Mac Pro: 4/6/8/12 Cores for Sound Processing? PERMALINK

Reader Juan De Leon writes:

Hi Lloyd,

Great site!... I just wish I could have find it earlier. One request I know all your comments are photo user related but do you think could you add one post for music user related. I mean I'm PC user and have been waiting for a long time for this Mac Pro update.

MPG: I’d like to. That means buying Logic Pro (eg $500), and incorporating something into my battery of tests (I see no point in a one-time test, I’d want continuity). I’d also need some advice from users working with sound on what the best approach to testing is (not my area of expertise). Ditto for video.

As a free site, I have to consider what I do with my time— I have bills to pay — no one pays me for the long hours it takes or the massive expense of the hardware itself (consider the cost of buying a 12-core and a 6-core Mac Pro, and outfitting them, let alone the time and effort at $0/hour). I am actively considering requiring a subscription to access some areas because there has to be ROI (return on investment). That’s why supporting my sites is so important including buying your Mac Pro as an MPG Photo Workstation, or consulting. I tried “donate” buttons for two months, and received two (2) donations, not even enough for one meal for my family, and my aspirations lie beyond food.

I will use the machine in a combination of graphic and music production. The music part will require the use of software like Logic Studio with many plugins. I know some could benefit from the multicore and the 64 bit platform.

MPG: almost everything benefits from using the 64-bit kernel. I recommend 12GB of memory for most users, more if the usage warrants it.

Multiple cores represent potential— depending on the software design, a program might be “single threaded” or might use all cpu cores efficiently (or inefficiently), or might use a few cores.

But anyway my question will be, do we (music users) benefit from a higher speed processor or a higher multi-core system.

MPG: it all depends. Take the 3.33GHz hexacore Mac Pro— it has a 13.6% speed advantage over the 12-core 2.93GHz Mac Pro. So in essence it’s an equivalent to a 6.8 core Mac Pro at 2.93Ghz. Except that there is more and more overhead with more cores, so that it might be just as fast as an 8-core machine, even with all cores uses on either machine. It all depends, but only specialized and very well written applications can make 12 cores run (almost) twice as fast as 6 cores.

Here is a list of the software:
1. Apple Logic Studio - http://www.apple.com/logicstudio/
2. Ableton Live - http://www.ableton.com/suite-8
3. Native Instruments Komplete (Currently own version 6 but will upgrade to 7 as soon as the release it) - http://www.native-instruments.com/#/en/products/?category=1649
4. Native Instruments Maschine - http://www.native-instruments.com/#/en/products/producer/maschine/
5. Native Instruments Kore - http://www.native-instruments.com/#/en/products/producer/kore-2/
6. Waves Mercury - http://www.waves.com/content.aspx?id=175
7. Novation Midi Keyboard with Automap - http://www.novationmusic.com/us/products/midi_controllers/sl_mkii
8. M-Audio Project Mix I/O - http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/ProjectMixIO.html

All the software above might be running simultaneous at one certain point for music production and some of them are very hungry for CPU use. My question (which I think many out there will have)— if I go for a Mac Pro and use all the software mentioned, will I benefit from a higher processor speed or a higher core amount?

MPG: Even if a program is “stupid” and uses only one CPU core, if you are in fact running multiple programs at the same time, having multiple cores is of great value, since each program can run without degrading the others. The question is how many cores are needed to satisfy any given mix of programs.

Another issue goes like this: if the mix of programs utilized 6 cores, is running a 6-core Mac Pro faster or slower than a 12-core Mac Pro? The answer to that also depends: the 6-core model runs 13% faster in clock speed, so it will probably win. But the 12-core model has two CPUs, and thus twice the onboard cache memory, so that potentially offsets some of the difference.

Pricing and Valuing the iMac Against the Mac Pro PERMALINK

Yesterday I wrote:

Add in the Core i7 processor option ($200) and 16GB memory, and check your premises— you can buy a Mac Pro with a 27" display for about the same money and have a better, more flexible system. So unless “cool and hip” is what matters to you, go straight to the Mac Pro.

I added it up (see further below), and with judicious buying, the iMac system is less money (assuming you need a new display— many buyers do not), but also not so much as a percentage, and you also get a lot less for your money, more on that below.

With four CPU cores (assuming you choose the right CPU), and up to 16GB memory, the iMac can suffice for a serious photographer — for a while at least.

But there is a lot more to a workstation than how fast it runs with a virgin hard drive. In the real world, you need more and faster storage over time, you need efficient backup, you need reliability, etc.

The iMac is a not a good value as a serious tool for the medium or long term. While it’s gorgeous and nicely done, for what it is, it’s a dead-end Mac for photographers and other professionals. Consider the following:

• Impossible to add fast external drives*. At best, you have Firewire 800, which runs at 2/3 the speed of a single hard drive and 1/4 the speed of a fast solid state drive (and for volumes over 1TB, 1/3 the speed of a single fast hard drive). Speed varies by drive and by Mac, but it is never fast.
• Impossible to add an internal Time Machine backup of adequate size. This forces you to use an external drive (cables, noise, clutter) or something like an Apple Time Capsule.
• Impossible to add a mirrored internal backup for increased reliability. Again, you have to go external at extra expense, with the cables, noise and clutter it involves.
• Impossible to create a 4TB striped volume, a 2TB mirror, etc, since you’re limited to one hard drive and one SSD internally. Yes, you can do so externally, but it’s nuts to use Firewire 800 on a 4TB volume—just reading the data would take an entire day.
• Impossible to double/triple/quadruple drive speed, and hard drives slow down as they fill up. A year later, with the drive mostly full, you’ll be forced to expand with sluggish FW800. You can never make that as fast as even a single hard drive.
• Slow backup of large amounts of data: Firewire 800 running (for writes) at 1/2 to 1/3 the speed of a single fast hard drive. Backing up 1.5TB of data is at least a 7 hour operation, if you’re lucky.
• One (1) Firewire 800 port. A thicket of cables and wall warts makes a big mess. Reliability suffers, noise levels go up, performance goes down.
• Display support: need more than two monitor: there are some USB solutions on the iMac (not so great), but no problem on the Mac Pro: the single video card has three ports.
• Memory limited to 16GB. That’s usually plenty, but should you start doing big jobs, you’re stuck. A Mac Pro can do 32GB (64GB for the 8-core).
• Mirror-like screen. It’s beautiful with a dark room and black shirt, but poor room lighting is a visual impediment. The hyper saturated mirror screen is not good for print matching.
• Want to calibrate the screen for accurate color? Calibration is going to tweak the video card in 8 bits, not tweak the display itself in 10-bit or 12-bit internal to monitor itself. Apple doesn’t supply a hardware calibrator. The NEC 27" display (or 30") is the right choice for photographers.
• Want to swap or add an internal drive? It’s an involved operation to do anything inside the iMac, and there’s little or no expansion to begin with (one HDD and one SSD or similar). In a Mac Pro, it can be done in a few minutes, by anyone, with near-zero risk (you get 4 bays + a lower optical bay for another hard drive or SSD = 5 drives, and six if you remove the optical drive).
• Drive failure? On a Mac Pro, replace in under five minutes with a screwdriver, but on an iMac... well, you’re screwed until it’s fixed (don’t forget that external backup drive on the iMac!). Can you as a professional tolerate several days of downtime?
• If the iMac display goes bad for any reason, you are down while the iMac is repaired. Can you as a professional tolerate several days of downtime? With a Mac Pro, swap in a working display.
• Expansion— want eSATA, a card with extra USB or Firewire ports, a special video or sound card, etc? No problem with a Mac Pro, but far fewer options with an iMac.

