PC vs. Mac Pro?

[AidenShaw]

You can configure it with up to 64gb from Apple, but it supports up to 128gb.

What do you think will happen if you put 32 GiB DIMMs in and you call AppleCare about a hardware problem? How about "<click> <dial tone>"?

"Supported" means that you can call Apple and get "support" if there are problems.

Apple does not support 32 GiB DIMMs at this point in time, even if some of them might "work" in the system.

And, of course - whatever the density, the Dell has 8 DIMM slots and should work with twice as much RAM as the Apple with 4 DIMM slots. How anyone can take issue with my "new Mini Pro supports 64 GiB" table without realizing that is mind-boggling. Clearly a failure in primary school mathematics education.

You can always take a look here.

How 'bout that - Phil says 64 GiB, just like the Apple Store.

 

[koban4max]

Actually, I completely disagree.

Good luck understanding the difference between hardware and software.

By the way , if you run windows on a mac, does the mac all the sudden become crap and crash?? If so blame apple, they wrote the drivers

uh..nope...it's software all right....

 

[0x2102]

For the OS. Design/style.

I find a lot of people do not even consider an alternative , it must be a mac and only a mac, the only price considerations is what spec to get.

Macs have never had the best hardware nor dollar/performance bang for the buck, people bought them cause back in the day they just worked, while listening to people stories on here , owning a PC was a horrible experience and these former prisoners of Microsoft will never go back!

----------



And sexy..... If you just look at the front

Good post

@AidenShaw: Your comparison is no comparison because you impute that Apple is technically limited to those number - which they are not.

 

[AidenShaw]

@AidenShaw: Your comparison is no comparison because you impute that Apple is technically limited to those number - which they are not.

The Dell "supports" twice as much RAM as the Apple, any way you want to interpret "supports".

 

[linuxcooldude]

What do you think will happen if you put 32 GiB DIMMs in and you call AppleCare about a hardware problem? How about "<click> <dial tone>"?

Talking about absurd posts...nearly any type of support who cares about quality assurance will not hang up on you.

Apple does not support 32 GiB DIMMs at this point in time, even if some of them might "work" in the system.

Apple does not support any third party parts you might install that does not void warrantee. You have to go to the manufacturer where you buy them.

 

[0x2102]

The Dell "supports" twice as much RAM as the Apple, any way you want to interpret "supports".

Yes, and your Xeon CPU supports 256GB of RAM. Why doesn't your Dell support that?

What I am saying is that Apple designed the new Mac Pro for a reason and the reason was not to create the biggest PC case in human history, nor was it to include redundant 2 x 2500W power supplies or 16 x RAM slots, nor was it to include PCIe slots or a internal DVD/BluRay drive or anything that you might value on your Dell.

 

[AidenShaw]

Yes, and your Xeon CPU supports 256GB of RAM. Why doesn't your Dell support that?

Because, like with Apple, 32 GiB DIMMs were not available to be qualified when the system was introduced. By "available", I mean not available in the quantities and price needed to be a viable option.

Why the outrage about a minor point where I treated both systems the same?

It should be obvious that since I showed the "web price" for the systems that the table showed possible BTO options, not after-market mods....

 

[flat five]

Yes, and your Xeon CPU supports 256GB of RAM. Why doesn't your Dell support that?

What I am saying is that Apple designed the new Mac Pro for a reason and the reason was not to create the biggest PC case in human history, nor was it to include redundant 2 x 2500W power supplies or 16 x RAM slots, nor was it to include PCIe slots or a internal DVD/BluRay drive or anything that you might value on your Dell.

to me, what you're saying is correct..

it seems as if a lot of the argument is something like "dell is better than apple because they can do something that apple can't"

but really, it's not like apple can't design a computer whose specs match a dell.. they could definitely design a computer which out specs dell.. just like dell could design a computer which out specs a dell..

all these differences being argued about are design choices -> not technical limitations of the companies..

dell isn't 'better' ,in regards to their technical skill, because they support more ram just like apple isn't 'better' because they build smaller machines.

 

[BenTrovato]

This is a funny thread! I don't understand why people are so opinionated on one side versus the other. Apple makes great products while focusing on the user experience.

I'm just going to point out that this is 2014 and hackintoshes are relatively easy to build. If you use a motherboard that has no issues with drivers, it's straight forward. I still wouldn't sway from Apple's laptops, mainly because I like their build quality and the experience on them is still great. Desktop-wise, "dollar for dollar" I don't understand the comparison unless you need the support.

I much prefer a proper dual boot over running parallels.

 

[flat five]

This is a funny thread! I don't understand why people are so opinionated on one side versus the other.

the opinions are understandable to most extents..

