| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Buying a new MAC - SAS or ATA Hardrives?
Tom Sperduto, Photographer
 |
Edison | NJ | USA | Posted: 8:45 AM on 02.28.09 |
->> I am in the process of researching the best configuration for a new MAC Pro.
When given the option to configure the hard drive bays, there are choices of a Serial ATA or SAS drive. The ATA drives offer more space, but the SAS drives are more expensive and require the RAID card which is also an additional $800.
I'm trying to decide where to get the most return for my upgrade options and I am unsure which drives to select.
I realize the SAS drive is likely the better drive. I'm just not sure if this is more important than additional memory or processor.
Thanks for the help. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 9:12 AM on 02.28.09 |
->> SAS or Serial Attached SCSI is meant for mission critical and server raid applications (or so I've been told). They are more expensive because of their better build quality, better MTBF ans in some cases faster spindle speed.
SATA on the other hand is meant for everyday computing and while not as robust, offers a better value for the buck. One other point was that SATA drives came (back when I was looking) in bigger capacities. |
|
Brian Dowling, Photographer
|
Philadelphia | PA | USA | Posted: 11:19 AM on 02.28.09 |
| ->> sas if you are doing a lot of video rendering. its one of those things where if you don't know if you need it, then you probably don't need it. i would also upgrade my ram and hds on my own. much cheaper |
|
Tom Sperduto, Photographer
|
Edison | NJ | USA | Posted: 11:21 AM on 02.28.09 |
->> Thanks, Guys.
Kevin - You may have just saved me a boat load of money. I am going to wait also. Hopefully the new one will be here soon. |
|
Nik Habicht, Photographer
|
Levittown | PA | USA | Posted: 12:30 PM on 02.28.09 |
->> If you're building a box with multiple drives, some benefits are derived from faster spin speeds: When I built my current system five years ago, I installed two WD Raptors -- they're only 74 gb drives, but they spin at 10,000 rpm -- as well as a 500 gb storage drive that spins at 7,200 rpm.
One of the Raptors held the OS and applications, the second Raptor served as the image import drive for photo mechanic folders and as the Photoshop scratch disk.
That made working with images incredibly fast, and I literally was never able to outrun the computer.... |
|
Nik Habicht, Photographer
|
Levittown | PA | USA | Posted: 12:32 PM on 02.28.09 |
| ->> Raptors are now available in 150 gb capacity and are cheaper than the 74 gb versions were five years ago. There may be 15,000 rpm SCSI drives available too -- if you're planning on editing video on the system, I'd consider at least some very fast drives.... |
|
Daniel Putz, Photographer
|
Jefferson | MD | USA | Posted: 1:13 PM on 02.28.09 |
| ->> You can get a Raptor in 150 and 300gb versions. They're both fantastic, and doubly-fantastic in RAID. The 300 goes for about $230 on newegg. |
|
Jim Comeau, Assistant, Photo Editor
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 1:54 PM on 02.28.09 |
->> Some folks run Raid 0+1 for speed and redundancy. It can be a really sick setup.
SAS is rarely used on workstations. |
|
Rich Cruse, Photographer
|
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 12:30 PM on 03.03.09 |
| ->> My advice is to avoid the new single processor models. They max out at 8 gigs of ram! |
|
Tom Sperduto, Photographer
|
Edison | NJ | USA | Posted: 1:22 PM on 03.03.09 |
->> Kevin,
Thanks. I really lucked out on the timing with this one. I had my finger on the button to purchase one until I saw your post last week.
Rich - Thanks for the advice. I am taking it.
So now I am wondering ...
How long should I hold out before buying the 8-core Mac Pro?
I am ready to buy next week.
How long would you wait? |
|
Kevin M. Cox, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Galveston / Houston | TX | US | Posted: 1:33 PM on 03.03.09 |
->> I haven't had time to do much thinking yet (I'm blaming Apple on me being late for work today) but I'm slightly disappointed with the BTO options. Having 6GB RAM minimum on the 8 core prevents being able to upgrade yourself cheaper after purchase (from a default 2GB for example). Likewise with the hard drive. Obviously that won't stop me from purchasing.
I've been ready to buy for 6 months but I'm going to wait until they start shipping and places like BareFeats get their hands on one to do some benchmarking. They have preliminary thoughts posted here already: http://www.barefeats.com/nehal01.html
It'll feel like a long wait but at this point another week or two won't kill me. I also need to make a decision on an LCD since many people thought the 30 inch Cinema Display might also get updated to LED backlighting and that the 24" display might get a matte option (based on the 17" MPB being offered with one). Since those haven't materialized already today I doubt they'll show up anytime soon. |
|
Tom Sperduto, Photographer
|
Edison | NJ | USA | Posted: 1:37 PM on 03.03.09 |
->> what are your thoughts on the Two 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon or the 2.93?
Huge price difference. I am really on the fence if the 2.93 is worth the extra money. |
|
Rich Cruse, Photographer
|
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 2:29 PM on 03.03.09 |
->> Hi Tom:
I have the previous 2.8 ghz dual quad core model and frankly, it is overkill for me and my PhotoShop. I have watched the Activity CPU monitor and my machine rarely uses more than 2 cores at once. I have seen the CPU usage peg when converting video or using iMovie, but I think the best advice is to get the most you can afford. I would suggest saving on the processors and spending the savings on extra memory and drives. FYI, Apple has a business lease to own program on purchases of $5000 or more. I used the program to get the 8 core 2.8ghz Mac Pro and the 30" Cinema Display. LOVE the display and I most appreciate the 4 internal drive bays on the Mac Pro. I was using an iMac before.
