Post Parts for Custom Built PC equivalent to Mac Pro!!!

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Orange™, Jul 10, 2010.

  1. Orange™ macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    #1
    Title says it all. Not looking for Hackintosh!
    People say that they can build a PC that is comparable to a Mac Pro for half the cost. Could users who have done this please post the exact parts they used.

    Thanks in advance!

    P.S. Looking for 8 core (2x4), 6 core(1x6), or 12 core(2x6)!
     
  2. rmwebs macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    #2
    What OS you looking to run? If its Linux, you will need parts that are compatible with your distro (unless you are ok with hacking away at the kernel!)
     
  3. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #3
    What OS (not only matters on parts as mentioned above, but Linux can also be downloaded for free, as where Windows requires you to purchase a license)?
    What level of parity?

    I ask, as there's wide variances on cases, boards, and PSU's for example.
     
  4. MacVidCards Suspended

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Location:
    Hollywood, CA
    #4
    A Mac made of "equivalent" parts IS a Hackintosh.

    This is true primarily because there is no "equivalent" Logicboard...this is an Apple only part.

    A Non-Hackintosh Hackintosh is like a Non-Reflective Mirror.
     
  5. slughead macrumors 68040

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #5
    I'm not sure OP knows what a hackintosh is.

    You should, however, read other threads on actual hackintoshes that include benchmarks. That way you know it's the same OS getting same or better performance, as opposed to trying to compare OS X and windows.

    I don't like trolls that just default to "use forum search!"... but seriously: do.
     
  6. Invocation macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    #6
    Erm.. Alright..

    Here's an easily Overclockable (4GHz+) Intel Based Computer..

    -Intel i7 930 (8 Logical Cores @ 2.8GHz [stock]) ~ $319.99
    Note: Cores do not stack linearly. More isn't necessarily better.
    -Antec 900 ~ $119.99 (Whatever fits your tastes. There are a plethora of cases available)
    -Corsair H50 CPU Cooler ~ $79.99
    -EVGA X58 3X SLI ~ $229.99
    -Patriot 6GB @ 1333MHz Memory ~ $114.99
    -WD 500GB Caviar Black 7200RPM ~ $59.99
    -Corsair HX 650W PSU ~ $134.99
    -XFX Radeon 5850 1GB GDDR5 ~ $329.99

    Total: $1404.92

    This thing'll destroy anything in its path.



    Here's a base Mac Pro:

    Base Cost: $3,299.00

    Notable Differences:

    -The two Xeon's in the Pro will be inferior to the i7 in the PC for anything practical.
    -The PC has 1333MHz memory, vs 1066MHz Apple memory.
    -The PC HDD has 140GB less space. Easily upgradeable with $30.
    -The Mac comes standard with a GTS 120. This is a rebranded 9500GT, considered one of the worst cards of Q2 2009. The PC comes equipped with the strongest Single-GPU built Graphics card ever. The difference is so vast it's immeasurable.
    -A Media drive is included with the Apple. Media drives are now ultimately useless as you can install OS' using a flash drive.

    Happy OP?

    3299 / 2 = 1649.50

    1404.92 < 1649.50
     
  7. Invocation macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    #7
    Wait, forgot to add SATA cables to the PC build.

    *Add $20 to the PC build.

    *Also note: neither come with a monitor.

    *Moreover: all prices are in CND.
     
  8. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #8
    That board comes with SATA cables, so there's no need to add any. ;)
     
  9. Invocation macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    #9
    But I like my special L-shaped pink ones!
     
  10. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #10
    There's a wierd one in every bunch... :rolleyes: :D :p
     
  11. Invocation macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    #11
    Hey hey now, to each their own!



    Alright, let's upgrade this PC now and keep it under half.

    $1649.50 - $1404.92 = $244.58

    We'll replace all the fans on the case with the Scythe Slip Stream (Kaze-Jyuni).

    The fans move an impressive 110CFM of air.

    Cost each: $9.99

    We'll need:
    -2 on each side of the H50 Radiator (tossing out the Corsair Fan)
    -2 on the front of the case
    -1 on the side of the case, cooling the HD 5870.

    So 49.95 total.

    $244.58 - $49.95 = $194.63

    We'll fork the rest of that over to a Corsair Extreme Series 2.5in SATA II Solid State Drive, 32GB costing $179.99

    That'll house whatever OS you desire, and your 500GB can house whatever else you want.
     