"i like lots of ram"
ok, good-- use a computer with lots of ram

it's the pitting of manufacturers vs. manufacturers which makes it funny.. or even takes it off topic.
but mac vs. pc will never be won.. it's not even a win_able argument (until apple or microsoft or dell etc goes out of business.. a which point.. well, nothing really will happen at that point)

 

[AidenShaw]

the opinions are understandable to most extents..

"i like lots of ram"
ok, good-- use a computer with lots of ram

it's the pitting of manufacturers vs. manufacturers which makes it funny.. or even takes it off topic.
but mac vs. pc will never be won.. it's not even a win_able argument (until apple or microsoft or dell etc goes out of business.. a which point.. well, nothing really will happen at that point)

It's not "pitting" manufacturers against each other. The question in the original post was "Is it true that you could get a much better PC for the same price a Mac Pro would cost?".

I posted a verifiable online configuration that is 60% of the price of the Apple. If you want/need/like internal expansion - it's a "better" system. If you want/need/like dual GPUs or external expansion - it's not "better".

 

[flat five]

It's not "pitting" manufacturers against each other. The question in the original post was "Is it true that you could get a much better PC for the same price a Mac Pro would cost?".

ha.. guilty.. i don't even think i've read the OP yet and am making general sweeping statements about the title of the topic.

pretty sure i should just quit opening this thread.

 

[energy23]

Is it true that you could get a much better PC for the same price a Mac Pro would cost?

Hardware wise, yes definitely. Look here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/18992876/

Essentially a Hackintosh that's on par in CPU performance as a cylinder Mac Pro for $1,357 vs. $2,999. You get a number of other benefits with the Hackintosh as well (the most important being an upgrade path and actual options for superior video cards).

Operating system though? That's subjective... and that's where most people are going to have problems with making a decision on which route to go, even if its a hackintosh as those things can and often times are very tricky.

 

[simsaladimbamba]

Hardware wise, yes definitely. Look here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/18992876/

Essentially a Hackintosh that's on par in CPU performance as a cylinder Mac Pro for $1,357 vs. $2,999. You get a number of other benefits with the Hackintosh as well (the most important being an upgrade path and actual options for superior video cards).

Operating system though? That's subjective... and that's where most people are going to have problems with making a decision on which route to go, even if its a hackintosh as those things can and often times are very tricky.

That Hackintosh has a weak GPU, when one ignores gaming and CUDA and is bound to use OpenCL.
The RAM is also only consumer RAM.

 

[flat five]

a Hackintosh

the hackintosh argument only goes so far.. or, it applies to such a small percentage of people that the point could/should be rendered moot..

hackintoshers, even if they're using the machines in the workplace, are hobbyists/computer builders etc.. they're getting something else out of building/modifying/hacking the computer other than $/performance.. they're having fun with it too..

if someone is hackintoshing strictly as a means to save a few bucks but are otherwise uninterested in gadgetry/fiddling/tinkering then they're setting themselves up for a painful journey (imo)

anyway.. another reason the hackintosh argument should have some separation is that someone could also self build a windows computer for less than dell/hp/etc is charging.. so it's more about someone saying "i can build or assemble my own computer for cheaper than apple or dell charges for a prebuilt computer".. and not so much about mac vs. pc..

 

[energy23]

the hackintosh argument only goes so far.. or, it applies to such a small percentage of people that the point could/should be rendered moot..

This is true, it mostly applies to the kind of people that know how to jailbreak iphones or root and flash Android phones. Bu, the possibility shouldnt be ignored considering the wealth of information available online. I think sometimes we underestimate the competence of people on the forums.

hackintoshers, even if they're using the machines in the workplace, are hobbyists/computer builders etc.. they're getting something else out of building/modifying/hacking the computer other than $/performance.. they're having fun with it too..

That would probably never happen. Using a Hackintosh breaks the EULA rules and if there were ever an audit or whatever to check for legal copies of their software, that workplace would be screwed. I'd wager that anyone building a Hackintosh is going to be using it privately... or at least they should be.

if someone is hackintoshing strictly as a means to save a few bucks but are otherwise uninterested in gadgetry/fiddling/tinkering then they're setting themselves up for a painful journey (imo)

I'd say more likely yes, but its still possible to have a smooth install. I've done it before back in 2007 and it was tedious back then, I can only imagine that things have become much easier since. But I had the dilemma of Hackintosh vs. a used Mac Pro. Eventually, I actually opted for the Mac Pro since I got it for dirt cheap ($550 for a 3,1 w/ 16gb RAM). The only thing that held me back was the potential headache with the Hackintosh initially AND updating from 10.9.1 to 9.2, 9.3 and so on.

anyway.. another reason the hackintosh argument should have some separation is that someone could also self build a windows computer for less than dell/hp/etc is charging.. so it's more about someone saying "i can build or assemble my own computer for cheaper than apple or dell charges for a prebuilt computer".. and not so much about mac vs. pc..

