Posts
If I make an XP box, all it will be is a game box. I no longer like working on PCs now that I have gotten used to where Mac keeps things.
Mac OS 10.5 has a thing called Bootcamp. It allows a dual boot so you can run XP native. There is also an app called Parallel that allows you to run XP inside 10.5. AutoCAD runs fine under Parallel. Supposedly so does IL2. Not sure about Wings Over Vietnam.
The flight sims are better run under XP native, but there are several programs for XP that would be nice to have while the normal Mac stuff was running, like AutoCAD.
What surprised me is a Mac Pro is only about $500 more than an XP box if you match hardware relatively closely. There are, however, many lower levels available for XP that just don't exist when buying a Mac.
I just don't know what to do!
Comments welcome.
"What surprised me is a Mac Pro is only about $500 more than an XP box if you match hardware relatively closely."
[citation needed] I'm inclined to "roll to disbelieve" that statement. Some supporting data and / or linkage would be appreciated. Also, to what purpose(s) will you be putting a new machine? Must it brows your internets and compose your emails? Will it be doing your taxes, as well as playing IL2, Crysis, Bioshock, etc.? If you're happier with the Mac OS and "productivity suite", then perhaps you should get a Mac and run Boot Camp. I've heard remarkably few complaints from people using that strategy. It is, however, more expensive. Remember that you'll be buying a retail copy of the XP operating system either way. If the machine will be solely a game machine, I'd still recommend XP. It's possible the games you want will perform better (Or that some may not run at all on a Mac, though I doubt that.) I think you can do better than $500 less for comparable hardware. And the PC hardware upgrade path is much more flexible. | ||
23rd-Sep-2008 11:18 am (local)
|
It's a baited statement. Apple uses Xeon processors not Core 2 Quad or Core 2 Extreme. When you find a PC that uses Xeon, you find a huge price upswing.
Alienware came in about $900 cheaper than Mac. With the Area 51 7500 I would be getting a single monitor and single processor. In trying to avoid an apples to oranges comparison, I configured the Mac to single chip and single monitor. The Alienware video card was also, "SUPERCLOCKED!" whatever that means. Marv is the one who made the $500 cheaper PC from an online vendor he's used before. | |
23rd-Sep-2008 02:43 pm (local)
|
Re. The relative costs of Mac vs. PC:
First, Alienware is a rip-off. You're paying for brand recognition at least as much as you are with Apple. When you mentioned a sparse $500 price difference, I was actually going to ask if you'd been shopping at Alienware :> What's the performance increase of a Xenon over a Core 2 Extreme? I bet it's not even close to the price difference. [did research: http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/t/3345 The Mac Pro with dual quad-core 2.8GHz Xenons, 4GB 800MHz DDR2, two 1TB 7200RPM drives in RAID 1, the GeForce 8800GT (the only decent video card on the list), and two 16x Super Drives tips the scales around $5,100. Add two 23" Cinema Displays, and the total is closer to $7000. I'm going to just assume that for that price, you can wedge in a copy of XP Pro somewhere. Let's build our PC system on the ASUS P5Q SE Motherboard http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a for $100. And we'll stick in two C2Extreme 3.2GHz Processors. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a Same 1600MHz FSB, same 12MB Cache, 14% faster clock. Staggering price of $3,100. Slip in 4GB (dual channel) DDR3 1600MHz http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a Same capacity. *cough* TWICE *cough* the speed $250 Two 1TB 7200 RPM Drives http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a for $280. Add the (superior) GeForce 9600GT http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a at $150 Two CD/DVD burners (price varies by brand preference, cache, speed, etc.. but you could get an acceptable pair for $60.) ------------ TOTALS: Mac Pro $5,100 PC $3,950 I'm sure if you shopped around, you could find things on sale or at other retailers for a lower price, and squeeze a mouse and keyboard in under $4000. Your quality cinema displays are going to be about the same price for comparable performance. Heck, I'm pretty sure you could even use the same Apple displays on the PC box. The PC is *AT LEAST* $1000 less, as well as being FASTER in every way. If you were willing to scale down to 3.0GHz and 1333MHz FSB (rather than 1600MHz FSB) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a you could pretty easily trim *more than $1000* off the price tag, and hardly notice the performance hit. | |
23rd-Sep-2008 02:59 pm (local)
|
Oh here, I fixed the Xeon objection.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a This processor is a Xeon, is over $500 cheaper per, retains the 1600MHz FSB, and is still 3.0GHz instead of the Mac's 2.8. There, better in every regard, and chop $1000 more off the PC's price. --------------- TOTALS: Mac Pro........$5,100 PC.............$2,900, call it $3000 with Keyboard, Mouse, etc. The PC is still faster in every way. | |
23rd-Sep-2008 06:48 pm (local)
|
Um, if you're worried about things breaking, remember you'll still have a nice big wad of cash for replacements and / or upgrades. For comparable hardware, you could essentially buy TWO of EVERYTHING for the same price.