  12. Roman23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    #12
    one question for you..

    Ok, compared to 1066 DDR3, how much of a percentage faster in PC terms is 1333? Btw, my mac pro uses desktop i7-975 as it used to be a xeon. I decided against the w3580 and ordered for 200 dollars cheaper a i7-975 which runs at 3.33 ghz.


     
  13. gaspra macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    #13
    For the price, why don't you go for the new Hex-core although none of them supports ECC memory. If you were going to use 1333 memory, You could go for cheaper non-ECC ones anyway.
     
  14. Invocation macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    #14
    Um.. Well, not exactly sure how 'PC terms' differ from standard math.

    1333 / 1066 * 100% = 125%
    So 1333 is 125% the speed of 1066.

    The faster memory will be of relevance in memory-intensive applications. Large programs which wish to store large parts of themselves in your memory will benefit from faster memory.

    But you'd be crazy to leave a PC with those specs at stock. Once you start upping the reference clock, you'll have to start lowering the multiplier for the RAM to make sure it doesn't melt. You could easily have 1333MHz memory at 1800MHz without breaking a sweat.

    Wise choice on the i7 over the Xeon. The W3580 is seriously overpriced for the 'Q3 2009' punch it packs. An i7 isn't going to be anywhere near the bottleneck for your system. That hardware's overkill at that point.

    Your bottleneck will probably be your HDD at this point. (vs an SSD)
    Unless your GPU is brought into the equation, which is a severe weak point of most Macs. (GT 120's are rebranded 9500GT's)
     
  15. Invocation macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    #15
    i9's are incredibly silly when you can't even order a Mac Pro from Apple with an SSD.

    i9's are incredibly silly when you can't order a nVidia Card past the 9XXX line in a Mac Pro from Apple.

    i9's are incredibly silly when you can't order a 5XXX ATi GPU in a Mac Pro from Apple.

    i9's are incredibly silly when the Mac Pro uses 1066MHz RAM. (DDR2 was available in that speed, that's not even real DDR3..)



    Does no one understand what a bottleneck is? :mad:

    You buy (a) $1(+)k Processor(s) and use almost none of it. Why would you do that?
     
  16. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #16
    Has no relevance at all, you can use SSDs in your Mac Pro as many do. None of the big certified workstation vendors offer SSDs on them. Even if Apple did you'd pay a lot for some brand they chose, unlikely you'd get even one of the best 3 choices around.

    If you are a gamer maybe. Many users don't need a powerful graphics card at all.

    Not even real DDR3? Only the top tier processors even support more than 1066MHz without overclocking. On a dual socket board with the second rank of DIMMs installed it won't run at more than 1066MHz unless you have a board that allows it to be reconfigured, and I only know of ASUS and Tyan ones that do.


    You can can max out six 3.33GHz cores with 800MHz memory, a 5400RPM drive and integrated graphics. It just depends on what you are doing. Even if you can't utilize all 6 cores, you are still getting that 3.33GHz clock speed. Also there is no i9.

    Sorry to break your post down like that, but you posted a lot of ill-thought out statements.
     
  17. gaspra macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    #17
    Core i7-975 and Core i7 980X are similarly priced, they are both near $1K. It really depends on how you use multi-cores. For gaming, it's a non-issue. For parallel computing, more cores mean faster speed if the code is optimized properly. Indeed I don't find SSD is very useful since the code doesn't read/write disk often. The fastest SSD won't help 1% of my application.

    Core i7 doesn't support ECC. Some CPU/Memory intensive applications could run for weeks even months. Without ECC support, such applications usually crash (largely due to memory error) in several days.
     
  18. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #18
    He upgraded his Mac Pro, and they don't actually support any 32nm processors at the moment and likely never will nor will they run 1333MHz memory. He also got his processor quite cheap as you can see. The 6 cores aren't really around in used quantity to have those lower prices yet.
     
  19. gaspra macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    #19
    Well, I thought it was a very recent upgrade:)
     
  20. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #20
    He is not trying to run OS X on it, so it is not a hackit0sh. (At least that is what he implies has he says PC) He is trying to build a PC that has equivalent or better performance than a Mac Pro. Which is doable.

    Read above, OP not trying to run OS X (implied).


    Well, here OP. Custom made NewEgg build. You can furthur customize it the way you want OP. You can go the physical 8-core way, but that requires more expensive server parts. I also include a picture of the costs of server parts. However, factor it a new PSU also, and it's a hefty build.
     