Yeah, but I think its safe to say that everyone in THIS forum is focused on getting the most bang for the buck without sacrificing OS X.

----------

That Hackintosh has a weak GPU, when one ignores gaming and CUDA and is bound to use OpenCL.
The RAM is also only consumer RAM.

Sure, but thats the beauty part of the build; you can upgrade to a number of GPUs of your choice.... hell, you could throw in a couple Titans in there if you'd want and have it run circles around those rebranded AMDs in the nMP.

 

[Stingray454]

Here is a link to my hackintosh build. I opted for this option as it's a ton cheaper than a matching Mac Pro. It was _not_ a pain to build or install (one night of my spare time), and installing updates is easy (just get it through AppStore, but I do have to re-install a sound driver after each upgrade, but that takes a few seconds).

I mostly went with this option as I don't need 8/12-core CPU performance, and get similar or better performance out of it than a Pro for about a third of the price. Also, I like beeing able to swap GPU's, drives, PSU and whatnot when I feel like upgrading - even though the GPU in the Pro is removeable, I doubt we'll see a big range of choices for replacements. I was considering an iMac too, but there I can't swap anything but the RAM, so that wasn't a viable option either. Overall I'm very happy with it and have no regrets at all about skipping the Pro.

 

[joema2]

...It was _not_ a pain to build or install (one night of my spare time)....

Your own experience shows why this isn't a viable option for most users: http://www.tonymacx86.com/user-buil...ell-uatx-4770k-ga-z87mx-d3h-dual-r9-280x.html

You had to do extensive research, despite that encountered multiple problems, spent hours debugging various issues, spent more time browsing forums looking for solutions, and still have a few lingering glitches.

If anything else goes wrong you bear the full burden of troubleshooting the problem yourself. Outright hard failures with well-defined, consistent parameters aren't so bad. But highly intermittent problems with vaguely-defined characteristics can consume many additional hours or days of debugging.

If you are a technically astute hobbyist and have the time to spend, that may be OK. Increasingly the vast majority of users have specific work to do, often under high pressure and a deadline. They can't afford to be a hardware/software systems integration engineer.

So I don't see how the "I can build it cheaper" argument is widely applicable to the general user base considering a new Mac Pro.

A pre-built machine from a major manufacturer like Dell, with similar support would be a better comparison. However those don't seem dramatically less expensive, at least on the higher end, say vs. a 12-core maxed-out nMP.

 

[linuxcooldude]

Hardware wise, yes definitely. Look here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/18992876/

Essentially a Hackintosh that's on par in CPU performance as a cylinder Mac Pro for $1,357 vs. $2,999. You get a number of other benefits with the Hackintosh as well (the most important being an upgrade path and actual options for superior video cards).

Operating system though? That's subjective... and that's where most people are going to have problems with making a decision on which route to go, even if its a hackintosh as those things can and often times are very tricky.

As usual, trying to compare a gaming machine to a workstation does not work well. The use of a Xeon processor that has more access to PCI lanes and more RAM. Subpar video card. While you mention its upgradable will probably mean upgrading the power supply. Adding those Nvidia Titians / hardware necessary to bring it to workstation class will most likely over the price of the current Mac Pro.

Then, as mentioned, hackintoshing it for a hobby is fine, but not for a production machine used to make a living.

 

[Stingray454]

You had to do extensive research, despite that encountered multiple problems, spent hours debugging various issues, spent more time browsing forums looking for solutions, and still have a few lingering glitches.

If anything else goes wrong you bear the full burden of troubleshooting the problem yourself. Outright hard failures with well-defined, consistent parameters aren't so bad. But highly intermittent problems with vaguely-defined characteristics can consume many additional hours or days of debugging.

Well, I can't argue with you, it isn't for everyone. Though I did opt for builting my own setup with mixed parts instead of going for one of the many, many builds that people already have tested. Using one of those "recommended builds" removes all the research / tinkering from the build. But yes, there is some assembly / research required either way, so maybe not the best option for very non-technical people. I made that build log in case someone wanted to build a similar computer, to help with troubleshooting / installation.

Personally, I did it mostly because I hadn't assembled a computer in 10+ years, because I was curious if a hackintosh was a viable project, and it seemed like fun. I probably spent a totalt of a few hours assembling, and a few hours setting it up (which for the most part was setting up a dual-boot with windows). Total time spent maybe 5-10 hours somewhere.

In the end the computer works 99% the same as a "real" mac (the only downside left is that I need to manually reinstall the sound driver after each OS upgrade, but that isn't too often), and I saved in the range of $3000 by building it, so I'm happy . Also, I feel it's more modular / expandable than a Pro. It has been used daily since I built it in January for professional work without a single crash / glitch. Just wanted to share my personal opinion / experience.