* Hack: it is technically possible to remove the internal optical drive and make external its eSATA connection, products might soon arrive that allow that. But you would then need an external optical drive, and it’s still only a single eSATA port.

Those are my concerns, but they might not be yours, so if an iMac appeals, fantastic. And for some, the iMac might be all they ever need. No argument there.

But I cannot afford to be down two hours, let alone two days, losing data is not an option, and avoiding that by dangling multiple hard drives off a FW800 port is a noisy and unreliable mess. Finally, the ergonomics of a screen that won’t adjust for the right height is a painful past experience I won’t repeat. So the iMac is a non-starter for my intensive work.

Adding it up

For the people who need to be “right” (including derogatory reader Richard L)— I was mistaken yesterday— the iMac is less expensive on a parts basis. But that does not make it a good value for professionals.

Setting aside the limitations of the iMac detailed above, let’s look at pricing.

Matching the processor speed exactly is a red herring: the Intel Core i7 is not the same as a Xeon in the Mac Pro, so don’t write me and insist that both have to be 2.93GHz. Choose $2149 or $2449 as you like for this comparison for the Mac Pro.

These prices were obtained on July 28, 2010, and won’t be updated. See this OWC shopping cart for current prices on various parts, and the Apple Store for prices on Macs or the Apple refurbished store.

Parts costs below are at OWC prices, at large savings compared to Apple. The iMac is cheaper because it includes the display, but you do lose in functionality, and there’s no real expansion except with slow stuff. But if you already have a display, the picture changes radically— you can put that savings towards a hexacore 3.33GHz Mac Pro. Besides, a wide-gamut color display with reliable hardware calibration in 10 or 12 bits is a must-have for serious photography, and that’s my need.

Note that for the iMac, the upgrade to 2TB drive is an upcharge, and you don’t get the original drive. It’s difficult to swap out the hard drive, so get the 2TB drive, because hard drives slow down as they fill up. If you need more space than the 1TB drive offers, you’ll need to pay for an upgrade, unless you are very comfortable with a tricky install, so always get the 2TB drive.

Figure total the system cost, then figure in the limitations of the iMac, and its long-term viability. Think in percentage terms, future expansion, down the road value.

There is no way I’d sink $3000 - $4000 into an iMac system with all its limitations.

Shopping cart	Mac Pro	iMac
Base machine	$2449 for 2.8GHz quad-core $2149 for 2.66GHz quad-core (refurb)	2.93GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7 $2199
16GB OWC memory	$610	$549
2TB hard drive	$139.99 you KEEP the stock hard drive and can use both internally!	$150
Solid state dive	$629 for best-in-class 240GB drive	$750 for inferior 256GB drive
Display	$999	built-in
eSATA card	$59	not possible
2TB Backup drives (3)	$750 eSATA fast	$700, slow
Applecare	$249	$169

Memory Upgrades — How Does Your Vendor Test? PERMALINK

I was talking with Larry O’Conner of OWC today about the need for 1333MHz memory for the new iMacs and the 3.33GHz Mac Pro and some dual processor models (up to now it has been 1066MHz). OWC will have the right 1333MHz memory as soon as new machines can be tested. Perhaps 1066MHz memory will also work in those models, but at a small speed hit, but if you’re buying one of the faster Mac Pro models, the right speed memory is the way to go.

Testing memory for all Mac models and variants

In an offhand way while we were discussing the new Mac Pro and iMac, Larry mentioned that they “have to buy one of every Mac model for testing anyway”.

I asked for clarification— he didn’t just mean one iMac and one Mac Pro, he meant one of every variant and speed: “We buy every model and with every processor option too”.

Think about the cost involved for that level of testing!

Here is a memory vendor with a robust financial committment to making sure their product peforms properly on every Mac that’s sold. Actions speak louder than words, and money talks. The OWC test lab houses a lot of these Macs, but some are distributed around to employees.

If you’re buying from another vendor, ask them if they test their memory in the particular Mac model and speed that you are buying it for.

As I currently have about 100GB of OWC memory (8GB and 4GB and 2GB modules in Mac Pros, MacMinis and MacBook Pros), I can state with confidence that OWC memory is rock solid, even when I beat up the machine with MemoryTester.

Analysis of the new August 2010 Mac Pro PERMALINK

My preliminary report is now published on the August 2010 Mac Pro, announced by Apple today. Details will be steadily added. Read my report.

As soon as the new model actually is available for sale (August), and can be obtained, I’ll be adding an in-depth performance analysis and comparison.

My initial focus will be comparing the existing 3.33Ghz quad-core Mac Pro Nehalem to the new 3.33GHz hexacore Mac Pro.

