By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - Are Mac's really faster?

goddog said:
IllegalPaladin said:
I looked at Apple's website to spec out a Mac Pro a week or two ago and compare it with my planned Core i7 build. From the get go at default options it's already $1000 more expensive than my build and my build includes building a WHOLE new tower as well as getting a new monitor and the only things I'd be saving from the old tower are the hard drives and DVD drives.

which build the single xeon or the dual? and how much ram are you throwing in your tower 3 or 6 gig? id like to see your build out to see if its a fair comparison or if you should be comparing it to the imac line which is far more in line with use of a core i7 chip though the line has nto been refreshed in awhile

 

edit really its a question of class the mac pro is a workstation not a true desktop. how much ram can the mobo you want hold the base lower end pro maxes at 16 GB (white papers) and the two quad core unit is at 32gb? is the mobo designed to hold 2 cpus but can run on one? 

Specs of the Mac Pro which I haven't edited any of the configuration options so the baseline price is $2499

  • One 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
  • 3GB (3x1GB)
  • 640GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
  • NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB
  • One 18x SuperDrive
  • Apple Mighty Mouse
  • Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (English) and User's Guide

Looking back at my build again, it'd be better to say it costs a little under $1600 to account for shipping.

  • Antec 1200 case
  • Corsair 850w PSU
  • Asus P6T Deluxe V2 Mobo
  • DDR3 6gb (3x2gb) ram
  • Core i7 920 (2.66ghz) cpu
  • Xigmatek HDT-S1283 CPU cooler
  • Xigmatek bracket for LG775 and 1366
  • EVGA GTX 280 superclocked
  • LG 23" LCD monitor (2ms)
  • 6ft dual link DVI cable
  • Round IDE cable for length and better airflow 

So while my build doesn't account for a Windows OS, I can either stick with 32-bit XP for a little while (though that'd be stupid), 64-bit Windows Ultimate for a student price of ~$60, or use the Windows 7 64-bit RC/try to get Windows 7 when it comes out. Still, the biggest thing I'm looking at is the price comparison with some similar specs. Yea, the iMac's on the website are still using Core 2 Duo's and the 24" inch one is the closest one to my spec's without being more expensive (again, without any customizing of the package).

Also, if I have a PC build like that, it would also be more of a workstation to me than my current PC could ever have been. I could pick up an Adobe package to use my computer in the same fashion that I use the Mac's on campus for. The only downside is that Final Cut is exclusive to Apple, but Premiere isn't bad. Still, that'd be a fortune in software in either case.



Around the Network
eb30577 said:
Macs are more stable. My mac hasn't been shut down, turned off, or restarted in over 6 months. The OS is much better at reallocating resources when programs are exited. The computer still runs just as smooth. Let me see a PCWhore say the same thing.

I am running Windows 7 and have yet to need a reboot or get a lockup. Macs used to be faster and more efficiant when they were running SCSI drives and better Processors. My dad bought 2 Imacs with there Core2 duo processors and 4 GB of ram. My AMD Quad core is faster at everything under Windows 7. His is quieter though.

He paid around $2500 or so, I paid $300. When I upgrade again, I will add another $400 or so but will be running an even faster processor, more Ram at higher speed and will have still paid less.



Given they use the exact same parts as PCs, I can only assume they run faster because Jobs personally sprinkles each component with magical fairy dust.



eb30577 said:
Macs are more stable. My mac hasn't been shut down, turned off, or restarted in over 6 months. The OS is much better at reallocating resources when programs are exited. The computer still runs just as smooth. Let me see a PCWhore say the same thing.

You're not going to last around here.

 

That said, using XP at work, I can go months without a restart, without issues. I'm not sure I'd try it on my Vista machine at home, but XP is solid as anything. (Nor would I try to at home, there's no point since it boots up in a flash - no need to waste energy leaving it on)



Yay, more apple-hating.

The animosity is fun to watch, tho.





Current-gen game collection uploaded on the profile, full of win and good games; also most of my PC games. Lucasfilm Games/LucasArts 1982-2008 (Requiescat In Pace).

Around the Network

Depends. You can't ignore all the crap they throw onto a store bought PC that MS had nothing to do with. This will bog things down. Macs are totally controlled from start to finish through Apple. So you're getting a clean computer. Short of building your own, a clean reinstall of the OS is a good idea if you get a store bought one. But nowadays you get a recovery disc, not sure how viable that is.

I have an iMac, the last gen one (New ones launched in Feb) and all in all, I'm impressed. It came with 1GB of RAM, and it loaded up faster than any of my PC's did. I had many programs open, I never once noticed a slowdown. I upgraded to 4 (The max) and so no difference in speed. Kind of saying a lot that 1 gig could do all that. This would be impossible with Vista or even XP in my book. Hell, even my broadband speed is much faster. Not even sure such a thing is possible, but dammit I KNOW I'm not imagining it! Maybe the PC I had acted like a bottleneck? I dunno. But it seems memory is alloted a hell of a lot better than any PC I had ever owned. Though I haven't been a PC gamer in ages, and my computer time is pretty much limited to the web. So I haven't tested out what the Mac can handle with any big third party program.

Again, I'm happy with the purchase. Though did I really need to spend this going of money to surf the tubes of the Internet? Eh. But in 6 months, no slowdown, no hangups, no freezing. Although this morning was the first time in a loooong time I decided to reboot to get FireFox to respond (Wouldn't open up) reminded me of my PC days. And I've had a long history of PC days. From top of the line (at the time) store bought and built by me, to cheapo Acer ones that I had to make do with because my last super PC decided to die.

In the end, price I believe is the biggest factor. I got lucky. Newegg was still selling Macs, and I got this one for 1 year, no finance charge. So same as cash. If I didn't get that deal, I would not have plopped down over a thousand at once for a computer.



eb30577 said:
Macs are more stable. My mac hasn't been shut down, turned off, or restarted in over 6 months. The OS is much better at reallocating resources when programs are exited. The computer still runs just as smooth. Let me see a PCWhore say the same thing.

So you've never updated it, I take it?



Personally, I've owned wintel PC's since 1989 and in 2007 I switched over.

So far it's been worth the price of admission.





Current-gen game collection uploaded on the profile, full of win and good games; also most of my PC games. Lucasfilm Games/LucasArts 1982-2008 (Requiescat In Pace).

Maybe a smidge faster.

But you will have to pay double for the same specs, gotta love mac pricing!



Bitmap Frogs said:

Yay, more apple-hating.

The animosity is fun to watch, tho.

I don't think anyone hates Apple, at least any more than the next massive international mega corps with dodgy ethics and a control freak tendency. It's just that it seems to have far more than its fair share of smug, rather clueless fanboy disciples infesting every tech forum going. To me, Macs aren't objects of wonder- they're very expensive locked-down PCs with a garish, dumbed-down OS- just right for a certain segment of the market, pretty much useless to the majority.