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

The Merged Hackintosh Thread

What describes you?

  • No way would I build a hackintosh

    Votes: 349 23.0%

  • I'd consider it if Apple doesn't provide a new Mini or headless iMac in the next three months

    Votes: 185 12.2%

  • I'm considering it right now

    Votes: 578 38.2%

  • I already built one

    Votes: 403 26.6%
  • Total voters
    1,515
XnavxeMiyyep said:
I haven't read through this thread, so I don't know if it's already been covered, but if you want OS updates to work without waiting for hacked versions, install the Vanilla Kernel.
Click to expand...

no, even with a vanilla kernel going through apple su will break it. however not the case for 10.5.4 as they didnt change system kexts

you still have to run commands via terminal with the update file or wait for a hacked version

source: from my own unlucky experience lol
 
dukebound85 said:
no, even with a vanilla kernel going through apple su will break it. however not the case for 10.5.4 as they didnt change system kexts

you still have to run commands via terminal with the update file or wait for a hacked version

source: from my own unlucky experience lol
Click to expand...
Oh, ok. Sorry for the misinformation. I actually haven't gotten around to installing the Vanilla Kernel, or updating past 10.5.2.; I just thought I recalled reading that on the InsanelyMac forums.
 
Cave Man said:
Everything I used to use my Mini for, except now I have three 3 gbps SATA 7200 rpm 32 mb cache 3.5" hard drives, a real video card that can drive two 30" displays, a 20x DVD burner, eSATA ports and 4 gb of RAM. Oh, and have I said it's much faster? ;)
Click to expand...

Only a Mac Pro or a high-end PowerMac G5 can beat your Hackintosh. :p;)
 
kabunaru said:
Well then, you have one of the best Macs even though it's a Hackintosh.
Click to expand...

Geekbench score of 6297. That puts it firmly between the 4-core and 8-core Mac Pros.

Do you play games on your Hackintosh? What about Final Cut Studio?
Click to expand...

Nope, not a gamer or Studio user (although I do use FC Express). Aperture and Handbrake scream on the machine, though.
 
kabunaru said:
Only a Mac Pro or a high-end PowerMac G5 can beat your Hackintosh. :p;)
Click to expand...

nope my quad will beat a high end powermac easily. a octo macpro....not really

Cave Man said:
Eight-core, but not a four-core.

exactly

I doubt that.
Click to expand...

kabunaru said:
When I meant high-end, I meant: 16GB RAM, Quadro FX 4500, 2.5GHz Quad or 2.7GHz Dual, Fastest HDD PowerMac G5. :eek:
Click to expand...

Cave Man said:
Like I said, I doubt it.
Click to expand...

i agree

kabunaru said:
Well then, you have one of the best Macs even though it's a Hackintosh.
Do you play games on your Hackintosh? What about Final Cut Studio?
Click to expand...

yea thats the jist of it. my hackintosh is veeeerrrryyyy worth it to me and guess what, cheaper than an imac!
 
So, you guys that have Hackintoshes, are you the same people that want Apple to release a upgradeable mid-range Mac tower? :rolleyes: ;)
 
hackintosh's do seem very attractive (as witnessed by the longevity of this thread), but they will always be more trouble than buying an mac where 'everything just works'.

they also lack the cool factor (whatever that may be), and, unless you're trying to beat a Mac Pro, will be more messy on the desktop than iMac/Mac Mini.

however...i have been thinking that a Mac Pro/PowerMac G5 enclosure and apple keyboard and mouse would solve the coolness factor, and going all out on the hackintosh would justify the messiness (if that kind of thing is important to you)

guess i'm thinking aloud.........


oooh...why doesn't apple build a mini tower with decent graphics and support for dual screens!
 
kabunaru said:
So, you guys that have Hackintoshes, are you the same people that want Apple to release a upgradeable mid-range Mac tower? :rolleyes: ;)
Click to expand...

YES. I would be all over that. Considering the Mini is around $600-$700, and the iMac is $1200+...I'd be willing pay around $900-$1000 for something similar to the iMac's hardware but in a real case with room for 3 or 4 hard drives and a video card that could drive at least two 24" monitors. Since that doesn't exist, I built my hackintosh for about $800 (2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB, 2.4 TB). I don't need the raw power of the Mac Pro...I just need something that can support 4-8GB of RAM and a couple of good-sized (and good quality -- so the iMac's out) monitors.
 
