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

Shopping comparisons new MP vs Hackintosh

T

thegame46

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Mar 4, 2009
10
0
I thought I would share this research I had been doing in trying to decide whether to drop money on a MP or try and build my own. Sorry if its hard to read but basically I used the exact same configurations with the acceptation of not using ECC ram in the hackintosh. Main thing that changes is the board and cpu. I added 3 tb drives and wireless to all of them to reflect my actual purpose with the Education discount, which is $300 off. So just add $300 to mac prices to account for the discount. I also used the 4870 vid card in all to keep it consistent and I was thinking I would go with that for compatibility sake

MBP
Base 3134
8gb ram
2x 2.26 nah
nvidia gt 120
airport extreme
640gb hd

extra ram
4gb $99
Vid card upgrade

HD's
3 x 1tb 270

Total 3503

oct 2.66 4394
8gb ram
2x 2.66 nah
nvidia gt 120
airport extreme
640gb hd

extra ram
4gb $99
Vid card upgrade

HD's
3 x 1tb 270

Total 4763

Quad 2434
2.66
6gb mem

air 45

HD's
3 x 1tb 270

Total 2749

quad 2884
2.93
6gb mem

air 45
HD's
3 x 1tb 270

Total 3199

Hackintosh
core i7 290
HD's 270
Vid Card 170
MB 300
Case 100
PSU 75
Wireless card 50
superdrive 25
cooling fan 50
memory 314

Total 1644

Oct Hackintosh
2.26 $740
HD's 270
Vid Card 170
MB 600
Case 100
PSU 75
Wireless card 50
superdrive 25
cooling fan 50
memory 630

Total 2710

2.66 $2,120
HD's 270
Vid Card 170
MB 600
Case 100
PSU 75
Wireless card 50
superdrive 25
cooling fan 50
memory 630

Total 4090

In conclusion, the Macp Pro 2.66 and up is not a bad value vs what you could build on your own. But the 2.26 and the single quad core versions are not a very good value when compared to using comparable hardware.
 
I would love to see some bench marks though.. I haven't seen Hackintosh beat an actual mac in benchmarks yet.
 
This comparison really doesn't make sense aside from Comparing the Quad 920 vs the Quad 2.66.

No motherboard exists currently that supports multiple Xeon CPU's.

What is clear is that the Quad Mac Pro is around 100% more then an equivalent PC which is ridiculous. Don't forget that the 920 can be easily overclocked without additional cooling.

Here is a benchmark of a typical 920 overclocked setup.

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/115516

13,516 aint bad at all for a $1500 setup.
 
idiotboy said:
I would love to see some bench marks though.. I haven't seen Hackintosh beat an actual mac in benchmarks yet.
Click to expand...

Almost every quad i7 Hack is beating the quad Macs and as soon as dual processor Xeon motherboards are available you'll see the Hacks take the overall performance lead again. Unfair or not, every Hack user has the advantage of being able to easily overclock the hell out of their chips.
 
davewolfs said:
This comparison really doesn't make sense aside from Comparing the Quad 920 vs the Quad 2.66.

No motherboard exists currently that supports multiple Xeon CPU's.

What is clear is that the Quad Mac Pro is around 100% more then an equivalent PC which is ridiculous. Don't forget that the 920 can be easily overclocked without additional cooling.

Here is a benchmark of a typical 920 overclocked setup.

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/115516

13,516 aint bad at all for a $1500 setup.
Click to expand...

What is interesting is that an overclocked 920 to 3.6-4.0ghz runs single-threaded applications blazing fast. Plus when you need to render, my overclocked i7 920 4-core beat or equaled my octo 2.8ghz mac pro. No, it won't beat the 2.93ghz Octo Mac Pro, but that config is nearly $6000 versus my sub $1000 Hackintosh at 3.6ghz. It's nearly the best of both worlds, fast at single-threaded and multi-threaded applications.

When comparing quad to quad, even my micro-ATX X58 motherboard has 6 DDR3 slots and up to 24GB of RAM versus 8GB limit on the Mac Pro Quad.
 
You got to remember the pro comes with the best case and a pretty nice power supply.
 
davewolfs said:
No motherboard exists currently that supports multiple Xeon CPU's.

What is clear is that the Quad Mac Pro is around 100% more then an equivalent PC which is ridiculous. Don't forget that the 920 can be easily overclocked without additional cooling.

Here is a benchmark of a typical 920 overclocked setup.

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/115516

13,516 aint bad at all for a $1500 setup.
Click to expand...
Manufacturer's haven't yet posted the DP boards on their sites, but the SKU's have made it to e-tailers already, if not actual stock.

The cost differences make a Hack a tempting alternative though, and I'd expect a few are looking at it as a serious one, given the pricing of the MP line.
sneezymarble said:
Almost every quad i7 Hack is beating the quad Macs and as soon as dual processor Xeon motherboards are available you'll see the Hacks take the overall performance lead again. Unfair or not, every Hack user has the advantage of being able to easily overclock the hell out of their chips.
Click to expand...
The lower cost of a self built machine, and at least the potential of beating a stock MP with an OC is hard to ignore. ;)
idiotboy said:
So what are we paying apple more money for? :)
Click to expand...
Marketing. :p

On the serious side, you get a system that's ready to go (no assembly required, or hunting drivers), and has a single warranty provider.

The importance of this depends on the individual, and perhaps their skill level with DIY systems, and OC'ing, if they take that route. If you're an old hand at making it stable, it may not be that big a deal. OTOH, if an individual doesn't have lots of experience or possibly time, a ready made system would be a more attractive alternative.

