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

New 'Mac Pro' $900!

In terms of speed, you might be underestimating the Q6600. True that his overall system might not be as capable as a maxed out 8 core (not even close), but how many people on this site have more than 8GB RAM, 8 core and an 8800GT?


I have a Q6600 system and I scored 28.5 seconds in the photoshop test thats the first item within this section of the forums.

I think a new 2.8 scored somewhere between 29 and 24 seconds. Varied from run to run. Also the the time I got with my Q6600 is faster than a quad xeon 2.66Ghz so its possible that clock for clock,the 2.4 quad core is faster than the xeon.

I've got 8GB of RAM now in my box, 15K SCSI drives and an 8800GT. Not all custom boxes have to suck :)

...for most people, the difference in speed between a Q6600 and a 4 core xeon box will be quite small, but the price tag is kinda big. One thing is for sure, if Apple had released a 3/4 sized mac pro with a Q6600 system with all the limitations such as 8GB max, only 2 PCI-E 16X and stuff like that, I'd bet it would out sell the Mac Pro easily.



Random Chaos said:
Actually, it isn't anywhere near as fast or as capable:

- He's running 4 cores at 2.4GHz. In comparison, a base line Mac Pro has 8 cores at 2.8GHz.
- His video card is a 8600GTS, which is less than half the speed of the 8800GT offered by Apple.
- His DVD drive is a read only. All Mac Pros come with the Superdrive, which has all modes of Write available to it.
- His Mobo has only 2 PCI-E slots 16x, same as the Mac Pro, but for the other PCI-E slots he has two 1x stubby slots vs the Mac Pro's two 4x full length slots.
- He has one Firewire 400 port, vs the Mac Pro that has 2 Firewire 400's and 2 Firewire 800's.
- He has one Gigabit Lan port, vs the Mac Pro's 2
- His mobo supports up to 8GBs memory, vs the Mac Pro's 32GBs.
- His FSB is 1066MHz vs the Mac Pro's 1600MHz

I hate to say it, but that is no where near as speced out as a Mac Pro...
Click to expand...
 
Random Chaos said:
Actually, it isn't anywhere near as fast or as capable:

- He's running 4 cores at 2.4GHz. In comparison, a base line Mac Pro has 8 cores at 2.8GHz.
- His video card is a 8600GTS, which is less than half the speed of the 8800GT offered by Apple.
- His DVD drive is a read only. All Mac Pros come with the Superdrive, which has all modes of Write available to it.
- His Mobo has only 2 PCI-E slots 16x, same as the Mac Pro, but for the other PCI-E slots he has two 1x stubby slots vs the Mac Pro's two 4x full length slots.
- He has one Firewire 400 port, vs the Mac Pro that has 2 Firewire 400's and 2 Firewire 800's.
- He has one Gigabit Lan port, vs the Mac Pro's 2
- His mobo supports up to 8GBs memory, vs the Mac Pro's 32GBs.
- His FSB is 1066MHz vs the Mac Pro's 1600MHz

I hate to say it, but that is no where near as speced out as a Mac Pro...
Click to expand...

Why the hell do you care? It's not a mac pro anyone with eyes can see that, HE MAKES COMPUTERS FOR FUN. Who cares? Let him make his damn computer.
 
contoursvt said:
...for most people, the difference in speed between a Q6600 and a 4 core xeon box will be quite small, but the price tag is kinda big. One thing is for sure, if Apple had released a 3/4 sized mac pro with a Q6600 system with all the limitations such as 8GB max, only 2 PCI-E 16X and stuff like that, I'd bet it would out sell the Mac Pro easily.
Click to expand...

Which is probably why they haven't done it. It is a marketing decision, not a technical decision on why they haven't released such a machine.

It would but it in direct competition specs wise with vendors like Dell. Currently Dell is offering a deal on a XPS 420 system for < $1000 with a Q6600, 3gb ram, 500gb HD, BLU-RAY Reader/DVD Burner, at 8800GT plus much more... Hard for Apple to complete with that which is one reason I believe Apple doesn't even make a system using Desktop processors right now.