Note the “starting at” prices. I expect that the mose useful machine, the 3.33Ghz hexacore, will be priced at about $3700, perhaps more. The 12-core 2.93GHz model is likely to come in at $6000 or so. Those are best guesses of course.

Apple’s SSD for Mac Pro (or iMac) — Not a Smart Move PERMALINK

Why would you pay a premium for an inferior product?

According to Apple’s own figures compared to my real-world test results, here’s what you get with an Apple SSD compared to the Mercury Extreme Pro.

Performance over time

Apple’s SSD offerings have much slower performance to start with, and are unlikely to maintain that performance over time (most SSDs degrade badly with use).

Value

My advice: don’t waste your money on the wrong product.

You get a short 1 year warranty with Apple’s SSD (three years if you pay extra for AppleCare, but that won’t cover degradation of SSD performance).

How about a 30-day money back guarantee and a three/five year warranty instead?! It’s a no-brainer. (Warranty duration depends on which product line is chosen).

See also

Much more can be found here on this site— see the index page.

Special Report— Real World SSD Performance
OWC Mercury Extreme Pro Solid State Drives
Optimizing Photoshop CS4 on the Apple MacBook Pro using Solid State Drives
Using solid state drives (SSD) for Photoshop scratch.

New Apple Mac Pro! The “Westmere” hexacore chip arrives! PERMALINK

I’m not yet sure what to call the the new Mac Pro, since it uses either the existing Nehalem processor or the new Westmere processor.

As key perspective for my coming report, please see Shootout: 8-core 2.93GHz or Quad-Core 3.33GHz.

You can’t yet order the new models yet, but when you can, here are some buying tips.

A few quick comments—

• The new hexacore 3.33GHz model with 12MB of cache will be the hands-down winner for 99% of users out there. The slower clock speed 12-core is going to be pointless for most everyone.
• Storage (drive bays and optical) appear to be unchanged.
• For thoughts on the SSD option, read What About Apple’s 512GB Solid State Drive (SSD)?.
• The faster graphics card will benefit some, but my tests for photographers show zippo/zero/nada influence for key tasks. Certain tasks will benefit, but not any I do.
• The dual MiniDisplayPorts and single dual-link DVI port mean that a single video card is now an option for some configurations (avoid adapters of any kind).

I’ll post much more in my coming report later today.

MPG Photo Workstation

I can’t say for sure until I get my hand on one, but I see no material changes to the new models that would affect the MPG Photo Workstation configurations.

You can get a quote now, since most parts wont’t change, though pricing on 1333MHz memory for the new 3.33GHz hexacore model might be slightly higher. Get an MPG Photo Workstation ...

Without a doubt, the new 3.33Ghz hexacore Mac Pro is the way to go for anyone looking for maximum performance. The 12-core model could be a choice for a rare few that really do use programs that can use that many cores, but the vast majority of programs will run slower on a 2.93GHz 12-core versus a 3.33GHz hexacore.

Get the best Mac Pro for your needs

A personalized consultation now will have you in great shape for a purchase of the Mac Pro— the consultation offers long term knowledge value , much more than just immediate configuration issues.

Here’s what consulting client Conrad Erb had to say about his recent experience:

I know a good deal about computers and can handle a lot of technical information, but after many hours researching a new workstation, I was overloaded with information and confused with so many options. You explained the options and prevented me from spending a big pile of money on a system that wasn't going to offer good performance. I recently picked up a workstation according to your recommendations, and performance is exactly what I needed. I ended up spending significantly less than had I not consulted with you. Investing in your advice was absolutely worth it - it saved me time and frustration. I'm actually enjoying my work again spending more time DOING my work instead of waiting for my computer to catch up with me!

Apple’s SSD for iMac (dual internal drives) PERMALINK

See my discussion of solid state drives with the Mac Pro — the same ideas apply.

The good news is that you can now have dual drives in an iMac: a hard drive and an SSD. But don’t be surprised if you see much better upgrade deals come along by September.

The bad news is that Apple’s offering is for thick wallets: $150 to upgrade to a 2TB drive instead of a 1TB drive (when a fast 2TB drive can be purchased outright for $139!) The price to move to a 256GB SSD (only) is a $600 upcharge, and to move to the SSD plus a 2TB drive is $900.

Add in the Core i7 processor option ($200) and 16GB memory, and check your premises— you can buy a Mac Pro with a 27" display for about the same money and have a better, more flexible system. So unless “cool and hip” is what matters to you, go straight to the Mac Pro.

Apple Mac Pro update — Coming soon? PERMALINK

In my Apple Mac Pro update — When?, I discussed the non-arrival of a new Apple Mac Pro, and when it might appear. See my comments there about what might be expected.

At this point, I expect a Mac Pro in August and perhaps as early as next week. But I don’t expect any compelling new features as compared with the existing model, with the following exceptions:

• A 6-core (hexacore) model at the highest clock speeds, possibly retaining the 4-core model as the entry level model. Six cores is a performance sweet spot, see the Quad-core vs 8-core Shootout.
• The latest graphics cards. Which I don’t care about.
• Some kind of enhanced connectivity, such as USB 3.0, or faster Firewire. This is not exciting as eSATA serves the needs of Mac Pro users quite well.
• Support for SATA 6 Gb/sec. Which will matter eventually, but not yet.

If all of the above happens, it’s nice, but not that compelling. But Apple could have a surprise of some kind, maybe even an unpleasant one in keeping with its “keep it hip” approach, such as downsizing the form factor, and removing drive bays. Let’s hope not.

The 30" Cinema Display is long overdue for an overhaul, so the odds of something new there are very good. But I’d much rather have the NEC displays anyway.

Unlikely but possible:

• A 12-core (dodecacore) model. It would provide ample marketing hype, so Apple might offer it, but hardly anyone should care.
• We might see more memory slots eg 6 slots on the 4/6-core models or 12 slots on an 8/12 core model. Unlikely.
• BluRay support. The movie industry has seen to it that this format won’t gain traction anytime soon. It won’t be as useful as it could be if it were to appear, due to copy protection restrictions.

With a current or new model, consider an MPG Photo Workstation, taking into account the quad-core vs 8-core shootout. My top recommendation remains the 2.66Ghz quad-core “Burly” MPG Photo Workstation, with the 3.33GHz model a smart move for increased interactive responsiveness. A new 6-core model would seal the deal.

