iMac vs Mac Pro

[mcblue]

I have been working on a Powerbook G4 1.25Ghz and wanted a desktop. Right now,

at home I connect the Powerbook to a 20-inch Apple display. I'm looking into

getting a desktop since the Pbook is quite sluggish even with full-size JPEGs

(Nikon D200). Also, I don't shoot RAW much right now, but I've been wanting to

do that mroe for a while now but I don't have the time and patience to work on

RAW on the Pbook with Nikon Capture.

 

I was thinking of either these two:

 

1. Mac Pro (2GB RAM) -- will just connect this to my 20". I like the fact that

it's more upgradeable and I can but a larger display later.

 

2. iMac 24" (also 2GB RAM) -- cheaper plus I can sell my 20" monitor and just

use my Pbook as my mobile machine.

 

(I limit the RAM upgrade to 2GB since my main concern are with Adobe apps. Also,

beyond 2GB, Apple charges a lot for RAM so I'll probably just get more from a

third-party vendor in the future.)

 

Since it's simply cheaper and I get a larger display, I'm actually wondering if

Option #2, the iMac, is good enough for my needs working with D200 jpegs and

possibly RAW files. The software I use is Photoshop CS, iView MediaPro for

cataloging, and Nikon Capture for the occasional RAW. I also use DxO for batch work.

 

I'm also looking for general opinions if it's just better to buy either system

in the long term. But definitely, I'm set on upgrading to an Intel machine

because of my Pbooks age and also because of Photoshop CS3 set to come out next

spring. Thanks a lot in advance.

[patricklavoie]

Both of the machine you look at are certainly to big and too fast for your need for what you

describe and intend to do with them, but if i was you il go with the 20 inch Imac, or the 24

Imac if you want a bigger screen, you will anyway be able to connect your other screen on it

by the way. so buying a 20 inch + your 20 inch...= good setup. I have a Imac (just the model

before the Intel) that i use on location when whe do fashion, around 800 shot a day all in

RAW and JPEG and it fly smoothly with Bridge and ACR, got 1.5 gig of RAM in it. At home i got

a G5 3.5 GIG of RAM to do the work.

[bieg]

I just set up my Mac Pro 3Ghz. The big advantage to the Mac Pro is the quad processors

and the fact that you can have 4 internal drives. In my case I have 4 500 gig drives set up

as 2 mirrored raids. This gives me almost foolproof redundancy against drive failure wiping

out my work. Of course you can set up external drives with an iMac to do the same but

then you sort of ruin the whole idea of the all in one design.

 

Either way they are great machines. Both are works of industrial art.

[patricklavoie]

the big difference between the 2 system is 4000$US : ) a bit expensive to work with JPEG

images.

[mcblue]

Thanks Patrick and Steven!

 

So I guess the even the iMac is more than enough a machine for JPEGs? My Pbook must be really old...

 

I may want to work on more RAW (D200 NEF) in the future and also work on 10-40 MB Photoshop files (I'm in the graphics biz, though I've only been doing web stuff right now). I don't do much movie, 3-D work, or gaming.

 

I guess I'm leaning on the iMac now, especially since I didn't know I could connect my 20"...

 

Thanks again.

[patricklavoie]

I am working with 350 meg on my Imac G5 pre-Intel and it work like a charm...you should be

OK with a 10 meg file : )

[ace_fury]

<I>,,,,the big difference between the 2 system is 4000$US : )</I><P> More like $400.

[mcblue]

Ok. Thanks Patrick. :)

[godfrey]

BTW: Older PowerBook G4 laptops were fitted with slow, 4200 and 5400 rpm drives. If you

want to spruce up your PB G4's operation significantly, max out the RAM and fit a fast

100-120G laptop drive. This is not so expensive nowadays.

 

I use a PowerBook G4 1.67Ghz fitted with a fast 120G drive and 1.5G RAM for Photoshop

work on the road. It can't hold a candle to the G5 or Mac Pro desktop systems, but it works

well enough to do a lot of work, and certainly is no problem with JPEG image files.

