Help Choosing a new G5 Mac...

Hi

 

I've recently started scanning my 645 and 69 negs to print on an Epson 2400. I'm scanning

on a rented Imacon 949 at maximum resolution (3200ppi) and 16 bit. File sizes are

between 200 and 400 Mb. When worked on in Photoshop CS2 the files end up being

between 400 and 800Mb (several adjustment layers, and a couple of retouch layers). Of

course, such large files are not necessary for output on the Epson, but I want to archive

high res files for future exhibitions.

 

I've been trying to do this work on my lowly eMac (G4 800Mhz, 768Mb Ram), but it's

clearly not up to the job - an action that rotates, flattens, resizes, converts to 8 bit, and

sharpens, takes about 4 minutes.

 

I've consider a Mac Mini or a G5 iMac, but I've decided that what I really need is one the

new G5 powermacs with a 20" Cinema Display.

 

Can anyone advise on configuration?

 

Will the bottom of the line 2Ghz machine be adequate to my needs?

 

How much RAM do I need?

 

What's the difference between Non ECC RAM and the more expensive ECC RAM?

 

Is is it best to get the 256Mb graphics card, or is 128Mb sufficient?

 

Do I need a second internal HD as a dedicated scratch disk (I have several external drives

for storage)?

 

Roughly how much faster will this machine be than my eMac? (Twice as fast? 10 times as

fast?)

 

Is it wise to buy one of the new machines so soon after their release? Or should I wait a

few weeks to see if there are any problems?

 

Thanks for any advice.

 

Elliot

 

(p.s. I'm not in the market for a PC)

I 'd get a minimum of 2Gb RAM but 4Gb will make things go faster. Allocate 72% of

available RAM to Photoshop. Don't buy your RAM from Apple though -- the charge a

premium. Try http://www.smalldog.com

 

The bottom of the line (a dual 2Ghz G5) will be fine but of course more horsepower will

make things go faster.

 

Yes you want a second internal HDD with one partition (not the whole thing) used as a

scratch drive.

 

I bought my first G4 , a 2001 Quicksilver, as soon as it was announced. It has been

running

more or less non-stop since August 2001 with no problems. G5 technology is pretty well

established by now and so is OS X 10.4 (Tiger) so you too should have smooth sailing.

The sweet spot for value on Apple's machines tends to be their middle option. For the

extra $500, it looks like you get a pretty good return in both performance and storage,

and you won't feel like your computer is out of date quite so soon. Also, it looks like

Apple's new Aperture software will be heavily dependent on the quality of the graphics

card, so it probably is a good move to go that route as well. Photoshop speed increases

noticeably with more memory. I have 2.5 GB on mine, and it seems like enough, but more

is always better. Buy the memory, though, from someone other than Apple and save some

money.

 

I don't use a separate scratch disk, but I do use a high speed 70 GB dedicated system/

applications disk. This was recommended to me by several others, and I've noticed,

especially over time, that my computer is a bit faster than those that don't have this setup.

I have a 250 GB drive in the second bay, and keep a daily backup to an external firewire

extreme.

 

I'm not sure of the value of ECC RAM - I can only say that I have the non-ECC, maybe I just

don't know what I'm missing.

 

I wouldn't wait. They've changed a lot this time, but they're still incremental updates to

existing machines. I think the biggest problem Apple saw on the early G5s were cooling

issues, and the new machines have cooler chips.

 

How fast? Fast enough.

ECC ram is mostly only for servers. This type of memory checks for errors and corrects in case of one. It is not really something you are missing if your computer has never crashed.

As Ellis suggested, the "low-end" 2-GHz dual-core should do fine. If you can spare the

extra cash the dual-core 2.3-GHz gives a little better performance and comes with a 250-

GB disk standard and the better video card.

 

Smalldog is a great vendor to deal with not only for RAM but systems, too.

 

You don't need ECC RAM -- this is usually used on servers to protect against cosmic-ray

induced single-bit errors.

 

It's hard to guess relative performance -- with enough RAM I suspect it'll be at least 10x

faster than the G4 eMac.

 

I wouldn't hesitate to buy a new machine -- I've never had *any* hardware problems with

the Macs I've purchased (and I do have a few).

