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

spacedcadet

macrumors regular
Mar 5, 2009
202
53
Reading this and the other OC threads with interest as in the same boat here regarding the latest Adobe apps.
As a precursor, I successfully updated my firmware to 144.0.0.0.0 last night.
Lots more reading to do before I decide whether to take the leap, I'm a bit worried about bricking my work machine.
This 5,1 has been amazing value via upgrades, I do a lot of heavy Photoshopping and it rarely breaks a sweat.
Would be nice to keep it going a while longer to see what new AS Macs come out next year.

Props to the amazing upgrade community on here!
 
  • Like
Reactions: rodedwards

sfalatko

macrumors 6502a
Sep 24, 2016
641
365
Reading this and the other OC threads with interest as in the same boat here regarding the latest Adobe apps.
As a precursor, I successfully updated my firmware to 144.0.0.0.0 last night.
Lots more reading to do before I decide whether to take the leap, I'm a bit worried about bricking my work machine.
This 5,1 has been amazing value via upgrades, I do a lot of heavy Photoshopping and it rarely breaks a sweat.
Would be nice to keep it going a while longer to see what new AS Macs come out next year.

Props to the amazing upgrade community on here!
Well the "safest" way is to create a backup of your working install via Carbon Copy Cloner or SuperDuper! and then do your OpenCore and Catalina (or BigSur or Monterey) install on a different drive. That way you don't touch your working install (and you have a clone for recovery if something goes wrong).
 
  • Like
Reactions: spacedcadet

ssgbryan

macrumors 65816
Jul 18, 2002
1,488
1,420
At some point, you have to let go of old hardware. :(

The workarounds are not going to get easier. Are you staying on MacOS because you have software that ONLY works on MacOS? If not, you should fully assess your options.

If you are still on a 5,1, you truly don't understand just how far behind you are.
 

ddhhddhh2

macrumors regular
Jun 2, 2021
242
374
Taipei
At some point, you have to let go of old hardware. :(

The workarounds are not going to get easier. Are you staying on MacOS because you have software that ONLY works on MacOS? If not, you should fully assess your options.

If you are still on a 5,1, you truly don't understand just how far behind you are.

Really? cMP 5,1 are still pretty good on latest adobe. As long as the user understands how to update or maintain the OS, the 5,1 can still fight. If they has an excellent graphics card, it would be better.

I use 5,1 for work at home, and I carry MBP when I go to work at the company. I don't think there is much difference between them.

As far as I can see, The help of the community makes 5,1 still great, and it will live longer than any Mac I have in the past.
 

vsc

macrumors member
May 8, 2014
74
33
I'm hanging on to my 5,1 Mac Pro for another couple of years. I'm not interested in getting a laptop. I'll get a Mac mini next as I already have a very good monitor and multiple keyboards and mice.

I don't do any video other than the odd short thing in iMovie. And Photoshop is much less multiple CPU aware than most video applications, as far as I'm aware. I work with some pretty large photo files in Photoshop and I'm certainly not sitting around twiddling my thumbs waiting for it to do stuff. I also use DxO PhotoLab and they have managed to really speed that up over the last couple of releases too.
For reference using Martin's 0.7.5beta OC I was able to put 12.0.1 on my 5,1 MacPro last night without issue. Honestly it is so similar to BigSur I really can't tell any difference. Everything works as expected, including Photoshop and Lightroom.
 

ssgbryan

macrumors 65816
Jul 18, 2002
1,488
1,420
Really? cMP 5,1 are still pretty good on latest adobe. As long as the user understands how to update or maintain the OS, the 5,1 can still fight. If they has an excellent graphics card, it would be better.

I use 5,1 for work at home, and I carry MBP when I go to work at the company. I don't think there is much difference between them.

As far as I can see, The help of the community makes 5,1 still great, and it will live longer than any Mac I have in the past.
Yeah, really.

Sata II
PCIe 3.0
DDR3 memory
No modern video cards

Look at this forum, nothing but How do I get this to work? What is the workaround for X?

At the end of the day, what is your time worth?