How many cores?

Remember, faster clock speed with 4 cores is very competitive with slower clock speed 8 cores.

Get the best Mac Pro for your needs

A personalized consultation now will have you in great shape for a purchase of an existing or future Mac Pro— it offers long term value in choosing a system, much more than just immediate configuration issues.

Here’s what consulting client Conrad Erb had to say about his recent experience:

I know a good deal about computers and can handle a lot of technical information, but after many hours researching a new workstation, I was overloaded with information and confused with so many options. You explained the options and prevented me from spending a big pile of money on a system that wasn't going to offer good performance. I recently picked up a workstation according to your recommendations, and performance is exactly what I needed. I ended up spending significantly less than had I not consulted with you. Investing in your advice was absolutely worth it - it saved me time and frustration. I'm actually enjoying my work again spending more time DOING my work instead of waiting for my computer to catch up with me!

Carbon Copy Cloner 3.3.3 Cautionary Advice When Cloning to a Larger Volume PERMALINK

Update 7/18/2010 — My original post follows verbatim further below (excepting the title). The facts I stated have not changed, but there is an explanation. I was contacted by a very concerned Mike Bombich, author of Carbon Copy Cloner, and I believe I now understand what happened.

All my past cloning for backup purposes has been from a 3TB volume(with 1.8TB of data) to a 2TB volume. In that case, CCC always does an incremental clone, exactly what I want. This saves considerable time, since only changed items are copied.

But with the 6TB volume, CCC chose to do a block-level clone this particular time (explanation below). That means wiping out the target volume and recopying the entire source volume, or at least all 1.8TB of data on it. For me at least, that totally defeats the purpose of using CCC for backup.

CCC does issue a "may delete files and folders" warning, which I understood/understand to mean files and folders that no longer exist on the source volume, not all files and folders.

The fine print at the bottom of the main window that states “What will happen” is contradictory; it’s an either/or, so the user can’t know what will really happen. I took it to mean “will be efficiently updated”, since that’s what had always happened for me before.

In my case, a particular detail contributed: CCC was able to unmount the source volume, and thus was able to wipe out the target volume in preparation for a block-level clone. This caused software I had running (Dropbox) to immediately complain, which startled me, which is why I then clicked Stop. At that point, I had no backup left, since it had just been wiped out. That seemed Bad.

Retesting today showed totally different behavior. The difference? Today I had files open on the source volume (as I almost always do), so that CCC could not unmount it. So CCC thus chose to perform a file-level incremental clone, which is what I wanted all along.

User interface suggestions

This non-deterministic behavior is confusing, and needs to be addressed in the user interface. The user should know exactly what will happen, since the behavior could change unpredictably, depending on current system status (eg apps running with open files, or not).

The fine-print at the bottom of the window should be eliminated; it is long and confusing at best, and ambiguous as to what will actually happen.

In the case of a full erase and copy, the user should be told explicitly that the volume will be erased, and this should be confirmed with a dialog eg “The entire target volume Backup will be erased and the entire contents of the source volume Master will be copied to it. OK | Cancel” .

Something like that. If this had been in place, I would never have proceeded with the clone. As it was, it turned a 10 minute quick update into a 5 hour backup.

 

Original post follows...

-------------------------

Update! I cloned my Master volume to a 2TB backup drive— different and correct behavior (no “Initiating system restore...” nonsense). All worked well. So it appears that either the volume size is at issue (6TB vs 2TB), or there is something about the device itself (both devices used the same PCIe eSATA card, a FirmTek SeriTek 2ME4-E).

This morning, I turned on my OWC QX2 for a weekly backup. There it was, safe and sound on my Desktop. I have my QX2 set up as a 6TB volume (4 X 2TB drives as RAID 5). To the Mac, it just looks like one 6TB drive.

The last time I backed up to to the QX2, Carbon Copy Cloner also had a problem, but I wrote it off as a fluke (I did a Finder-copy backup instead). But this time, I thought that since an incremental backup would be much faster (just changed files), I decided to use cloning. CCC offered to install its latest update, so I did so. I don’t know if that is related or not. Since it misbehaved last week also, I don’t think it’s necessarily version 3.3.3 that’s the issue.

Not wanting to copy 1.8TB again, I decided to give CCC a fresh chance:

1. Initiate the clone: Master => 2010-0717.
2. CCC gives its usual warning, then I notice that it says “Initiating system restore...”. This sounds pretty scary— it’s not what I usually see when I clone. I do NOT want to restore my system! Maybe it’s an erroneous message, but I don’t remember getting that message for other clones.
3. Dropbox software now complains that its folder is missing (which is on the source volume to be backed-up). Now I’m getting really nervous. I don’t want the source volume screwed with.
4. CCC is apparently stuck doing nothing, so I click "Stop".
5. My backup volume vanishes from the desktop.
6. Because the backup volume had vanished, I reboot, and my backup drive is now toast—Disk Utility shows that the volume is just gone. My Master drive (the one I was backing up) seems to be OK, but I’m feeling very concerned, to say the least.

I’ve had plenty of success using Carbon Copy Cloner many other times (on smaller volumes).

I might try using SuperDuper to see if it has a similar issue, which could be the case if it were a volume capacity issue. Perhaps CCC has an issue with large volumes? My QX2 backup volume was/is 6TB.

Bottom line

One reason I use Finder-copy for backups is to avoid scenarios like this. More software = more problems; no software ever written is ever problem-free. The Finder has bugs too of course, but I’ve not had it fail me copying files to local drives.

Western Digital Caviar Black 2TB Hard Drive. Fast! PERMALINK

Just in for testing courtesy of Other World Computing are a pair of the Western Digital Caviar Black 2.0TB enterprise hard drives (part WDGWD2001FASS).

Price and peformance

The Caviar Black offers an attractive price point when you’re looking for top performance, but don’t want to pay the steep premium for the Western Digital RE4.

However, the Hitachi 7K2000 offers an even more compelling price/performance ratio, and the difference is so little that few users are likely to notice.

Get the Western Digital RE4 at OWC, along with their 90-day drive-swap guarantee

See this cart for recommended drives.