 

-Mike

Yes, bottom line, the 2.0 dual will be more than adaquate for your needs. Photoshop at this point has, a Ram limitation of 2 gigs, but apperantly in some setups it can address more. However 2 gigs or more would be great. The stock video card is fine for now. 256 Vram is great but 128 is more than adaquate, this probably isn't a gaming machine. In fact the 20" iMac with 2.5 gigs is a very attractive package even with only 1 processor. But if money is there...why not get the new powermac quad? That would be a fantastic machine. Also, I think you can still find the dual 2.7's around. All these machines would be great. Powermac is, of course, more powerful and expandable. Some other important features of PM over IM is firewire 800. Also powermac has the PCI X and the new ones use PCI Express which speeds the graphics and also other kinds of add ons. However you can still do very well with a top of the line iMac. You just have to determine what your needs are and what you can afford.

 

I'm using a 20" iMac it is definately doing the job and its been very good in photoshop. The screen is fantastic and with a Spyder 2 Pro, it calibrates very accurately. I also have been using FCE with it and its great for that kind of Video. Of course the PM would render stuff faster and just be faster. Very efficiant unit for space limited work stations.

 

As elegant as they are and popular, I don't think I'd reccommend the mini if you are doing heavy photoshop work. People do like them but really it has a slow processor and sub system. Also if you have to buy a monitor and keyboard, mouse etc. its getting towards the cost of an iMac anyways, a much more powerful machine.

 

Oh, do get a 2nd hardrive. For my iMac I use external HD's works great even though they are limited to firewire 400 instead of 800.

2GHz PowerPC processor (G5) is faster than 2Ghz Intel, and consumes less power. G5 (you have to check) comes with Altivec (( http://developer.apple.com/hardware/ve/ )) so this will enhance your editing experience.

 

If you (or your friend) works for major companies (like dell, IBM, Microsoft .... ) you/they can get upto 18% discount on Apple computers and IPOD. I bought my ipod at 8% discount, and 10% (I think) on my powerbook. I had a "tier 3 premium discount". So that is something you might want to think abt too...

<I>2GHz PowerPC processor (G5) is faster than 2Ghz Intel</i><P>Only with Altivec optimized applications. Of course that list includes mostly what we're talking about here.

Dont go with a mac mini, its almost the same of what you already have./ _Imac G5 could

do it, but you are better with a dual./ _a dual 2ghz will be enough (i work on big file like

600 meg -1200 meg everyday, for amazingly for me)/ _Max RAM it, like 4gig, DDR, i think

its what you need but ask your sale rep./ _128 video card will be perfect for a 20 to 23

inch screen at the highest resolution./ _Yes you will need internal/external hard drive to

store your file, a good back up solution like digital tape or good DVD like Matsui brand

100+ archival./ _I cant say how much, its not even the same processor, the same

hardware, the same technologie...but you will see a major difference for sure, it will like

waiting for the file to open on your Emac, and BAM open on your dual./ _If you keep

waiting you will never buy a new machine, if you dont like to live dangerously, buy the last

month G5 : ) Advice given by a professionel photoretoucher, that use is machine 50hre a

week to work...and im working pretty fast with that set up. hope that will help you.

Many thanks for the advice.

 

Yesterday, I went to the Apple Store here in London, with a 400Mb 16bit file on a CD

together with a photoshop action that goes through the moves that I usually make (various

adjustment layers, rotate, crop, resize, usm etc.)

 

They only had Photoshop CS2 installed on a 2.7Ghz Dual (with 3.5Gb RAM), so that

was the machine I tested. The

sales assistant said I would get similar performance from the new 2.3Ghz dualcore.

 

The results were impressive....

 

Open the file by dropping on Photoshop icon (i.e. including Photoshop start-up):

 

eMac = 2m 20s,

G5 = 18s

 

Photoshop action:

 

eMac = 4m 48s,

G5 = 50s

 

Save file (400Mb) to desktop:

 

eMac = 1m 45s,

G5 = 10s

 

Total times:

 

eMac = 9m 3s,

G5 = 1m 18s

 

So the G5 was 7 times faster than my eMac.

 

Later this week I'll be buying the new 2.3Ghz G5 with an extra 2GB of RAM and a 20"

Cinema Display.