Gonna be my next computer for sure. I think waiting for Lepoard and the UB version of Photoshop might be a good idea. Likely they will have even faster CPU's by then as well.
Yep, the 2 * 4 core machines will be even more tempting, but there comes a point where the OS can't do much if the applications aren't programmed with the right multi-threading approach in mind. Besides, the more CPUs you have, the more RAM you need in the end and 64 bits OS do typically use more RAM for a given task in the first place... a 8 core 64 bits machine would probably make little sense without 16 GB or RAM. TBC admitedely.
If I look at where I waste time currently, it is mostly (in order of decreasing importance):
- In I/O between my XP station and the NAS.
- In swapping for large 4*5 scans with multiple layers. The 2GB don't do it,
- In stitching very large images,
- In DxOing RAW files.
Only the last 2 are CPU limited.
I feel that a 4 cores 8GB machine should be able to cope with my needs for the foreseable future. 2.66 Ghz Xeon CPUs are probably enough at this stage. Anyway, I'll probably spend a bit less on the workstation itself, and more on a real fast SCSI 320 external storage unit.
What is unclear at this stage is the cost of software migration from PC to Mac. If the virtualization solution are real good:
- can work with sharable Mac/PC partitions,
- can control the amount of resouces allocated to them,
- do an efficient usage of CPUs/RAM,
- don't have any problem controlling all the USB, IEEE1384, SCSI periphals...
then working with a virtual PC inside OS X could be a workable solution, and the need for software migration would be limited to the core applications likes PS CS, Capture NX, DxO, my next DAM,...
MS Office, all the special image softwares,... ect would stay on Win XP no questions asked.
Anyway, I'll probably wait until year end until they release the 8 core machines, and will then buy a cheaper 4 core one. That is if I can wait that long... :-)