Instead we get a choice of non-mainstream systems such as low end system using mobile parts (Mac mini), integrated system using mobile processors (iMac) and Workstation using Xeons (Mac Pro). They are all great products and pretty well priced, but non of them are what alot of us are looking for... and it is getting REALLY frustrating....
 
ungraphic said:
Its a tool, not a fashion statement.
Click to expand...
It's both actually, but if you think a $30 ATX case from Fry's is beautiful, then no one can argue, as the eye of the beholder saying allows.

This is more about being clever and defiant than truly "needing" a Mac OS box on the cheap. And there is nothing illegal about it, unless he's using a bootlegged / borrowed copy of Leopard (which is a good question because he doesn't list the OS in his price breakdown).
 
Hackintoshes prove that there is a gap in the Apple product line (a topic that has been beaten to death on these boards). There's a huge market out there for people who need more power than a mini and less than an MP. For many users, this means iMac, but for the enthusiast or gamer, the appliance model of the iMac is unupgradible, all-in-one hell.

And yes, while the $2500+ MP will resell for more than this $900 Hackintosh, look at the margin. You'll get $1000 for the MP and (perhaps) $0 for the hack, resulting in a net loss of $1,500 vs. $900: the hack wins (assuming the user would get the same value from the two machines over their lifetime, which really depends on what they're using it for and other variables beyond the scope of this discussion).

I love Mac Pros and use them daily, but lets face it, I'll never get one for home because it's overkill for what I use home desktops for: media center, server and internet for guests (no one touches my MBP :)). My needs are met by cheap hardware and I get to enjoy the process of building and upgrading. So, I'll stick to Linux despite my growing love for OSX because even the "freetards" know how to support the majority of hardware configurations. I think it's great that people have found a way to pursue their hardware hobby and still use their favorite operating system. Who cares if it's more powerful than an MP or not? It's fun and it scratches an itch Apple refuses to.
 
ungraphic said:
Its a tool, not a fashion statement.
Click to expand...

That's really a matter of opinion, isn't it? Maybe you care only about the mechanical power of your computer, but a legion of designers and users would disagree with you.

barijazz said:
Why the hell do you care? It's not a mac pro anyone with eyes can see that, HE MAKES COMPUTERS FOR FUN. Who cares? Let him make his damn computer.
Click to expand...

Uh, the guy writing the article is the one who claims to have built a mac pro for 1/3 the cost. If he just said he was doing it for fun we wouldn't rip in to him, but if he's going to make self-congratulatory, uninformed, incorrect statements, he should expect to get called on it.

Anyway, I don't find these kinds of things very interesting. Here's why:
1) As others have said, his specs are nowhere near those of a real mac pro.
2) Even if they were, so what? Is anyone surprised that you can build a computer for less than it costs to buy one that's already put together? Let's look at some of apple's expenses that this guy doesn't have:
- Employee salary
- R&D
- Cost of maintaining physical stores
- Need for profit for shareholders
- Cost of providing service and support for 1 year

So lo and behold, they charge more than the sum of the parts. Wow, stunning. :rolleyes:
 
Actually this is what the guy says:

"In case you haven’t guessed yet I’m going to detail for you my adventure building a Hackintosh box running Leopard that rivals the speed of a similarly configured Mac Pro.

But for less than 1/3rd the cost!
"

So he's saying he can build a box that is similar in speed to a similarly configured Mac Pro for 1/3rd the price. I dont think what he said is false.

Also interesting note. If you get a box from Apple, you get 1 year warranty standard.
If you build a box yourself, you get this kind of warranty (although you have to deal with the individual companies yourself)

-3 year warranty for Asus motherboards and some others.
-3 year warranty for the Intel and AMD processors
-Lifetime warranty for most RAM brands
-Lifetime warranty for most Nvidia brand video cards
-3 to 5 year warranty on most good PSU's such as OCZ, Seasonic, Corsair..etc.
-3 to 5 year warranties on most drives

So pretty much you will get 3 to 5 years warranty for almost the whole computer. I've had no major issues getting support from reputable brands in the event of a failure.

QCassidy352 said:
Uh, the guy writing the article is the one who claims to have built a mac pro for 1/3 the cost.
Click to expand...
 
peejack said:
osx386-7.jpg


Beautiful :rolleyes:;)
Click to expand...