In windows, everything just works, and is much, much faster.
 

ddhhddhh2

macrumors regular
Jun 2, 2021
242
374
Taipei
Yeah, really.

Sata II
PCIe 3.0
DDR3 memory
No modern video cards

Look at this forum, nothing but How do I get this to work? What is the workaround for X?

At the end of the day, what is your time worth?

In windows, everything just works, and is much, much faster.

I see, so as far as I'm concerned, you've got the new M1 Max, right? Then the new MBA (maybe the new Mac Pro M1) comes out next June, and you'll have to catch up, or you'll be a dishonest person, because your old Mac is too old in comparison.

It's a pretty shameful thing to do when people treasure what they still have, as far as you're concerned, isn't it?

For the cMP 5,1, I have every reason to believe that its specs will satisfy most people's needs, and if someone thinks it's too slow, then naturally that person won't be asking on the forums how this 5,1 should be .....

How much do you think time is worth? Come on, the ATA100 runs much faster than the time you spend staring at the screen. Tell me how much time you spend looking at IG, FB, YT and anything else before you talk about how useless this cMP is.

Of course, I have every reason to believe that you are working on a pretty impressive project, and the great thing about this project is that if your SSD is on the M.2 provided by 5,1, you are going to cost your boss money, that's obvious.

Since I first started using apple's 7200, the cMP 5,1 has probably been the longest-lasting Mac I've ever used, Even though I still have the MBP 16"/64 and the company may even buy the M1 Max for me this year, I'm still happy to keep the 5,1 for as long as I can, and yes, my time is certainly cheap.

Oh yeah, you mentioned windows, two words, BS, working with it? No way! For me, I only use the VM to open it when verifying cross-platform standards, but of course I have a windows PC that houses a lot of STEAM games, and the recent hot D2R is no exception, with an RTX30 series graphics card, it's fast as hell, hope you're happy.
 

ssgbryan

macrumors 65816
Jul 18, 2002
1,488
1,420
I am not most people - I need performance, not looks. I appreciate antiques (all of my furniture is from the '20's & '30's) - but I don't do my computing on an antique - (I own an original IBM PC and an Apple SE - they are nice talking pieces).

I am now the typical Apple user - I have an iPhone, an iPad, and I do my real work on a PC. I need horsepower (at a reasonable price) which Apple doesn't have at the moment. Unlike you, I didn't have to buy a second PC to do gaming stuff on a computer, I just added another SSD for my steam library.

I can expand my Ryzen system (already have gone through 1 round of upgrades) and several cards moved from my Mac Pro to my PC. That will not be possible for Apple Silicon going forward.

I can use both AMD and Nvidia cards at the same time - I can't do that on Apple Silicon.

I have internal storage (32Tb) in my PC - I didn't have to dump $600 to replace the internal HD connections that Apple has removed from Apple Silicon systems.

I can still use my back up system (which I got for my Mac Pro), because I dropped my e-sata card into the PC - I can't do that on Apple Silicon.

I can easily upgrade any part of my system, based on my needs - I can't do that on Apple Silicon.

I have more software available than you do - by several orders of magnitude. Good luck when you have PowerPC levels of software availability.

I did not have to change my workflow - I just installed the windows versions of my applications and away I went.

I can use new software, or I can use old software - you can't. Have fun replacing all of your software (and you will be renting quite a bit of it). I am not going through another round of Rosetta.

I can use any new piece of hardware that comes out, if it fits my needs - you can't.

I no longer have do deal with the whole what do I need to do for this workaround, in Windows, it just works. (And it pains me to write that.)

For you, it appears to be an emotional issue, it isn't for me. If you haven't used windows 10, you haven't used Windows. It is as reliable as OSX; (because reliability has been going down in OSX since 10.6.8). Although neither is reliable as OS/2. I miss measuring my uptime in years. My move to OSX was about performance and reliability, not P.T. Barnum's BS marketing.

The computer is a tool, nothing more. I understand your love for the Mac Pro - I started with one of the pizza boxes as my 1st Mac, and it was a sad day when I decommissioned my last Mac Pro (see sig).

