Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

What's best.. ATI 5770 or 5870 1GB Graphics Card?

Aug 19, 2012 8:55 PM

I have to buy a new Mac Pro, so I'm looking at the 3.2 Quad-Core with 16GB ram. I run large image files with many layers in CS5 extended and will be moving up to CS6 extended. All of my image management is through LR4 as well as several plug-ins.  So is the ATI 5870 1GB card worth the extra $150 upgrade price over the ATI 5770. I'd prefer to wait for the new Mac Pro models coming in 2013 but I do have to make a living. I've been using the ATI 5770/1GB with no issues on a 2.66 MacPro running Mountain Lion. I'm running dual NEC 27" PA271w displays. 

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 19, 2012 10:16 PM   in reply to kevcole123

    The upgrade price I see in the Apple Store is $200 for the 5870.

     

    Personally, I'd skip the 5870 GPU upgrade (which I understand runs loud and hot and is a power hog) and grab the 6 core upgrade for $500 instead. The RAM for the quad core 3.2GHz runs at 1066MHz and the 6 core 3.33GHz RAM runs at 1333MHz.

     

    So for a $300 difference (vs quad core with 5870) you pick up 50% more processing power across the board.

     

    Check out www.barefeats.com for speed comparisons like this one http://www.barefeats.com/pscs6.html

     

    PSCS6 features the Mercury Graphics Engine (MGE) which takes great advantage of GPU, but only certain filters are accelerated: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4289204#4289204

     

    For my money a MacPro that's faster on all fronts is the better deal. You can swap out the GPU later, but the CPU is definitely best ordered up-front. I have the 2010 6 core 3.33 Westmere and combined with an SSD runing just the OS and APPs, it really sings. Plus the price has come down quite a lot on the 6-core option with the 2012 models (used to cost additional $1200 I think).

     

    Here's Digilloyd's take on MacPro configuration http://macperformanceguide.com/Mac-HowToConfigureAMacPro.html NOTE that he suggests 24-48GB of RAM for intensive Photoshop work.

     

    Here's another BareFeats test (from Sept 2010, but then these are old GPUs) http://www.barefeats.com/wst10g7.html

     

    and you'll see that while the 5870 beats the 5770 for some things (but ties on many), the 6-core 3.33GHz Westmere beats everything else on the list -- and is roughly twice the overall speed of your 2.66GHz quad-core from 2006 even with a 5770.

     

    Hope that helps!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 20, 2012 11:24 AM   in reply to kevcole123

    I hate to say it but no GPU from AMD/ATI is going to help much in Photoshop CS4 and later.  All GPU acceleration I know of in Photoshop occurs with CUDA which is strictly Nvidia and Macs can't take Nvidia.  Apple was so happy to hear about that that they sued Adobe and I think Nvidia too and lost, obviously lol.  I haven't kept up with AMD technology because I don't like it but I don't recall hearing any sort of acceleration technology added to CS6.

     

    If you're going to photo or video edit, it's a very bad decision all around to get a Mac.  Only a Windows computer will run it exceptionally fast.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 20, 2012 11:37 AM   in reply to wizzerd144

    wizzerd144 wrote:

     

    I hate to say it but no GPU from AMD/ATI is going to help much in Photoshop CS4 and later.  All GPU acceleration I know of in Photoshop occurs with CUDA which is strictly Nvidia and Macs can't take Nvidia.

     

     

    I don't think CUDA is used at all by Photoshop. OpenGL and (when supported by the GPU) OpenCL, yes, but not CUDA.

     

    My Mac has an NVIDIA GPU and it accelerates Photoshop.

     

    Where are you getting the false information that you're passing on?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 20, 2012 11:33 AM   in reply to wizzerd144

    wizzerd144 wrote:

     

      All GPU acceleration I know of in Photoshop occurs with CUDA which is strictly Nvidia and Macs can't take Nvidia. 

    Photoshop does not use CUDA, it uses Mecury Graphics for acceleration.  Some features in Premier Pro use CUDA.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 20, 2012 12:05 PM   in reply to wizzerd144

    wizzerd144 wrote:

     

    All GPU acceleration I know of in Photoshop occurs with CUDA which is strictly Nvidia and Macs can't take Nvidia.  

    If you're going to photo or video edit, it's a very bad decision all around to get a Mac.  Only a Windows computer will run it exceptionally fast.

    Good grief!!! Look, I'm a Windows guy, always have been, always will be, but I would never think to post such a bunch of ill-informed twaddle on a public forum!

     

    In my day job I deal with clients in the TV/Movie production industries, as well as photographers, graphic designers, web developers, print shops etc, the vast MAJORITY of them run Apple hardware, everything from the Mac Mini to the Mac Pro tower.

     

    "Time is Money" to these people, and you can be sure that if they would get significantly better performance on the Windows platform than the Mac, they'd swap in a heartbeat!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 20, 2012 12:10 PM   in reply to wizzerd144

    Photoshop uses OpenGL and OpenCL.

    Photoshop does not use CUDA.

    Photoshop added quite a bit of new GPU acceleration code in Photoshop CS6.

    Macintoshes can use some NVidia cards, and they run just fine (well, except for the buggy 7300GT).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 20, 2012 6:22 PM   in reply to kevcole123

    ohhhhhh it's a couple of my plugins that use CUDA, not Photoshop itself. My bad.  Premiere uses it and Photoshop plugins use it so I assumed photoshop did it and I could have sworn that my instructor back in the day said it did.  Btw, take a look at these numbers.  Maybe Photoshop should use CUDA lol.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/adobe-cs5-cuda-64-bit,2770-8.html

     

    Of course, almost all filters are very unfriendly towards GPU processing cores I haven't seen Open CL numbers either

     

    Oh and to the Mac dude, businesses have these things called budgets so Macs aren't typically in them, especially at a graphics shop.  There's overpriced macs then there's high end, performance-oriented overpriced macs and they're on another planet when it comes to pricing.  You can get 2 PCs for every Mac.  You can get actually get a low end HP web server cheaper than some graphics-oriented Macs I've seen They're really more of a showy, shiny product not a business one and their customer base is typically people who don't know how to properly and safely run a PC without catching a virus.

     

    Every Kinkos and local graphics design or printing shop I've seen to has all PCs.  Oh and if your customer has a Microsoft Publisher file, you don't even know bad graphics performance until you've seen that run on a Mac.  I take it back, run basically anything in Parallels lol.  It's frightening.  Also for high end printers, the drivers just aren't there.  It limits your options so much, you just can't get the hardware you want.  If you want a die sub printer, welcome to Windows land.  Large format blueprint printer?  Same deal.  That's just how it is.

     

    The worst of the worst is if you want to download some little plugin or utility or nice assisting program, it has about a 1% chance of running on a Mac.  Like the overlay color matching in realtime program Pixie.  That's PC only.  It's just not practical to run a Mac on any sort of professional environment!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 20, 2012 6:44 PM   in reply to wizzerd144

    That review is talking about a third party plugin - and we don't know how well optimized their non-GPU codepath is.

     

    Photoshop has a lot of optimization - and when a filter runs at DRAM bandwidth limited speed, it would only be faster on the GPU if the entire image fit in the VRAM (along with everything else in there).

     

    Photoshop does use OpenCL - which is the standardized, grown up version of CUDA supported by many manufacturers.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 20, 2012 7:27 PM   in reply to wizzerd144

    wizzerd144 wrote:

     

     

    Oh and to the Mac dude, businesses have these things called budgets so Macs aren't typically in them... It's just not practical to run a Mac on any sort of professional environment!

    My GOD!!! What have I been DOING all these years?!?!?! You're absolutely right of course, "It's just not practical to run a Mac on any sort of professional environment!" I repent of my sins, the Wizz has spoken and I have seen the light... HALLELUJAH!!!

     

    First thing tomorrow I'm gonna hit the phones HARD, calling ALL my clients, especially the one who's spend with me hit $1.25 Million a couple of months ago, and tell them to dump their Macs, because "it's just not practical to run a Mac on any sort of professional environment!"

     

    Look, if you want to make a fool of yourself posting stupid fanboi trashtalk, go right ahead, but you might want to re-read my original post and understand what I said.

     

    First of all, I'm not a "Mac dude," I'm a Windows guy, and build my own systems.

     

    I work in IT Sales, over 90% of my sales are to Business PROFESSIONALS, you know, the ones for whom "it's just not practical to run a Mac," the rest are personal referrals from my clients to family members, friends etc; I don't deal with the public.

     

    About 85% of my sales per annum are made up of Apple hardware plus software and accessories for the platform, the rest is Windows based.

     

    The typical point of contact for me with my larger clients is the CTO, and/or CFO, y'know, the ones who control the budget that Mac's typically aren't in.

     

    You are right about one thing, print shops are the most challenging environment for the Apple hardware, and ALL of my print clients run a combination of Mac's and PC's.

     

    ALL hardware and OS's have their strengths and weaknesses, but to make a blanket statement like "It's just not practical to run a Mac on any sort of professional environment!" is simply idiotic.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 20, 2012 7:53 PM   in reply to pf22

    Wow, I never thought I'd see a real, actual aggrivated Mac fanboy in the wild!  I heard about them on slashdot but seeing one in person, wow! *snaps a photo*  Yes people sell them.  Yes, people buy them.  People don't always make the best purchase decisions and any salesman can convince them their product is superior.

    But without any bias, based on logic and numbers, Macs cost way too much.  The end.  That's seriously all there is to it.  No amount of useability or features or support are worth an extra thousand or so.  Our last custom built, i3-2100, 8GB (1333 CL7), military class MSI board, 128GB SSD, Photoshop Elements 10 system in an MSI Raptor case with USB 3.0 and a cardeader embedded for my company cost $640 and that included an MK120 set and Xtrac ripper 11x17 mousepad.  An equivilant Mac with an SSD of similar performance is around $1500...sooo that option was off the table real quick.  Not that it ever was, as we run Windows servers lol.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 20, 2012 7:53 PM   in reply to wizzerd144

    wizzerd144,

     

    You are new the the forums, so welcome.  But please try to stay factual as we are here to help people not peddle our personal biases. 

     

    You can agree to disagree, but please respect the others opinion also and no name calling.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 20, 2012 9:43 PM   in reply to Curt Y

    Ah huh, so I'm posting facts and he's posting sarcastic, offensive comments and I'm the one you direct that to?  FYI, this adobe account is about 8 years old.  Dunno why it says differently.  Anyway, I have about 30,000 posts on another tech support site so what's the exchange ratio here?

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points