Performance

Read the details in my review.

Speed of internal SATA Ports with Mac OS X PERMALINK

Today I retested a few Hitachi 7K2000 hard drives that I had previously tested and reviewed, using the Mac Pro internal SATA ports on my quad-core 3.33GHz Mac Pro Nehalem.

To my astonishment, the drives were faster than I had previously tested (not just the same model, the exact same drives I had tested before).

Previously, I had never seen a read speed above 135MB/sec for the Hitachi 7K2000, and that was the best of 10 drives, with some samples reading as low as 123MB/sec.

Today, here is what I measured using DiskTester run-sequential with two samples of the 7K2000.

Sample 1: 133 / 140
Sample 2: 130 / 136
(Write/read in MB/sec)

It’s nice to get a free speed upgrade.

OWC offers 30-day Money-back Guarantee on Mercury Extreme Pro SSD PERMALINK

I reported yesterday on the new OWC Mercury Extreme Pro 480GB, and the 400GB Pro RE before that.

OWC has an incredible offer for you:

To ensure the highest level of customer satisfaction and confidence, OWC is offering a 30-Day Money Back Guarantee on its 50GB to 240GB OWC Mercury Extreme Pro SSD models. This program, unmatched by any other SSD brand manufacturer, is valid for a user purchase of up to two OWC Mercury Extreme Pro or Pro RE SSD units. For more information on this program, the complete OWC Mercury Extreme Pro SSD line, or to order, visit: http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/internal_storage/Mercury_Extreme_SSD_Sandforce

How can you lose? But I don’t think OWC has much to risk here— the Mercury Extreme Pro is my SSD of choice, after my other brands all died or degraded badly in performance. You’ll be hooked once you try one of these amazing drives. I run them in both of my Mac Pros (as RAID-0 stripes), as well as my MacBook Pro.

Readers have inquired about Apple’s 512GB SSD. See my comments.

Install a 5th Drive Into the Mac Pro PERMALINK

Looking for a way to install a 2.5" or 3.5" drive securely into your MacPro’s lower optical bay? (Good for Windows PCs also).

OWC’s multi-mount drive adapter kit installs smaller form factor (2.5" & 3.5") hard drives and SSDs into larger sized (3.5" & 5.25") drive bays in Mac Pro and PC tower computers.

Most Mac Pros have an empty lower optical bay. Using this kit, you can install an extra (fifth) drive in the bay. If you are willing to remove the optical drive also, then you can install two drives. And if you can figure out a way to get more SATA connectors from a PCIe card, you can install more than that, using 2.5" drives.

On 2006-2008 Mac Pros, there are two spare SATA ports on the motherboard, so these machines can install dual 2.5" drives in the lower optical bay eg dual solid state drives.

My preferred approach is to install a solid state drive as a boot drive, which frees up all 4 standard bays in the Mac Pro for data.

But you can also install a 5th hard drive, such as the Hitachi 7K2000 or Western Digital RE4 2TB.

Of course, the Mac Pro has 4 standard bays, but the MPG Photo Workstation uses all four of those bays for higher performance and reliability.

What About Apple’s 512GB Solid State Drive (SSD)? PERMALINK

Readers have inquired about Apple’s 512GB SSD (a $1300 upgrade), offered with several Mac models.

You will love the Apple SSD— for a while. It’s a great honeymoon. And for casual use, you might never see an issue (congratulations if you have an extra $1300 to spend for casual use).

But since Apple provides no TRIM support, the only convenient way to restore the drive to its original speed once it starts degrading in performance is to use the DiskTester recondition command, or to boot up Windows and tweak the drive.

To be clear, I have not run the Apple SSD through my severe duty test, but it’s apparently the Samsung SSD, and I’m dubious that it can hold up (I’m not going to spend $1300 just so I can “toast” one). Or even that it performs as fast when brand-new. Anyone who thinks it will hold up is welcome to send their unit to me, and I will test it.

Solid state drives are definitely not equivalent (though all of them are expensive), many of them start slower, degrade quickly and some just fail outright. The Apple drive is not based on the Sandforce controller, and I have yet to see any non-Sandforce SSD that can hold up over time. Read my report.

For these reasons, the only SSDs I can recommend at this time are ones based on the Sandforce controller. My drives of choice, which I use in two Mac Pros and MacBook Pro are the OWC Mercury Extreme Pro and Mercury Extreme Pro RE.

See my in-depth of the OWC Mercury Extreme Pro.

OWC Mercury Extreme Pro 480GB and 240GB Solid State Drives (SSD) PERMALINK

Just on the market is the new OWC Mercury Extreme Pro RE 480GB solid state drive.

Laptop users looking for a single drive should be looking at this drive, and it would make a great drive even in a Mac Pro, assuming that’s enough capacity.

I received a 240GB and 480GB model for testing, and I tested them both as single drives, see the test results below.

See my previous blog entry for details on the differences in the Mercury Pro and Mercury Pro RE line.

Readers have inquired about Apple’s 512GB SSD. My response is “caveat emptor”. Solid state drives are definitely not equivalent (though all of them are expensive), many of them start slower, degrade quickly and some just fail outright.
Read my report.

The OWC Mercury Extreme line is the best choice on the market today for Mac users.

Performance

Read the review of the OWC Mercury Extreme Pro RE 480GB vs 240GB models.

OWC Mercury Extreme Pro RE 400GB Solid State Drive (SSD) PERMALINK

Just on the market is the new OWC Mercury Extreme Pro RE 400GB solid state drive.

Laptop users looking for a single drive should be looking at the 480GB model, but anyone looking for the ultimate MPG Pro Laptop will want two of these puppies installed for an 800GB double-speed volume (I currently run dual 200GB models = 400GB in my MacBook Pro, which is plenty of space for me).

I received two samples for testing, and I tested them both as single drives, and in a RAID-0 stripe.

Readers have inquired about Apple’s 512GB SSD. My response is “caveat emptor”. Solid state drives are definitely not equivalent (though all of them are expensive), many of them start slower, degrade quickly and some just fail outright.
Read my report.

The OWC Mercury Extreme line is the best choice on the market today for Mac users.

