Im thinking a “maxed out 27” iMac”

at least 16GB ram, SSD and i7

Im running a 2.9GHz i7 8GB RAM on a SSD and i have no problems.
You need to look at RAM and a SSD for speed with no lagging. Processor Speed is negligble wsoi wouldnt worry what that is. Get the best you can afford, is my advice for situations like you.

I just upgraded from a 2008, 3.1, Mac Pro to a “maxed out” (or it will be when I finish adding RAM) 27” iMac. I have 6 T of images on a Drobo in multiple Libraries. The iMac for me is a dream pulling up Libraries, going to plugins and back and flipping through images.

Would I have liked a new Mac Pro? Sure, but I have saved some money and have all the machine I need.

I feel so behind the times … I’m running a 2011 iMac 2.5 Ghz i5 12GB RAM running 10.9.1 … I have about 12TB of RAW and 16 bit PSD files in my active archive, connected via two four-drive JBOD FW800  towers … often I run Aperture, FCP X, Motion 5, Ps, ID, Safari, Mail, etc. simultaneously … I experience very few spinning wheels or delays … I think Mavericks did a lot under the hood to address multi-tasking house cleaning which improved app switching and memory swapping …

I will be upgrading my external drives to Thunderbolt once OWC starts shipping their new Mercury Elite Pro Dual boxes … I plan on two of them, each with 2 4TB drives in stripe mode … one for working files, the second for in house clone of the working files.

According to MacWorld’s Benchmark testing the iMac is fastest with Aperture,  faster even than a brand new 8 core MacPro:Lab tested: New Mac Pro is the speedster we’ve been waiting for (finally) | Macworld

This means that Apple has not updated Aperture to take advantage of the latest hardware which feels like they really don’t view it as a Pro App the way they do Final Cut.

Perhaps they will in the future but we probably shouldn’t be holding our breath.

Walter,

I certainly hope that you are correct, it would indeed be nice. I am a long time user both personally and professionally. Aperture’s basic structure is brilliant, and I have long been a fan.

Nothing would make me happier than a solid and drama free (Aperture 3, 3.0.1,3.0.2 Final cut Pro X) release that took full advantage of Apple’s latest hardware.

It’s a bit of a dilemma for me because I’m now running 2 systems, one with Mavericks and Aperture 3.5.1 on MBP for personal work , but our main studio machine is an aging MacPro 1,1 (Quad 3.0 16GB Ram, Boot SSD, 5770, Raid libraries Dual 23” CD’s) which has been frozen at 10.6.8 and Aperture 3.2.x (not sure off the top of my head) because it is stable there, and was not stable higher than that.

My plan has  long been to upgrade to the next MacPro/Thunderbolt etc and new 10Bit displays. So I was more than a bit surprised to learn that Currently,  Aperture runs faster on an iMac than on a new 8 core Mac Pro with dual fire pro 700’s. And, Apple offers no guidance about when/if Aperture will be updated, and when it is, will it support a 10bit workflow, and I haven’t been able to ascertain if an iMac can (Apple just says ‘millions of colors’ which is Not 10 bit) 

My wife already owns a MBP retina & Thunferbolt display and frankly while they are great in most respects I would rather edit on a pair of non-glossy displays capable of hardware calibration and a 10 bit workflow.

I don’t change very often, so it makes more sense to go with the highest standard I can. I’ve gotten used to identical dual displays and was hoping to keep that setup.

One would have thought that even the base configuration of the New MacPro would smoke everything else in the lineup, but it does not. (at least not with Aperture)  further , it is at least possible that Apple could write a very nice update to Aperture but does not address either the 10bit workflow or the machines for which it is optimized.

So in my case at least I just have to wait and see what apple does before I replace the Hardware, and hope my hardware keeps kicking along until we get some clarification.

There is nothing I would like more than being able to run the same (latest) version of Aperture on both machines , and have it run really well on both. And you must admit that having Applications like Aperture tested to run Slower on Apple’s latest workstation than on it’s consumer desktop is a bit counter intuitive, No?

I just bought the cadillac iMac 27.  Running my 1 TB aperture managed library like a champ.  I have the 3 TB fusion drive.  Aperture opens in just about 3 seconds.  I use a bunch of post processing software (mostly PS and Nik suite); all run great.  I considered the Mac Pro, but the dual GPUs won’t do much for me with photography as I understand.  

Jeff,

I think you did the right thing, and I may end up doing exactly the same. I have been told several times over the years that Aperture does not address more than one graphics card, and benefits from a fast processor and memory– all of which the iMac provides.

What we don’t know is if an Aperture update will allow for the type of cutting edge color and display technology that Final Cut supports, or take the iPhoto with more features approach recent Aperture updates have seemed to follow.

Personally I would much prefer to use true wide gamut displays like the Eizo’s and NEC Spectraview series which are all 10 bit displays (without glossy screens) So I have to wait to see what Apple does with Aperture, and hope my old Mac Pro keeps chugging along until then.