I jumped platforms, because at the end of the day, Apple can no longer provide the computing power I need to do what I do. I truly had no idea how much performance I had passed on by staying with my nearly maxed out 4,1.

My workflow isn't well supported on Apple Silicon (3d art). That may change in the future, but I would not bet money on it. Apple is going in a very different direction, and that is fine. They have a vision, and they are sticking with it. They have made the decision to shed entire areas of computing. Their call, and I am sure they won't miss people like me. Good on them.

My entire workflow for the past 15 years is built around how many cores I have and how much memory I have. In 3d art, there is never enough ram, or cores, and now - GPU processing. Staying with Apple means reworking my entire workflow - the Apple "experience" isn't worth it - because at the end of the day, we do our work in applications, not operating systems. Apple Silicon simply isn't capable of doing what I use a computer for. The only Apple computer that can be maxed out for 3d is the soon to be abandoned 7,1 Mac Pro.

The Base 7,1 MacPro is a $1,500 computer with a $4,500 case, not including the (unlocking) wheels @ $400. And my $2500 Ryzen system will out perform it (for what I do). But if I do need more horses, there is Threadripper. Which would be a CPU/Motherboard replacement - everything else would move in, no muss, no fuss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: garibaldo

ddhhddhh2

macrumors regular
Jun 2, 2021
242
374
Taipei
I am not most people - I need performance, not looks. I appreciate antiques (all of my furniture is from the '20's & '30's) - but I don't do my computing on an antique - (I own an original IBM PC and an Apple SE - they are nice talking pieces).

I am now the typical Apple user - I have an iPhone, an iPad, and I do my real work on a PC. I need horsepower (at a reasonable price) which Apple doesn't have at the moment. Unlike you, I didn't have to buy a second PC to do gaming stuff on a computer, I just added another SSD for my steam library.

I can expand my Ryzen system (already have gone through 1 round of upgrades) and several cards moved from my Mac Pro to my PC. That will not be possible for Apple Silicon going forward.

I can use both AMD and Nvidia cards at the same time - I can't do that on Apple Silicon.

I have internal storage (32Tb) in my PC - I didn't have to dump $600 to replace the internal HD connections that Apple has removed from Apple Silicon systems.

I can still use my back up system (which I got for my Mac Pro), because I dropped my e-sata card into the PC - I can't do that on Apple Silicon.

I can easily upgrade any part of my system, based on my needs - I can't do that on Apple Silicon.

I have more software available than you do - by several orders of magnitude. Good luck when you have PowerPC levels of software availability.

I did not have to change my workflow - I just installed the windows versions of my applications and away I went.

I can use new software, or I can use old software - you can't. Have fun replacing all of your software (and you will be renting quite a bit of it). I am not going through another round of Rosetta.

I can use any new piece of hardware that comes out, if it fits my needs - you can't.

I no longer have do deal with the whole what do I need to do for this workaround, in Windows, it just works. (And it pains me to write that.)

For you, it appears to be an emotional issue, it isn't for me. If you haven't used windows 10, you haven't used Windows. It is as reliable as OSX; (because reliability has been going down in OSX since 10.6.8). Although neither is reliable as OS/2. I miss measuring my uptime in years. My move to OSX was about performance and reliability, not P.T. Barnum's BS marketing.

The computer is a tool, nothing more. I understand your love for the Mac Pro - I started with one of the pizza boxes as my 1st Mac, and it was a sad day when I decommissioned my last Mac Pro (see sig).

I jumped platforms, because at the end of the day, Apple can no longer provide the computing power I need to do what I do. I truly had no idea how much performance I had passed on by staying with my nearly maxed out 4,1.

My workflow isn't well supported on Apple Silicon (3d art). That may change in the future, but I would not bet money on it. Apple is going in a very different direction, and that is fine. They have a vision, and they are sticking with it. They have made the decision to shed entire areas of computing. Their call, and I am sure they won't miss people like me. Good on them.

