Great article. I don't think there's any doubt that a custom-build PC will trounce any Apple out there on a £for£ basis, particularly in gaming where Macs ship with stupidly underpowered graphics by default. I mean, Mac Pros - machines costing multiple thousands - ship with barely more than Nvidia integrated. Lamé.
Ultimately, though, I think that Macs are about the user experience and that regardless of performance, you are paying top dollar for the unique Mac experience. As you noted, taking an iMac out of the box, plugging in the single cable and just getting to work is a spectacularly nice thing to do. Using OSX is a world away from Vista (although I haven't used Windows 7).
When it comes to performance both on the desktop and laptop side, Apple is definitely behind the curve (although less than it was in the G5 days, thankfully). My MacBook Air is nothing beyond a very fancy netbook when it comes to actually doing stuff. BUT I would use it over a notebook twice as powerful because a) for 90% of people (including me) performance is no longer an issue (Firefox on 1.8GHz vs 3GHz...) and b) It's just a pleasure to use in the hardware and software sense.
What does amaze me are Mac people who could desperately use the extra power and refuse to. Photoshop users, for example, would do a lot better with an uber PC and a nice 8-bit or 10-bit display, as opposed to the crappy 6-bit ones that Apple ships. Apple's smartest long term move on that front would be to buy Adobe, but I doubt they'd do that.
the whole point of buying Apple computers are for their Mac OSX. so please install Hackintosh.
if you were to install hackintosh, however, a more mainstream motherboard may be needed better (Gigabyte/Asus).
IMHO, for gaming, you got to stick with PC for the wide range of games. for everything else, a iMac or Hackint0sh offers better user experience than Windows. (from presonal experience of installing Hackintosh on my sig PC)
Originally Posted by wuyanxu the whole point of buying Apple computers are for their Mac OSX. so please install Hackintosh.
if you were to install hackintosh, however, a more mainstream motherboard may be needed better (Gigabyte/Asus).
IMHO, for gaming, you got to stick with PC for the wide range of games. for everything else, a iMac or Hackint0sh offers better user experience than Windows. (from presonal experience of installing Hackintosh on my sig PC)
Originally Posted by wuyanxu the whole point of buying Apple computers are for their Mac OSX. so please install Hackintosh.
if you were to install hackintosh, however, a more mainstream motherboard may be needed better (Gigabyte/Asus).
IMHO, for gaming, you got to stick with PC for the wide range of games. for everything else, a iMac or Hackint0sh offers better user experience than Windows. (from presonal experience of installing Hackintosh on my sig PC)
But the whole point of the article was to build a Mac killer - that includes killing the OS they come with IMHO and building a faster machine which (unfortunately) comes with Vista.
Originally Posted by WilHarris Great article. I don't think there's any doubt that a custom-build PC will trounce any Apple out there on a £for£ basis, particularly in gaming where Macs ship with stupidly underpowered graphics by default. I mean, Mac Pros - machines costing multiple thousands - ship with barely more than Nvidia integrated. Lamé.
Add to that that the higher end cards (Which cost you your children) are underclocked anyway, to maintain the noise levels.
Originally Posted by wuyanxu the whole point of buying Apple computers are for their Mac OSX. so please install Hackintosh.
if you were to install hackintosh, however, a more mainstream motherboard may be needed better (Gigabyte/Asus).
IMHO, for gaming, you got to stick with PC for the wide range of games. for everything else, a iMac or Hackint0sh offers better user experience than Windows. (from presonal experience of installing Hackintosh on my sig PC)
But the whole point of the article was to build a Mac killer - that includes killing the OS they come with IMHO and building a faster machine which (unfortunately) comes with Vista.
Otherwise, a nice build. That case is pretty sweet, I could see myself using that for a HTPC.
Overall, the results don't surprise me too much, but don't forget the Mac gets even more expensive if you want to play games because you still need to buy a Vista license!
Otherwise, a nice build. That case is pretty sweet, I could see myself using that for a HTPC.
Overall, the results don't surprise me too much, but don't forget the Mac gets even more expensive if you want to play games because you still need to buy a Vista license!
Yes, it doesn't look quite circular in the shot, but it is just the camera angle. I've cut that hole so many times I could do it with my eyes closed ;p
Missed that slight weft in the tube though. Oh well =)
We where very pleased with the case. It looks great and is a decent size if you're thinking of water cooling.
Well not really - we wanted to try and build something that competed in terms of quality of noise and aesthetics too. Not simply to know if we could do it cheaper.
Perhaps a better comparison would have been against a G5 rather than an iMac? After all, the iMac is an all-in-one unit (using laptop parts). Really to "compete" against the iMac you would have to do the same thing.
I own a 24" iMac and a self built gaming PC (Q9550 @ 3.6Ghz / 260 Graphics Card / 4GB mem)
Two very different computers. The speed of my iMac is 3.06Ghz... and it doesnt matter in the slightest. I love that iMac. Its quiet (silent), and has the best screen on any computer Ive used. OSX is just perfect compared to Vista (in my opinion).
The only reason I have the PC is for gaming, which it performs very well at.
