New Macs and Old Adobe

[timrock 1]

I hear that the Adobe Photoshop and other programs work slowly with the new Mac computers with the superfast Intel chip. How slow is slow? Is it excruciatingly slow or just kind of like a Mac without the Intel?

 

If anyone has tried this, let me know.

 

Best,

 

Tim

[RogerC 4]

do a search on the web, there are benchmarks of it.

 

I seem to recall specs on a process that take the very fastest G5 macs 1 minute take the macbook 2 minutes. So it really doesn't bother me and wouldn't hold me back from buying one right now. My old mac will probably be running in the 2 minute range, too. But, I don't spend a lot of time in photoshop, and I don't do anything in photoshop that takes 2 minutes of processing time.

 

here's one, there may be others:

 

http://www.macworld.com/2006/03/firstlooks...marks/index.php

[Drew 0]

Depends on the plug ins and filters you use. Rob Galbraith tested an IMAC which is pretty much the same thing and it ran 10-30% slower depending on PS CS2 tasks. Yet some filters like noise ninja were faster with the Mactel machine.

[timrock 1]

I'm talking about the newest Mac with Intel chips in them. Mac OS X and its applications run natively on the Core Dup chip on the new Intel Macs. But apps like Photoshop are not native to Power PC and Intel chips. Thus, I am told they run slower than OSX apps.

 

But how slow. Is it neglible or noticebale. Does anyone have a new iMac or MacBook Pro running CS2? I'm curious. I woouldn't think with the transitional technology called Rosetta it would make much of a difference but I'd like to hear from someone who has tried it.

 

Best,

 

Tim of the Deep

[timrock 1]

Thanks for the link Roger. I see Ron Gailbraith is going to do more tests soon. Perhaps that will be more definitive. I think you're right. Probably OK to buy one without a major problem. Maybe Final Cut will be more of a problem but CS2 should be fine.

 

Best,

 

T

[Drew 0]

Tim

PS CS2 is PowerPC native (that is altivec enabled). It is not Universal Binary, which is optimized for the Intel chip.

The Imac Duo core is pretty much the same as the Macbook Dual Core. Rob Galbraith and Barefeat both have tested the macbook and imactels.

I just tried the macbook and imac and they are both great for FCP 5 (UB version coming out end of this month). Zips thru renders. Haven't tried the PS version. The MS Office is also slower but not very significantly so. My C1 Pro software is faster as is the other 3rd party software plug ins. I think this is mainly due to the increased Ghz and bus speed.

I thought I'd be holding back but the performance has almost doubled in many cases thus I switching to a macbook sooner than later. My only problem is my new eSATA PC Card doesn't work and I'm stuck without connection to my Server from my laptop should I buy the macbook. I hate new technology!

[timrock 1]

Hi Vag,

 

Thanks so much for those insights. That's what I thought but just wanted to here it from someone who actually played with the machines and some non-"i" programs. I went thru Houston on the way back from Bonaire last month and had a layover so I checked them out at the Woodlands Mall Apple store. I was duly impressed, but those were all running iLife programs. Should make Garage Band a lot of fun. Anyone wanna buy a G5?

 

Best,

 

Tim of the Deep

[MikeVeitch 0]

Hey Tim,

 

D200.....

 

And thats ScubaDru not Vag.... or should i call you Damsel?

 

[timrock 1]

Yo Mike,

 

20D.....

 

Damsel is better than Sea Nettle (which I was once I think). I wanna be Tiger Shark but given my current waistline, whale shark is more like it!

 

Gotcha ScubaDru - These fancy forums are too technikal for me.

 

Timbo

[Starbuck 0]

Tim -

 

Latest MacAddict has some benchmarks comparing Adobe PS on new Intel Macs.. Their conclusion was to wait until end of year and Adobe should have new versions available.

 

Quote from the mag:

 

"In our Photoshop Actions test using 100mb file, the 1.9 Ghz iMac g5 was 27% faster than 20 inch INTEL iMac and 43% faster than the 17 inch INTEL iMac." "Apple recommends that the INTEL iMacs NOT BE USED with non-native pro apps such as Photoshop"

 

M.

[scubag 0]

Tim,

 

I compared my 867Mhz Powerbook G4 (with 1.25 GB Ram) to the new Intel core duo 2.0 Ghz MacBook Pro (with 1 GB Ram) at my local apple store using both Photoshop Elements and CS2. The MacBook was faster all the way around, although my 12" 3 year old Powerbook is a bit out of date.

 

They had lots in stock, I might just have to save my pennies for one. A very impressive machine.

 

Doug

[tdpriest 115]

US gear freakery?

 

We poor Europeans still think that a G4 is pretty whizzy, after struggling with PCs.

 

CS2 doesn't seem too slow on my G4 compared to CS on a PC, despite similar RAM and processor speed.

 

I fancy a D200 more than an Intel processor, though I suppose Tim Rock chews through thousands of images a week, lucky man.....

 

Tim

 

B)

[MikeVeitch 0]

I fancy a D200 more than an Intel processor, though I suppose Tim Rock chews through thousands of images a week, lucky man.....

 

Tim

 

B)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

And he wants a D200 too....

[whitehead 0]

I have the old Imac G5 and the new one with the intel chip also now. TBH I cannot see any noticable difference in speed when operating CS2 with my workflow. I was a concern for me b4 I bought the new one (overheating issues with the old one made me jump so I now have the new one in Thailand and the old in the UK where its less prone to overheating) but am happy/relieved with the descision. A Probook is on the cards when I return to Thailand.

 

Paul