Cheers!
Rich |
|
Tom Sperduto, Photographer
|
Edison | NJ | USA | Posted: 3:37 PM on 03.03.09 |
| ->> Rich - thanks for the info. It helps greatly. |
|
Kevin M. Cox, Photographer, Assistant
|
Galveston / Houston | TX | US | Posted: 4:14 PM on 03.03.09 |
->> I'll probably end up with the base 8-core. According to the Bare Feats link:
"Based on our extrapolations from Apple's published performance tests, the "early 2009" 2.26GHz 8-core will equal the "early 2008" 3.2GHz 8-core on many benchmarks and the "early 2009" 2.66GHz 8-core will beat it on all benchmarks. In other words, you don't have to spend $6K+ on the 2.93GHz version to beat the fastest "early 2008" Mac Pro."
Basically the new low-end 8-core will equal the performance of the old top of the line 8 core.
I'm going to disagree with Rich on one point. I'd say spend the most you can on processors up front (whether upgrading is actually worth the money or not will depend on the independent benchmarks) and save money on the RAM and HD for later. You can add RAM and more/bigger hard drives much cheaper yourself rather than ordering them with the computer. You can also wait six months or so on these if you need to for monetary reasons and then add them in later down the road. You won't be easily upgrading your processors to faster models in six months or a year for example so those are in it for the life of the machine. |
|
Rich Cruse, Photographer
|
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 5:35 PM on 03.03.09 |
| ->> Kevin has a point with the processors, but I still think you get more bang for the buck with more memory. You generally will not be able to upgrade your processors, so make sure you get what you need. If money is no object- then of course buy the best. PhotoShop does not require nearly the horsepower that video and 3D rendering does. |
|
Tom Sperduto, Photographer
|
Edison | NJ | USA | Posted: 6:27 PM on 03.03.09 |
->> The processor is a difficult decision. I don't shoot video but I will be
processing D3X files. Cost is always a consideration. |
|
Kevin M. Cox, Photographer, Assistant
|
Galveston / Houston | TX | US | Posted: 10:05 PM on 03.03.09 |
->> Tom, this is where you have to closely pay attention to real world tests that should start showing up early next week. You'll have to use the early benchmarks to decide if you want the new model that was just released or if you want to save money and buy the just discontinued model before they sell out everywhere.
Just remember that most of the stuff out there right now is speculation and it'll be next week before the testers get an actual model in hand.
http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/2009-03-blog.html#_20090303MacPro |
|
Dan Goldfarb, Photographer
|
Staten Island | NY | USA | Posted: 3:19 AM on 03.05.09 |
->> Tom
Some of this has already been covered by other posters, but let me add a few points
First, the "new" Mac Pro will not guarantee better results than the existing 8 core model,
in fact, the new 2.26 gHz single CPU model will be inferior to a comparably equipped dual CPU 8 core 2008 model.
Second, most application can barely take advantage of the hardware and number of cores in the 2008 model, let alone the new version. Editing d3X files doesn't even come close. OVERKILL extraordinaire! Photoshop is not going to require or take advantage of your mac pro, so until you start editing HD video or rendering intense 3D graphics don't sweat the latest and greatest.
Third, if you use the computer for mission critical work applications you are better served in my opinion by using a tested and solid platform like the 2008 than being an "early adopter" of the 2009 model. Every piece of hardware requires ancillary components to have proper drivers and such to work, and new models take time for the component manufacturers to catch up -
Fourth, you are better served by buying the 2008 model and putting more RAM in there, than by spending every last dime for the "newest" model with some base amount of RAM and storage.
As mentioned, NEVER buy RAM or HD from Apple, unless you are a masochist and want to pay 5-20X the price (seriously, the Apple RAM upgrades are close to 20X the market price for the RAM)
In addition, you do NOT need Apple's RAID card, you can use software raid with your drives (not ideal), or any one of dozens of aftermarket cards (better!). I would personally recommend the 3Ware Sidecar -
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=...
For $250 clams it includes a hardware RAID card (sort of like that apple card, but cheaper)- and an external enclosure for SATA drives. I have one configured with a mac pro with 4 X 750GB WD black drives from newegg (total cost with drives under $600) giving me 2TB RAID, with throughput of over 300MB/sec, which again is SERIOUS OVERKILL for editing d3X files.
Also - you do not need an Apple brand monitor, unless again you like to spend your money. Look at a Dell 30" (the 3008 model is $1099 right now from Dell, see Dealmodo), I got a 3007 refurb for $750. These displays use the SAME (and in many cases superior) panel as the Apple brand models. No reason for an Apple brand display.
I just built a mac pro (2008 model) system for 3D graphics work last month, and would be happy to give you more specific details if you want to contact me offline. |
|
Tom Sperduto, Photographer
|
Edison | NJ | USA | Posted: 6:45 AM on 03.06.09 |
| ->> Dan - Thanks for the info. I am going to contact you offline for some suggestions. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|