    Attached Files:

    • 1.png
      1.png
      File size:
      152.5 KB
      Views:
      120
    • 2.png
      2.png
      File size:
      78.2 KB
      Views:
      79
    • 3.png
      3.png
      File size:
      74.5 KB
      Views:
      77
  21. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #21
    How can you say a processor with 4 cores and 8 threads is equivalent to a system with 8 cores and 16 threads? When it comes to 3D rendering more cores is definitely good. Hyper threading only gives a 30% increase over the same processor if it wasn't hyper threaded.
     
  22. Cindori macrumors 68040

    Cindori

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Location:
    Sweden
    #22
    The 930 can be easily overclocked to ~4.2GHz. I'm not sure about all software, but generally that tears a 8x 2.26Ghz apart.

    You could replace the 930 with a 980x if you're still picky about cores.
     
  23. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #23
    Basically this. Remember, not every program is hyperthreading sensitive nor optimized, so in fact having 8 threads vs 16 threads can lead to a bigger performance jump. In many cases, multiple threaded CPUs tend to hurt performance.

    Bear in mind, signle threaded performance is boosted more by a higher clock than more cores. A i7-930 is perfect because you can have the 8 threads if you need them there or you can turn HyperThreading off and have quality single threaded performance @ 4.2GHz if need be.
     
  24. Roman23 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    #24
    I would.. but one problem, well two of them actually. Since the 2009 single-quads are capable of using all the bloomfield core i7 and xeon(w3520,w3540,w3565,w3570, and w3580), Apple did not leave room inside for the microcode needed to run the core i7-980x or its xeon brother.

    This would require B1 stepping which I have D0 stepping.. Another factor is the situation that in order for the 980x to work in the single-quad core, the microcode would have to be flashed to the EFI chip inside the mac pro for it to be used and even if this can be done, there are no guarentees that the machine would even be bootable anymore, or it may boot but nothing would come up... Idk, has someone ever gotten ahold of the microcode to do this?

    I didn't want to go PC, as building a hackintosh is complicated at this point.. Sure, I'd like to buy any PC and put mac os x on it, as I do own it(bought for 29.99), but not all PC's will support it.


    Orig conf: w3520 2.66 quad-core single
    6GB of ddr3 1066 memory
    4 x1TB hard drives - total 4TB.
    Two superdrives 22x
    GPU: Radeon 4870 HP.. I know the GT120 is crap, therefore got rid of it.

    But the other problem is even with my new processor and non-ecc memory, Apple still has 1066 locked in so going to 1333 isn't going to happen, at least on the mac pro.


    And add to the fact that the i7-980x or its xeon brother won't even work in ANY 2009 quad-core single mac pro, as it uses B1 stepping plus one would need to flash the microcode needed for the processor to work.. Apple has this and I doubt even if a 2010 were to come out someone couldn't successfully on here copy over the microcode and develop a FLASH BIOS or EFI flasher to flash over the new microcode.. Impossible? Maybe.. I would pay someone for it, though not really worth it unless someone on here knows that it will work for sure when flashed.


    Ok, is there a way for me to use 1333 on my mac pro now that I have a i7-975 in my system? I thought Apple's firmware locked all of us even duals at 1066 ddr3.. is there a way to go beyond 1066 into 1333? The core i7 975 I have supports 1066 and 1333 as well as the w3580, but it seems Apple has us locked in at 1066 and can't go beyond that..

    As for SSD drives? They are out of my price range!! How many years will it be for someone to walk into a Best Buy and buy at least a 1TB SSD drive? I have 4x1TB drives in my system right now.


    Given I don't use pro apps at all, name me some consumer apps that I would have trouble with using non-ecc memory?


     
  25. AZREOSpecialist macrumors 68000

    AZREOSpecialist

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    #25
    How is that i7-975 working out? If you read through my original thread on upgrading my 2009 Mac Pro, you probably saw that I started with a Core i7 and eventually went to the W3580 after the i7 caused severe wake-from-sleep issues. Many others who "upgraded" to the 3.2-3.3 GHz i7 part thinking it was identical to the Xeon equivalent also experienced wake-from-sleep issues on all upgraded Mac Pros. Everyone who upgraded to an i7, with the exception of one person that I know of, ended up getting rid of the i7 in favor of the W3580.

    You'll note the parts have slightly different voltage ranges which may or may not cause issues depending on the bin quality of the i7 you purchased. Each batch has a slightly different voltage draw, while the W3580 has a more consistent specification (hence the higher price). This all happened over a year ago, so I'm not so good with the specifics anymore. I also thought the Core i7 975 did not turbo boost as well or to as high a frequency as the W3580 - I don't remember.
     

Share This Page