My Dream DIY PC Build Vs Mac Pro Pricing

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,987
2
81
Originally posted by: TheStu
As for not seeing much performance difference, of course you won't, THEY ARE PCs! They all use the same hardware now. However, where OS X shines, particularly when used on Apple hardware, is in its ease of use (not to be confused with being underfeatured) and enhanced workflow. Generally speaking, I can do the same things in both OSes, however, I usually can do it either faster with the same number of steps, or faster with fewer steps in OS X. Basically, I can get more done in the same amount of time.
Performance isn't as simple as looking at hardware. Here's a nice article showing this:
OS X vs XP on a Mac Mini
XP is faster for copying files
XP is faster at making .rar files
XP is faster at converting sound formats
XP is faster at GIMP photo manipulation
XP is faster at converting video files to DVDs

The conclusion was that much of the software on OS X had to be run through an emulator because a lot of stuff isn't natively programmed for it. Of course that article was written a while ago, but the general idea is still the same. Something will be made for Windows, then get sloppily ported to OS X. This happens with drivers as well; companies like Nvidia put 10x as much work into their Windows drivers as they put into their OS X drivers.


You really should keep your mouth shut about things you don't know. The truth of the matter is that almost 100% of the Mac user base has used Windows at some point, whether it be at work, or on another system, hwat have you. Honestly, I would be surprised if 10% of the existing Windows user base can say the same. Can most of them or you honestly say that they or you have used a current Mac, using an updated version of OS X (Tiger or Leopard)? I don't really think most of them can, and thus we get this drivel.
Since 99% of school computers are macs, most of have used macs. We didn't like the experience so we stayed away.



In the end I still think it's a good idea to just get the cheaper Mac to do basic Mac stuff then just get a Wintel if you really need to do gaming. A $700 Mac and a $1000 gaming PC is still a lot cheaper than a $2400 Mac that does both.
Rather than paying out another $2400 when it's time to upgrade for newer games, just pay $1000. The Mac will easily last several game generations, just as my dad's Athlon 2200 still does word/email even though he bought it 6 years ago; I've had 3 gaming computers over that same time period.
 

bearxor

Diamond Member
Jul 8, 2001
6,609
2
81
Originally posted by: ShawnD1
Performance isn't as simple as looking at hardware. Here's a nice article showing this:
OS X vs XP on a Mac Mini
XP is faster for copying files
XP is faster at making .rar files
XP is faster at converting sound formats
XP is faster at GIMP photo manipulation
XP is faster at converting video files to DVDs

The conclusion was that much of the software on OS X had to be run through an emulator because a lot of stuff isn't natively programmed for it. Of course that article was written a while ago, but the general idea is still the same. Something will be made for Windows, then get sloppily ported to OS X. This happens with drivers as well; companies like Nvidia put 10x as much work into their Windows drivers as they put into their OS X drivers.
This isn't exactly what they meant when they said this:

First and foremost is the fact that many of the applications in this test were running under the Rosetta emulation due to lack of Universal Applications. When a Universal Application such as iTunes is used there is no performance difference. This means that the performance gap will likely be closed between the two operating systems as more applications are ported over to the Universal binaries.

I'll explain what Rosetta is. It's PowerPC emulation. So, what he's saying is that many of the applications used in the test were running under PowerPC emulation on the Mac. Apple made it quite clear that everyone needed to move to Universal binaries by stating that Rosetta-translated apps got about a 30% performance hit. It's there for the sole purpose of making sure the transition from PowerPC to Intel chips was as seamless as it could be. A lot of people would be mad to buy a new Mac and find out that none of their software works

It's not because of a poor windows to os x translation, as you guessed, but a poor PowerPC to Intel translation, that likely doesn't exist anymore. In general, applications like the ones described in your article are translated more commonly from some kind of *nix-based version of the app.
 