That's a decent safety net, and less hassle than dealing with a warranty. | |
23rd-Sep-2008 05:20 pm (local) - Shenanigans!
|
You're buying more than minimum RAM from Apple. Why would you do that? Get the minimum, then add two http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as
You're also wasting hundreds of dollars on Apple(TM) hard drives. The drives you found for the PC will plug right in; there's another $470 off the Mac price, and that assumes that you actually need the Apple(TM) second DVD burner. This is Geff with no LiveJournal account, reminding you that buying a Mac doesn't mean you aren't allowed to shop around. | |
23rd-Sep-2008 06:50 pm (local) - Re: Shenanigans!
|
Geff,
Point taken. I was assuming an "all Apple, from the Apple store" purchase, because it seemed to be the way Curt was leaning. On the topic of saving money by "shopping around" : What reason not to buy all of the components I specified, and with the extra TWO GRAND laying around, just buy a copy of OSX and install it yourself? | |
23rd-Sep-2008 09:59 pm (local) - Re: Shenanigans!
|
Oh, that may well be the way to go (as long as MacOS X has drivers for everything important on that motherboard, and as long as you're not worried about what Apple might do in the next update), but that TWO GRAND is closer to $1,300. The difference would be more than enough to replace the best computer I own.
| |
23rd-Sep-2008 10:09 pm (local) - Re: Shenanigans!
|
Mac Pro 2x2.8 Ghz Quad Core 4 gb 512 mb nVidia GeForce 8800 GT 1 tb 7200 rpm 16x double-layer SuperDrive 2x23” Apple Cinema Display 1920x1200 $5,547.00 From Apple.
Realistic Mac Pro 2x2.8 Ghz Quad Core 2 gb 512 mb nVidia GeForce 8800 GT 320 gb 7200 rpm 16x double-layer SuperDrive None $2,949.00 adding two Seagate 1 tb drives and buying third party (Mac approved) RAM and Acer 24" Monitors $4,043.95 So it's more like $1500, a grand of which is just the displays! Edited at 2008-09-23 10:10 pm (local) | |
23rd-Sep-2008 07:33 pm (local) - Re: Shenanigans!
|
But but but, the pathchouli...the the the orphans!
WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN!? RAM I will get from them because they are NOTORIOUS about warranty on aftermarket RAM. "I see it caught fire starting in the power supply, aftermarket RAM." Drives though... I think I will get my second or third 1 TB from Best Buy. Does any of y'all experts know if the Mac Pro case accepts standard optical drives in its bays? Edited at 2008-09-23 07:36 pm (local) | |
29th-Sep-2008 10:57 pm (local) - Steve Jobs Shenanigans!
|
I have just been informed of an absurdly bad design decision by Apple that invalidates my earlier recommendation. The MacPro has inadequate cooling, so the RAM I called for above will overheat and die.
This is essentially the same RAM, but with the monster heat sinks required to compensate for Apple's anti-fan bigotry: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as The extra cost is only about $10/DIMM, but it's a cost due solely to bad design. This will continue to be an annoyance, as non-commodity components don't get the full benefit from the usual market forces that keep bringing prices down as technology improves. | |
30th-Sep-2008 03:23 pm (local) - Re: Steve Jobs Shenanigans!
|
I've done a bit more research on the matter. To keep the machine quiet, they run the fans slow. There is plenty of cooling capacity, they are not utilizing it!
The problem in RAM land is they have a temp probe on the RAM, when that gets above a certain point, rather than cranking up the fans, they shut down the stick! FUCKING MORONS! Edited at 2008-09-30 03:23 pm (local) | |
23rd-Sep-2008 11:21 am (local)
|
I am happy with the OS and productivity suite.
I had planned on using Boot Camp and sucking up the extra cost. What I cannot find information on is will XP barf on the dual quad cores? Do I need to find a copy of XP 64? In addition to games, it must run AutoCAD. Bootcamp and Parallels both do AutoCAD as well. | |
23rd-Sep-2008 01:32 pm (local)
|
I have no information that XP Pro 32-bit would not run perfectly well on the dual quad cores. Then again, I haven't yet done the research.