400 vs 480GB

Like the other 50/100/200GB Mercury Extreme Pro RE models, the 400GB version is a RAID-ready model with 28% over-provisioning that supports intensive 24 X 7 usage in heavy duty environments.

Mercury Extreme Pro RE = RAID-0 ready for extreme heavy duty usage, 28% over-provisioning
Mercury Extreme Pro = not intended for RAID, 7% over-provisioning with 20% higher capacity

The 60/120/240/480GB Mercury Extreme Pro line has 7% over-provisioning, which is still 7% more than most brands, and still very robust. With 20% more capacity, that’s the smart move for single-drive use (prices are similar). But if you are thinking of moving to RAID-0 striping for more performance or capacity, then stick with the RE line.

Performance

Read the review of the OWC Mercury Extreme Pro RE 400GB.

Join our Mailing List, Get the RSS feed too, Follow on Twitter PERMALINK

Join the mailing list for MPG. Check the box for MPG, and if you’re a photographer, try the other interests also.

It’s a low volume mailing list, totally opt-in. We won’t spam you, we don’t sell emails, and you can opt out at any time.

In fact, you might wonder if you’re on the list at all, because we send only particularly interesting or useful information. For example, when the new Mac Pro arrives, the mailing list will likely be used for some key points.

Twitter

There is one Twitter feed for both Mac Performance Guide and diglloyd.com.

RSS feed

An RSS “feed” lets you keep up to date on new postings and articles.

There are many ways to view an RSS feed. The simplest one is to view it right in your web browser, by clicking the icons shown at right.

View the Mac Performance Guide feed

View the diglloyd.com feed

Subscribing to an RSS feed in Apple Mail

If you are using Mac Mail, you can subscribe to a feed by first viewing it (click the RSS feed icon shown above), then choosing Subscribe in Mail. as shown below.

The feed then shows up in Mac Mail just like an email message does

Fastest Ever! Western Digital RE4 2TB Enterprise Grade 'RAID Edition' hard drive w/ 64MB Cache PERMALINK

Just in for testing courtesy of Other World Computing are a pair of the Western Digital RE4 2.0TB enterprise hard drives (part WDGWD2003FYYS).

Don’t confuse this drive with the slightly lower-priced RE4 “Green Power” version, which might not match its performance (not tested).

Where to buy

Get the Western Digital RE4 at OWC, along with their 90-day drive-swap guarantee.

The main downside to the RE4 is the price, which is more than double that of the non-enterprise Hitachi 7K200, though nearly the same price as the Hitachi UltraStar A7K200. Price conscious users will find the Hitachi 7K2000 an outstanding value and performer. But those looking for top performance will find the RE4 very attractive.

Performance

Read the details in my review of the Western Digital RE4 2TB hard drive.

As of July 2010, the Western Digital RE4 2TB is the fastest SATA drive I’ve yet tested.

The performance level is high enough that the speed of only a 2-drive RAID-0 stripe should suffice for all but the most demanding users. This drive would be an excellent choice for the MPG Photo Workstation for users seeking the highest possible hard drive performance.

The RE4 is also an enterprise grade drive, which implies higher reliability. That reliability, along with apparent best-in-class performance means that this is a great choice for demanding users.

 

NewerTech StoraDrive™ for Bare Hard Drive Storage PERMALINK

A reader inquired:

I just have been reading your article about the Voyager Q drive dock. I actually use it for backup with bare hard drives for about a year now, and it has been a great way of backing up!

Something I have noted though— as the hard drives I'm using come from different generations (but all 3,5") they all have different packaging if any. That looks very untidy, gets dusty and does not really stack well either.

I have searched the internet many hours but did not find any appropriate cover / bag etc.
Essentially something like the leather carrying case that comes with the OWC Mercury On-The-Go Pro Kit - but for 3,5".

Any chance you came across something that works for this matter? If not: how do you handle the backup drives?

By coincidence, OWC has just started shipping the NewerTech StoraDrive™, which accepts two bare hard drives. Stackable, and with rubber feet, this might be just the solution for anyone backing up with bare hard drives. At about $12.99, it’s a no-brainer in terms of price.

Alternatives

Wiebetech offers their Anti-static drive Case, or even a hard-shelled waterproof case that holds up to ten drives.

Connecting a MacBook Pro or iMac or Mac Pro to a DisplayPort Monitor (Mini DisplayPort to DisplayPort cable) PERMALINK

I recently reviewed the NEC PA271W 27" wide-gamut display, an outstanding monitor that I liked so much that I’ve bought one for myself. I love using it in portrait mode next to my 30" NEC display.

But how to connect it? Most Macs today have a MiniDisplayPort connector, but the NEC display has dual-link DVI and DisplayPort— no go by itself. OWC is now carrying the necessary MiniDisplayPort to DisplayPort cables in various lengths. That is the only way to go— adapters of any kind are likely to cause headaches, so don’t go there.

With lengths up to 15 feet, this also allows locating the Mac Pro (or MacMini, etc) well away from the display itself (you’ll also need a USB cable that reaches).

Note that this cable also allows connecting the Mac Pro to the display via the MiniDisplayPort connector on the video card, which has both DVI and MiniDisplayPort connectors. For dual monitor setups, this cable neatly solves the port issue with a single video card.

Why I disable OpenGL in Photoshop CS5 PERMALINK

See yesterday’s discussion on OpenGL problems.

One thing I do constantly in Photoshop is to toggle layers and channels for viewing:

• With OpenGL disabled, screen refresh is instantaneous.
• With OpenGL enabled in any form, screen redraw is herky-jerky and slow.

I do use a 30 inch display, and I don’t know if this issue exists on smaller displays, as I have none smaller.

While I know that OpenGL can speed up some advanced operations (ones I rarely use), the fact that it slows down screen redraw so badly makes it unusable for me.

I can choose OpenGL Basic, Normal, Advanced . The Basic setting is fastest, but still sluggish. The Vertical Sync setting doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter if I use the NVidia GT120 or the ATI Radeon 4870.

This is not a single machine issue; with an 8-core Mac Pro and a quad-core Mac Pro, same problem. The problem has also existed for well over a year, and with previous Mac OS X versions, and CS4.

At settings other than Basic, it’s even worse: a checkerboard pattern is visible for the better part of a second! See below.

