i7 vs 8 Core

[Mattie Num Nums]

So in a situation here just wanted to get some more opinions. I have a 27" i7 at my desk with 8GBRAM and an external G-Tech GSafe 2TB RAID external. This machine absolutely FLIES! Very impressed by the screen, power, and build quality of the iMac. Now I have a graphics team here that works on Photoshop, Flash, etc and they have always been the buy the most expensive stuff no matter what. Budgets are important to me because I feel like the money they are wasting on machines could be spent on good external RAID and backups etc. So its time to buy new machines and they want to get the 2.26GHZ Octo with 16GB of RAM and 1TB internal HDD. I was suggesting getting the 27" iMac i7 with 16GB RAM and 2TB internal. Any other opinions on this. Not only will they save around $1000 dollars but now they can all have killer 27" screens.

 

[TMRaven]

Very few filters/tools in photoshop take advantage of more than 2 cores (gaussian blur is the only one I can think of off the bat). If they were working on video, then they'd like the 8 cores.

 

[milkybrainuk]

Hi,

i would go with the iMac i7 over the 8 core macpro.

The only way to justify the cost and need for an 8 core macpro would be if your graphics team are doing loads of processor intense task. Like 3D rendering / video encoding / motion graphics.

Using apps like After effects / Cinema 4d / Maya everyday. The time saved in rendering out your work might save money in the long run.

But if they are doing photoshop / flash work mainly then its not worth it.

Oh a plus on a macpro is if the harddrive fails etc then its easier to user replace then a imac. So that saves on production downtime.

Running Photoshop on either of these machines with the same amount of RAM will have little performance difference.

Ask them what monitors they want with the MAC PROs. If you have existing ones then you can dual screen with a iMac.

Oh i wouldn't bother with paying the 2TB in iMac. Seriously doubt they need that much space internally.

 

[Scorecard]

The imac 27 i7 is an awesome machine. The 8 core mac pro is also an awesome machine. But again it all depends on how intensive their tasks are because waiting for pictures and videos to burn/render is money. So it really depends on how intensive their tasks are.

The i7 will have 4 cores with HT while the MP will have 8 cores with HT. (Probably not a big selling feature) but the MP can accommodate 2 Super drives and those burn and read much faster than the iMac.

Some people love the 27" screen and some don't. Depends on the professional.

So a cost benefit analysis is in the works. I would almost hold out another month is possible because of rumored updated MP.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

The bulk of this is multimedia interactive web and print design. So to me the iMac seemed perfect. As for space these guys use a TON of it. We are a major major major media conglom so they have a lot of graphics. I still think for all intensive purposes the iMac is exactly what they need.

 

[Winni]

Now I have a graphics team here that works on Photoshop, Flash, etc and they have always been the buy the most expensive stuff no matter what.

Sounds like they're very spoiled, because neither Photoshop nor Flash demand that much horse power - a 27" Quad Core iMac offers more than enough CPU power for those applications.

I'd tell them that they have to earn themselves "the most expensive stuff". And they should also PROVE that they need that equipment.

But unless they're doing 3D animation movies or genetic simulations on their computers, they will have a very hard time justifying the purchase of supercomputers...

 

[milkybrainuk]

The bulk of this is multimedia interactive web and print design. So to me the iMac seemed perfect. As for space these guys use a TON of it. We are a major major major media conglom so they have a lot of graphics. I still think for all intensive purposes the iMac is exactly what they need.

I would suggest you invest in a NAS for these guys. Or file server. You really don't want to be storing assets for projects on local hard drives.

Sort your workflow / file system out. If your working in teams for projects you dont want to be messing with which machine has what file. Or multiple same assets on different machines. yes you can share each computer on the network but what a headache.

Seriously you want at least the source files on some sort of file server. Archive projects on it etc.

Lets anyone work on any machine.

Plus if you go for iMacs. If the thing breaks or drive goes. Off the whole thing goes to the repair guy. Along with all the files until you get it back.

Also you dont want to be having loads of external drives all over the place. "Wheres that file for xxxx" "oh its on Bob external drive".........

Waist so much time and money. just because people can't be bothered to sort out their files.

But as your a "major major major media conglom" i would expect you to already have such a setup?

 

[Sun Baked]

Refurbished Mac Pro 2.66GHz 8-Core Intel Xeon

Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processors
6GB (6x1GB) of 1066MHz DDR3 ECC memory
640GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7200 rpm
18x SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 512MB GDDR3 memory

$3,999.00

If time isn't as critical, I'd suggest refurbs for Mac Pros.

And if they are basically just updating the CPU, and have the supplement it with screens and the drives from the old machines ... it won't hurt as much.

If they complain it doesn't have TB drives and 16GB, it is infinitely cheaper to select these from 3rd parties.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

I would suggest you invest in a NAS for these guys. Or file server. You really don't want to be storing assets for projects on local hard drives.

Sort your workflow / file system out. If your working in teams for projects you dont want to be messing with which machine has what file. Or multiple same assets on different machines. yes you can share each computer on the network but what a headache.

Seriously you want at least the source files on some sort of file server. Archive projects on it etc.

Lets anyone work on any machine.

Plus if you go for iMacs. If the thing breaks or drive goes. Off the whole thing goes to the repair guy. Along with all the files until you get it back.

Also you dont want to be having loads of external drives all over the place. "Wheres that file for xxxx" "oh its on Bob external drive".........

Waist so much time and money. just because people can't be bothered to sort out their files.

