I am a little confused about hackintosh graphics cards

[diamondschwin]

I was interested in the lifehacker.com 900 dollar mac pro build and was just wondering how the graphics card functions since it is a PC version.


Wouldnt you need to flash the card to a mac rom to get it running or is this handled differently because of the pc motherboard bios??



Thanks:apple:

[jzuena]

I was interested in the lifehacker.com 900 dollar mac pro build and was just wondering how the graphics card functions since it is a PC version.

Wouldnt you need to flash the card to a mac rom to get it running or is this handled differently because of the pc motherboard bios??

Thanks:apple:

The reflash is to get the card to understand EFI instead of BIOS, so you would leave the card as-is on a hackintosh since the hardware uses BIOS.

[300D]

$900 will not even remotely come close to building a "Mac Pro", just a low-end wannabe Hackintrash.

[CoryBoyUSA]

Other than it not being in a pretty case by Apple, if it meets or exceeds the specs of a Mac Pro, how does it not "remotely come close" to one? Please elaborate, 'cause I'm really curious to see the reasoning behind that statement.

$900 will not even remotely come close to building a "Mac Pro", just a low-end wannabe Hackintrash.

[dukebound85]

$900 will not even remotely come close to building a "Mac Pro", just a low-end wannabe Hackintrash.

you do know you can buy a lot of computer for 900 right...

[300D]

if it meets or exceeds the specs of a Mac Pro
For $900? Bull.

how does it not "remotely come close" to one?
Have you actually priced out the components of a real Mac Pro?

you do know you can buy a lot of computer for 900 right...
With the computational power and build quality of a Mac Pro, no you can't. $900 will get you some low-end Core i7 powered heap of cords thrown together in a generic case. And it certainly won't buy you a Mac other than a Mini or a hacked :apple:tv

[dukebound85]

For $900? Bull.


Have you actually priced out the components of a real Mac Pro?


With the computational power and build quality of a Mac Pro, no you can't. $900 will get you some low-end Core i7 powered heap of cords thrown together in a generic case.

build quality?
computational power?

yes, you can....simply look at benchmarks.

remember not EVERYONE needs a dual socket cpu mb either which really drives the cost nor server grade cpu's over desktop cpus or server grade ram when most dont need anything more than regualr desktop ram. server grade does not boost performance in terms of benchmarking

but you also alluded to 900 being a low end hackintosh which is flat out false

when you build your own system, you can control the build quaility of the components

[CoryBoyUSA]

Have you actually priced out the components of a real Mac Pro

Have I personally? No. Have you? Apparently you have some wisdom the rest of us do not, hence my request for you to elaborate, versus answering questions with questions. Please enlighten us with the breakdown of how we can't create a system that has equal or greater specs that runs OS X just as well.

[cluthz]

http://netkas.org/ for all you need to know about graphics cards on macs and hacks

[300D]

remember not EVERYONE needs a dual socket cpu mb either which really drives the cost nor server grade cpu's over desktop cpus or server grade ram when most dont need anything more than regualr desktop ram. server grade does not boost performance in terms of benchmarking
Then buy a single CPU model Mac Pro, thats why they have them.

What do you do if you can't afford an Audi? Buy a VW.

but you also alluded to 900 being a low end hackintosh which is flat out false
No, I stated a fact that $900 will build a low-end Hackintrash.

when you build your own system, you can control the build quaility of the components
No you can't. You're stuck using consumer parts from a list of known compatible components.
In addition, how about control of R&D? Component layout? Cooling zones? The OS being designed with your machine's exact specs and components in mind? Something that doesn't need gay lights and viewing windows to look cool?
Didn't think so.

Have I personally? No. Have you?
It doesn't take a genius to use google.

Apparently you have some wisdom the rest of us do not
Not just wisdom, common sense.

how we can't create a system that has equal or greater specs that runs OS X just as well.
Thats extremely easy, OSX isn't licensed to run on anything but Apple-built hardware. Since you don't work on Apple's design team (you wouldn't be here if you did) it would be pretty darn hard to build an Apple machine.

[dukebound85]

Then buy a single CPU model Mac Pro, thats why they have them.


lol you missed my point

No, I stated a fact that $900 will build a low-end Hackintrash.


clever play on words. 900 is not low end for a hackintosh

No you can't. You're stuck using consumer parts from a list of known compatible components.

consumer parts? LOL, you do know that mac parts are consumer too right...


In addition, how about control of R&D? Component layout? Cooling zones? The OS being designed with your machine's specs and components in mind? Something that doesn't need gay lights and viewing windows to look cool?
Didn't think so.



ah apple defense at its best.

R&D? cooling zones? component layout? what makes you think pc's dont incorporate any of this? lol

oh and i dont use "gay lights" *gasp*

oh nevermind that many of the same components macs used can easily be bought for a pc
quite amusing

regardless, the fact is that many hackintoshes outperform macpros is very easily found by google
It doesn't take a genius to use google.


lol indeed. try it

the claim was that a hackintosh cant give macpro performance and it can easily as evidenced by a simple search


Thats extremely easy, OSX isn't licensed to run on anything but an Apple-built hardware. Since you don't work on Apple's design team (you wouldn't be here if you did) it would be pretty darn hard to build an Apple machine.
we arent building apple machines, we are making machines that run osx.

[UltraNEO*]

How is a hackintosh when it comes to online software updates? does it work like a real mac? or are you stuck with the version installed?

[dukebound85]

How is a hackintosh when it comes to online software updates? does it work like a real mac? or are you stuck with the version installed?

i have upgraded to every update

sometimes kexts are broken but lately its been really seemeless as of late (10.5.5 on to SL that is)

[UltraNEO*]

i have upgraded to every update

sometimes kexts are broken but lately its been really seemeless as of late (10.5.5 on to SL that is)

That's pretty cool!! *thumps up* :)
Guess a 'hackintosh' is like a poor person's Mac?

[Diseal3]

That's pretty cool!! *thumps up* :)
Guess a 'hackintosh' is like a poor person's Mac?

I can see this getting ugly real fast.

[dukebound85]

That's pretty cool!! *thumps up* :)
Guess a 'hackintosh' is like a poor person's Mac?

i did it not for the money aspect, but for the fact that i wanted a challenge

[UltraNEO*]

I can see this getting ugly real fast.

Well, that depends on the indevidual and how they wish to take it. Personally I don't think it's a bad thing for users to build windows boxes to run MacOS. If anything it's all positive! After all, if there's a million hackintosh users out there, then there's a million more MacUsers - so to speak.

Looking at your common Intel Mac machine, if you strip away all the custom casing/housing, it's essentially a PC anyway.

i did it not for the money aspect, but for the fact that i wanted a challenge

Challenges are always fun!!!

So can you use any board for a hackintosh box? Or is the mobo and components fairly sensitive?? ...as you can see, i know nothing about them.

[dukebound85]

Challenges are always fun!!!

So can you use any board for a hackintosh box? Or is the mobo and components fairly sensitive?? ...as you can see, i know nothing about them.

You need to pick compatible components. Just research the heck out of insanlymac when you decide to

[nanofrog]

So can you use any board for a hackintosh box? Or is the mobo and components fairly sensitive?? ...as you can see, i know nothing about them.
It will depend on the method you use, and what you may consider acceptable for "success". ;) :p

For example, the EFI emulation + Vanilla Kernel will work on most anything to some degree. Every single part may be functional, maybe not, if there's no kext for it, and the ones built into OS X won't make some aspect (component) work.

In researching the board we're both using for example, there's no solution to use the Marvell SAS chip on it. :eek: I can live with that. :D Someone else may not be able to though, as they want to boot off a SAS drive.

It just depends on the specifics for the user IMO. ;)

[UltraNEO*]

You need to pick compatible components. Just research the heck out of insanlymac when you decide to

example?

[nanofrog]

example?
As you already have the ASUS P6T6 WS Revolution, it would be easier to search out what you have already. :eek: :p

Unless you want to do this with an entirely different system (that you haven't yet decided on parts). ;)

[300D]

i did it not for the money aspect, but for the fact that i wanted a challenge.
...
You need to pick compatible components.

Oh, so you wanted the "challenge" of assembling parts made to work with each-other from a list of known "OSX compatible" parts. Skill busting.

After all, if there's a million hackintosh users out there, then there's a million more MacUsers - so to speak.

Apple is a hardware company, not a software company. It doesn't matter if a million people pay the $30 for OSX, Apple doesn't make any meaningful profit from it.

[Kristenn]

I don't have anything against Hackintosh per say. But I'm a little shocked that people are allowed to talk about this stuff here >>

With it being mainly a Apple Rumors website. You think it wouldn't be allowed :confused:

[nanofrog]

Apple is a hardware company, not a software company. It doesn't matter if a million people pay the $30 for OSX, Apple doesn't make any meaningful profit from it.
Going by recent events, Apple's become a device/gadget company (iPods, iPhones, :apple:TV,...., i.e. portable devices in particular). These they still design. The aquisition of P.A. Semiconductor bears this out, as it will produce the silicon for such devices specifically tailored to Apple's product lines.

The computers however, specifically the MP, and to a lesser extent the iMac are afterthoughts these days. Apple's even admitted this to some extent at least.

Ive's designs the case. ODM's do the rest of it (Intel, Foxconn,...).

[goMac]

Other than it not being in a pretty case by Apple, if it meets or exceeds the specs of a Mac Pro, how does it not "remotely come close" to one? Please elaborate, 'cause I'm really curious to see the reasoning behind that statement.

For me, the problem with building an i7 is you can't do 8 cores and you can't do dual processor configurations. At that point, you might as well go Xeon, and you might as well get a Mac Pro.

You could argue that not everyone needs 8 cores, but that still means a real Mac Pro will blow away a Hackintosh in benchmarks. They aren't comparable, don't pretend they are.

It's a bit like someone saying that a netbook is comparable to a real notebook. They both have their uses, but it's plain stupid to pretend they are the same class of machine.

[Donar]

Then buy a single CPU model Mac Pro, thats why they have them.
From a consumer point of view:
The single CPU (4 core) MacPro is overpriced for what you get (performance/price), better get an 8 core it is not cheap but worth the price if you need/want a genuine Apple branded computer.

If you need your computer for work and don't think it's fun to tinker with OSX - get the 4 core anyway. Spare time or time spend with the children can be precious too.


What do you do if you can't afford an Audi? Buy a VW.
Why do people always think that others "Can not afford" something? I wanted a 4 core tower - i could "afford" a MacPro but i bought a Gigabyte Board, Q9450, 8 Gig of Ram and a 9600GT and a MacBox Set instead of a MacPro. For the rest i bought a 2.26 GHz MacBook Pro... I really see no sense in getting a MacPro at this moment in time. Maybe i will get a 32 nm "Sandy Bridge" MacPro later on, if i loose interest in tinkering with OSX/have to spend too much time with getting things straight after an upgrade. This mostly depends on how my "vanilla" Snow Leopard installation works out.


Thats extremely easy, OSX isn't licensed to run on anything but Apple-built hardware. Since you don't work on Apple's design team (you wouldn't be here if you did) it would be pretty darn hard to build an Apple machine.It's really funny, this discussion everytime goes from:
"You can only put a piece of thrash together for 900$" to "You are not allowed to do it"...

For me, the problem with building an i7 is you can't do 8 cores and you can't do dual processor configurations. At that point, you might as well go Xeon, and you might as well get a Mac Pro.
Building a Hackintosh mostly is about having a (mid sized) consumer tower for a "good" price. -> Apple won't give consumers their xMac -> consumers build their own.


You could argue that not everyone needs 8 cores, but that still means a real Mac Pro will blow away a Hackintosh in benchmarks. They aren't comparable, don't pretend they are.
The 8 core MacPro will blow away a 4 core Hackintosh in Benchmarks - the 4 core MacPro won't do it necessarily...
In real world applications the 8 core MacPro will blow away a 4 core Hackintosh if the software uses all cores. If the 4 core Hackintosh is clocked higher than the 8 core MacPro and the software does not make use of all cores - it could be the other way around.


It's a bit like someone saying that a netbook is comparable to a real notebook. They both have their uses, but it's plain stupid to pretend they are the same class of machine.I admit that my Hackintosh is not a MacPro but i think your comparison is flawed. I would say that comparing a Hackintosh with a MacPro is like comparing a "consumer computer" to a "Workstation". The "Workstation" could be faster than the "consumer computer" but it also could be the other way around. A Nehalem Xeon is not faster than the Core i7 9xx at the same clock rate.

Oh what was the topic? Hackintosh graphic cards ... :) By the way we have a thread here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=499678).

[300D]

Apple won't give consumers their xMac -> consumers build their own.
Thats what the iMac is for. There is no market for an "xMac", it would eat into both their iMac and Mac Pro sales until all three aren't selling enough to be successfully profitable.

[Donar]

Thats what the iMac is for.
Easy answer - The iMac does not come in quadcore configurations and i do have a Dell 2408 WFP monitor. I often use Handbrake, so i like to have four cores at hand. I know - nobody is using "desktop" computer's anymore, because it's all laptops and eee pc's and so on - but i don't like following every stupid trend.

There is no market for an "xMac", it would eat into both their iMac and Mac Pro sales until all three aren't selling enough to be successfully profitable.So there is a market for an xMac but it could eat into Macmini, iMac and quad core MacPro sales.

As for me they would have sold one machine more if they actually had redesigned/rebranded the 4 core MacPro to "Mac" based on a X58 and Core i7 with say 200/250€ added to the price i can build a comparable machine myself. No sale taken from mac, iMac and MacPro - but one from Gigabyte.

[akm3]

Have I personally? No. Have you? Apparently you have some wisdom the rest of us do not, hence my request for you to elaborate, versus answering questions with questions. Please enlighten us with the breakdown of how we can't create a system that has equal or greater specs that runs OS X just as well.

Nice, request to prove a negative. Good way to win debates. aka Shifting the burden of proof.

[300D]

Easy answer - The iMac does not come in quadcore configurations
Wait two weeks.

and i do have a Dell 2408 WFP monitor.
Last I checked, the iMac supports multiple monitors.

[nanofrog]

Thats what the iMac is for. There is no market for an "xMac", it would eat into both their iMac and Mac Pro sales until all three aren't selling enough to be successfully profitable.
So because Apple's too concerned with it "eating profit magins", means the concept of such a system is totally foolish? NO.

It's not that it's a bad idea, but the result of Apple's greed for high margins, and not pricing the systems in a manner that it wouldn't.

If you think this is impossible, look at other vendors that make laptops, AIO's, consumer desktops, workstations, and enterprise servers (rackmount systems). HP is one such example btw, and it's not killing their business.

Wait two weeks.
But you're forgetting something though. You won't be able to upgrade any of the internal components. ;)

[dukebound85]

Oh, so you wanted the "challenge" of assembling parts made to work with each-other from a list of known "OSX compatible" parts. Skill busting.


seriously, who freaking cares if people want to make a hackintosh

youre cracking me up

Thats what the iMac is for. There is no market for an "xMac", it would eat into both their iMac and Mac Pro sales until all three aren't selling enough to be successfully profitable.


excpet i have already invested in nice monitors so there goes that idea...
not to mention i want a quad, more than one internal hdd and a real graphics card

not some laptop pretending to be a desktop

[300D]

So because Apple's too concerned with it "eating profit magins", means the concept of such a system is totally foolish? NO.
Incorrect. Apple is a business first and foremost.

But you're forgetting something though. You won't be able to upgrade any of the internal components. ;)
Then buy what you want from the start.

seriously, who freaking cares if people want to make a hackintosh
Apple, their shareholders and the REAL Mac users that hackintrashers embarrass by devaluing the Apple name.

excpet i have already invested in nice monitors so there goes that idea..
Again, the iMac is not limited to the internal screen. Basics people, keep up.

not to mention i want a quad
Again, again, wait a few weeks.

Want want want want. Didn't your parents teach you about NEED?
more than one internal hdd
Completely pointless. FW800 will keep up with what a hard drive can put out.

and a real graphics card
As in?

dukebound85, quit crying and buy a quad Mac Pro.

[milk242]

OP, I would read up a lot on insanelymac.com and also yea the video card does not need to be flashed when building with pc components not made by apple.

Anyways, I never really understood the argument of hackintosh pro vs mac pro. A mac pro is made to be a workstation, reliability in first, performance second. A hackintosh is just what everyone wants apple to make, a mid tower, low cost machine with expandable bays. You can not compare a hackintosh with a mac pro just because they are both housed in towers and have expandable bays.

[sneezymarble]

You could argue that not everyone needs 8 cores, but that still means a real Mac Pro will blow away a Hackintosh in benchmarks. They aren't comparable, don't pretend they are.

A Nehalem 8-core Mac Pro at 2.66GHz (for example) will obviously perform significantly better than an i7 4-core Hack at the same clocks. But, that's just not saying anything practically informative or useful at all; at best that's just a trivially true bit of information...in other words, duh.

Following this line of thought, a Nehalem 4-core Mac Pro at 2.66GHz will not perform significantly better than an i7 4-core Hack at the same clocks. In fact, according to all the benchmarks I've seen, they'll perform identically. There isn't any magic performance juice in the Nehalem Xeons. The big benefit of Nehalem Xeons has nothing whatever to do with raw performance. Rather, the benefit is error correction.

If you don't need error correction, then you can get identical performance from a 4-core Hack that you would from a 4-core Mac Pro. Of course, it doesn't stop there because the Hack will be easily overclockable. So, you end up spending significantly less and getting more raw performance compared to a comparable 4-core Mac Pro.

In short, if performance is one's major consideration and one's intention is to get a 4-core system, a $900 Hack will do the exact same things, faster, and for significantly less.

Edit: And to answer the OP's question, No, you don't need to flash a GPU for a Hackintosh build.

[nanofrog]

Incorrect. Apple is a business first and foremost.
Profit Margin = Business, so it's not incorrect. Apple just happens to be one of the greediest out there for computers, given their idea of "acceptable profit margins".

I think Steve made an extra strong batch of Kool Aid just prior to the creation of the pricing schedule, and someone's sent you some. :eek: :p

Then buy what you want from the start.
That's the point. They're way too expensive for the MP's, particularly the Quad core (SP) models.

So people are taking matters into their own hands, and building a hackintosh. It's all about choice, and Apple doesn't like to give you many.


Apple, their shareholders and the REAL Mac users that hackintrashers embarrass by devaluing the Apple name.
How so? Because they've enough sense to realize that Apple's off their rocker with their pricing, and OCD over control?

1. They use the same exact components (down to the semiconductors) as any other system.
2. R&D costs are minimal, as they are using the same reference designs, as it's all farmed out to Intel (ODM for the MP's). Ive's designs the case (including adjusting the internals to make the board fit). Intel does the engineering and manufacturing.
3. Manufacturing costs are very similar, as it's done with the same methods, and components as any other computer (workstation/server).

So for the big difference in price, the only thing left is profits, as the direct and indirect costs are of similar lines to any other vendor. It really is that simple.


Again, the iMac is not limited to the internal screen. Basics people, keep up.
Of course it does. The rest of it's internals are primarily laptop components, as they're the only thing that would fit.

[dukebound85]

Apple, their shareholders and the REAL Mac users that hackintrashers embarrass by devaluing the Apple name.


Let's see, I have multiple macs and am a shareholder and buy the OS. Next...

Again, the iMac is not limited to the internal screen. Basics people, keep up.


I do not want an AIO PERIOD. I furthermore do not want a "desktop" with laptop components. I have nice monitors...as in more than one. And yes, you can only hook up*gasp* one to an imac....but regardless it's basics as you say. I don't want an AIO

Again, again, wait a few weeks.

I have ZERO interest in the imac

Want want want want. Didn't your parents teach you about NEED?

Who the heck are you? I have a job and I'll buy as I please....and you don't know what my WANTS or NEEDS are so yea...

Completely pointless. FW800 will keep up with what a hard drive can put out.


LOL no it won't. Nice try though. Play again soon

As in?

dukebound85, quit crying and buy a quad Mac Pro.



As in a real graphics card that isn't a mobile version....

I have no desire for a macpro. I can afford one but I do not like the idea of paying a crap load more for a machine with server grade parts when I do not have those requirements

Your defense of apple is VERY amusing. What will you come up with next?

[Dr.Pants]

I do not want an AIO PERIOD.

Need to chime in on this one with an "indeed" and "+1"

Incorrect. Apple is a business first and foremost.

Well, IIRC, wasn't there a time when people considered a MacPro before a custom build as there was something about the affordability?

Profit Margin = Business, so it's not incorrect. Apple just happens to be one of the greediest out there for computers, given their idea of "acceptable profit margins".