TheStu

Moderator<br>Mobile Devices & Gadgets
Moderator
Sep 15, 2004
12,089
45
91
Originally posted by: ShawnD1
Originally posted by: TheStu
As for not seeing much performance difference, of course you won't, THEY ARE PCs! They all use the same hardware now. However, where OS X shines, particularly when used on Apple hardware, is in its ease of use (not to be confused with being underfeatured) and enhanced workflow. Generally speaking, I can do the same things in both OSes, however, I usually can do it either faster with the same number of steps, or faster with fewer steps in OS X. Basically, I can get more done in the same amount of time.
Performance isn't as simple as looking at hardware. Here's a nice article showing this:
OS X vs XP on a Mac Mini
XP is faster for copying files
XP is faster at making .rar files
XP is faster at converting sound formats
XP is faster at GIMP photo manipulation
XP is faster at converting video files to DVDs

The conclusion was that much of the software on OS X had to be run through an emulator because a lot of stuff isn't natively programmed for it. Of course that article was written a while ago, but the general idea is still the same. Something will be made for Windows, then get sloppily ported to OS X. This happens with drivers as well; companies like Nvidia put 10x as much work into their Windows drivers as they put into their OS X drivers.


You really should keep your mouth shut about things you don't know. The truth of the matter is that almost 100% of the Mac user base has used Windows at some point, whether it be at work, or on another system, hwat have you. Honestly, I would be surprised if 10% of the existing Windows user base can say the same. Can most of them or you honestly say that they or you have used a current Mac, using an updated version of OS X (Tiger or Leopard)? I don't really think most of them can, and thus we get this drivel.
Since 99% of school computers are macs, most of have used macs. We didn't like the experience so we stayed away.



In the end I still think it's a good idea to just get the cheaper Mac to do basic Mac stuff then just get a Wintel if you really need to do gaming. A $700 Mac and a $1000 gaming PC is still a lot cheaper than a $2400 Mac that does both.
Rather than paying out another $2400 when it's time to upgrade for newer games, just pay $1000. The Mac will easily last several game generations, just as my dad's Athlon 2200 still does word/email even though he bought it 6 years ago; I've had 3 gaming computers over that same time period.

So, you are quoting from a 2+ year old article (it talks about how some guys got Windows installed on the Mac, and that they were using their instructions. So this is pre BootCamp, so this is old) written by a guy that can't even get the file system right? OS X uses HFS+ not HPFS+. In fact, I am not even positive there ever was an HPFS+, I had to look up HPFS to see if it was even real or a typo, and it was apparently developed by IBM and Microsoft pre-NTFS to shore up the lacking areas of FAT. Yea, way to bring the hurt there buddy.

And I am not sure what schools you are attending, but when I was in school, sure, we had Apple ]['s in the computer labs, but that was elementary school. Come High School we had Dell computer labs, and the same for college. The college my town has Mac computer labs, but they have a deal with Apple. It is distinctly possible though that you are right, that the schools that I attended and have travelled to occupied the apparently 1% of the market that were not Macs, but I find it unlikely to say the least.
 

bearxor

Diamond Member
Jul 8, 2001
6,609
2
81
Originally posted by: TheStu
So, you are quoting from a 2+ year old article (it talks about how some guys got Windows installed on the Mac, and that they were using their instructions. So this is pre BootCamp, so this is old)
Yes, but that wouldn't really effect the OS X scores mentioned in the article, would it?
 

Kmax82

Diamond Member
Feb 23, 2002
3,008
0
0
www.kennonbickhart.com
Originally posted by: bearxor
Yes, but that wouldn't really effect the OS X scores mentioned in the article, would it?

It might.. but I don't think that Apple has done any improvements to their file structure in that time.. so I doubt it would.

I personally didn't notice a difference in file transfer time when I moved from Windows to Mac. It seemed pretty close to what I was getting with Windows, but then again, I didn't do any extensive benchmarks.
 

TheStu

Moderator<br>Mobile Devices & Gadgets
Moderator
Sep 15, 2004
12,089
45
91
Originally posted by: bearxor
Originally posted by: TheStu
So, you are quoting from a 2+ year old article (it talks about how some guys got Windows installed on the Mac, and that they were using their instructions. So this is pre BootCamp, so this is old)
Yes, but that wouldn't really effect the OS X scores mentioned in the article, would it?

It would if we are now talking about Universal apps, or new apps that are better at the task.
 

bearxor

Diamond Member
Jul 8, 2001
6,609
2
81
No I mean, wether or not it's pre-boot camp won't effect the OS X scores - yes, as i pointed out above your post, running in Rosetta will effect the OS X apps, but you made it sound like making the mac boot windows pre-boot camp would has some kind of negative impact on the os x apps performance.
 