 

Godfrey

[inspiration point studio]

Whether you work with jpeg or RAW files have nothing to do with whether you need an

iMac or a MacPro. Both jpeg and RAW files, once opened in Photoshop, will be expanded to

the same dimensions in pixels counts, and it is this opened size that determine your

memory requirement. No matter how powerful your computer is, RAM size is the bottle

neck for the entire system. Photoshop works best when you have RAM that doubles the

size of the opened file. Suppose you have three photos you want to stitch together to get a

panorama print, each file is 50MB large, just opening the files will take 150MB, the

resultant Panorama file is another 150MB, totalling 300MB. Useing the x2 factor, that's

600MB of RAM requirements for Photoshop. If you work with layers, or filters that build on

layers, the memory requirements go up. Add that to your OS RAM requirement, and any

applications you want to run at the same time (Photoshop Bridge, Capture, Internet web

browser, iTune...). You get the picture? Now, the iMac only has 3GB of memory fully

loaded, that will be your first hardware limit. I work with scanned images that take up

100MB to 350MB each, so iMAC won't fit my need just from memory requirement alone.

[inspiration point studio]

One quick clarification. When I say a jpeg file and a RAW file open to the same file size, I

assume both use 8 bit representation. RAW file format can support 16 bit while jpeg cannot,

so it's possible to have a bigger RAW file when opened.

[gdanmitchell]

For most people the 20" or 24" iMacs will be a great, especially if equipped with enough

memory. I'd go for 2GB.

 

If you use Photoshop, one thing to keep in mind is that the current version runs in emulation

on the Intel processor iMacs. It apparently runs quite well, but no faster than on the older

processors. The full speed advantage will not come until Adobe releases native versions of

their software.

[mcblue]

Thanks Godfrey, Michael and Dan for all the info. I wonder how much it costs to upgrade my old G4 Pbook's hard drive and RAM. I still probably want an Intel desktop but it might be worth it to keep the Pbook going.

 

I think it would be rare for me to have files over 100MB. The largest files I've worked on are some TIFFs and many-layered PSD files, so maybe I'm one of those people who'd be happy with the iMac and 2GB of RAM. I also heard that current Photoshop can only use a maximum of 2GB anyway though I'm not sure.

 

Still it's tempting to get a desktop since I tend to keep my machines for a long time anyway before upgrading...

[basscheffers]

I'd go for the 24" iMac; it's rediculously fast already. (The Mac Pro is ludicrously fast :)

 

Upgrading RAM and HD in your PB is easy and cheap if you don't get it from Apple. Just do a

search on "Mac Ram" or something to find a vendor that will guarantee you get the right

memory using a selector based on what machine you have. As for harddisks, any 2.5" ATA

(not SATA!) will do. Make sure you get a 7200RPM one with a lot of cache. (usually up to 8MB)

[Uhooru]

I'm going for a 24" imac 2 gig o'ram, but if I already had a nice ACD I would seriously

consider getting the mac pro with probably 2 gig of ram to start.W/o monitor w/ 2gig ram,

500 gig harddrive, upgraded video card is about $3400 bucks off the Apple site. That's about

500 or 600 or so more than an iMac 24.

 

The only problem with the iMac that I see is you can't really upgrade it so the replacement

cycle is much faster, however, they seem to keep up value so you can often get a decent price

for them when its time for an upgrade.

[patricklavoie]

ACE_I was obviously for the price difference refering of Steven system (from what he

describe) vs the Imac Marvin want, 5938$US for is Mac Pro vs 2799$US for a Imac 24inch

3gig of RAM...3189$US to be exact, not 4000$US youre rigth.

[mike cary]

Per Apple Website

"Mini-DVI output port with support for DVI, VGA,

 

Support for external display in extended desktop

Digital resolutions up to 1920 x 1200

Analog resolutions up to 2048 x 1536 "

 

Marvin,

 

I'd do a little research and see if its possible to use your 20" ADC with the iMAC. 24"+20" would make one wicked work space :)

[mcblue]

Bas - Thanks. I didn't know there were 7200RPM hard drives that can be used in a Pbook (or laptops in general). I know this is off-topic, but is it easy to swap out the hard drive in the Powerbook by myself?

 

Barry - Thanks. $3400 would be beyond what I want to spend. So far, I've been buying a new computer every three years -- with the older machine getting used for a few more years afterwards until I become very dependent on the new machine.

 

Patrick - It would really deter me from buying the Mac Pro if it were $4k more. :)

 

Mike - Thanks for looking it up. I should probably do my homework and read the specs more myself. (I simply assumed I could not connect another monitor to the iMac for some reason.).

[mcblue]

I looked it up and I can connect my current 20" ACD to the 24" iMac. From the Apple website:

 

# Support for external display in extended desktop

 

* Digital resolutions up to 1920 x 1200

* Analog resolutions up to 2048 x 1536

 

# Support for external display in video mirroring mode

 

Very cool. I think I'll settle for the iMac. Thanks again guys.

[Uhooru]

I'm pretty sure the 24" would support a ACD monitor as they put that support in with the first

Mactel iMacs.