My entire workflow for the past 15 years is built around how many cores I have and how much memory I have. In 3d art, there is never enough ram, or cores, and now - GPU processing. Staying with Apple means reworking my entire workflow - the Apple "experience" isn't worth it - because at the end of the day, we do our work in applications, not operating systems. Apple Silicon simply isn't capable of doing what I use a computer for. The only Apple computer that can be maxed out for 3d is the soon to be abandoned 7,1 Mac Pro.

The Base 7,1 MacPro is a $1,500 computer with a $4,500 case, not including the (unlocking) wheels @ $400. And my $2500 Ryzen system will out perform it (for what I do). But if I do need more horses, there is Threadripper. Which would be a CPU/Motherboard replacement - everything else would move in, no muss, no fuss.

There is a proverb that says there is a kind of cold that your grandma thinks you are cold.

You spend a lot of space explaining that you 'have such a high performance computer', which is not helpful to the user of this thread.

My answer is a useful option for him, and this option is based on the accumulation of the forum.

Of course, maybe I'm saying that 5,1 is good enough for most people, but that's probably an inaccurate judgment, and you have the right to question that, so please allow me to answer, when I compare the 5,1 to the 2019 MBP i9 16", I don't think there is a very far difference in performance.

At least 5,1 is not unacceptably slow, especially with M.2, and SSD speeds are at least in a reasonable range.

If the MBP i9 is very poor and the 5,1 is way behind the MBP i9 in terms of usage (let's forget about those scores), then I would not say that the 5,1 is still a usable performance for most people, and I believe that the MBP i9 is at least not quite "old speed" for most people, that's my basis.

My work are front-end development, compilation, back-end development, database development, docker building, and I occasionally use adobe as well as 3D graphics (C4D, SKP), AE, and so on.

It may not be great, but if all this work makes me think that there is not such a huge difference between the 5,1 and the MBP i9, it is hard for me to convince this user to give up this "old Apple" that you claim.

So, with all due respect, your answer is just like the salesman at the store, sincerely sarcastic about his intention to keep the 5,1, one only has to read through this post to see how unrealistic that is.

Your sarcasm is based on your own experience, and you are taking your own subjective experience as absolute authority.

Because your project requires 'how fast the computer is', so everyone must have that performance, yes, I believe I have not misunderstood your intent.

But in fact, how do you know that this user actually only needs to solve this 5.1 problem?

So, in this post, I don't even need to speculate, because he only has one question: his 5,1 can't run the latest adobe, and the reason is just the OS support policy, simple as that.

It's pretty basic logic, unless, of course, you're the grandma who thinks he'll be cold, all this really has nothing to do with emotions.

Oh yeah, isn't your time expensive? Why waste it on this cheap issue.
 

pmiles

macrumors 6502a
Dec 12, 2013
812
678
Just FYI, you can't "lock-in" a specific version of Adobe products if they are subscription based (which all of them are now). They keep updating them perpetually. If you happened to have the old Suite software and never had to reinstall the software, then you could use that for all perpetuity so long as you never needed to reinstall it (no more license servers to initialize it).

So in a nutshell, because he is on the subscription software, he would ultimately be forced to upgrade to an ARM machine over the course of the next few years as Adobe would abandon the INTEL version as it has with OSes of past thus far.

If you don't have a real need for Photoshop and the like, meaning, you use it purely because you have always used it not because of a technical requirement for it, consider some of the other offerings out there... unless you enjoy paying a high price for a software subscription service. The interface may not be as pretty, but the gist of the applications remain the same, you just have to adapt to it. The benefit of this route is you are back to being able to control when you upgrade your hardware/software because you aren't leasing the software.

Now if you have a ton of files in said format (which is proprietary by the way) and need to be able to edit existing files, then you are stuck with paying Adobe because no software out there will 100% import the files in a truly editable state. If you never need to edit them, most of the other packages out there will read the files in. The mess that becomes of the layers et al is another story... hence why you want to start using the alternative software if that is your plan going forward.