Please tell me you are joking.
 
All well and good, however you are all dancing around the fact that no version of OS X is licensed to run on such a machine. As an experiment BRAVO!!, legally watch your back, the " $900 Mac Pro " could cost you far more in legal fees.
 
kirkbross said:
And there is nothing illegal about it, unless he's using a bootlegged / borrowed copy of Leopard (which is a good question because he doesn't list the OS in his price breakdown).
Click to expand...

Either way its very illegal. Its against the EULA. Mac OS X can't be installed on a non apple branded item without breaking the EULA.
 
I've ran a Hackintosh on my Dell E1405. It works pretty nice. Outside of lag issues and no sound. It only runs 1 core as well. It's fun to try to get it to work if you want to see how OSX looks and feels. It's definitely not something you can use day to day, especially being a professional. Mac Pro for the win! :)
 
k

to be honest the hackintosh route is a very alluring routre , i think if anything the recent 8800 saga has taught us that some times apple will not play ball when it comes to upgrades where as a hackintosh will be upgradeable for at least 3-4yrs (roughly) as long as you can hack osx.

however although i really did condier this route i decued that a good system rivaling the mac pro would costs me at least £1000-

quad core cpu £350
graphics £220
mobo £150
ram £70
case £70
psu £ 60
dvd + accessories £100

total is roughly £1000-1100

apple can supply me with edu discount a mac pro for £1600

the question now becomes is it worth the 3 years warranty + true apple build
i think yes but ultimately some people will say no.

although we cant flame the man for his efforts as for people who dont care about some factors then a custom build may be the way forward
 
Gokhan said:
to be honest the hackintosh route is a very alluring routre , i think if anything the recent 8800 saga has taught us that some times apple will not play ball when it comes to upgrades where as a hackintosh will be upgradeable for at least 3-4yrs (roughly) as long as you can hack osx.

however although i really did condier this route i decued that a good system rivaling the mac pro would costs me at least £1000-

quad core cpu £350
graphics £220
mobo £150
ram £70
case £70
psu £ 60
dvd + accessories £100

total is roughly £1000-1100

apple can supply me with edu discount a mac pro for £1600

the question now becomes is it worth the 3 years warranty + true apple build
i think yes but ultimately some people will say no.

although we cant flame the man for his efforts as for people who dont care about some factors then a custom build may be the way forward
Click to expand...

Like I said, it's a novelty. It's not worth the $1k savings, because it never works as well. It's laggy, unstable, and truly does not function like a real Mac.
 
An odd ethical standard, that it is OK to use OS X for an unlicensed machine just because it happens to use an intel processor. Guess all those Windows pirates have graduated to being OS X pirates. And, no, saying you paid $129.00/$199.00/$499.00/$999.00 for a retail copy of OS X does not make it any different.
 
newtech said:
An odd ethical standard, that it is OK to use OS X for an unlicensed machine just because it happens to use an intel processor. Guess all those Windows pirates have graduated to being OS X pirates. And, no, saying you paid $129.00 for a retail copy of OS X does not make it any different.
Click to expand...

Pirating windows gave you an actual working and fully functional copy of Windows. Pirating OSX is like stealing a car with a busted suspension and broken wheel. It works, but it's not really something you can use normally day to day and save money on. Besides. I like Apple and would rather put some money into their pockets for a good OS - don't we all feel the same way?
 
Mr.PS said:
Pirating windows gave you an actual working and fully functional copy of Windows. Pirating OSX is like stealing a car with a busted suspension and broken wheel. It works, but it's not really something you can use normally day to day and save money on. Besides. I like Apple and would rather put some money into their pockets for a good OS - don't we all feel the same way?
Click to expand...


Always nice to rationalize something that is illegal and wrong. See a great future for you in politics.
 
jablko said:
Hackintoshes prove that there is a gap in the Apple product line (a topic that has been beaten to death on these boards). There's a huge market out there for people who need more power than a mini and less than an MP. For many users, this means iMac, but for the enthusiast or gamer, the appliance model of the iMac is unupgradible, all-in-one hell.

And yes, while the $2500+ MP will resell for more than this $900 Hackintosh, look at the margin. You'll get $1000 for the MP and (perhaps) $0 for the hack, resulting in a net loss of $1,500 vs. $900: the hack wins (assuming the user would get the same value from the two machines over their lifetime, which really depends on what they're using it for and other variables beyond the scope of this discussion).

I love Mac Pros and use them daily, but lets face it, I'll never get one for home because it's overkill for what I use home desktops for: media center, server and internet for guests (no one touches my MBP :)). My needs are met by cheap hardware and I get to enjoy the process of building and upgrading. So, I'll stick to Linux despite my growing love for OSX because even the "freetards" know how to support the majority of hardware configurations. I think it's great that people have found a way to pursue their hardware hobby and still use their favorite operating system. Who cares if it's more powerful than an MP or not? It's fun and it scratches an itch Apple refuses to.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you got your estimated prices for the MacPro, but you are WAY off base.
 
This is a touchy subject, but leaving aside the fun of building your own machine (which I think is a major reason people build hackintoshes), I think that

1. The Mac Pro is overpriced, but

2. Hackintoshes are, well, hacks. I have a flashed video card in my Mac but I'm really not willing to go with a hacked OS. Even if it's "pretty stable".

I can't stand Apple "fanboys" who blindly tow The Steve's line, and speak from ignorance - but at the same time I can't stand smug hackintosh owners who take on an air of superiority over people who went out and paid hard-earned money for their Mac.

I wish Apple sold a cheaper tower, but hackintoshes, while an interesting project for the hobbyist, are too much work for most users who choose the Mac because of the control Apple maintains over both hardware and software.

And let's face it - DIY PCs will always be cheaper than anything else of equivalent power (but have no value-added goodies), while Apple towers as they exist today will always cost a lot more because they use server-grade bits, come with a substantial amount of software and have a fat profit margin attached.
 
deathshrub said:
That guy is a douche. I hope he enjoys his unreliable machine.
Click to expand...

Elitism much?

Hackintoshes are cool especially for those of us who only recently defected. I love my MBP and I'm getting a Mac Pro very soon but I also like to tinker with generic hardware. If they sold parts for assembly of a Mac Pro, I'm sure sales would dwindle drastically but speed wise, if you're running OS X at comparable speeds as the Mac Pro, why not? They do most of the work out of sight, anyhow. I just find it objectionable to call someone a douche because they've been able to build a PC that rivals a $3000 Mac. Kudos to him.
 
Start of rant....

Tell yourself that the Mac Pro is some magic box because its a Xeon. Pretend that a Xeon is somehow faster than an equally clocked Core2 based CPU. Do the above if it helps you sleep at night :)

Truth is that a Core2 Quad 2.4Ghz is equal in performance to a Quad Xeon 2.66Ghz and actually sometimes a bit faster. I dont recall anyone saying that last generations quad 2.66 was exactly a slug. Also the 8GB limit for the Core2 based machines is not exactly that low. For most power users, this is plenty.

Running OSX may be illegal but you know, for some OSX is not the be all and end all. For some, flexability and upgrade path might actually be more important. I'm sure there are plenty of users right on this forum getting frustrated to the point where they might consider Linux or Gasp...even Windows at the chance to have a strong machine for half the price. I personally dont love OSX enough to buy a new Mac. I refuse to spend 2X the price to get similar performance and less upgradability routes.

Also regarding the operating systems. Intelligent people can work on any operating system and find software workarounds that will suit their needs. There are also many users right on this board that have run other OS's including windows that have no stability or performance problems with those other operating systems..... It takes time to learn the platform and know what to do and what not to do. Each has its quirks.

I also dont enjoy the forced obsolecense built into Apple products. Question. If someone purchased a retail version of Tiger not that long ago and just purchased a Mac Pro (or any Mac) that shipped with Leopard, can they choose to go back to Tiger? Everything I've read pretty much says No... in the sense that you will not have the proper hardware support and might end up with an unstable box. I dont like that. Should be my choice.

My rant is over now.


PS. I'm quite happy with my Antec P180 case and dont find it ugly in the least. I also enjoy having 6 internal hard drive bays :)


synth3tik said:
Build yourself the ugliest Mac PRo with little tiny C2Ds instead of XEONs.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back