very basic iMac questions...

[msl1983]

hi everyone,
I'm a bit of an idiot about computers so any help would be much appreciated. I've been running an upgraded mac pro for a while to do artwork and it's been moving slowly lately. I don't have the $ for a new mac pro nor do I have the time or knowledge to build a computer... Will a new iMac run Maya (esp. Mental Ray rendering), Photoshop w/ large files, and Zbrush faster than my old set-up? Specs are below. Thanks for any advice you could give me.



Michael

 

[Raz0rEdge]

Welcome to Mac-Forums..

On a pure performance level, your Mac Pro has a Geekbench multi-core score of 24514 while the newest top-of-the-line iMac has a score of 19520. Your Mac Pro has 12 cores while this iMac has 4 cores..

You have enough memory it seems, but your system could take more which might help a bit with performance. You don't know how much free space you have on your HD. This is another important factor. Lastly, you should grab a copy of OnyX and run it to clean things out.

Lastly, it wouldn't be a bad idea for you to run Geekbench yourself to get an idea of how well you are faring. Once you report back your numbers, we can see what else can be done to potentially improve it..

 

[pigoo3]

Raz0rEdge beat me to it…but yikes…that is one "Big Dog" Mac Pro you got there!!! As Ashwin recommended…try running Onyx to clean things up…and run Geekbench to see if your Mac Pro's benchmarks are where they should be.

Have your Maya projects become more complex. If so (as you might imagine)…a more complex project will seem slower (take longer to render) than less complex projects (just a thought).

You have a pretty top end Mac Pro there…and I think only one model of the new Mac Pro has better CPU scores. Of course the new Mac Pro's probably have better GPU scores (due to newer model graphics hardware than the Quadro 4000).

Considering how high-end this computer is…one weak area I see is ram. 16gig of ram isn't as much as it once was. The Mac Pro model can handle up to 96gig of ram. Considering what your doing with it…I would think that a ram upgrade could be one way to help.

Let's hope that Onyx can clean things up. Also…make sure your hard drives aren't getting too full. And rebooting the computer every so often can help too.

HTH,

- Nick

 

[chscag]

@Nick:

I've been reading where professional users actually prefer the Mac Pro 2010 model over the newer trash can Mac Pro since the older model is more configurable. Not just one article but several say the same thing. Of course a certain individual who frequents our forums disagrees.

 

[msl1983]

Thank you for the suggestions! Geekbench gives me a 26972 score... I'll use Onyx to clean it up. And get some ram. etc etc.

 

[harryb2448]

How full is the hard drive and how long since you rebooted the Mac Pro?

 

[msl1983]

65% full of a 1 TB HD,
and what do you mean reboot--- like reinstall? restart?
thanks
Michael

 

[pigoo3]

@Nick:

I've been reading where professional users actually prefer the Mac Pro 2010 model over the newer trash can Mac Pro since the older model is more configurable.

I've heard that too…and can definitely see why. I was curious & checked eBay…and some 12 core Mac Pro's (genuine 2010 models & not upgraded 2009 models)…are selling for a low as $1500-$1600. About 50% the price of a 12-core "new Mac Pro" (with similar CPU benchmarks). Of course the new Mac Pro's have flash storage, better graphics, etc. For CPU intensive tasks & configurability…an older 12-core Mac Pro is certainly still a great option.

- Nick

 

[pigoo3]

...and what do you mean reboot--- like reinstall? restart?

Restart.

- Nick

 

[pm-r]

I don't know if it still works with OS X El Capitan, but doing a shutdown and then cold booting up using Safe Boot Mode in previous versions often cleaned up a lot of surplus chaff and stuff, then just Restart to get back to normal.

PS: Would using Activity Monitor not give the OP some indication that they may be short or memory or not??? But I think I'd want at least having 32GB for any intense graphics work with that Mac Pro, but I'm not sure how the OS/software and GPU use it.

 

[chas_m]

I again have to point out that processor score isn't everything. The 12-core 2010 model is indeed fearsomely awesome, but it gets its rear end handed to it by the storage and graphics of the new Mac Pro, and thus -- as with every computer -- what you're doing on it and the software you're doing it with being able to leverage all 12 cores makes a HUGE difference in whether the older or new machine is going to "win" at a given task.

As for what's causing the slowdown, the recommendation for OnyX is probably a great starting point.

 

[pm-r]

@Nick:

I've been reading where professional users actually prefer the Mac Pro 2010 model over the newer trash can Mac Pro since the older model is more configurable. Not just one article but several say the same thing. Of course a certain individual who frequents our forums disagrees.

I think he might have just arrived…

 

[harryb2448]

Nah he is here permanently!

 

[pm-r]

My gosh, I just noticed the close race by two almost seemingly permanent residents:
harryb2448 in the lead with 20,951 posts with
chas_m following closely behind with 20,491 posts…

 

[harryb2448]

To say nothing of Nick's 32K odd!

 

[dtravis7]

Trash Can Mac! Priceless! Grin


Can not one install SSD's in place of the rotational HDDs on that 2010? Sure it would not be PCI-E but Sata 6.0 is quite fast. Can not the graphic cards be upgraded in that 2010 also?

I know the answers but asking to see what others will say!

 

[chscag]

You're right on Dennis. Both can be upgraded. I have no experience with a Mac Pro but what I've read in several places from the folks who use them professionally, is that their overwhelming choice is the 2010 machine. Has to be a reason; and the reason they all give is that the 2010 is more configurable. One guy even stated that the Trash can Mac Pro looks like a snake farm with all the wires protruding. Yes, you can see some nice neat pictures of them but in reality the wiring and cables are the one thing they all mentioned about the new Mac Pro.

 

[dtravis7]

I do not hate the new Mac Pro but like many like the older design better for a pro machine.

And yes the new one can also be upgraded. The CPU's, Graphics Cards and the RAM and the PCI-E drives also but that might be proprietary.

 

[pigoo3]

Can not the graphic cards be upgraded in that 2010 also?

I know the answers but asking to see what others will say!

Not 100% sure if this is one of the answers you already knew. One of the graphics card upgrade issues on a 2010 Mac Pro is lack of a clear upgrade path. One of the problems with Mac Pro's is…after 2010 or so…Apple pretty much ignored the Mac Pro line (pretty much just CPU speed bumps).

The Quadro 4000 graphics card is a pretty good one. And usually I would say to someone…try the Mac version Radeon 5770 or 5870. But reviews I've read show that the Quadro 4000 and the more powerful Radeon 5870 are not terribly different (some tests yes & some tests no).

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/0...vidias-sole-mac-offering-a-promising-start/1/

The other graphics card upgrade option is to try more powerful "Windows version graphics cards" (which can work in a Mac Pro). But this gets a bit "tricky"…since someone needs to know which cards are more powerful…which cards work well in a Mac Pro…and if there are any special hurdles to installing the card (download special drivers or special procedures to installing the non-Apple card).

- Nick

 

[pm-r]

I do not hate the new Mac Pro but like many like the older design better for a pro machine.

And yes the new one can also be upgraded. The CPU's, Graphics Cards and the RAM and the PCI-E drives also but that might be proprietary.

That Apple "P" word proprietary is scary or impossible when considering some recent Mac upgrades, and one site used to be great for info but doesn't seem to be as active as it used to be with the older Macs:
http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems.html
http://www.xlr8yourmac.com

I haven't been there for ages though…