Self-built rig or new Mac?

[crsgardner]

I admit it: I have a little Mac envy. I like the pretty icons. And yeah, the desktop experience is nicer than Windows.

However, I'm a gamer, and up until this point I stayed away from Apple with a 10-foot pole. The Intel announcement earlier in the year intrigued me, but I said I'd wait until they produced a reasonable desktop. Now they have. Reasonable, but from a graphics standpoint not top of the line.

So here's the thing. I have my rig I built about a year ago, and I specced out a new Mac. Is it worth it for me to upgrade? (Keep in mind the new Mac DOES run Windows, so I'll be spending most of my gaming time there).

My rig:

Athlon 64 3200 (1 processor)
7800 GTX 256MB
2 GB RAM
2x74 GB 10,000 RPM RAID 0
1x250 GB 7200 RPM (for storage)
Dell FPW 2005
Single-layer DVD burner
CD-RW
Audigy 2

Specced machine:

Two 2.66GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon
ATI Radeon X1900 XT 512MB
2GB RAM
250GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s (I would probably slot in my existing 10,000 RPM drives -- same interface)
Apple Cinema HD Display (23" flat panel)
2 x SuperDrives (dual layer DVD burners)
Bluetooth 2.0+EDR module

Keep in mind, as specced, this machine is RIDICULOUSLY expensive. It's over $4000. However, that's mostly due to the Cinema Display, which costs $1000 (I can ditch it and use my existing Dell).

The question is whether or not I would see much, or any, performance gain. The processors definitely blow mine out of the water, but the video cards' performance is very similar.

 

[supastar1568]

why cant you upgrade your current rig to the specs close to the specced machine?

Like sell your 7800GTX get a x1900xt, etc.

But forgive me if i am missing something completely

 

[crsgardner]

It's an option.

But, in order to get something comparable I'd have to ditch the motherboard entirely. I'm guessing (don't quote me on it) that a board and two dual-core Xeons will be at least a grand, if not close to $1500. I'd probably wouldn't replace the 7800gtx as it's so similar to the x1900 XT.

The real reason I'd go with a Mac at all, though, is I happen to like it as a desktop environment. I use my main rig for both work and play, and I think I'd get the work side done better using MacOS. I do systems administration, so most of my work involves remoting into various servers, creating scripts, etc. Like I said, though, some of it is just OS envy.

I guess the real question is whether or not the Mac Pro would make a suitable gaming machine with a X1900 XT (running in Windows). Money isn't too much an issue to me. Like I said, I can always get rid of the Apple display. And I can sell the parts from my existing rig to probably get $1200 at least.

 

[nitromullet]

It really depends on if you can use or need a mac... If the answer to that is a resounding yes, then go for it. It will be an awesome PC and an awesome mac, but you might not quite have the hardware flexibilty as you would with a PC. If the answer is a maybe, then build a good gamer PC, and get a mac mini. If you find that the pretty interface isn't enough to keep you on the mac, you can always sell the mini (macs tend to hold their value pretty well). Alternatively, do what I did, and get a mac laptop... Then it fills multiple needs... For me, I game and mostly use my PC at home, but I get an awesome UNIX based machine with a pretty interface that is also portable with the Powerbook.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

You should get an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and an x1900xt. OC the 4200+ a couple hundred Mhz and you're set.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

i second gersson's idea. you dont need 2 cpu's.

 

[lamere]

MAC all the way. If you can afford it, go for it. Others have ZERO right to tell you what you need and don't need, unless you're 12 and that's your father.
Look on the apple site, they have benchmarks for gaming with windiows loaded on top, and it's pretty impressive.

 

[Jules]

Mac.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Originally posted by: lamere
Others have ZERO right to tell you what you need and don't need

isn't that a little unnecessary. He came here to ask if he should do a or b. People choose, then you declare 'people have no right blah blah'.

Very strange.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: lamere
MAC all the way. If you can afford it, go for it. Others have ZERO right to tell you what you need and don't need, unless you're 12 and that's your father.
Look on the apple site, they have benchmarks for gaming with windiows loaded on top, and it's pretty impressive.

The OPer is the one asking for opinions?

If your motherboard and accept an Athlon X2 processor, then I'd say get an X2 and a top of the line video card (1900XT is great if you're going for price/performance). If you have money to burn, then by all means get that Mac, but you're system can do nearly as well (if not as well) at games by doing a couple of minor upgrades. Now if you do content creation work, etc. (i.e. your workstation pays the bills and doubles as a great gaming machine), then you'll enjoy the Mac that much more.