Given that I've been running XP Pro x64 for more than two years, and I HAVE YET to discern any performance benefit from it in ANY application, game, or OS task, and I have noticed MULTIPLE additional frustrations, complications, or simple incompatibilities, I would have to recommend that you run 32-bit XP on your fancy 64-bit processor(s). Which is perfectly feasible. I'll see what I can find about XP running on dual quad core processors. But I'm resorting to my "research" skill, same as you would be. Also, I seriously doubt it'll be a problem. My suspicion is that, at worst, it won't scale as well as perhaps it should. Remember, using Boot Camp is essentially the same as having installed XP on the machine. Boot Camp does some special things to allow XP to boot, and includes some special drivers for the Mac-ified hardware. But the Mac Pro is essentially all PC parts. Beyond bootstrapping the OS and specific drivers, Boot Camp basically doesn't interfere with XP running as it wishes. Which on this hardware should be "blazingly". If you were talking about a PC with dual quad-core Xenons, would you be concerned that XP wouldn't run, or that you need 64-bit (you don't)? | |
23rd-Sep-2008 03:09 pm (local)
|
Please note, I'm not trying to talk you into buying the PC hardware. You've stated that you like the Mac experience, and I have no argument with that. By all means, suck up the extra cost to get the machine that will make you happiest.
I was just stunned at the "only $500 cheaper" comment. I believe (and have supported that belief with links to a reputable retailer) that the PC is more like $2000 cheaper for slightly better gaming performance. Maybe $2500 cheaper for identical performance. Oh, and I'd meant to link the Mac Pro I was using for comparison: http://store.apple.com/us_smb_78313/con Anyway, given the HALF PRICE, SAME PERFORMANCE option, I'm pretty certain I'd be buying the PC. $2,500 is a lot of new games and future upgrades. | |
23rd-Sep-2008 04:36 pm (local)
|
I believe the product you want to install under Boot Camp (Or Parallels or even better, VMWare Fusion) is "Windows XP Pro SP2" http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a
Specifically, the "Pro" version, not "Home" or "Media Center", as they will only address *one* CPU (and worse, possibly only one core). The normal, 32-bit version. x64 may hypothetically provide some benefit when running on true 64-bit hardware. But in my experience, this benefit is *ONLY* hypothetical. What x64 does provide is driver incompatibility, application incompatibility (I still have to run the 32-bit version of my browser on my 64-bit system, because none of the plugins run 64-bit), games incompatibility, and gawd-awful troubles with boot camp. The only realistic benefit of the x64 version is that it can address more than 4GB of RAM. Since you've only got 4GB anyway, the normal 32-bit version should be what you chose. The x64 version can address more than 4GB, but it still only allocates 4GB to a given process anyway. So even if you had 16GB and were using it to run one process (a game, say), it'd still only get allocated the 4GB. Maybe, someday in the candy-coated future, multi-threaded applications will be developed that take advantage of multiple processors and multi-core processors. But in the really real world, the list of applications that take advantage of multiple cores and multiple processors is limited enough that I could count them on my fingers. And the list of applications that take advantage of 64-bit architecture (when run on a 64-bit OS on 64-bit hardware) is vanishingly small. I don't think the (consumer) application exists that would take full advantage of more than 4GB of RAM on as many as 8 virtual cores, and utilize 64-bit math. Such an application would be the province of multi-billion dollar video rendering houses. Certainly not video games. Not in 2008. This is part of why my old Pentium D 3.4 GHz processor is still so gaming capable. Since most games will only ever utilize one virtual core anyway, my 3.4 is just as good as, if not better than your eight 2.8's. Well, that Xeon is one hell of a chip. I'm sure it'd smoke my Pentium D. It's got newer architecture, faster clock, sitting on a faster bus, etc. But it wouldn't ruin it by more than 8x, which is what the straight numbers would indicate. Lastly, you'll want to make sure that you get a RETAIL version of XP Pro, and that said retail version comes with SP2 already on the disc. Any sold today should be, but don't think you're getting a discount if you buy an old "upgrade" disc on ebay, or buy something without SP2 and figure you'll just download the upgrade. SP2 is required to install under Boot Camp. | |
24th-Sep-2008 09:45 am (local)
|
Note: This will be the 16th reply to this post.
Apparently, all you have to do to cause your silent readers to make themselves known, is to post about a reader-relevant religion. | |
No comments:
Post a Comment
You are a guest here when you comment. This is my soapbox, not yours. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.
Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.
If you're trying to comment anonymously: You can't. Log into your Google account.
If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.