Mac Pro or Conroe PC for CS2/MX8

[ErikVsn]

Hello everyone,

The title is alittle misleading but this is not another tiresome which is better or flame bait. I am hoping someone can help me find which computer would be best for running CS2 and Macromedia 8 right now. I am in school about to graduate in graphic design(knock on wood) and my old PC is on its last leg. I have been itching to get a Mac but since Adobe CS2 and Macromedia 8 are not universal I have been keeping my distance on getting a new one.

Now that Apple has released Bootcamp do you think it would be better for me to buy a Mac Pro and run the design software in Windows until CS3 comes out or will it still be such a performance hit that I should just build another PC because it would be faster running the software. I guess I am just trying to find which would be fastest for me right now since there is no universal CS3. Also I don't want to spend so much money if the Mac Pro is not going to produce the fastest results for me right now.

Thank you for your time and help

-Erik

 

[PowerBookG4]

I would go with the mac pro because you want to go mac and it would be cheaper to stay buy the mac now, and then go to mac osx when cs3 comes out, then to buy a new pc now, then go out and buy a mac and cs3 when itcomes out.

 

[yogi]

You can safely buy the Mac Pro and run Windows for a while. It will cost you more to get a comparable Windows product.

The slightest of doubts only exists in the performace of boot camp on the Mac Pro (they required to upgrade it for the xeon). Since it's not "time-tested" like the other macs, it might just be one small area of concern. If at all. But I just try to cover every possibility for a flaw.

 

[london]

You mean a single CPU (core 2 duo) PC vs a Dual CPU mac pro.

If your just using CS2 and studio 8. You could make make a good 2.6Mzh core 2 duo (conroe) PC for like $2000 AUD. A mac Pro 2,63Mhz costs $4000 AUD.
But of course thats Dual CPU and FB ECC memory on the Mac pro (that memory costs a fortune)
Depends on what u want to spend, money no object get the mac pro.
Bang for buck get the PC core 2 duo.

Unless your using like 1Gb photoshop files or something, you dont need a Pro Mac.
Unless your doing heavey work in final cut, shake, After effects, Motion, logic pro, pro tools. avid.
I dont thinkyou will need a mac pro.
Of course, it would still be nice to have one

 

[ErikVsn]

Thank you everyone for your quick responses. Yeah I guess I really don't need all that horsepower that the Mac pro gives but I really want to try out a Mac since everyone in my field swears by them. I wish Apple had something midranged without a built in monitor. Oh well I guess I will have to sit down and see whats best for me and my wallet.
As of right now though I am still leaning to the Mac for now.

Thanks again for all your input it really will help me in my decision

 

[dan828]

You mean a single CPU (core 2 duo) PC vs a Dual CPU mac pro.

Dual Xeon PC workstations are readily available at a similar price point as the Mac Pro-- the major difference being the OS (and if you go with Dell they usually throw in a flat panel monitor). No reason to compare the Mac Pro to a single CPU workstation.

That said, I'd still go with the Mac Pro, due to the flexibility and the fact of wanting to check out OS X. My understanding is the Adobe products on the Mac are better than their PC equivilents, though there will, of course, be a bit of a wait for the new versions.

 

[PowerBookG4]

My understanding is the Adobe products on the Mac are better than their PC equivilents, though there will, of course, be a bit of a wait for the new versions.

I agree, using photoshop on a pc is just not the same as using it on my mac, I really like the lay out and how the windows are aranged as seperate enities and not part of a huge window that takes up the whole screen. I feel doing graphics on a mac does make you more productive becaues it is easier to work with. I know that sounds like I am just trying to get you to switch, but it was just somebody who was not doing grapics and really was just curious and did not want to spend the money, I would tell them not to get it. I would say that because if they don't want it that badly, and they don't need it, then there is no reason to buy one. In your case however, I feel that you will probably need this power in the future, depending on your clients, talent, and intensity of your work, and you will wish you had the mac pro. However, I will tell you that if you honestly are not sure, wait it out a week or two and really give it serious thought.

You can always run bootcamp and keep windows on your mac pro later if you decide you don't want the mac, or you can sell it for alot of money, macs seam to keep their value quite well. If you build your own computer, or buy a pc, like a dell, hp, or other brand, you can not put osx on it later if you decide to. Get the mac since graphics is the feild you will be entering, and it will level the playing feild using the same equipment as people competeing with you.

Good luck, hope the decision you make is the one you are happy with, in the end its your choice.

 

[claudius753]

...Now that Apple has released Bootcamp do you think it would be better for me to buy a Mac Pro and run the design software in Windows until CS3 comes out or will it still be such a performance hit that I should just build another PC because it would be faster running the software....

I'm not quite sure you completely understand BootCamp. BootCamp is not a virtual machine like Parallels or Virtual PC (which is done for anyway). BootCamp lets you dual boot OS X and Windows.


When running Windows via BootCamp on a Mac Pro, there should be absolutely no performance difference than on an equal spec PC. With the switch to Intel, Macs are basically generic PCs with the superb ability to run OS X.

If you run Parallels, which basically is running Windows within a window on OS X, there will be some performance penalty because you have the overhead of running OS X and Parallels instead of just running Windows via BootCamp, but you don't have to reboot to get back into OS X, both are running side by side.