Its unfortunate some buffoon at Apple realised that they could jack up prices. Potentially it was a long-term plan to produce something publically for their target market to buy into at a loss, and then jack up the prices later. Can't remember the exact name at the moment.

I think Steve made an extra strong batch of Kool Aid just prior to the creation of the pricing schedule, and someone's sent you some. :eek: :p

I've posted it before, but we need to see the exact effects that this Kool-Aid has on the populus!

http://www.comicsbulletin.com/rage/images/050401/koolaidmansm.jpg

As you can see, everybody's thrown for a loop!

1. They use the same exact components (down to the semiconductors) as any other system.
2. R&D costs are minimal, as they are using the same reference designs, as it's all farmed out to Intel (ODM for the MP's). Ive's designs the case (including adjusting the internals to make the board fit). Intel does the engineering and manufacturing.
3. Manufacturing costs are very similar, as it's done with the same methods, and components as any other computer (workstation/server).

I think you, Nano, have hit on why it gets easier and easier to build a Hakkentosh!

That's the point. They're way too expensive for the MP's, particularly the Quad core (SP) models.

Unfortunately the one I'd be getting, considering that I'm a student and Apple has a horrible time with supporting two-year-old systems (If the '07 MP had EFI32, that is, AFAIK). How come? I may make money with it someday (video editing/Nobel Prize Work :D), so I need a clean slate when the audit comes 'round.

[nanofrog]

Its unfortunate some buffoon at Apple realised that they could jack up prices. Potentially it was a long-term plan to produce something publically for their target market to buy into at a loss, and then jack up the prices later. Can't remember the exact name at the moment.
Yep. It's all in the marketing. ;)

Unfortunately, Apple's good at it, as there's enough people that can't seem to see things for what they are.



I think you, Nano, have hit on why it gets easier and easier to build a Hakkentosh!
Hardware wise, the only thing that separates a Mac from most other systems is it's firmware. Not because it's "better", but to allow for additional control (locks OS X to a Mac).

The Hackintosh community has found multiple methods around it of course. :D

Unfortunately the one I'd be getting, considering that I'm a student and Apple has a horrible time with supporting two-year-old systems (If the '07 MP had EFI32, that is, AFAIK). How come? I may make money with it someday (video editing/Nobel Prize Work :D), so I need a clean slate when the audit comes 'round.
Understandable. Budgets are rarely a non-issue.

The fact Apple's decided to no longer support the '06 - '07 owners (specifically the firmware), is wrong. They're workstation systems, and typically are supported for a min. of 5 years by other vendors. It's expected, given the cost of such systems.

But a hackintosh may be more of a viable option these days, as it's come a long way in terms of stability. Hardware has more options, and it's cheaper (at least the potential, depending on what you actually use). :p

[Zaap]

dukebound85, quit crying and buy a quad Mac Pro.
:confused:

I'm curious- do you own a MacPro?

Your sig says G4 Mini and G5 PM. What's the reason (if you haven't) that you haven't done what you're calling out others to do, and using an alternative to a new MacPro?

[psingh01]

If you're not buying Mac Pro grade or better components then it's not a $900 Mac Pro. It's more like a mythical mini-tower Mac that lives between the iMac and Mac Pro.

Most people don't NEED the high end hardware, but that doesn't mean the cheapo Hackintosh route is equivalent to it.

[nanofrog]

If you're not buying Mac Pro grade or better components then it's not a $900 Mac Pro. It's more like a mythical mini-tower Mac that lives between the iMac and Mac Pro.

Most people don't NEED the high end hardware, but that doesn't mean the cheapo Hackintosh route is equivalent to it.
It's far closer now than ever though, as the i7-9xx parts are the Xeon 35xx parts with the ECC functions disabled (from a feature POV). The voltages are slightly different as well.

ECC is rarely needed, save scientific research in a radioactive environment, military, space vehicles,..., it's fine for what most people that are buying MPs for. ;)

The only real reason for using the Xeons is to make a DP system, as the i7's aren't capable of this.

So a Quad core (SP) hackintosh is a possiblitity for those willing to live with the compromises (provide their own support, and time needed to do it).

[iCheddar]

So...just to clarify...did we end up reaching a consensus on who has the biggest dick in this thread? I wasn't certain.