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

nMP 6c + D300s?

A

AppleDroid

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Apr 10, 2011
631
84
Illinois
I've read up on Barefeats and MacPerformanceGuide as well as a few other sites but the one combo I can't seem to find data on is upgrading the base nMP 4C to a 6C but keeping the D300s. Does anyone have data on whether the D500's are worth it for Photoshop/Lightroom?

The reason I ask is if you take BF data the CTO iMac is faster than the 4c nMP at most PS and LR tasks but the 6c/D500 beats it outright. Question remains if it the CPU or the better GPU's that push it past the 4c nMP/iMac in benchmarks?

Any guidance would be appreciated.
 
alphaod said:
For Photoshop/Lightroom, it's the better processor.
Click to expand...

Thanks very short concise answer. Originally I thought about going from my 09 MP > iMac but I just didn't want an AiO. Unfortunately the Xeon chips are a generation behind so the nMP Quad is underwhelming so I figure the 6c / 512GB SSD upgrades would keep it under $1k more than the top CTO iMac.
 
I have a 6 core with D300s and a 512SSD, if you want any specific benchmarks done, let me know.

Choosing the right spec is a bit of a minefield - I went heavy on the ram (64Gb aftermarket from Crucial) and light on the graphics cards because I do a lot of work in After Effects CS6, which is a memory hog if you configure it to use multiple cores, but probably won't get drivers tuned for D-series cards.
 
Last edited:
I have a 6c + D300 configuration too, though I use it for engineering research.

From my understanding, GPU acceleration in Photoshop is extremely limited (i.e., optimized for a few filters). "Mac Performance Guide" has quite a few articles on the subject, here's one: http://macperformanceguide.com/MacPro2013-performance-GPU-filters.html

The taxing software I use – MATLAB and ANSYS – are heavily CPU based and aren't optimized for ATI GPU computing. The software needs serious optimization for GPU computing and I doubt it'll happen anytime soon, so what's the point. I'll spend money on a better GPU when it's justified, till then, the D300 is plenty.
 
I do mostly Lightroom (70%) and Photoshop work (10%) with a little 4K video editing (20%). I regret getting the D500 in my 6-core new Mac Pro. I think it was wasted money and I should have stuck with D300s instead.

I may change my tune in the coming years but, for now, the benefit to my workflow (and most photographers) is minimal.
 
AndyUnderscoreR said:
I have a 6 core with D300s and a 512SSD, if you want any specific benchmarks done, let me know.

Choosing the right spec is a bit of a minefield - I went heavy on the ram (64Gb aftermarket from Crucial) and light on the graphics cards because I do a lot of work in After Effects CS6, which is a memory hog if you configure it to use multiple cores, but probably won't get drivers tuned for D-series cards.
Click to expand...

Thanks and what we got for the 2014 CC update nothing really changed as far as my main apps, PS and LR, as far as utilizing dual GPUs so it didn't seem like a deal breaker. Honestly the only reason I upgraded my GT120 to the GTX285 was because the GT120 was horrendously underpowered. Same cannot be said for the D300's. Also thank you for offering to do benchmarks - I can run the MPG Photoshop Speed/Medium/Huge tests but bare feats doesn't provide images or scripts to compare against sadly.

Cal3b said:
I have a 6c + D300 configuration too, though I use it for engineering research.

From my understanding, GPU acceleration in Photoshop is extremely limited (i.e., optimized for a few filters). "Mac Performance Guide" has quite a few articles on the subject, here's one: http://macperformanceguide.com/MacPro2013-performance-GPU-filters.html

The taxing software I use – MATLAB and ANSYS – are heavily CPU based and aren't optimized for ATI GPU computing. The software needs serious optimization for GPU computing and I doubt it'll happen anytime soon, so what's the point. I'll spend money on a better GPU when it's justified, till then, the D300 is plenty.
Click to expand...

Thanks. The only reason it was even a debate for me was due to Apple's insistence on locking everything down. If they allowed us to buy new GPU's or SSD blades I'd have a new system already. My fear is that I keep machines around 4-5 years and will the D300's, or the older Ivy Bridge CPUs, be woefully underpowered compared to the 2015 Broadwell. Ugh ;)

hualon said:
I do mostly Lightroom (70%) and Photoshop work (10%) with a little 4K video editing (20%). I regret getting the D500 in my 6-core new Mac Pro. I think it was wasted money and I should have stuck with D300s instead.

I may change my tune in the coming years but, for now, the benefit to my workflow (and most photographers) is minimal.
Click to expand...

Great to hear thank you. I only do minor video editing, nothing crazy that would demand D700 (or even D500) levels from what I've read. It seems the consensus is the 6c for PS and LR is a much bigger deal than GPU even with the CC 2014 update.
 
AppleDroid said:
I've read up on Barefeats and MacPerformanceGuide as well as a few other sites but the one combo I can't seem to find data on is upgrading the base nMP 4C to a 6C but keeping the D300s. Does anyone have data on whether the D500's are worth it for Photoshop/Lightroom?

The reason I ask is if you take BF data the CTO iMac is faster than the 4c nMP at most PS and LR tasks but the 6c/D500 beats it outright. Question remains if it the CPU or the better GPU's that push it past the 4c nMP/iMac in benchmarks?

Any guidance would be appreciated.
Click to expand...
...............................

One should not forget that 2 x 2 GB Video RAM (D300) is a lot when compared with the GPUs 5770 and 5870 (both with 1 GB RAM) Apple offered a year ago!.
Most users having bought D300 or D500 will probably give you the same answer as those you received already. No noticeable difference in most common and graphic applications.
Those people using software heavily relying on GPU invest already in the expensive D700 pair.
 
Riwam said:
...............................

One should not forget that 2 x 2 GB Video RAM (D300) is a lot when compared with the GPUs 5770 and 5870 (both with 1 GB RAM) Apple offered a year ago!.
Most users having bought D300 or D500 will probably give you the same answer as those you received already. No noticeable difference in most common and graphic applications.
Those people using software heavily relying on GPU invest already in the expensive D700 pair.
Click to expand...
Wow does this discussion take me back to the SGI days with SolidIMPACT, HighIMPACT, and MaxIMPACT (late model Indigo2 systems), SI, SI + Texture (early Octane systems), SSI, and MXI along with SE, SE + Texture, SSE, and MXE (late Octane systems) graphics choices.
 
Even the 4 core is fairly speedy...

Ny 4 core nMP with only 16GB RAM and the D300s run large RAW and TIF files quite will in CS6CC and LR5. If that changes I can always upgrade my CPU later. I do very little video editing.

Very happy with this machine!:D
 
AppleDroid said:
Thanks very short concise answer.
Click to expand...

I would invest the difference in additional memory. I bought a channel configuration (so non-BTO), so mine came with only 16GB of memory and the D500. I would have gladly done with more RAM and the D300.

I just ordered 64GB of RAM to upgrade. I see a much better performance boosting coming. 16GB just isn't enough for my workload.
 
Riwam said:
...............................

One should not forget that 2 x 2 GB Video RAM (D300) is a lot when compared with the GPUs 5770 and 5870 (both with 1 GB RAM) Apple offered a year ago!.
Most users having bought D300 or D500 will probably give you the same answer as those you received already. No noticeable difference in most common and graphic applications.
Those people using software heavily relying on GPU invest already in the expensive D700 pair.
Click to expand...

That was my suspicion but it's aways nice to hear from so many that the D300's are "good enough" for non-video/4k editing.

hassiman said:
Ny 4 core nMP with only 16GB RAM and the D300s run large RAW and TIF files quite will in CS6CC and LR5. If that changes I can always upgrade my CPU later. I do very little video editing.

Very happy with this machine!:D
Click to expand...

Glad to hear it! The only thing is apparently Intel is changing the socket again so the next round of CPU's will not be comparable with the current nMP which is why I decided to budget for the 6c now.

alphaod said:
I would invest the difference in additional memory. I bought a channel configuration (so non-BTO), so mine came with only 16GB of memory and the D500. I would have gladly done with more RAM and the D300.

I just ordered 64GB of RAM to upgrade. I see a much better performance boosting coming. 16GB just isn't enough for my workload.
Click to expand...

Thanks again. I plan on picking up the 16GBx2 32GB Crucial kit along with the nMP. Other purchases are the RAID5 8TB OWC Thunderbay, 6TB backup drive and a new USB 3.0 card reader so all of that will keep it under $6k which is my absolute price ceiling. Hopefully I an keep using/swap out new drives with the Thunderbay so my next machine will just be the price of the machine.
 
alphaod said:
I would invest the difference in additional memory. I bought a channel configuration (so non-BTO), so mine came with only 16GB of memory and the D500. I would have gladly done with more RAM and the D300.

I just ordered 64GB of RAM to upgrade. I see a much better performance boosting coming. 16GB just isn't enough for my workload.
Click to expand...

Can you please check back on that when you get them and have the time to test it with more RAM? I'm waiting for my stock 6-core (same as yours) and I have been wondering how big of a difference would it be if I maxed the RAM.

Thanks a lot!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back