Given your desire for the Adobe features, you're best bet is actually an ARM Mac (or a PC) because your alternatives are only going to be a short lived stop gap on your old rig. Not that the rig is incapable, it's forced obsolescence by the software vendor.
 

rodedwards

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jul 7, 2010
208
69
Thanks to everyone for their input on this thread. May i pick more brains please ...

I use Adobe Photoshop professionally, so i can't switch to Afinity Photo or similar - and many of my files are psd.

This means i can either try upgrading to newer OS - with associated risks. I'm not a whizz kid with computers, and it's a gamble. My set up includes Drobo 4 bay as back up and not sure it will work 100% as intended.

This leaves me with the option of upgrading hardware to newer Mac. However, I don't think the latest iMacs are much faster than my current set up - and the new Mac Pros are hideously expensive. Hence my dilemma.

I'm currently on an early 2009 Mac Pro (flashed 4,1 > 5,1), with Mojave 10.14.6, upgraded 2 x 3.46 Ghz 6-Core Intel Xeon, 96Gb 1333 Mhz DDR3, Radeon RX 580 8Gb graphics card, 1 Tb Samsung SSD 970 EVO and four 6Tb internal hard drives - all displayed on an old 23" Apple Cinema HD Display.

I use Photoshop / Lightroom, FCP X etc but shoot very high res 360 degree images and 8k 360 degree VR video. The faster the GPU the better as playback of 8k 360 video is intensive - even on Youtube.

Would a new iMac be faster and cope with 8k 360 video?

These are my Geakbench 5 Scores :

CPU : https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/10814517

Compute Metal : https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/3659984

CPU.jpg
GPU.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: spacedcadet

spacedcadet

macrumors regular
Mar 5, 2009
202
53
Thanks to everyone for their input on this thread. May i pick more brains please ...

I use Adobe Photoshop professionally, so i can't switch to Afinity Photo or similar - and many of my files are psd.

This means i can either try upgrading to newer OS - with associated risks. I'm not a whizz kid with computers, and it's a gamble. My set up includes Drobo 4 bay as back up and not sure it will work 100% as intended.

This leaves me with the option of upgrading hardware to newer Mac. However, I don't think the latest iMacs are much faster than my current set up - and the new Mac Pros are hideously expensive. Hence my dilemma.

I'm currently on an early 2009 Mac Pro (flashed 4,1 > 5,1), with Mojave 10.14.6, upgraded 2 x 3.46 Ghz 6-Core Intel Xeon, 96Gb 1333 Mhz DDR3, Radeon RX 580 8Gb graphics card, 1 Tb Samsung SSD 970 EVO and four 6Tb internal hard drives - all displayed on an old 23" Apple Cinema HD Display.

I use Photoshop / Lightroom, FCP X etc but shoot very high res 360 degree images and 8k 360 degree VR video. The faster the GPU the better as playback of 8k 360 video is intensive - even on Youtube.

Would a new iMac be faster and cope with 8k 360 video?

These are my Geakbench 5 Scores :

CPU : https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/10814517

Compute Metal : https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/3659984

View attachment 1902246 View attachment 1902245
Pretty sure a 2019 or 2020 iMac 5k would be faster than your Mac Pro. Can't speak for the video stuff, but I use an iMac Pro with 32GB RAM at a client's office and it's noticeably faster for some bigger Photoshop work, not so massively to the extent that the 5,1 feels outdated (which is why the 5,1 upgraded rocks!). It's nearly 10 years newer so stands to reason it would be faster.

You can get a 2020 iMac 10 core i9 with 8gb RAM and 1TB SSD from the refurb store for about £2300 and upgrade the RAM to a decent amount yourself. This is probably the route I will go down, depending on what comes out next year in terms of pro Apple Silicon stuff. Downside for me is the screen although beautiful, does not calibrate well, and I don't need two 27" monitors on my desk.

In the meantime I have got Open Core working and am nearly ready to set up a test Catalina disk so I can run the new versions of PS/ID/IL.
 

ddhhddhh2

macrumors regular
Jun 2, 2021
242
374
Taipei
Thanks to everyone for their input on this thread. May i pick more brains please ...