The thing to remember about people who buy these macs.... PRICE is not their primary concern. (It wasnt for me). I wanted something stylish, usable without any of the windows headaches (I sound like that Lauren woman from Laptop Hunters!), and silent with a great screen. I could have bought/made a PC, but to be honest.. why bother when Apple does such a great job. Same with their laptops... their new 13" macbook pro stomps on PC laptops for both style / power / and now price.
Also I paid less than £1200 for my iMac 24" ... not the crazy new prices (about £1600). The previous top end models are almost as good as massively cheaper now, thanks to Apple hiking the price of the new models.
I liked the article though and remember reading about it in the Custom PC magazine a while back.
I'm not sure I agree with your final paragraph saying that OS X is better than Vista. Surely its based solely on personal opinion, as I for one can't STAND OS X.
I also have to wonder wether your watercooling kit was worth it. I'd either want to cool the GPU aswell, or spend the money elsewhere on good air coolers or better hardware.
But im glad you've drawn attention to how awful the Mac's display really is.
not fair comparison, you should have tried to build all-in-one computer, using smallest case available (shuttle) as iMac is using laptop components. and yes, mac is about mac os that's something you don't get on win machine so there's no point to build mac killer if you don't run mac os/hackintosh os on it. but nice article, but not fair
Comments 1 to 25 of 128
ReplyUltimately, though, I think that Macs are about the user experience and that regardless of performance, you are paying top dollar for the unique Mac experience. As you noted, taking an iMac out of the box, plugging in the single cable and just getting to work is a spectacularly nice thing to do. Using OSX is a world away from Vista (although I haven't used Windows 7).
When it comes to performance both on the desktop and laptop side, Apple is definitely behind the curve (although less than it was in the G5 days, thankfully). My MacBook Air is nothing beyond a very fancy netbook when it comes to actually doing stuff. BUT I would use it over a notebook twice as powerful because a) for 90% of people (including me) performance is no longer an issue (Firefox on 1.8GHz vs 3GHz...) and b) It's just a pleasure to use in the hardware and software sense.
What does amaze me are Mac people who could desperately use the extra power and refuse to. Photoshop users, for example, would do a lot better with an uber PC and a nice 8-bit or 10-bit display, as opposed to the crappy 6-bit ones that Apple ships. Apple's smartest long term move on that front would be to buy Adobe, but I doubt they'd do that.
if you were to install hackintosh, however, a more mainstream motherboard may be needed better (Gigabyte/Asus).
IMHO, for gaming, you got to stick with PC for the wide range of games. for everything else, a iMac or Hackint0sh offers better user experience than Windows. (from presonal experience of installing Hackintosh on my sig PC)
That's a really sick build =)
+1
But the whole point of the article was to build a Mac killer - that includes killing the OS they come with IMHO and building a faster machine which (unfortunately) comes with Vista.
Add to that that the higher end cards (Which cost you your children) are underclocked anyway, to maintain the noise levels.
Then it's just a PC >_<
Is the left hose really as doglegged as it looks?
http://images.bit-tech.net/content_images/2009/07/how-to-make-a-mac-killer/15s.jpg
This hole doesn't look circular, it's just the camera angle, right? ;) Oh, and it needs C-strip.
Otherwise, a nice build. That case is pretty sweet, I could see myself using that for a HTPC.
Overall, the results don't surprise me too much, but don't forget the Mac gets even more expensive if you want to play games because you still need to buy a Vista license!
Yes, it doesn't look quite circular in the shot, but it is just the camera angle. I've cut that hole so many times I could do it with my eyes closed ;p
Missed that slight weft in the tube though. Oh well =)
We where very pleased with the case. It looks great and is a decent size if you're thinking of water cooling.
It's the angle of the photos - the tube goes down in line with the shot before going in ;)
How exactly? Clearly you didn't even bother to read, or even click on the article, simply resorting to trolling the comments with a fanboyish rant.
I do agree with the comments about OSX though - unfortunately I suppose that's Apple's monopoly.
Also, of course you can get a cheaper machine if you build it yourself! It's a given!
Well not really - we wanted to try and build something that competed in terms of quality of noise and aesthetics too. Not simply to know if we could do it cheaper.
Two very different computers. The speed of my iMac is 3.06Ghz... and it doesnt matter in the slightest. I love that iMac. Its quiet (silent), and has the best screen on any computer Ive used. OSX is just perfect compared to Vista (in my opinion).
The only reason I have the PC is for gaming, which it performs very well at.
The thing to remember about people who buy these macs.... PRICE is not their primary concern. (It wasnt for me). I wanted something stylish, usable without any of the windows headaches (I sound like that Lauren woman from Laptop Hunters!), and silent with a great screen. I could have bought/made a PC, but to be honest.. why bother when Apple does such a great job. Same with their laptops... their new 13" macbook pro stomps on PC laptops for both style / power / and now price.
Also I paid less than £1200 for my iMac 24" ... not the crazy new prices (about £1600). The previous top end models are almost as good as massively cheaper now, thanks to Apple hiking the price of the new models.
I liked the article though and remember reading about it in the Custom PC magazine a while back.
I also have to wonder wether your watercooling kit was worth it. I'd either want to cool the GPU aswell, or spend the money elsewhere on good air coolers or better hardware.
But im glad you've drawn attention to how awful the Mac's display really is.
4GB Corsair TwinX PC2-6400 £23.74 (inc. VAT)
Corrected, thanks :)
-
« Previous
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums