Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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. ;)
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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?
 
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!

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.
 
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
 
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?
 
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.
 
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).
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.