With OpenGL enabled, the redraw is not only so slow I can easily see it sluggishly redraw, I can photograph it too! The refresh takes almost an entire second using OpenGL, but is almost instant with it disabled. At this reduced size, the checkerboard pattern is not visible, but that white area is the checkerboard pattern that Photoshop displays prior to drawing.

Below is what happens in CS5 or CS4 on my Mac Pro Nehalem 8-core 2.93GHz with 48GB memory, SSDs, etc. It’s absurdly poor performance. Here, I switched to viewing RGB to viewing the red channel. A similar problem occurs toggling layers on/off. Performance is erratic, sometimes it takes about 1.5 seconds for the refresh, at other times perhaps 1/2 second.

Photoshop CS5 Crashing With OS X 10.6.4 with ATI Radeon 4870 and OpenGL on Mac Pro PERMALINK

Update! Feedback I’ve received from one reader suggests that the Photoshop CS5 update has addressed various issues discussed here (since I have NOT had issues, I cannot confirm these claims):

"The Photoshop update (released yesterday) seems to have fixed everything. I haven't had a single crash. Period. What's more—everything seems way faster to me—including (/perhaps especially) the Open GL features."

... original post below.

Causing consternation among Photoshop CS5 users, CS5 apparently crashes with the ATI Radeon 4870 video card on the Mac Pro. The problem apparently affects Adobe After Effects as well.

Here is the Adobe discussion thread about the issue. Way too many details are unclear to say what exactly causes it. Apparently users can revert to 10.6.3 as one workaround, but that does not mean that is is an OS X bug. It could be a bug with Adobe software, it could be a bug in the OpenGL driver, or it could be a combination bug.

See Optimizing Photoshop CS5.

Your best workaround for problems

In my experience to date, the benefits from OpenGL rank right up there with paying taxes. Consider also the adjective definition of “rank”. Turn off OpenGL.

Turn OpenGL off and be content, unless you actually test with it and without it, and find that it helps with tasks that you (a) perform regularly, and (b) it actually speeds things up by a worthwhile amount.

OpenGL is supposed to speed up video operation. But I always leave it TURNED OFF. Why? Because it slows down screen drawing on every video card I’ve tried. For example, toggle layers on/off or switch between channels in Photoshop; this results in an annoying checkerboard “flash” with OpenGL enabled, as well as herky-jerky screen refresh in other cases (though not all).

Video cards and OpenGL are voodoo

To speed anything up, fast and reliable driver software is needed, and that has eluded Macs right up through 10.6.4.

Graphics drives are the source of numerous problems. Turn off OpenGL unless it proves its benefits on something you need.

Why my ATI Radeon 4870 is installed in a cardboard box

In my pimped Mac Pro Nehalem 2.93GHz 8-core with 48GB memory, dual SSDs and 8TB RAID, I use dual NVIDIA GeForce GT120 video cards, one per display.

The “faster” ATI Radeon 4870 sits in a cardboard box. Why? Because it’s a massive power pig, it has an annoying fan, and I have yet to find anything photo related that I do that’s faster with it than the standard GT120 video card.

I tried to find a RAW-file processing program, or any Photoshop operation that I actually perform that benefits— nothing so far. Performance can change with a video driver update, so I’ll stay open to future benefits, but unless the video card GPU speeds up something I do frequently, then whoop-de-doo.

All my photography tests show that the “faster” ATI Radeon 4870 does absolutely nothing compared to the base GT120 card. Except suck huge amounts of power and make noise. That’s not to say that there aren’t some possible benefits: high end video processing, certain specialized filters or effects, real-time skew, etc. If you do such things a lot, you’ll want to test and confirm that you have a benefit by swapping cards and doing an A/B test. For that matter, test with and without OpenGL enabled.

Gaming benefits? Perhaps. But I don’t have time to waste playing games.

Better is worse

I’ve had video card issues over the years— always with the “faster” cards, the ones that most people don’t buy. That’s a bad recipe, because in the event of issues, the minority choice just won’t get nearly as much attention as the commonplace choice.

Don’t waste your money and buy yourself headaches by upgrading to a “better” card that does nothing for you (for the vast majority of users).

When a new Mac Pro comes out, the base video card is often faster than the previous fastest card. So why do you need to pay even more for a theoretically faster upgrade? It’s marketing hype designed to part you from your money, which is better spent on memory or a solid state drive.

Apple Mac Pro update — When? PERMALINK

In my Jobs silent on hexacore Mac Pro at WWDC entry, I discussed the non-arrival of a new Apple Mac Pro, and when it might appear. See my comments there about what might be expected.

At this point, we cannot expect a Mac Pro before late July. Something has to happen by August (I hope), since the fall buying season starts not long after. But who knows, what with the iPhone now producing the lion’s share of Apple’s profits.

In the meantime, if a new or refurbished Mac Pro saves you time and/or increases reliability now, consider an MPG Photo Workstation, taking into account the quad-core vs 8-core shootout. My top recommendation remains the 2.66Ghz quad-core “Burly” MPG Photo Workstation, with the 3.33GHz model a smart move for increased interactive responsiveness.

Get the best Mac Pro for your needs

A personalized consultation now will have you in great shape for a purchase of an existing or future Mac Pro— long term value in choosing a system.

Here’s what consulting client Conrad Erb had to say about his recent experience:

I know a good deal about computers and can handle a lot of technical information, but after many hours researching a new workstation, I was overloaded with information and confused with so many options. You explained the options and prevented me from spending a big pile of money on a system that wasn't going to offer good performance. I recently picked up a workstation according to your recommendations, and performance is exactly what I needed. I ended up spending significantly less than had I not consulted with you. Investing in your advice was absolutely worth it - it saved me time and frustration. I'm actually enjoying my work again spending more time DOING my work instead of waiting for my computer to catch up with me!

Reviewed: NEC 27-inch professional wide gamut color display PERMALINK

Just posted is my review of the NEC PA271W wide-gamut display, perfect for photographers!

I like the PA271W a lot, and I might just have to buy the evaluation unit, it’s that useful to me.

Be sure to get the “BK-SV” model with the bundled calibrator and Spectra View II software, not just any calibrator will do.

Converting to a Larger Time Machine volume, and a Faster One Too! PERMALINK

With 1.7TB of data, my 2TB Time Machine backup volume has been feeling squeezed for space, even though I had excluded various items that are more archival in nature (and for which I have other backups). Time Machine keeps copies of both deleted files and versions of files as well, so a good rule of thumb is 50% - 100% more space than what is to be backed up.

Here’s what I did and what you can do:

1. Make sure you have an up-to-date Time Machine backup.
2. Removed the Time Machine drive(s) and set aside as a backup.
3. Install new drive(s).
4. Initialize the new drive(s), set up RAID if you’re using that (I set up dual 2TB drives as a 4TB RAID-0 striped volume “tm”).
5. Set Time Machine to backup to the new volume, then let it chug away until done.

You don’t have to use a RAID-0 stripe; you might want a single drive or a RAID-1 mirror instead.

But I needed more than 2TB space, and I like the double speed that the striped pair of drives offers— and it stays faster as the volume fills.

How to

Get more space than you need, because drives slow down as they fill up.

Here’s how to set up RAID.

Here’s how to partition a drive.

Parts needed

For a dual-drive RAID-0 stripe for Time Machine, I like the FirmTek 2ME2-E. For eSATA, you’ll also need a card for your Mac Pro or MacBook Pro (only certain models of MBP have the required slot). Here’s a cart with the various parts I used or recommend.

Dual internal Drives in a MacBook Pro with “OWC Data Doubler” BracketPERMALINK

OWC’s Data Doubler $79.99 drive bracket for the MacBook Pro is now shipping. I’ve been using a prototype of this bracket for several months now in my MPG Pro Laptop, and it’s a first rate metal bracket which fits perfectly. (Other such brackets exist, but I have no experience with them).

Here is a handy shopping cart with all the drive I recommend for use with it, and a few related items.

Use of this bracket means removing the internal optical drive. Since many of us have little use for the built-in optical drive, this is a fantastic way to get a lot more storage inside your MacBook Pro (models from recent years only, those with a SATA connector for the optical drive).

You can install the second drive yourself, but you can also just order the MPG Pro Laptop, and get a great system and have OWC install and test it for you. New or existing laptop, OWC can handle it. Order here.

I run my own MacBook Pro Core i7 with dual 200GB solid state drives as a 400GB RAID-0 stripe, for an incredibly responsive 400GB single volume. A popular MPG Pro Laptop configuration is a 240GB SSD + 1TB hard drive. There are many possibilities:

• Dual solid state drives as a single double-speed and double-capacity striped RAID (RAID-0 stripe recommended only with enterprise grade SSDs);
• Dual solid state drives as separate volumes eg Boot and Data;
• An solid state drive (100-480GB), along with a 500GB or 1TB hard drive for extra data storage;
• Dual 500GB hard disk drives as a RAID-1 mirror for reliability (low cost, high reliability!);
• A 500GB hard drive and a 1TB hard drive for maximum storage capacity.

 

Big Price Drop on 8GB Memory Modules PERMALINK

A hefty price drop just occurred on 8GB memory modules at OWC (see review). There is still a premium for 8GB modules over 4GB modules, but the price per GB is now much closer.

The OWC 8GB modules have been running flawlessly for two months now— highly recommended.

In the quad-core Mac Pro Nehalem (see review), the four slots accepts four modules, maxing-out at 32GB of memory. But unless you really need 32GB, 24GB is better idea, since triple channel memory is fastest. I use 24GB in my 3.33Ghz Mac Pro.

For my 8-core 2.93GHz Mac Pro Nehalem, I use 48GB (six 8GB modules), which is also optimal (triple channel memory, 3 channels for each CPU).

Cost Effective Reliable Backup and Storage PERMALINK

OWC just dropped prices again, so a 2TB RAID-1 mirror is now about $428. Use the GMax for a Time Machine backup or other backup, reliable main storage, etc.

No muss, no fuss, the NewerTech Guardian Maximus (GMax) offers RAID-1 mirroring in a compact all-metal enclosure with eSATA/Firewire 800,400/USB 2 connectivity. Read my review of the GMax.

RAID-1 mirroring is about redundancy— failure of one drive is a non-event in terms of functionality (though you will want to replace the failed drive). The resilience of mirroring comes from the fact that all drives in a mirror are identical copies, so that when a drive fails (all do eventually), the remaining drive is still operational and intact. The GMax has two drives internally, so one of the two can fail while retaining full access to your data.

The beauty of the GMax is that both the user (you) and the Mac see it as one drive. There is no special configuration, no special driver— just plug and play, knowing that your data is protected in the event of a drive failure. If a hard drive failure occurs, once the new drive is installed, the Guardian MAXimus will automatically rebuild the Mirror without loss of data to time using the remaining intact drive.

 

Speed is outstanding using eSATA on the Mac Pro and eSATA on the 17-inch MacBook Pro. Firewire 800 and USB 2 are inherently slow, this is not a GMax issue but rather the limits of those standards.

Get the Right Mac Pro for your Needs PERMALINK

A real pleasure Lloyd. Plunking down 4 or 5 thousand bucks on a computer system when it's not my field of expertise is stressful. Not only did I learn a lot from your website and our talk but I just feel a lot more relaxed going forward knowing that my money is being spent wisely.
— Paul H

My consulting services are a tremendous value. Many of my clients end up saving money, because they don’t over-buy, or worse, buy the wrong system for their needs.

A Mac Pro or MacBook Pro is a major investment, so it not only makes sense to get the right system for your particular needs, but also to consider reliability and backup as well. I cover those topics and more with every one of my clients, with the Mac Pro or MacBook Pro.

Even if you’re after an MPG Photo Workstation or MPG Pro Laptop, consulting is still a great investment in understanding how to approach you computing needs, as well as to tailor a system for the very best results for your particular tasks.

So-long Photoshop CS4 PERMALINK

I haven’t used Photoshop CS4 for a month or so now.

In spite of some issues with CS5 (some of which I know Adobe is fixing), my work frequently involves multi-gigabyte files, so CS5 offers a huge performance advantage, once warmed up, since it can use as much memory as it needs. Plugins are still an issue for some users, but not for me.