But as your a "major major major media conglom" i would expect you to already have such a setup?

We have data centers across the world. These people use there local storage for files they are working on as well as storing locally (which are then automatically backed up to our data center.) The clients just like keeping copies locally as well as on the share drive. Clients can also have projects that are between 20-50GB's at a time. We give them options. All projects are saved to a share. Trust me this isn't a question of infrastructure, we have that, just computer specifications.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

If time isn't as critical, I'd suggest refurbs for Mac Pros.

And if they are basically just updating the CPU, and have the supplement it with screens and the drives from the old machines ... it won't hurt as much.

If they complain it doesn't have TB drives and 16GB, it is infinitely cheaper to select these from 3rd parties.

We don't purchase Refurbished machines.

 

[Sun Baked]

We don't purchase Refurbished machines.

Should think about trying it, a refurbished APC 1400/1500 UPS and a refurbished Mac Pro can likely save a boat load of money.

Quite a few companies do.

Since the major part likely to give you any problems is the drive, and they can be upgraded to the highend units and still come in less than new. And the simple utility SMART Utility.app or Techtool Pro will tell you how many hours are on the drive when you get it.

---

Spending an extra $1k+ or more just so you don't have to deal with getting memory from a Mac Memory place or a 5 year warranty for a high end drive is crazy for most companies these days.

 

[gbarlow]

We don't purchase Refurbished machines.

I'd also have to say you might be a little crazy to avoid them so vehemently. I normally stay away from refurbished products, however all of my experiences with apple's refurbished store have been positive. It comes with all of the same coverage and saves a decent chunk of cash, I really do not see a downside. Also there is no way I would want to buy 16gb of ram directly from apple you're going to end up spending far more than you should. It's not like installing the memory is going to take too much time or effort it's a five minute job for most people and will save you big time in the end.

I would definitely look at the refurbished side for the mac pros, since most of what you're going to want to beef up in the machines are the hd's and ram and the mac pros will allow you to do this easily from a third party.

 

[OatmealRocks]

Here is a question. What are the benefits of 8GB vs 16GB of ram. I thought I came across a test with photoshop, flash and even final cut. I can't seem to recall but for photo editing there was marginal benefits going the 16GB route. I may be wrong but could some share some incite on this?

 

[mlts22]

Performance aside, one advantage of the Mac Pro setups is the ability to have hardware RAID. This way, should a drive fail, someone's work isn't completely derailed for the time it takes to replace the drive in an iMac and restore the data.

This can be mitigated somewhat by an external drive + Time Machine, but if the data is really critical, it might be also good to have a backup program (Retrospect or others) which is run on a backup server that copies the client data nightly. Another factor is that if the shop has a lot of machines, having the same amount of external hard disks may be an IT nightmare compared to a "standard" Mac Pro configuration which has everything inside.

So, just for the fact that there is a less change of hardware failure causing interruptions when getting graphic work into production on the Mac Pro might justify the machine. The cost of the hardware is just one piece for a business.

 

[Sun Baked]

So, just for the fact that there is a less change of hardware failure causing interruptions when getting graphic work into production on the Mac Pro might justify the machine. The cost of the hardware is just one piece for a business.

Always liked keeping a 2nd live copy of the OS on another drive in the tower, this always made drive repairs easier ... for a work machine a live copy of the OS plus the critical apps makes unwinding a bad OS/app upgrade as easy as a restart.

All depends on how critical keeping the apps up and running 99.5% of the time versus drive performance.

Plus with the Mac Pro, yanking all the drives in a mission critical machine when it dies and turning around an putting them in another machine in the office makes the Mac Pro handy. If the bean counters can be locked in a closet when you hide one of the old production machines in the attic, it is even better.

While people might complain about replacing a factory drive and putting it in a drawer, having that factory drive with no critical info on it at all makes peace of mind in shipping the machine off for repair with only that drive in it easier to handle.

With the iMac, when the computer crashes, that data is locked in there and if it is highly sensitive or mission critical ... it might be gone a week unless you wish to risk losing the warranty removing the drive or taking it to a local Apple repair place to remove the drive for data retrieval.

 

[mlts22]

Always liked keeping a 2nd live copy of the OS on another drive in the tower, this always made drive repairs easier ... for a work machine a live copy of the OS plus the critical apps makes unwinding a bad OS/app upgrade as easy as a restart.

All depends on how critical keeping the apps up and running 99.5% of the time versus drive performance.

Plus with the Mac Pro, yanking all the drives in a mission critical machine when it dies and turning around an putting them in another machine in the office makes the Mac Pro handy. If the bean counters can be locked in a closet when you hide one of the old production machines in the attic, it is even better.

While people might complain about replacing a factory drive and putting it in a drawer, having that factory drive with no critical info on it at all makes peace of mind in shipping the machine off for repair with only that drive in it easier to handle.

With the iMac, when the computer crashes, that data is locked in there and if it is highly sensitive or mission critical ... it might be gone a week unless you wish to risk losing the warranty removing the drive or taking it to a local Apple repair place to remove the drive for data retrieval.

+1 The security aspect here is a big asset. Encryption is one thing, but whole disk encryption solutions sometime get unwieldy, and nothing is better for security than just pulling the drives before the machine goes for service.

In a business, if a Mac Pro breaks, pulling the drives from the old one, and slamming them in a loaner saves a lot of time for the people working, as well as the IT staff. Often times, this makes the Mac Pro a better investment than an iMac in larger firms.