Not sure what the cost will be for those, there are also 5680s (dual 3.33 6-core)
Or wait for the "2013 6,1" "Cylinder" 12-core that could cost a real arm & leg.
Yes it will be better, the 2,26's were never what I saw as efficient and CS6 is better off on fastest GHz but does not really leverage more than one 4-core or 6-core. A dual processor has overhead, complexitity and does not have a 1:1 increase.
If there was a single processor with 3.9GHz and 4 or 6 cores - that, plus the 96GB...
The 4,1 might want to upgrade the firmware to 5,1.
Have you looked at the extensive thread (might be 2-3) but is long one, on cpu upgrade on MacRumors?
Yes on one or two pcie SSD controllers for scratch / system and offering 6G bandwidth will help.
Hate to say after all these years but before you spend that much.... wait and see if the 6,1 fits your needs and budget.
If you have not separated out a Boot Drive, with only System, Library, Applications and the hidden unix files and no User files, THAT is the upgrade that gives you the biggest speed increase because it decreases the I/O "traffic jam" around the Boot Drive.
If you can afford a larger-than-128GB Fast SSD, it is so much faster than a rotating drive that it can provide an impressive increase all by itself.
Creating a Boot Drive on any-size SSD (128GB is about as small as you shoud go) provides a very nice boost.
BUT: with an SSD, you need to deal with TRIM-ing Unsued Blocks with something such as TRIM Enabler. If you can boot from an alternate full System with TRIM Enabler in it, Disk Utility (Repair Disk) will clean up unused blocks on the SSD and make everything faster.Mac Pro (Early 2009), Mac OS X (10.6.8), & Server, PPC, & AppleTalk Printers
I would sell it for a 6-core 3.33GHz and 10.9 supports - though check with MPG and OWC on this: 4 x 16GB (support issue is with firmware) but that only gets you 64GB.
cpu always matters.
using 4 x 480GB SSD for scratch and one for system - that is a lot of $$$ but CS6 still uses scratch and you do not want to have it using even your 10K boot drive and you do not want it using the SSD(s) as boot drive.
Depends on what your files are in size and why you want to do this. Where is the performance or bottlenec if anywhere now?
MacPerformanceGuide goes into optimized upgrades and he is graphic photog and has 12-core 3.34 96GB with as many SSDs and a 4x4TB media array.
There are times when the Apple forums get their indexes into a tizzy - your last post does not load, it shows there is one.
Something - a typo - about 4 x 1GB something VelociRaptors - if so you have $1000+ of 4TB of storage capable of 750MB/sec (the highest that the native SATA ports (4) can deliver).
Those OWC cards are reviewed by Lloyd in their uses for CS6.
Will hope the thread and Apple forum software/servers are working better and fixed? tomorrow - not, as this issue with the forums has been around ever since the new forum design went into effect--- with posts and replies just not showing up.
Now that I posted a rely, your post shows up!
Depends what you want to achieve. Whether you want the system only, or whether you are better off with other configurations. I favor SSD for both system and some for scratch. You can use two 10K VR for the system too. Obviously you either have 1TB $275-300 10k VR or you have smaller, but you do not have "1GB" anything.
Try it. Make one change, you need to add SSD (or more) to get more performance and better processing.
If you have two open PCIe slots I would find ways to use those too.