Advise; 2008 Mac Pro or Sandy Hackintosh

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by irishgrizzly, Jan 13, 2011.

  1. irishgrizzly macrumors 65816

    irishgrizzly

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    #1
    A friend asked me which would be better a 2008, 8-core, 2.8mhz Mac Pro or a Sandy Bridge Hackintosh using the highest spec processor. He's using it Graphic Design work on the mac side and gaming in boot camp.
     
  2. chrismacguy macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #2
    If hes using it commercially, Id get the Mac Pro purely because it is guaranteed to work. (Hackintoshes can be unstable and also not all the features of the OS work)
     
  3. irishgrizzly thread starter macrumors 65816

    irishgrizzly

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    #3
    No, he's 16 but wants to get into more demanding computing – graphics/video. Does anyone knowhow these would bench against each other?
     
  4. chrismacguy macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #4
    It really depends on how he hooks up the hackintosh (I understand his pain, as an 18 yr-old who stretched himself far too far to get the latest Pro for Final Cut Studio and Creative Suite) The Motherboard, RAM, HD choice etc can all have a massive impact on performance (Id still pick the Pro purely because its much less likely to be broken by a Mac OS X update)
     
  5. fabriciom macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Madrid, España
    #5
    mac pro = 0 compatibility problems
    hack = every time there is a new a update there is the possibility of hosing your system...
     
  6. seek3r macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    #6
    I dunno.... The arguments ya'll are using work for more, well, work oriented uses but... At 16 I would've found the hack more fun, 9 years later like everyone answering I need my main machine to work, without having to futz with anything and have the time (and cash) to futz with other machines as a hobby and have such resources as well at work and school. I didn't have those extra resources at 16, and most 16 year olds don't.

    My answer: A hackintosh (additionally hopefully running Windows and/or linux of some flavor in addition to OSX) will break more, but if the guy who's buying is a tech geek at all he'll learn a lot from fixing it that may be valuable later! It all depends on need and tech ability (or willingness to void the warranty if you want to have your cake and eat it too :p)
     
  7. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #7
    If he feels he can build the hackintosh then go with that. At his age he likely has time but not money. The Mac Pro is obviously going to perform worse and be more expensive, money which could be spent on a tablet, better display, better desk/chair, software etc so he needs to think overall budget. The best thing about the Mac Pro is it may just let him be creative and not worry about hardware issues so much. However it isn't likely to be covered under any warranty, he may end up throwing good money after bad if the logic board goes or the PSU.
     
  8. flatfoot macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    #8
    Have a look at http://tonymacx86.blogspot.com and the adjoining forums. It's a foolproof method.
    I've had zero problems with Mac OS X updates or anything.
     
  9. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #9
    I'd say Hackintosh. Like Umbongo stated, time is available, money usually isn't at 16 (there are exceptions, but the fact the question was asked, I presume this isn's such an exception).

    As per Hackintoshes always breaking with Software Update, it's not that common any longer (you do have to put in the research on the parts selection though, not just the software methods to get OS X running).

    And it would be a better system for gaming, and could come in cheaper (assuming the most expensive parts aren't used everywhere - but modular 1000W PSU's, top of the line cases, multiple top end GPU's, .... will push the cost up quickly, and can exceed the cost of a base Quad MP - especially vs. a used or Refurbished model).
     
  10. goMac macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #10
    8 core Mac Pro would be better. It's an older socket, but it's got more cores than you can get on Sandy Bridge, and for video and graphics design, you want to get more cores.
     
  11. chrismacguy macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #11
    And Final Cut Studio is guaranteed to run without going "Oh I dont like your hardware - no RT Extreme rendering for you" (A friend did have that on his hackintosh - hes since upgraded to a proper Mac Pro, and whaddya know, it works reliably, quickly and nicely)
     
  12. goMac macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #12
    Yeah, if you're going the Final Cut route, I would especially go with a real Mac Pro. And the new Final Cut is bound to take way better advantage of multiple cores.

    At least it better.
     
  13. chrismacguy macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #13
    If it doesnt I shall be annoyed since FCP7 doesnt even take full advantage of my Quad Mac Pro - although undoubtedly by the time FCP8/9 comes out, Ill've got a job and moved to a 12+ Core Setup...
     
  14. GroundLoop macrumors 68000

    GroundLoop

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2003
    #14
    I would build a PC and acquire Adobe CS5 Master Collection. Problem solved.

    GL
     
  15. ashman70 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    #15
    Along with what everyone else suggests, if he had the money to spend, get the Mac Pro, if he has more time then money, go the Hackintosh route.

    I have an powerful desktop machine with an i7 920 CPU overclocked to 3.33GHz at the moment, with 6GB of RAM and an Nvidia 9600GT, it Geekbenches just over 10,000 which puts is in the league of older Mac pro's but its very very fast, so there is no question he can get excellent performance on par with Mac Pros but at the cost of possible stability issues down the line.
     
