only need them if your a gaming fanatic, or doing some serious 3D work.


The Mac Pro can handle lots of RAM because it is essentially a server cramed into a desktop box. It's why it is so powerful, and also so expensive.
However, if you have a good PC guy who looks after your current system, there is no reason he can't build you a similar server based workstation that will take even more RAM than the Mac Pro. I believe the current limit for Vista Ultimate is 128GB of ram. I have harddisks smaller than that.


I would either double the RAM in your current system and get Vista 64bit, which you can then upgrade in October to Windows 7 if you really feel the need.

Or, buy the Mac Pro dual xeon, ultra mega cool monster, and run Vista 64bit with CS4 on it so you can make the most of the RAM.