Corporate customers would most likely ignore a Hack all together. Easier as a tax deduction, can be financed if needed, and comes with warranty support. ;)
shokunin said:
What is interesting is that an overclocked 920 to 3.6-4.0ghz runs single-threaded applications blazing fast. Plus when you need to render, my overclocked i7 920 4-core beat or equaled my octo 2.8ghz mac pro. No, it won't beat the 2.93ghz Octo Mac Pro, but that config is nearly $6000 versus my sub $1000 Hackintosh at 3.6ghz. It's nearly the best of both worlds, fast at single-threaded and multi-threaded applications.

When comparing quad to quad, even my micro-ATX X58 motherboard has 6 DDR3 slots and up to 24GB of RAM versus 8GB limit on the Mac Pro Quad.
Click to expand...
This is certainly a good reason to at least consider a Hack for those who are willing. :D
 
Just another option
Ebay has openstar closes
i7 clocked at 3.2ghz
12gb ram
1.5 tb HDD

WiFi Card & Router, Network Card, Keyboard, Mouse

Advertised geekbench of 9400 running OS 10.5.6

$1799 OBO
 
Umbongo said:
You'd have to contact the seller if you were buying a prebuilt. If you are building it yourself you can make a quieter system than a Mac Pro.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

It's possible to build a system that keeps noise at 20dBA max., depending on cooler(s) and case fan choices made. :)
 
thegame46 said:
I thought I would share this research I had been doing in trying to decide whether to drop money on a MP or try and build my own. Sorry if its hard to read but basically I used the exact same configurations with the acceptation of not using ECC ram in the hackintosh. Main thing that changes is the board and cpu. I added 3 tb drives and wireless to all of them to reflect my actual purpose with the Education discount, which is $300 off. So just add $300 to mac prices to account for the discount. I also used the 4870 vid card in all to keep it consistent and I was thinking I would go with that for compatibility sake

MBP
Base 3134
8gb ram
2x 2.26 nah
nvidia gt 120
airport extreme
640gb hd

extra ram
4gb $99
Vid card upgrade

HD's
3 x 1tb 270

Total 3503

oct 2.66 4394
8gb ram
2x 2.66 nah
nvidia gt 120
airport extreme
640gb hd

extra ram
4gb $99
Vid card upgrade

HD's
3 x 1tb 270

Total 4763

Quad 2434
2.66
6gb mem

air 45

HD's
3 x 1tb 270

Total 2749

quad 2884
2.93
6gb mem

air 45
HD's
3 x 1tb 270

Total 3199

Hackintosh
core i7 290
HD's 270
Vid Card 170
MB 300
Case 100
PSU 75
Wireless card 50
superdrive 25
cooling fan 50
memory 314

Total 1644

Oct Hackintosh
2.26 $740
HD's 270
Vid Card 170
MB 600
Case 100
PSU 75
Wireless card 50
superdrive 25
cooling fan 50
memory 630

Total 2710

2.66 $2,120
HD's 270
Vid Card 170
MB 600
Case 100
PSU 75
Wireless card 50
superdrive 25
cooling fan 50
memory 630

Total 4090

In conclusion, the Macp Pro 2.66 and up is not a bad value vs what you could build on your own. But the 2.26 and the single quad core versions are not a very good value when compared to using comparable hardware.
Click to expand...

Your going to need more then 1 fan for an i7, i won't boot it with less then 4 or 5.
 
I've been using a hackintosh since Tiger. Based on an Intel board and Q6600. I think its been exactly 2 years. Let me tell you, just by the fact that every other update I would hose my system and had to format and reinstall. I'll pass on a hackintosh. Also there is always something that is not going to work right, network, sound, graphics,etc. Other wise if you want to try it. Go right ahead. For me it was a test to evaluate if I really needed to change and it also allowed me to learn to use Logic and also see if it was worth it.
 
fabriciom said:
I've been using a hackintosh since Tiger. Based on an Intel board and Q6600. I think its been exactly 2 years. Let me tell you, just by the fact that every other update I would hose my system and had to format and reinstall. I'll pass on a hackintosh. Also there is always something that is not going to work right, network, sound, graphics,etc. Other wise if you want to try it. Go right ahead. For me it was a test to evaluate if I really needed to change and it also allowed me to learn to use Logic and also see if it was worth it.
Click to expand...

I think I agree if you have a lot of software invested in OS X, Apple can take advantage of the fact that you've already invested a lot. For me I currently run Linux and Windows and was thinking of switching to a Mac Pro so I don't need something that will run OS X, just Linux and it seems to me a bit dangerous to acquire too much in the way of expensive Apple specific software as you are then captive to the whims of Apple's marketing.

I was attracted by Apple's student discount (which is quite good in the UK) but the price hike has been so enormous alternatives still look rather attractive. Also I find it very annoying that Apple have restricted the RAM slots to 4 per processor whereas other manufacturers (apart from Intel themselves) provide 6 per processor.
 
Gonk42 said:
I think I agree if you have a lot of software invested in OS X, Apple can take advantage of the fact that you've already invested a lot. For me I currently run Linux and Windows and was thinking of switching to a Mac Pro so I don't need something that will run OS X, just Linux and it seems to me a bit dangerous to acquire too much in the way of expensive Apple specific software as you are then captive to the whims of Apple's marketing.
Click to expand...
Switching primary OS's can be an expensive venture, as the softaware can easily out cost the machine. :(

Add it in, and you get the "real" cost of switching. Not attractive, whether going from windows to OS X, or vice versa, even with VM. Some things just have to be native, and then there's the programs you'd prefer to be. ;) :p
 
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