So, Hackintosh guys, what happens when you put in a new video card? Will "Hack" OS X recognise it? Or you have to make new drivers? Sorry if it's a silly question. I am somewhat new to the world of Hackintosh. :)

Believe it or not, I am actually interested in trying a Hackintosh out. Not making one, but using somebody else's. I would just like to try it out. My friend who is a hacker might make a Hackintosh. He said he might but it's not set in stone. I guess I will try his Hackintosh out if he does make one.
 
kabunaru said:
So, Hackintosh guys, what happens when you put in a new video card? Will "Hack" OS X recognise it? Or you have to make new drivers? Sorry if it's a silly question. I am somewhat new to the world of Hackintosh. :)

Believe it or not, I am actually interested in trying a Hackintosh out. Not making one, but using somebody else's. I would just like to try it out. My friend who is a hacker might make a Hackintosh. He said he might but it's not set in stone. I guess I will try his Hackintosh out if he does make one.
Click to expand...

the hardware compatibily lists will say which are the best

for instance the 8800gt works great
 
Genghis Khan said:
hackintosh's do seem very attractive (as witnessed by the longevity of this thread), but they will always be more trouble than buying an mac where 'everything just works'.
Click to expand...

That's a myth. I've not had any kernel panics or crashes in the three months I've had my hackintosh. Can't say the same for my Mini or MacBook Pro.

they also lack the cool factor (whatever that may be),
Click to expand...

It's hard to be cool when you're running four cores at 3.2 gHz. :D

and, unless you're trying to beat a Mac Pro, will be more messy on the desktop than iMac/Mac Mini.
Click to expand...

My hackintosh is quieter than my Mini/MiniStack II combo. It is bigger, but I needed room for all three SATA drives and that 256 mb 8600GT. :)

oooh...why doesn't apple build a mini tower with decent graphics and support for dual screens!
Click to expand...

Because it would cut into Mac Pro and iMac sales. Steve thinks he knows what you want. Remember the Superbowl ad? That's what Apple's become. :mad: (How's that for irony?) Perhaps you should let him know otherwise: steve@apple.com.
 
cave man, what set up are you using to get 3.2?

i have mine at 2.91 with the stock fan and its stable after running prime95 for a day but if i try to go to 3 it will fail prime95. not sure why as the temps are within range of spec sheet
 
I'd have to reboot into my BIOS to recall what I've done, but basically I've manipulated the cpu multiplier and dropped my RAM speed down to 667 mHz from 800 mHz to get it to run cooler. I really don't know much about PCs, but the Asus BIOS was really simple to figure out by trial and error. It comes in at 3.22 gHz. :)

Edit: I should add that if I run Handbrake, I have to manually bump the copper heat sink fan up to its maximum to keep temps below 70 C. It's a bit noisier, but not too bad. I guess that's the trade-off for transcoding a 2 hour movie into a 2500 bit rate/AC-3 5.1/AAC H.264 file in 35 minutes. :)
 
Cave Man said:
I'd have to reboot into my BIOS to recall what I've done, but basically I've manipulated the cpu multiplier and dropped my RAM speed down to 667 mHz from 800 mHz to get it to run cooler. I really don't know much about PCs, but the Asus BIOS was really simple to figure out by trial and error. It comes in at 3.22 gHz. :)
Click to expand...

The standard multiplier for this CPU is 9, so sounds like you went down to 8 (8*400MHz bus is 3.2GHz). I should add that I have a very similar setup (guess we both read the LifeHacker and MacWorld articles). I have the Q6700 clocked to 3.02GHz. It works great at 3.22GHz too but I didn't like the power supply fan ramping up under load.

My hackintosh is the best Mac I have ever owned.
 
I found a web tutorial with an overview of how to do it. It's bookmarked on my MBP (since I had to use another computer for instructions on the OC), but it's turned off and sitting in its case at the moment. Not much need to use it anymore. :)

This is the best "Mac" I've ever owned, too.
 
If you are really interested in the "coolness" factor of putting a hackintosh inside of an official Apple enclosure, check out the one I built in my sig
 
Cave Man said:
I'd have to reboot into my BIOS to recall what I've done, but basically I've manipulated the cpu multiplier and dropped my RAM speed down to 667 mHz from 800 mHz to get it to run cooler. I really don't know much about PCs, but the Asus BIOS was really simple to figure out by trial and error. It comes in at 3.22 gHz. :)

Edit: I should add that if I run Handbrake, I have to manually bump the copper heat sink fan up to its maximum to keep temps below 70 C. It's a bit noisier, but not too bad. I guess that's the trade-off for transcoding a 2 hour movie into a 2500 bit rate/AC-3 5.1/AAC H.264 file in 35 minutes. :)
Click to expand...

are you just using stock cooling to get 3.2? did you prime95 stress test it at all?
 
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