Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Can Aperture & Photoshop use multicores?
- Thread starter mcarnes
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wow... an MKIII... not jealous at all...
Anyway, yes, PS can take advantage of multi-cores (to a limited extent). Read this. I'm not sure about Aperture, but it couldn't hurt.
If I were building a photo-editing machine, I'd go for the mid- model (Quad 2.8), 4gigs of RAM, and the 8800 (both Aperture and PS will benefit from a heftier GPU). Add a couple of 500gig drives, and you should be sweet.
Anyway, yes, PS can take advantage of multi-cores (to a limited extent). Read this. I'm not sure about Aperture, but it couldn't hurt.
If I were building a photo-editing machine, I'd go for the mid- model (Quad 2.8), 4gigs of RAM, and the 8800 (both Aperture and PS will benefit from a heftier GPU). Add a couple of 500gig drives, and you should be sweet.
Aperture loves multiple cores. It regularly maxes both cores on my MBP. I can't wait till I get a Mac Pro with 8 cores!
Get the 8800 video card -- Aperture loves video cards too. And processors. And RAM.
Aperture is a beautiful beast.
Aperture is a beautiful beast.
Anyhow, Aperture Version 2.0 is overdue (for a long time now)
I hope we will see it next week.
Anyhow, Aperture Version 2.0 is overdue (for a long time now)
I hope we will see it next week.
Let's hope, but then, I doubt my MB would be able to run it.
Hopefully I'll get an iMac one of this days. Or if my dreams come true, an Apple executive would come to my front door and leave a Nikon D300 (no idea why he is going to leave a camera, but that is part of the dream) with a Mac Pro.
Thanks guys (or gals). That's what I thought but I just wanted to be sure. It'll probably be dual 2.8, 4GB, and step up to the NVIDIA. Sound good?
And yes, I really wish SJ would put more resources into developing Aperture. It has so much potential. But iTunes and iPhone seem to always be their priority, which I guess I can understand.
Edit: Would there be any advantage to 8GB of RAM for these two apps?
And yes, I really wish SJ would put more resources into developing Aperture. It has so much potential. But iTunes and iPhone seem to always be their priority, which I guess I can understand.
Edit: Would there be any advantage to 8GB of RAM for these two apps?
There are diminishing returns after 4GB but there is some difference. I didn't see a noticeable amount when I went from 5GB to 9GB.
Start with 4GB, see how you like it. It may be just right. You can always add more later on!
Start with 4GB, see how you like it. It may be just right. You can always add more later on!
Is that true? Are there benchmarks to demonstrate the difference? I would think the 8800 would really only matter in 3D applications.
My benchmarks saw a significant difference between 256MB and a 512MB card. It all depends on your library. I have somewhere around 90,000 RAW files in my library and I'm driving a big screen.
saw a significant difference between 256MB and a 512MB card. It all depends on your library. I have somewhere around 90,000 RAW files in my library and I'm driving a big screen.Is there is an advantage to two 500GB drives opposed to one 1TB drive? Just wondering if you guys set up your MPs in a special way for photography. Thanks.
The only advantage I can see is, if a 1TB drive goes out, that's a LOT of lost data. At least with two 500GB drives, you'd only loose half of your stuff.
I think you should find a size that allows for your current needs plus a lot of headroom -- and then get MULTIPLE drives to back up. I use 4 drives for maximum data redundancy (I lost everything 3 years ago).
1. System Drive (including Music, Videos, Applications, etc.)
2. Aperture Library
3. Aperture Vault
4. Time Machine (for Drive #1)
I don't want Aperture and Time Machine talking to each other for fear of corrupting one another. This solution makes certain that if any drive goes down, I don't lose any data.
One could use 2 or 3 drives instead of 4 (if your Aperture libraries, music, etc. aren't too big) but I prefer to have everything separate. Internal SATA drives are so cheap now that it is silly not to have multiple drives protecting your data. Just imagine if you lost everything
1. System Drive (including Music, Videos, Applications, etc.)
2. Aperture Library
3. Aperture Vault
4. Time Machine (for Drive #1)
I don't want Aperture and Time Machine talking to each other for fear of corrupting one another. This solution makes certain that if any drive goes down, I don't lose any data.
One could use 2 or 3 drives instead of 4 (if your Aperture libraries, music, etc. aren't too big) but I prefer to have everything separate. Internal SATA drives are so cheap now that it is silly not to have multiple drives protecting your data. Just imagine if you lost everything
In either case, you're backing up your data, right? The only reason I can see for the 1TB drives is if you're going to fill up all your drive bays. If you only need 1TB of storage, you might as well get two 500 GB drives -- much cheaper!