Who's buying Apple's new 27in Display or New MacPro?

Any one buying a new 6/12 core Mac Pro or 27in ACD?

I'll be placing my order next reek of an iMac 27"

if you state has same....be sure to do all computer purchases on tax free weekend. Many states have a weekend in August where they drop sales taxes on computers, software, other school supplies, and clothing articles up to X dollars.

Many local retailers will also run sells or special packages on tax free weekend!!!

Placed my order for a new MAC Pro this morning

Quad Core 2.8
8 GB Ram
Dual HD with 1 TB each

I already have my Eizo Monitor, so I should be set.

Purchased for some light photo editing, web surfing and spread sheets. Love the Apple platform, which I just moved to last fall. Would never go back to Windows for personal use.

Dave

oak3x wrote in post #10690287
Placed my order for a new MAC Pro this morning

Quad Core 2.8
8 GB Ram
Dual HD with 1 TB each

I already have my Eizo Monitor, so I should be set.

Purchased for some light photo editing, web surfing and spread sheets. Love the Apple platform, which I just moved to last fall. Would never go back to Windows for personal use.

Dave

Nice! The only Apple I have coming is a pair of Mac Minis for my daughters.

ZCphoto wrote in post #10690493
Nice! The only Apple I have coming is a pair of Mac Minis for my daughters.

Congrats on your purchase as well... Thought about the MAC Mini as well. Since I bought the Eizo, figured just to go with the PRO

I would have liked to have upgraded my 2006 Mac Pro to the new one but honestly I'm just not terribly impressed, not to mention how expensive the processor upgrades are! $1200 to get the 6-core? good lord.

If I can upgrade this year I'm actually planning on just maxing out the 27" iMac i7 and getting the 27" cinema display as well. That should be sufficient for my work for a few years.

I think honestly I'll never really need a Mac Pro I mean for photography its really hard for me to see where people need 12 cores. I guess I'm just an amateur though. I'd love the have the new ACD with my 2010 Macbook Pro. One day...

iSax1234 wrote in post #10691996
I think honestly I'll never really need a Mac Pro I mean for photography its really hard for me to see where people need 12 cores. I guess I'm just an amateur though. I'd love the have the new ACD with my 2010 Macbook Pro. One day...

There probably are no photography programs that can utilize that many cores, except maybe panorama stitchers, but people who actually have sh!t to do instead of dicking around in one program have 6+ heavy-duty apps on at any time, doing different things, which really pisses me off when reviewers never run multi-tasking benchmarks. if they made a test that has several 250~500mb files files being processed in PS, Qimage sending off a hundred images to queue, stuff being processed in PhotoAcute at the same time, then maybe i'd take their scores more seriously, since that's closer to real life. [/rant]

Kolor-Pikker wrote in post #10693022
There probably are no photography programs that can utilize that many cores

Aperture will. And hyperthreading.

PS, LR, and AP don't support more than 4 cores...after that, it's all about clock speed.

http://macperformanceg​uide.com …acPro-RAW-processing.html

12 cores is more for 3D rendering.

toxic wrote in post #10696732
PS, LR, and AP don't support more than 4 cores...after that, it's all about clock speed.

http://macperformanceg​uide.com …acPro-RAW-processing.html

12 cores is more for 3D rendering.

Interesting, I wonder if the apparent LR3 restriction has to do with Adobes programing, or OS-X?
I know under windows, LR 2 and 3 will use as many cores as you can throw at them, creating new threads for each image they process.
LR2 was hobbled in OS-X. pre-Snow Leopard OS-X was not very efficient at multi threading. Grand Central was supposed to fix this in Snow Leopard, and I would have thought Adobe would allow LR3 free reign.
The limit could also be storage related, i.e. read and write speeds to hard discs creating a bottle neck to the CPU. That is something that would be OS independent, but a good reason to run multiple hard drives.

Photoshop is an interesting one, as some of its processes are very CPU intensive only, some RAM intensive only, and some make heavy use of both.
Depending on what your doing, more cores might, or might not help.

Been looking at the big change (running a pc notebook now) to a MBP. I need a new laptop to do photo work on, I have my eye on a 24" external monitor also

Just trying to decide which one, thinking the 15.4 with the I7 but if I buy at Best buy (love the 18-24 months free financing) not sure what the upgrade from the 5400 rpm hard drive to a 7200 rpm would be

agphotography wrote in post #10690621
I would have liked to have upgraded my 2006 Mac Pro to the new one but honestly I'm just not terribly impressed, not to mention how expensive the processor upgrades are! $1200 to get the 6-core? good lord.

If I can upgrade this year I'm actually planning on just maxing out the 27" iMac i7 and getting the 27" cinema display as well. That should be sufficient for my work for a few years.

I'm sitting out this upgrade cycle, my 2006 Mac Pro with 32GB of RAM is still plenty fast for me. I'm actually thinking of adding an SSD for my boot and application drive and moving my Aperture library off to Drobo connected via FW800.

I would think of the iMac but I already have two 24" IPS based monitors.

I also have 2 24" monitors on my Mac Pro, but they are PVA not IPS, it's still fairly accurate and holds calibration well (far better than a TN panel) but still not IPS.

I definitely don't have that much RAM in mine, I'm running with 9GB, I thought about updating the graphics card, but there is some factor that is holding this thing back and I don't know what it is. It's just so slow with my 5DmkII and 7D RAW files. It used to be able to chew through my 1DmkIII files with ease! (Gee I wonder why? hehe)