 

[blckgrffn]

Originally posted by: crsgardner
I admit it: I have a little Mac envy. I like the pretty icons. And yeah, the desktop experience is nicer than Windows.

However, I'm a gamer, and up until this point I stayed away from Apple with a 10-foot pole. The Intel announcement earlier in the year intrigued me, but I said I'd wait until they produced a reasonable desktop. Now they have. Reasonable, but from a graphics standpoint not top of the line.

So here's the thing. I have my rig I built about a year ago, and I specced out a new Mac. Is it worth it for me to upgrade? (Keep in mind the new Mac DOES run Windows, so I'll be spending most of my gaming time there).

My rig:

Athlon 64 3200 (1 processor)
7800 GTX 256MB
2 GB RAM
2x74 GB 10,000 RPM RAID 0
1x250 GB 7200 RPM (for storage)
Dell FPW 2005
Single-layer DVD burner
CD-RW
Audigy 2

Specced machine:

Two 2.66GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon
ATI Radeon X1900 XT 512MB
2GB RAM
250GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s (I would probably slot in my existing 10,000 RPM drives -- same interface)
Apple Cinema HD Display (23" flat panel)
2 x SuperDrives (dual layer DVD burners)
Bluetooth 2.0+EDR module

Keep in mind, as specced, this machine is RIDICULOUSLY expensive. It's over $4000. However, that's mostly due to the Cinema Display, which costs $1000 (I can ditch it and use my existing Dell).

The question is whether or not I would see much, or any, performance gain. The processors definitely blow mine out of the water, but the video cards' performance is very similar.

DO IT.

And tell us how it goes

I am considering a Core 2 versions when the Mac non-pro is released, ordering the base video card and throwing the best video card I can throw into it... you'll be a great guinea pig

Nat

 

[crsgardner]

I will say one thing -- whether I get or not (still hedging, obviously), I like their case design. These are all PC parts. Why can't another OEM make a box this clean? http://www.apple.com/macpro/design.html

 

[redbox]

Originally posted by: crsgardner
I will say one thing -- whether I get or not (still hedging, obviously), I like their case design. These are all PC parts. Why can't another OEM make a box this clean? http://www.apple.com/macpro/design.html

It's probably just apple keeping it from being sold. Also the fact that it is custom built for Apple and doesn't have to be able to fit a whole bunch of differnt pc's with different motherboards and harddrives and all that jazz.

OP, I say do it if you would use it to make money otherwise just do what gersson said. I would also look into skins for windows and see if there are any that will subdue your os envy.

 

[crsgardner]

It's probably just apple keeping it from being sold.

Not sure I understand that comment. Keep what from being sold? The parts inside the case? It's a standard set of Xeons, standard memory, standard HDs, etc. I assume if one was done with the machine they could gut it like anything else.[/quote]

OP, I say do it if you would use it to make money otherwise just do what gersson said.

Well, it's going to be a personal box used for both work and play. I'm a systems admin/developer by trade, so it's going to be used for scripting, compiling, remoting into boxes, that sort of thing. But it's also going to be used for gaming (I hope), making DVDs, etc.

The question is whether this box is good enough to stand on its own as a Windows box. Processor-wise and motherboard-wise it looks solid. Good CPUs, huge bus, etc. They kept to the standards on SATA, so theoretically I could throw any drive in there. The only issue is that stupid video card.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

ok, then just get an x1900xt if you're really into gaming and call it a day

 

[crsgardner]

Originally posted by: gersson
ok, then just get an x1900xt if you're really into gaming and call it a day

But that's exactly my point. I'm going to do more than game on this. My "gaming rig" (the one I built) I use for lots of things.

Here, let me rephrase the question: can a rig be built with similiar features? What would be the price? If I could build a rig like this for cheaper, I'd make a comparison between that and the Pro, add in stuff like the price of my time, and from there I could make a decision.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Originally posted by: crsgardner

Originally posted by: gersson
ok, then just get an x1900xt if you're really into gaming and call it a day

But that's exactly my point. I'm going to do more than game on this. My "gaming rig" (the one I built) I use for lots of things.

Here, let me rephrase the question: can a rig be built with similiar features? What would be the price? If I could build a rig like this for cheaper, I'd make a comparison between that and the Pro, add in stuff like the price of my time, and from there I could make a decision.

I dont think anyone understands what you want

 

[akshayt]

PC

E6600
975
4GB DDR 2 800 or up
1900XT, + upgrade to Dx10

 

[crsgardner]

Originally posted by: akshayt
PC

E6600
975
4GB DDR 2 800 or up
1900XT, + upgrade to Dx10

Hmm, ok. Price?

dont think anyone understands what you want

Here, I'll make it simple:

1.) Is a 2 processor, dual-core Xeon overkill as a gaming rig?
2.) If it's not overkill, is $2500 a reasonable price considering all the parts?
3.) Will an ATI X1900 XT suffice for gaming in the next 1-2 years (about the time I usually upgrade my card)?

I think some people are trying to give suggestions based on a college student's budget (the typical age most people build rigs). I don't have those limitations, as I've been out of college for some time. I *can* spend $3000 for the tower, I just don't want to spend money stupidly.

If someone said to me "I can build a rig with those exact specs for under $1200", I would definitely not go for the Mac. If someone says "I can build the rig, but it'd cost $2500", then it becomes less clear. I would have to factor in how much I think the case costs, the benefits of having easy access to the drive bays and such, amenities like the extra gigabit ethernet and ports, quietness, stuff like that. Then I would have to factor in how valuable my time is (e.g. how much I make an hour) and determine if X number of hours to put together the system would cost more than just buying it outright.

I know we're in unchartered territory here folks. A lot of gamers, for a long time, hated Macs (I was one of them). And not a lot of us like the boutique PCs either, or Dell's attempts at high-end rigs. The Mac Pro looks like (to me) a well-designed machine. The question is whether or not it's a well-designed machine worth $2500+.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: crsgardner

Originally posted by: gersson
ok, then just get an x1900xt if you're really into gaming and call it a day

But that's exactly my point. I'm going to do more than game on this. My "gaming rig" (the one I built) I use for lots of things.

Here, let me rephrase the question: can a rig be built with similiar features? What would be the price? If I could build a rig like this for cheaper, I'd make a comparison between that and the Pro, add in stuff like the price of my time, and from there I could make a decision.

I think for your needs it would be an awesome rig, and I don't think that it's really possible to build the same thing right now.

I've found those procs on newegg, they are out of stock right now, but the Xeon 5150's go for $760/ea, so the processors alone cost $1500. Then, you take into account that you can't even buy (at least I couldn't find one) a motherboard that caters to the workstation/desktop market that uses these Xeons. So, that kind of puts it into a a league of it's own. Sure, there will eventually be motherboards that do offer this, but I imagine they will be around $300-400. So, basically, starting out with two Xeon 5150's and a motherboard that isn't even available yet, you are already close to $2000. The mac starts out at $2500, plus you get the ability to run two (3 if you really wanted to install Linux) OS'es on the same machine.

edit: Actually, I found this mobo which would make an awesome workstation playform: http://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/Xeon1333/5000X/X7DAE.cfm
(it sells for around $500)

The downsides that I can see are as follows:

1) It looks like you pay for that design... $400 for addtitional HD's, ouch...

2) I haven't quite decided what is going on with the PCIe x16 slots, but I can assure you that the 4 physical PCIe x16 slots don't have a total of 64 PCIe lanes... It's possible that there isn't a "true" x16 slot in the box at all. I'm guessing that one of the PCIe slots is actually x16, but I haven't actually found anything on Apple's site that can confirm that... The best I can find is:

# Three open full-length PCI Express expansion slots
# Configurable bandwidth that mechanically supports 16-lane cards

3) You might not get to be as cutting edge as with a PC. I imagine that the forthcoming graphics cards will all work just fine in the box, but you might have a delay on the mac drivers. Again, not necessarily important to you, but worth noting.

Aside from those thoughts, I'm actually really quite surprised as to how relatively inexpensive this box is.

 

[nitromullet]

1.) Is a 2 processor, dual-core Xeon overkill as a gaming rig?

Yes.

2.) If it's not overkill, is $2500 a reasonable price considering all the parts?

It is overkill, but $2500 is a reasonable price for what you get

3.) Will an ATI X1900 XT suffice for gaming in the next 1-2 years (about the time I usually upgrade my card)?

Depends on what games you play and at what rez. You mentioned a 24" LCD in your first post, a single X1900XT is already going to struggle playing most modern games at the native resolution of a 24" LCD.

I think what people are telling you is that you can build a better overall gamer for less. As you probably already know, the main thing a top gaming rig needs is a decent cpu, but a top of the line graphics card (or two). For this reason alone, a $2500ish gaming rig with dual 7900GTX's in SLI is going to bury that mac in a pure Windows gaming competition... You have to consider your other uses for it though, and ask yourself if you will truely take advantage of the four cores in other ways because you probably won't with gaming, as your graphics card will be the limiting factor.

 

[blckgrffn]

Originally posted by: nitromullet
1.) Is a 2 processor, dual-core Xeon overkill as a gaming rig?

Yes.

2.) If it's not overkill, is $2500 a reasonable price considering all the parts?

It is overkill, but $2500 is a reasonable price for what you get

3.) Will an ATI X1900 XT suffice for gaming in the next 1-2 years (about the time I usually upgrade my card)?

Depends on what games you play and at what rez. You mentioned a 24" LCD in your first post, a single X1900XT is already going to struggle playing most modern games at the native resolution of a 24" LCD.

I think what people are telling you is that you can build a better overall gamer for less. As you probably already know, the main thing a top gaming rig needs is a decent cpu, but a top of the line graphics card (or two). For this reason alone, a $2500ish gaming rig with dual 7900GTX's in SLI is going to bury that mac in a pure Windows gaming competition... You have to consider your other uses for it though, and ask yourself if you will truely take advantage of the quad core cpu's in other ways because you probably won't with gaming, as your graphics card will be the limiting factor.

But such a sweet, sweet limiting factor. I imagine that you will be able to upgrade your ATI video card whenever you please, so if you are feeling really constrained, you could spend some money a year from now.

Also, what are you going to be playing? Can you stand to play your games at a smaller size on the LCD (not stretched, but framed)? If the answer is yes, and you don't need uber AA with HDR in everything, I think this will be more than fine for you. And what an awesome upgrade!

I'd still hit it if I were you... were I not trying to buy a home, I would probably take a swing at being an early adopter too

 

[nitromullet]

We're talking about a $4k rig here, and you're bringing up compromising on resolution and AA... You really shouldn't have to do that.

The more I think about this, I pretty much come up with this:

It's a decent value for what you get, as you get two extremely powerful cpus and the ability to run two OS'es that historically have not run on the same machine. The downside is that if you don't take advantage of the cpu power or don't really need mac OS X, you have a woefully unbalanced, expensive PC.

 

[crsgardner]

The video card continues to be the Achilles (sp?) heel. I've been scouring the web for X1900 benchmarks at Apple display resolutions, and upgrade options for the video card. It turns out that people have stuck just about any card in the previous model. The Intels are even more compatible with the PCI-E standard, so one would presume there will be more options for upgrades in the near future. One board I read said people had successfully stuck 7900 GTX in the old model and gotten them to work. The main issue is drivers.

I guess I'll do some more research. It's a shame that Apple doesn't offer a model with an absolute top-of-the-line card. Then the decision would be a no-brainer.

 

[blckgrffn]

Originally posted by: crsgardner
The video card continues to be the Achilles (sp?) heel. I've been scouring the web for X1900 benchmarks at Apple display resolutions, and upgrade options for the video card. It turns out that people have stuck just about any card in the previous model. The Intels are even more compatible with the PCI-E standard, so one would presume there will be more options for upgrades in the near future. One board I read said people had successfully stuck 7900 GTX in the old model and gotten them to work. The main issue is drivers.

I guess I'll do some more research. It's a shame that Apple doesn't offer a model with an absolute top-of-the-line card. Then the decision would be a no-brainer.

:Q

I thought that was the abosolute top of the line card, minus the SLI'ish 7950 and any SLI/Crossfire pair...

I am sure if you wait a little longer, they will through the next big dog from ATI or Nvidia in there, and history has shown that the single best card from the newest generation typically beats out SLI from the previous generation.

Originally posted by: nitromullet
We're talking about a $4k rig here, and you're bringing up compromising on resolution and AA... You really shouldn't have to do that.

The more I think about this, I pretty much come up with this:

It's a decent value for what you get, as you get two extremely powerful cpus and the ability to run two OS'es that historically have not run on the same machine. The downside is that if you don't take advantage of the cpu power or don't really need mac OS X, you have a woefully unbalanced, expensive PC.

Of course I am talking about compromising with a 23" monitor. Holy cow, that is a lot of pixels to push. With his current 20" Dell, he should be good to go. I think he has been pretty clear that this for desktop use first/gaming second. Maybe I misunderstood that, but it is still a rockin' path to take. People spend way too much money on PC's all the time, this just seems like a way cooler investment. College kids can't replicate it with a little effort and half as much money...

Just my $.02.

Nat