The third option is running CS2, etc, via Rosetta. Rosetta takes code written for the PowerPC architecture and translates it into x86 (intel) code. There is a pretty substantial performance hit with Rosetta compared to other options, but Rosetta is free, you don't have to buy Windows and/or Parallels.

With the Mac Pro, there is much pressure for Adobe to get it into gear and get a universal version of its software as quickly as possible. I think the way to go is the Mac Pro and a copy of Windows XP to run via BootCamp until the universal versions of the software you need is available.

 

[Avalon]

Thank you everyone for your quick responses. Yeah I guess I really don't need all that horsepower that the Mac pro gives but I really want to try out a Mac since everyone in my field swears by them. I wish Apple had something midranged without a built in monitor. Oh well I guess I will have to sit down and see whats best for me and my wallet.
As of right now though I am still leaning to the Mac for now.

Thanks again for all your input it really will help me in my decision

I would say the Mac Pro would be more of a long term investment. A quad core 64bit system won't be obsolete for quite a while, I would say.
Eventhough CS2 isn't universal, the Mac Pro has enough power so that it won't be that bad running under Rosetta. And if it does, you still have the option to install Windows, BootCamp gives you the option of dual booting. Though I'm not sure if that 32bit system that doesn't use multiple CPUs/cores very effectively is such a good choice.

All in all, the Mac Pro is the better choice. It will be powerfull enough for quite a long time, and you have the option to have Windows AND Mac OS X. It sure is mainly a financial question though...

 

[london]

Dual Xeon PC workstations are readily available at a similar price point as the Mac Pro-- the major difference being the OS (and if you go with Dell they usually throw in a flat panel monitor). No reason to compare the Mac Pro to a single CPU workstation.

That said, I'd still go with the Mac Pro, due to the flexibility and the fact of wanting to check out OS X. My understanding is the Adobe products on the Mac are better than their PC equivilents, though there will, of course, be a bit of a wait for the new versions.

Conroe is a single CPU core 2 Duo for PC.
Thats what he asked to be compared. I know you can get dual CPU Xeon PC workstations. But they are not conroe CPU's

 

[london]

I agree, using photoshop on a pc is just not the same as using it on my mac, I really like the lay out and how the windows are aranged as seperate enities and not part of a huge window that takes up the whole screen. I feel doing graphics on a mac does make you more productive becaues it is easier to work with. I know that sounds like I am just trying to get you to switch, but it was just somebody who was not doing grapics and really was just curious and did not want to spend the money, I would tell them not to get it. I would say that because if they don't want it that badly, and they don't need it, then there is no reason to buy one. In your case however, I feel that you will probably need this power in the future, depending on your clients, talent, and intensity of your work, and you will wish you had the mac pro. However, I will tell you that if you honestly are not sure, wait it out a week or two and really give it serious thought.

You can always run bootcamp and keep windows on your mac pro later if you decide you don't want the ma c, or you can sell it for alot of money, macs seam to keep their value quite well. If you build your own computer, or buy a pc, like a dell, hp, or other brand, you can not put osx on it later if you decide to. Get the mac since graphics is the feild you will be entering, and it will level the playing feild using the same equipment as people competeing with you.

Good luck, hope the decision you make is the one you are happy with, in the end its your choice.

I hate the floating panels on Photoshop on the Mac. Click on the wallpaper by mistake and photoshop hides. Half the time I dont know if its open or not. Most new Apps are thankfully not doing that anymore.

I agree Macs hold there value longer. I mean look at the price some of the powerMac G4's and power books still go for. I dont think resaleof the Intels will be as good as the Power Pc based Apples.
If all your doing is CS2 and Studio 8. There is no greater reason to get the Mac because of this. You can get them both on Pc and Mac. Work pretty much the same. Although I think the workflow is better on the PC being able to have more options when you right click in say photoshop.

 

[Avalon]

Conroe is a single CPU core 2 Duo for PC.
Thats what he asked to be compared. I know you can get dual CPU Xeon PC workstations. But they are not conroe CPU's

The Mac Pro has 2 dual core Xeons (64bit), not Conroe (or Core 2 Duo, 32bit), so not really a good comparison.
Though right now 64bit might not yet bring any advantage, it surely will in future.
Personnally, I would rather buy a machine that will cope with future needs, rather than buying a PC now for CS2, only to buy a Mac, or a newer PC, later for CS3. Because that means spending more money in the end.

And the Mac still is dominant in the graphic design market, just another reason to go with a Mac, especially one that's anyway able to do both, OS X and Windows, if needed.

 

[london]

The Mac Pro has 2 dual core Xeons (64bit), not Conroe (or Core 2 Duo, 32bit), so not really a good comparison.
Though right now 64bit might not yet bring any advantage, it surely will in future.
Personnally, I would rather buy a machine that will cope with future needs, rather than buying a PC now for CS2, only to buy a Mac, or a newer PC, later for CS3. Because that means spending more money in the end.

And the Mac still is dominant in the graphic design market, just another reason to go with a Mac, especially one that's anyway able to do both, OS X and Windows, if needed.

He ask for the mac pro to be compared to the Conroe. So I compared what he wanted.
The Conroe is 64Bit!
Xeons are just a dual cpu capable Conroe with standard 4 mb cache, but can only used FB ECC Ram.