  16. bearcatrp macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Boon Docks USA
    #16
    If he can get the Mac pro dirt cheap, then go for the pro. Otherwise, build the hackintoch. The 2008 Mac pro may still be strong but it's out dated hardware. Look at the power savings SB is giving and how easy it is to over clock. But he has to be kind of a geek that wants to spend the time to make it work, which can be done with patients. Good luck.
     
  17. chrismacguy macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #17
    You cant do proper graphic design on a PC. Well, not as productivly anyway - PCs have (1) Terrible Font Handling, (2) Technically inferior methods of Font and Image handling, even in Windows 7 and (3) Dont allow you to use iMovie and Final Cut/Motion (better than After Effects CS5 for some things) - and Premiere/After Effects just doesnt compare to FCP/Motion/Shake 4 if you ever want to move into Video Graphic Design.
     
  18. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #18
    How familiar is he with computers? I don't think that has been asked or answered yet. Hackintosh is a great option but IMO you must be at least a hobbyist, i.e. you like playing around with computers and troubleshooting etc aren't issues for you. Even though I don't have any personal experience with Hacks (yet), I would say they require more work and time than e.g. Mac Pro does (no official support with Hacks). If he has his thumb in the middle of his palm when it comes to computers, then I would suggest getting the Mac Pro instead.

    I'm not sure would I get a Sandy Bridge hack right now. It works like noted by Tonyx86 but they do not recommend it yet as it required a patched kernel (I assume it causes instability and other issues). I would wait until Apple releases OS X with native support for SB, it shouldn't take that long. It also gives more time for people to test different mobos and report which work the best.
     
  19. flatfoot macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    #19
    +1
     
  20. Mackilroy macrumors 68040

    Mackilroy

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    #20
    I would go with a real Mac Pro – not because of stability (my hackintosh has always been as stable as my Mac Pro), but because you want to make sure FCP won't complain. I've never had anything even close to that happen on my hack, but who knows.

    Also, yes, SNB hacks currently use a patched kernel and not a native install as previous hackintoshes have. Full support won't appear until Apple is using Sandy Bridge in their own machines.
     
  21. matteusclement macrumors 65816

    matteusclement

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Location:
    victoria
    #21
    hackintosh stuff

    I have a hackintosh w/ a q9550 OC'd to 3.6 and 8gigs of ram and a mac 4870 ati. The mobo is a gigbyte ep45-ud3p. I have stayed on 10.6.3 w/o any problems. Stompin' fast. Building that on used parts would be dirt cheap.

    The key is a MAC video card or flashed. I just got a mac card.

    hackintosh pro = more hard drives. I have 12 internal
     
  22. chrismacguy macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #22
    hackintosh pro = horrendous mess when final cut pro decides to throw a hissy fit with a future update and dies on you.
    Mac Pro = guaranteed stability and performance, if it breaks, apple will fix it a lot faster than if a hackintosh breaks - I also like the fact that with an esata card and a empty G4 or G5 case I can create a 20HD Box... possibly more in a G5 - and even then it still looks one heckva lot better than any hackintosh.
     
  23. matteusclement macrumors 65816

    matteusclement

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Location:
    victoria
    #23
    Lol.

    I'm not kidding. one year of running that beast and it has been FLAWLESS.
    No FCP hissy fits. But mind you, I have stayed at 10.6.3 since it came out. I won't cry about staying behind a few updates. My machine is a work machine and "the app store" won't break me.

    again, the person in question is 16... they have time.

    I reccomend a gigabyte board. The 2 oz copper board makes OC'ing a dream.
     
  24. chrismacguy macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #24
    Okay, maybe it works for you :) - Id advise against it even if your 16 - I didnt have the time at 16, and even now as a 18yr old uni student with nothing better to do, I prefer having my Mac Pro as it just works when i need it too and I can be cavalier about the upgrades. (The big-putter-offer for me was when, as I mentioned before, a friends hackintosh at 10.5.6 or so refused to render in Final Cut at all, and would crash frequently, and this was a cleanly built system, so Im guessing driver imperfections of some kind. Also, Id take a Mac Pro over a hackintosh if your trying to learn applications as you never know what a hackintosh may break... especially in Apples Pro Apps (Since they are likely to use undocumented OS features over any other app using that).
     
  25. lewdvig macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Location:
    South Pole
    #25
    Faced with a similar choice I grabbed a 2006 and upgraded it.

    2008 is better because of EFI64 and related Nvidia video card support - but if you can get a cheap 2006 the CPUS are dirt cheap and the RADEON 5870 is still very good.

    My rig is the sig - very easy to get that same setup for $1000-1100.

    I am extremely happy with mine. Three weeks of ripping DVDs and playing games and I have seen zero issues.
     

Share This Page