 

[Onmybikedrunk]

I own the new Mac Pro 6-core/D700s. I am a freelance Industrial Designer and a huge fan of Apple products (and Dieter Rams haha). I use my computer for creative apps like Adobe, Autodesk, as well as Windows based software like Solidworks and Rhino. Ars Technica did a great review of the nMP that swayed me to buy it. I have to say, aesthetically it's beautiful, but otherwise I'm not as impressed as I thought I'd be. I am still within the return grace period and it's going back tomorrow.

I have a build pending that includes a consumer grade 6 core i7-4930K, dual Titan Blacks, 32GB RAM, and dual 512GB Samsung Pro for less than I paid for the 6core with D700s, a 512GB SSD and 16Gb RAM (to be upgraded). The truth of the matter is this...

The GPUs in the nMP are just rebranded Radeon cards. They DO NOT have ECC memory. You do get FirePro drivers on the Win (Bootcamp) side which is a plus. They are also downclocked because of the nMP's size/power restrictions. They function at about 80% of what REAL FirePro W9000's do (the card everyone compares the D700s too). In Windows they even show up as Radeon HD 7900 series cards... There is a reason a single W9000 card costs as much as the entry level Mac Pro. Everyone is like "Oh the nMP is such a steal just based on the FirePro GPUs!" Well guess what, Apple made some backroom deal with AMD on this one and AMD duct taped the FirePro brand to the GPUs. I must admit the OpenCL on these are pretty awesome.

I am not saying the nMP isn't a great feat of engineering and a thing of beauty (being in ID I appreciate this more than most), but unless you're using Final Cut Pro on a very professional level, I suggest staying away. At least until Apple gets more support from Pro apps other than Adobe/FCP that leverage a dual GPU setup. Anyone in the 3D modeling/rendering world would be much better with a well equipped PC because they're just going to end up running Bootcamp anyway to leverage all that expensive hardware. I also agree that most creative pros don't benefit from ECC memory... I know I don't.

 

[0x2102]

... I use my computer for creative apps like Adobe, Autodesk, as well as Windows based software like Solidworks and Rhino. Ars Technica did a great review of the nMP that swayed me to buy it. I have to say, aesthetically it's beautiful, but otherwise I'm not as impressed as I thought I'd be.

What software exactly did you test that didn't impress you? What were the results and what results did you expect?

The GPUs in the nMP are just rebranded Radeon cards. They DO NOT have ECC memory. You do get FirePro drivers on the Win (Bootcamp) side which is a plus. They are also downclocked because of the nMP's size/power restrictions. They function at about 80% of what REAL FirePro W9000's do (the card everyone compares the D700s too). In Windows they even show up as Radeon HD 7900 series cards...

What do you think they are? AMD and Nvidia are both using the same silicon for their consumer cards as for their $5000+ pro cards. They either put software or hardware restrictions on consumer cards and provide special drivers. What's your point here? You need real W9000 and the D700 are just not good enough to do what? Maybe give an example for a workflow or application where this applies.

There is a reason a single W9000 card costs as much as the entry level Mac Pro. Everyone is like "Oh the nMP is such a steal just based on the FirePro GPUs!" Well guess what, Apple made some backroom deal with AMD on this one and AMD duct taped the FirePro brand to the GPUs. I must admit the OpenCL on these are pretty awesome.

What is the reason the W9000 is worth $3400 and a D700 is only worth $300 in your eyes? Thanks for the inside information, btw.

To be honest I don't really know what you are trying to say. Is it that you need CUDA to get your work done and you just can't get it with a nMP? Or you need ECC memory with your GPU and the speed of two W9000's? It's clear as mud.

 

[linuxcooldude]

I have a build pending that includes a consumer grade 6 core i7-4930K, dual Titan Blacks, 32GB RAM, and dual 512GB Samsung Pro for less than I paid for the 6core with D700s, a 512GB SSD and 16Gb RAM (to be upgraded). The truth of the matter is this...

The dual Titan Black cards alone are already 2/3 the cost of the configured Mac Pro system. Not sure how you are getting that its a cheaper build.

The GPUs in the nMP are just rebranded Radeon cards.

As most any other workstation graphic cards normally are. But there is differences in the hardware, drivers and support with these types of cards that differentiate them with the consumer version.

 

[beaker7]

The dual Titan Black cards alone are already 2/3 the cost of the configured Mac Pro system. Not sure how you are getting that its a cheaper build.

Mac Pro 6 core, 32GB, 1TB, D700s is $5800 and 6 weeks wait.

2 Titan Blacks are about $2000.

So roughly 1/3, not 2/3, but hey what's $2000?

 

[linuxcooldude]

Mac Pro 6 core, 32GB, 1TB, D700s is $5800 and 6 weeks wait.

2 Titan Blacks are about $2000.

So roughly 1/3, not 2/3, but hey what's $2000?

The Mac Pro he currently bought comes out to around $4899.00.