I use Adobe Photoshop professionally, so i can't switch to Afinity Photo or similar - and many of my files are psd.

This means i can either try upgrading to newer OS - with associated risks. I'm not a whizz kid with computers, and it's a gamble. My set up includes Drobo 4 bay as back up and not sure it will work 100% as intended.

This leaves me with the option of upgrading hardware to newer Mac. However, I don't think the latest iMacs are much faster than my current set up - and the new Mac Pros are hideously expensive. Hence my dilemma.

I'm currently on an early 2009 Mac Pro (flashed 4,1 > 5,1), with Mojave 10.14.6, upgraded 2 x 3.46 Ghz 6-Core Intel Xeon, 96Gb 1333 Mhz DDR3, Radeon RX 580 8Gb graphics card, 1 Tb Samsung SSD 970 EVO and four 6Tb internal hard drives - all displayed on an old 23" Apple Cinema HD Display.

I use Photoshop / Lightroom, FCP X etc but shoot very high res 360 degree images and 8k 360 degree VR video. The faster the GPU the better as playback of 8k 360 video is intensive - even on Youtube.

Would a new iMac be faster and cope with 8k 360 video?

These are my Geakbench 5 Scores :

CPU : https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/10814517

Compute Metal : https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/3659984

View attachment 1902246 View attachment 1902245


Since you have a need for 8K editing, and if you are planning to buy the new model, I sincerely suggest that you get the M1 Max/64 without even considering the current "new" Mac Pro.

In fact, the M1 Max has already beaten the "new" Mac Pro in every way, and the price difference between the two is almost five times.

Here's a comparison video I watched a while back of a Chinese AV studio comparing their M1 Max to the Mac Pro, which you can see here.

MacBook Pro hits the Mac Pro hard

You don't need to consider the expensive Mac Pro at all unless you're willing to wait until after June next year, which may not be the case, and as usual, the price will not be very affordable.

With your current mac Pro 5,1, theoretically, installing a higher performance graphics card should do the job, and I don't think PCIE will be a performance bottleneck, yes, it will definitely be a limitation, but not the main reason, the main issue is the price.

The market for graphics cards is crazy. I saw a news story today that a graphics card delivery truck was stolen, we need to know that next year's graphics cards or 3C products are based on last year's chip supply, and this year's chip supply is quite short.

Because of Wuhan pneumonia, the wages paid by the capital are higher than in the past, and the mining is still going on, so the price of graphics cards will only get more expensive, and neither N/A can change fundamentally.

So, if you have a heavy demand for audio and video work, then I would recommend the M1 Max/64 as the ideal choice at this time.

I must also remind you that the 5,1 is indeed an old computer and the years will leave their mark on it. From the forum, we know that SPI flash is a hidden problem and if the years are retaliating on the 5,1, your work will be at risk.

So, instead of considering an iMac, I suggest the M1 Max/64, which is obviously quite suitable for your heavy-duty needs, and after seeing the comparison video, there's no doubt about it.
 

bsbeamer

macrumors 601
Sep 19, 2012
4,313
2,713
Just FYI, you can't "lock-in" a specific version of Adobe products if they are subscription based

Adobe supports the CURRENT version and PREVIOUS version of nearly all products. Technically believe this is CC 2022 and CC 2021 right now, though not every single product under license fits into that exact naming structure.

They do not force you to install application updates, but the Creative Cloud interface app must be updated after 6-8 weeks of an update being issued to maintain activation.

They used to support the previous two versions, but that generally ended with the issues around licensing Dolby stuff for old versions of video products a few years ago. Believe CC 2016 is the last version of products that can be successfully launched for most products without issue (if the Dolby licensing update fix was installed).


I would highly suggest anyone that 100% needs access to CC 2020 or previous apps to have bootable clones with those versions installed. The direct installers for CC 2020 and previous that were available from 3rd party sources at one time now have issues getting through activation during install. Offloading the Applications (directly from the Applications folder) onto an archive drive instead of removing during install/upgrade/update also helps.
 

ssgbryan

macrumors 65816
Jul 18, 2002
1,488
1,420
What is more important to you rodedwards? If you are staying with OSX, get an Apple product with a future, the new Apple Silicon is the way to go.