ViRGE

Elite Member, Moderator Emeritus
Oct 9, 1999
31,516
167
106
Originally posted by: bearxor
No I mean, wether or not it's pre-boot camp won't effect the OS X scores - yes, as i pointed out above your post, running in Rosetta will effect the OS X apps, but you made it sound like making the mac boot windows pre-boot camp would has some kind of negative impact on the os x apps performance.
It's just a shoddy article altogether(come on iDVD vs. Nero as a OS comparison?), which makes me agree with Stu in not trusting it. In this case the biggest overall change would be that Leopard is now out, which certainly throws a lot of old results out the door.
 

TheStu

Moderator<br>Mobile Devices & Gadgets
Moderator
Sep 15, 2004
12,089
45
91
Bearxor: I was mostly using the bootcamp comment as a way to mark the age of the article. Sort of if an article was talking about a blazing fast new 1.33 GHz G4 would give you an idea of how old it was. Since BootCamp got released not too long after the unofficial hack was unveiled, it is a decent age indicator. I do not know about you, but I couldn't find a date anywhere readily visible on the article, so I had to use context clues.

Honestly, one of the more fair OS X to XP comparisons was at OSXvsXP.com. They broke it down by individual items. Like, Movie Maker versus iMovie (the win goes to Windows here since Movie Maker is free with the OS, and iMovie is only free with a new Mac. They were comparing the OSes only). OS X (tiger) still won out I think, but after adding free 3rd party apps, it was pretty close. I wonder how the comparison is now, Leopard vs Vista.
 

Parasitic

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2002
4,001
2
0
Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

Amen, Plus when there is a minor update to Vista it's free, when the next OS X comes out, you'll have to buy it.

I didn't have to pay for 10.5.1 or 10.5.2 from 10.5.0.

If you are referring to Tiger vs. Leopard, that's like XP vs. Vista. It's not really a"minor" update. You don't pay for the OS .x updates the same way you don't pay for SPx updates.
 

Parasitic

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2002
4,001
2
0
By the way with that Psystar ordeal, does anyone fear that their Hackintosh days could soon be over? As long as Apple does some more coding modification that breaks the EFI bypass step all future updates would be useless.
And it wouldn't be hard too.
 

bearxor

Diamond Member
Jul 8, 2001
6,609
2
81
You guys make it sound like I'm taking the article seriously. I already dismissed the article, now I'm just trying to bug Stu
 

TheStu

Moderator<br>Mobile Devices & Gadgets
Moderator
Sep 15, 2004
12,089
45
91
Originally posted by: bearxor
You guys make it sound like I'm taking the article seriously. I already dismissed the article, now I'm just trying to bug Stu

Yeaaaaaa, its cool, it keeps me entertained.
 

Sylar Powers

Member
Mar 14, 2008
49
0
0
Wow. Holly Off Topic Batman!

Random Thoughts (that response to all the posts since my last one-follow the bouncing ball, and read the thread with me):

The Lian Li PC Case is kick ass, and if you think it's more than you need to spend to hold a pc, ok, but it is a better product like the Mac Pro case is, and well worth it. I spend lots of time looking at my PC and using it-so I feel the case is worth it. Not to mention, you can reuse it many many times-so why cheap out? I have owned this case's predecessors, and it was well worth every cent.

Never cheap out on your Mobo, it's the foundation. It is all your PC can become and do. I say go all out here.

DDR3 is expensive, but why put it off? All the best Mobo's are using it. Your going to have to take the plunge sooner or later. If you go DDR3 now, that's less you have to rebuy when you upgrade again. Prices will drop for upgrades in the meantime. In fact, I found 4GBs on Newegg today for $500.00, so the prices come down all the time.

Zalman Fans are quiet and, my ears like that. My wallet likes to listion to my ears, so 2 super quiet high end Zalman Heat Sink Fans (GPU and CPU) plus thermal stuff is worth 100-125 US Dollars to me.

Vista Ultimate Retail is useful because it comes with both 32bit and 64bit discs, and can be moved to other Mobos as you upgrade. OEM versions do not have both versions in the box, and they are tied to the Mobo you install them on.

Games are not on the Mac, but that's why I use a PS3 or Boot Camp. Mac thrives on Pro Apps, so yes, a Mac Pro can do lots a Mac Mini can't. Photoshop is not going anywhere, and will still be on Mac. Vista versions do differ on max RAM, OS X is only limited by the machine you are on. The Mac Pro goes up to 32MBs of RAM, and that's a good advantage.

OSX updates are free too, and they are more often than Windows IMHO. And the updates are mostly welcome by all, and Apple comes up with cool new features all the time. The same can not be said of every update from Windows. My Dad even avoided CS2 for a long time, due to bugs. Major updates happen more often than Windows, and require money. But the breath of features that come with it offset the cost. And I like my OS to look nice, even though it is a tool. That's why I buy Honda instead of Toyota. They are a better looking tool to me.

Apple is missing a machine between the iMac and Mac Pro. That's why the Mac Pro can seem like there is no use for it. But I know that to be false. For creative pros, that power is maxed out very easily. For users that just want the fastest machine they ever used, with computing power that will stay useful a few more years than normal, it's a good buy too-and it is the only way you can get a flexible Mac tower until Apple fills this missing link.

It takes time to rewrite software for new formats, and Photoshop will be fine until it gets to where it needs to go. Mac transitions are more easy going than say, XP to Vista. Just look at how smooth the transition from OS9 to OSX went, or from PowerPC to Intel chips. Hell, When Microsoft called out Vista, and we said Go Fish, we want Xp Pro back for a bit. Perhaps it is time to end legacy code, and start from scratch again with a real next gen Windows OS. Apple can do this better because of the fan base and they have less to lose. When Apple makes a change, that industry follows it. Noone says they don't want an Intel Mac, or that they want to stay on OS9-Apple leads, and Adobe, me, you, everyone else follows. I of course can point to how many people decided they wanted to stick with XP again, or avoid regular updates until they are bug free, but I rest my point. Apple is far more easy going with software rights too. OSX does not need an internet handshake to work, or does it put harsh limits on how many Macs you can install it on from a single purchase. If you buy a new version of OSX, you can use it on several (I think 8) Macs. Also, hobby guys make these cool, easy to use little programs all the time for the Mac, like itune alarm clocks, Little Snitch, MacTheRipper, ETC.

Performance of the OSs can differ for how long it takes to do the same tasks, but the power of the OS is considered very good in OSX, if not more efficient for what it is doing, when compared to say Vista. If you want to compare Xp, compare it to OS9.

I don't think kids in school have that many issues using Macs. I dug it back in the day. MacBooks made learning fun again, you know it's true-and just how many Macbooks are in an average StarBucks nowadays?

Roosetta PowerPC emulation was a great reasonably fast solution in its day, but now that time is over in just a few years. Everything is Universal Code now, and they can focus on optimization. It will take Windows users at least that long just to stop demanding that Xp Pro still be on the store shelves along side Vista.

Not to mention that because of Boot Camp, I can be brave enough to run Vista on my Mac, or cling to XP Pro like the rest of them, so this thread is not a software thread, it's a hardware comparison thread!

Comparing Nero to iDVD is stupid, iDVD comes with the OS, Nero does not. Compare it to Roxio Toast or something. I lost faith in whatever that article was comparing, and I didn't even have to read it. By the way, OSX comes with DVD player software, Xp does not (unless the manufacturer throws it in for them)-now that is a more gross oversight in this day and age. First thing after downloading Xp, I have to haul online to shake hands with MS, then download VLC. OSX comes with the Apple DVD Player application, and it works nice within moments of booting up, for your digital lifestyle pleasure. Handy if say, the internet is not connected right away. Things like this make me think it is fair to say that Xp is not up to OSX Panther, much less Tiger, or Leopard, but I know some will argue otherwise. Vista may be better in this regaurd, I dunno as I have yet to use it, but it is not an embraced OS like Leopard, and I doubt it is up to a fair fight with Leopard yet. Apple got it right like 5 years ago, and has been fine tunning ever since, and we are still waiting for Vista to show its chops.

That said, the first thing I want to do on my Mac Pro is load up Vista, and rock some Team Fortress 2. In that respect, Vista has some game. My biggest wish is to someday build my own Mac, like a Windows PC. So MS did allot of things right too. Just not any that begin with the letter "V".

And for the love of the 12 gods of Kobal, this is a hardware comparison thread in a Mac centric forum. Take your off topic OS fighting outside! A software debate is better left to a separate thread, and misses the point of this one. That said, I now know I placed it in the Apple software section, so perhaps it's my bad.





 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |