Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

PC vs. Mac Pro?

AidenShaw said:
In only nine words you've pointed out how unbalanced the MP is....
Click to expand...

Thats the point. It is by Apple for Apple. They don't care about Adobe either. When did 'balance' enter the picture? The Mac Pro is not a balanced platform. Don't care if you need or want dual AMD's you need to add them to balance your cost. Mac Pro users can't omit. That's the cost analysis point and the truth in previous posters claims. That others just brush aside aspects they don't need or want and say it is comparable. (ie . I don't need or want dual GPU's) It is only then comparable by you for you. OS X users do not have the HW luxury of picking or choosing. Now price it out with Dual AMD workstation GPU's SSD's etc and get a price total. It will be similar or higher than Mac Pro. I don't need or want it either but Apple isn't exactly ripping people off here. As always, buy low end and Apple takes your money, buy high end and you end up with a pretty good deal. In the middle will net you average pricing next to PC.
 
0x2102 said:
For me it matters the most. I also just went from a cMP 12c to a nMP 6c because I couldn't stand the noise anymore. So I value noise over performance. I am really happy now with a 25% slower CPU. It all depends on the individual and what they value. I would never reduce a Mac down to the hardware itself.
Click to expand...

And this as nothing to do with which OS you use... You can get a silent windows running PC also. I was replying to someone arguing about which OS to use...

----------
derbothaus said:
Thats the point. It is by Apple for Apple. They don't care about Adobe either. When did 'balance' enter the picture? The Mac Pro is not a balanced platform. Don't care if you need or want dual AMD's you need to add them to balance your cost. Mac Pro users can't omit. That's the cost analysis point and the truth in previous posters claims. That others just brush aside aspects they don't need or want and say it is comparable. (ie . I don't need or want dual GPU's) It is only then comparable by you for you. OS X users do not have the HW luxury of picking or choosing. Now price it out with Dual AMD workstation GPU's SSD's etc and get a price total. It will be similar or higher than Mac Pro. I don't need or want it either but Apple isn't exactly ripping people off here. As always, buy low end and Apple takes your money, buy high end and you end up with a pretty good deal. In the middle will net you average pricing next to PC.
Click to expand...

If that is Apple goals then they are painting themselves in a corner. As long as you're just using FCX, Mari & Logic Pro X then it's a great machine. But if you get out of the Apple ecosystem then it loses to the PC/Win world.
 
Android who? said:
Is it true that you could get a much better PC for the same price a Mac Pro would cost? Someone I know has been saying so... but then I see all these people saying how great the Mac Pro is...

P.S. This is not a fight and does not require bashing other computers. It's a question. Level-headed comments are definitely a plus.
Click to expand...

I believe the Mac Pro (new mini model) has hardware that is competitively priced. For some, this is a great buy for others not such a good buy -

If you want a small computer with everything on the outside so to speak, then the Mac Pro might be a good fit. If you use specific software that takes advantage of the Mac Pro's GPU(s), it might be a good fit.

However, if you prefer to have fully accessible upgradable cards for GPU and audio and more internally, then a PC is a better fit. If you play games that require Windows or take advantage of non-ATI cards, then a PC might be a better fit. Then again, if you want an HTPC that can handle HD audio, then a PC (with either Linux or Windows) is a good fit as would be the Mac Pro with Windows installed and used.

I think the notion of the small footprint is silly given how much external devices take up space such as external drive enclosures, disc reader/writers and the like.

Last thought - for those that dislike the Mac Pro, I wonder how much your numbers would have been reduced if Apple offered ATI OR NVidia as GPU options. Much of the chagrin is the ATI only option.
 
tuxon86 said:
Which for professional use is irrelevant since you'll spend almost all of your time inside your applications, and beside different keymaping they work the same on both OS.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree. Things like Spotlight, Exposé, and dragging files to an application have been gold mines that took Windows years to catch up to. (If at all, I honestly don't know what happens if you drag a file to the task bar in Windows 8.)

Those are all small examples, but the point is that there are dozens and dozens of small examples. They add up into something meaningful. And even if you come back and say that you don't use a single one of those features that's a description of how you work, not proof that they two systems "work the same."
 
Let's beat a dead horse

Android who? said:
Is it true that you could get a much better PC for the same price a Mac Pro would cost? Someone I know has been saying so... but then I see all these people saying how great the Mac Pro is...

P.S. This is not a fight and does not require bashing other computers. It's a question. Level-headed comments are definitely a plus.
Click to expand...

As many forum members have posted, "fast" is a relative term. I built a gaming desktop with a separate hackintosh partition this last year with a haswell i5, gtx 770, 8GB ram for about 1000$. For gaming, it wipes the floor with the new Mac Pro at about 1/3 the cost. For professional work, my machine is way slower than the Mac Pro, or any other professional pc.

Your question is hugely ambiguous. Until you determine what you need, we can't answer your question. Even between forum members arguing for the Mac Pro or for a similar professional pc, their arguments are relative. For expandability, I'm sure a pc would be better. For Cuda work, nVidia is obviously better suited.

The bottom line is that everyone has their individual needs, and you should get what you need for YOU. 99% of the population doesn't need a professional pc. God forbid you get a cheaper machine with a SATA SSD. If it makes you happy, and you can make a living off that machine, then props to you.

Maybe the best thing to do is give your friend a pat on the back, and let them know that no matter how much they spend on their computer, you will still love them.

I hope this helped to answer your question. If not, I'm sure you can read some other great rants on this thread.

Best,
Matt
 
tuxon86 said:
And this as nothing to do with which OS you use... You can get a silent windows running PC also. I was replying to someone arguing about which OS to use...
Click to expand...

My reply might have been misleading. The combination of hardware design, performance and the OS matters the most to me - if it doesn't people should/can buy a PC.
 
Android who? said:
Is it true that you could get a much better PC for the same price a Mac Pro would cost? Someone I know has been saying so... but then I see all these people saying how great the Mac Pro is...

Sourcing components and assembling your own computer from the usual online shops is easy these days, and you can build very powerful rigs at reasonable prices. So, better hardware for around the same price, sure.

On a business note, I wouldn't build a hackintosh for our customers because there is a risk of updates breaking a customer's installation. But if this is for personal use, oh heck yeah. If you have the money, the time, and the inclination, I would certainly go for it! Build a fire breathing monster, and have fun!
Click to expand...
 
Small White Car said:
I completely disagree. Things like Spotlight, Exposé, and dragging files to an application have been gold mines that took Windows years to catch up to. (If at all, I honestly don't know what happens if you drag a file to the task bar in Windows 8.)

Those are all small examples, but the point is that there are dozens and dozens of small examples. They add up into something meaningful. And even if you come back and say that you don't use a single one of those features that's a description of how you work, not proof that they two systems "work the same."
Click to expand...

"dragging files to an application " as been around since windows 3.1...
I've never used Exposé or Spotlight in my workflow. I boot directly to PS on my Mac. But I like being able to create a folder in any file manager in windows. I also prefer the network file sharing on windows.

But those are all personal preference and aren't representative of the strenght or weakness of one OS vs the other.

What I want for a workstation is performance that surpass a standard computer in my applications. Since I don't use FCX or Mari or other Apple exclusive then I wouldn't be getting real benefits from the nMP vs a PC.

Keep in mind also, that drivers development is also trailling the PC, especially in regard to GPU, hence why most gamer use bootcamp to play on the windows side.
 
tuxon86 said:
"dragging files to an application " as been around since windows 3.1...
Click to expand...

Then we're talking about something different because the last time I tried a year or two back Windows popped up a dialog box to tell me that's not allowed. (I like that it didn't just not work, but someone took the time to write that box to tell me that it doesn't work.)

I'm talking about dragging a file from the desktop onto that Photoshop icon there and having that launch Photoshop, even when it's closed. Does that work now?

taskbar.jpg


tuxon86 said:
But those are all personal preference and aren't representative of the strenght or weakness of one OS vs the other.
Click to expand...

No, Spotlight is a piece of technology. It is a feature. For the longest time Windows had nothing like it so when I was using a PC it was not an available option for me even when I wanted it.

That's not what "personal preference" means." It's a difference between OSes.
 
It all comes down to usage. If you plan to use the computer for professional work in the 3d/video/heavy graphics area, Mac Pro is the way to go. If you want a beast machine for gaming, hobby-level rendering, general work and such, you're pretty much wasting your money on a Pro. Sure the Pro is more compact, beautiful and silent than most PC builds, but not by a lot - you can match the noise level, and if you don't stare at the computer all day, you can probably live with a little less beautiful machine

Personally I was looking to buy a Mac Pro for my work. I do _not_ do 3d/video that much (although a little), but more OpenCL-demanding stuff and general work (many screens, tons of apps/documents open at the same time, and so on). Multicore performance is nice, but doesn't shave enough time off my work for it to be worth it.

I ended up getting a compact hackintosh after considering my options - I got a 4.7 GHz (overclocked) haswell, at somewhere around 18k cinebench score - I don't remember exactly. With that dual 280X GPU's that are quite compareable for W7000 for anything but CAD-type work (same or faster on general 3d, gaming, OpenCL and whatnot from the comparisons I have seen). 32 GB 2133 Mhz ram, Samsung 840 Pro SSD:s in raid (500Mb/s per disk = matching the Pro speed), water cooling and noctua fans for low noise, and so on. At the end of the day, I had spent about a third of the money I would have put on a Pro with similar performance for my working conditions.

My point with this rant is, that is depends greatly on what you use your machine for. If you use it for intensive work, or have the money and absolutely love/need the form factor, get the Pro. If you want a beast of a machine that will last for a long time, have similar performance to the Pro, be easier to swap parts in, and save money, get a PC / hackintosh.
 
MH01 said:
I can guarantee you that most of the people getting these systems do not need a Xeon or ECC supported ram.
Click to expand...

I don't specifically need a Xeon - but I'm getting the Dell T3610 workstation because I need ECC RAM.

With the 80 GiB of RAM that I'm starting with, I want the peace of mind that if there is a random "cosmic ray" memory error it will simply and silently be corrected.

And if there's a more serious error, I'll get a blue screen crash with "multi-bit memory error detected on DIMM #7" rather than some random application or system error.
 
It's the same with all Macs in my opinion. Apple delivers a better user experience in their hardware and software but ultimately you do relatively the same work no matter what platform you choose.

My MBA is a joy to use, I haven't had the same satisfaction on any Windows laptop I've owned. Since experiencing with hackintoshing, I find OS X is nicer than Windows. Everything is presented better I find. Obviously personal opinion. Buying a nMP will give you a higher satisfaction than a regular desktop but if money the main concern, then by all means go ahead and save what you can.
 
I really don't understand the position of tuxon86... Sure many many features like dragging files onto applications (even if it doesn't work in the same way heh...) are present in both OS but still... Generally speaking i find more pleasant the experience in OSX.

And i'm an ex Apple hater, been with Windows for like 20 years and loved building up my pc and change internal peripherals.

Personally i think i'll be going for a Hackintosh in the future to save some money, but for sure i'm not switching OS.

Question: how much have you(you= tuxon86) been using OSX? Forgive me, but you indeed raise good points in the discussion, but honestly i don't understand what's your purpose e.g. highlighting pros and cons of each OS or what else.
 
SimeoneSergio said:
I really don't understand the position of tuxon86... Sure many many features like dragging files onto applications (even if it doesn't work in the same way heh...) are present in both OS but still... Generally speaking i find more pleasant the experience in OSX.

And i'm an ex Apple hater, been with Windows for like 20 years and loved building up my pc and change internal peripherals.

Personally i think i'll be going for a Hackintosh in the future to save some money, but for sure i'm not switching OS.

Question: how much have you(you= tuxon86) been using OSX? Forgive me, but you indeed raise good points in the discussion, but honestly i don't understand what's your purpose e.g. highlighting pros and cons of each OS or what else.
Click to expand...

I've been using OS X since 2003. And my point is that most prosumer buy workstation to run an application or a suite of applications. They'll spend most of their time inside those piece of software and not spend that much time playing around the GUI and OS functions.

Think of a professional photo editor. 99% of his time will be spent in Lightroom/bridge and Photoshop.

Having worked for close to 20 years with just about every OS available on personal computer like I did, You come to realise that they all are only a way to achieve an end. They all do the same thing, just differently and it DOES come down to personal preference.

And beside an OS is way more than just the GUI.
 
Last edited:
MacPro is way better

I believe that this question is highly subjective so I will give a mostly subjective answer.

The Mac Pro is way better. Nothing to do with the hardware, it is the OS only.

1) Less chance for viruses (very few care to write for an OS with less than 10% marketshare)

2) Better OS/software stability (not many incompatibilities due to vertical integration of hardware/software)

3) Slightly better components/industrial assembly/customer service (I said my answer was subjective and so it is, but I did have Dell units built on same year as Apple units, and most of my Dells are dead while the Apples keep chugging along. My Dell laptop had its paint start to flake off while the Aluminum Macbook that I had still looked tip top. When I have a problem, it is pretty easy to walk into the Apple store and have it fixed. I am not a newbie, I know a lot about how to configure these machines, but I still appreciate the support. Does any other computer manufacturer have a national store presence of their own with the exception of Apple computer? Microsoft stores maybe -- but the only computer they really manufacture is the Surface series. And Sony Stores? they are almost or will be defunct for the most part, but they are the only two other companies whom I know sell their own PCs in their own stores with a significant national network)
 
stjames70 said:
1) Less chance for viruses (very few care to write for an OS with less than 10% marketshare)
Click to expand...
Tell that to the malware programmers having written actual viruses in public circulation affecting Mac OS 8 and 9 and even earlier systems, which had a much smaller market share in the 1990s than Mac OS X / OS X had in the past decade.
 
stjames70 said:
...
(I said my answer was subjective and so it is, but I did have Dell units built on same year as Apple units, and most of my Dells are dead while the Apples keep chugging along)
...
Click to expand...

I hope that you're comparing Dell Latitudes and Precisions to the Apples, not $300 to $400 Inspirons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back