There is no future with an Intel based Mac. Jump now, or jump later - you will be jumping, if you insist on staying on Apple based systems.
 

ssgbryan

macrumors 65816
Jul 18, 2002
1,488
1,420
There is a proverb that says there is a kind of cold that your grandma thinks you are cold.

You spend a lot of space explaining that you 'have such a high performance computer', which is not helpful to the user of this thread.

My answer is a useful option for him, and this option is based on the accumulation of the forum.

Of course, maybe I'm saying that 5,1 is good enough for most people, but that's probably an inaccurate judgment, and you have the right to question that, so please allow me to answer, when I compare the 5,1 to the 2019 MBP i9 16", I don't think there is a very far difference in performance.

At least 5,1 is not unacceptably slow, especially with M.2, and SSD speeds are at least in a reasonable range.

If the MBP i9 is very poor and the 5,1 is way behind the MBP i9 in terms of usage (let's forget about those scores), then I would not say that the 5,1 is still a usable performance for most people, and I believe that the MBP i9 is at least not quite "old speed" for most people, that's my basis.

My work are front-end development, compilation, back-end development, database development, docker building, and I occasionally use adobe as well as 3D graphics (C4D, SKP), AE, and so on.

It may not be great, but if all this work makes me think that there is not such a huge difference between the 5,1 and the MBP i9, it is hard for me to convince this user to give up this "old Apple" that you claim.

So, with all due respect, your answer is just like the salesman at the store, sincerely sarcastic about his intention to keep the 5,1, one only has to read through this post to see how unrealistic that is.

Your sarcasm is based on your own experience, and you are taking your own subjective experience as absolute authority.

Because your project requires 'how fast the computer is', so everyone must have that performance, yes, I believe I have not misunderstood your intent.

But in fact, how do you know that this user actually only needs to solve this 5.1 problem?

So, in this post, I don't even need to speculate, because he only has one question: his 5,1 can't run the latest adobe, and the reason is just the OS support policy, simple as that.

It's pretty basic logic, unless, of course, you're the grandma who thinks he'll be cold, all this really has nothing to do with emotions.

Oh yeah, isn't your time expensive? Why waste it on this cheap issue.
Did you replace your flashed Mac Pro with something else? The OP is trying to decide whether to stay with their Mac Pro or go in a different direction.

I was in the exact same boat. I have already gone down a road that the OP is considering. What the OP does is hardware intensive. What I do is also hardware intensive, which is why I gave my advice.

My decision doesn't align with most of the folks here, because they have an emotional attachment to what is, at the end of the day, a tool. You don't push your system like I or the OP does - (i.e. pegging every single core for hours at at a time.)

The OP will only be able to go the band-aid & baling wire route for so long; they have already stated that they aren't all that computer savvy, so how realistic is it for them to keep a 12+ year system going. Look at the stickies in this very forum.

It isn't just what I need today - it is what I will need tomorrow. I have been down the road of replacing a Tower Mac every time my software was upgraded. That gets expensive.

I retired a MacPro with almost the same specs as the OP. M.2 or SSD, the OP is still limited to PCIe 2.0. Even when you raid SSDs, you still will not see the performance that is available, right now on any other platform. The OP will have major issues going forward with video cards. AMD doesn't appear to be making reference cards anymore; you can't just drop any current AMD card into a 5,1 and expect it to work. AIBs have to justify cards that are 2.5 to 3 times MSRP, so don't expect all of $1,000+ cards to work (assuming of course, that they can actually get their hands on one).

I saw a significant jump in performance, for a lot less money than an Apple based solution. In addition to that - there is a clear path forward - which does not exist with an Apple based solution. It is what it is.

The OP will probably stay with Apple - he has integrated Apple software into his workflow, and that means that Apple will have their hand in his pocket for some time to come. That is the downside to going with Apple specific software.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.