|
Build a new PC or buy a Mac?
|
|
Member
|
10. September 2009 @ 22:22 |
Link to this message
|
This is a tough decision because I like the appeal of a mac no viruses, fast operating system, nice user interface,but I fell as if I am would be paying for a name brand, when I could easily build my own. I need a laptop for university in two years so what is a better option. I am looking for a price range of around 1600$, and it needs to be fast, but not looking for a gaming pc. My friend said I could get this stuff to make a computer:
Intel Core i7 920 2.66GHz LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Processor
RAIDMAX SMILODON ATX-612WB Black Foldout MB Computer Case With Side Panel Window
ASUS VH242H Black 23.6" 5ms HDMI Full 1080P Widescreen LCD w/Speakers
Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 500GB 3.5" SATA 3.0Gb/s Internal Hard Drive
PC Power & Cooling Silencer PPCS910 910W Power Supply Compatible with Core i7
EVGA 141-BL-E757-TR ATX X58 SLI LE Intel Motherboard
EVGA GeForce GTX 275 896-P3-1171-AR Video Card - Superclocked Edition
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
11. September 2009 @ 00:12 |
Link to this message
|
That build is a gaming computer. It sacrifices quality and overall functionality (as well as affordability) for gaming performance. You can build a good all-around laptop for much less money.
You say you don't game...what do you do/want to do with the computer?
If you realy, realy love the MAC operating system, it can be installed on a PC (macs are just cheap-o windows computers in different cases at much higher prices...you can get better performance, reliability, and price building it yourself).
http://lifehacker.com/5351485/how-to-bui...start-to-finish
|
|
scorpNZ
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
11. September 2009 @ 00:59 |
Link to this message
|
Agreed,the only diff between mac n' pc is the OS & for the price your better off with a pc ,it's not a tough decision at all,pc's get viruses ??no they don't,pc's get viruses because of user ignorance,if you want the best of both worlds & that's a cheap powerful pc with a fast OS then linux would be the go,personally i'd go win 7 along with linux in dual boot,why linux coz thats what a mac OS is so in essence you get the best of both worlds & better yet linux is free
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
11. September 2009 @ 06:14 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by scorpNZ:
Agreed,the only diff between mac n' pc is the OS & for the price your better off with a pc ,it's not a tough decision at all,pc's get viruses ??no they don't,pc's get viruses because of user ignorance,if you want the best of both worlds & that's a cheap powerful pc with a fast OS then linux would be the go,personally i'd go win 7 along with linux in dual boot,why linux coz thats what a mac OS is so in essence you get the best of both worlds & better yet linux is free
No, Linux and OSX are radicaly different, at the oposite ends of the spectrum even. OSX allows you to do just about everything from an easy-to-use GUI, where linux requires the command prompt for just about any system task.
OSX: Easy to use, but limited compatability and funtionality.
WIN7: Relativly easy to use, best compatability, good functionality, especialy with all the freeware available.
Linux: Rather difficult to use & setup, VERY limited compatability, excelent functionality, with a considerable collection of freeware available.
Yes, Linux and OSX don't have many viruses floating around...but then most software does not run on these platforms, so why should viruses be any different? A good virus scanner/firewall like ESET Smart Security will lock windows down a lot tighter than Linux or OSX...allowing detailed control over what programs may access what computers, through what ports.
|
Junior Member
|
11. September 2009 @ 08:49 |
Link to this message
|
OSX and Linux may be different from a GUI standpoint but the kernel is almost identical. You can do just about anything on a Mac that you can do on linux. Apple has just taken a version of Linux and modified it to make it work better with a GUI.
True, OSX and Linux don't have many virus programmed for them, but the only reason PC users get viruses is from downloading stupid stuff of limewire or shady websites. Not to say there are no viruses for mac and linux, but due to their growing popularity more and more are released everyday.
Linux isn't really compatible with a lot of software, but its hardware is usually good to go right after installation. And because Linux is developed with the GNU license a lot of users and programmers have developed very similar and free apps to download with linux. A good example is GIMP, which is the alternative to Adobe Photoshop. And if you really want a program that is windows only to run on linux, a good emulator will always work. WIN-E is the most popular for running windows programs in a linux environment.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
11. September 2009 @ 08:54 |
Link to this message
|
I probably would take a Mac over that build, it isn't especially well thought out. However, Performance wise, there is no mac that compares to that system at all. What are you doing with the PC?
I disagree about the Linux command line comment, there are fully featured GUIs like KDE for a lot of functions. The difference is, The sort of things you use Linux for are not the sort of things you use Windows or OSX for, and thus you tend to use command lines quite often. However, the sort of things you're doing would often be pretty long winded, or impossible to do in the other OSes.
|
|
scorpNZ
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
11. September 2009 @ 13:26 |
Link to this message
|
Linux & OS have at their core unix
both have come along way essentially they are the same,linux was rewritten a few years ago from the ground up with unix at it's core
hard to set up ? must've been a while since you installed linux killer,yeah some linux installs require command line n' stuff however there are others like ubuntu,puppy etc,etc, that require none to get setup, hell! ubuntu can do the install with one mouse click automatically by installing to free space,no more partitioning etc for the novice user like yourself :P *runs*
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
11. September 2009 @ 14:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
This isn't anything to do with the OP's thread.
|
Member
|
11. September 2009 @ 14:53 |
Link to this message
|
Thanks for the input yeah I was looking for a multi-purpose computer mostly for downloading and streaming video I have my xbox 360 for gaming. The one thing he did convince me on getting is the Intel Core I7? If you could help me find some parts I could easily put them together I was looking for a 1 terabyte hard drive, fast streaming HD capable,fast as in loads up fast and can run multiple programs. The place I planned to buy from is newegg.ca because they are in canada and have wide variety of hardware and it would be easier to ship with one company.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
11. September 2009 @ 15:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
Newegg.ca is doable. I much prefer gaming on a PC, especially if you're buying a high end one.
To be honest, the newly released Core i5 actually works out better value than the i7.
|
Member
|
11. September 2009 @ 16:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well I think I would like to prioritize a different field then gaming just to save some money.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
11. September 2009 @ 18:12 |
Link to this message
|
Well, you can certainly save money by not designing the PC for gaming purposes - that spec at the start of the thread needs some work though.
Some ideas:
Core i5 750
Gigabyte P55-UD4 motherboard
2x2GB Corsair XMS3 1600mhz memory for i5
80GB Intel Gen2 SSD (OS drive)
1TB WD Caviar Black WD1001FALS (Software drive)
Optiarc 24x DVD drive
Corsair VX 450W Power supply
Sapphire Radeon HD4650 Graphics card
NZXT Tempest case
Dell 2408WFP Monitor
Logitech Z-4 Speakers
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. September 2009 @ 18:12
|
Junior Member
|
11. September 2009 @ 21:13 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Well, you can certainly save money by not designing the PC for gaming purposes - that spec at the start of the thread needs some work though.
Some ideas:
Core i5 750
Gigabyte P55-UD4 motherboard
2x2GB Corsair XMS3 1600mhz memory for i5
80GB Intel Gen2 SSD (OS drive)
1TB WD Caviar Black WD1001FALS (Software drive)
Optiarc 24x DVD drive
Corsair VX 450W Power supply
Sapphire Radeon HD4650 Graphics card
NZXT Tempest case
Dell 2408WFP Monitor
Logitech Z-4 Speakers
Specs look good and I agree that his OP was a little..outlandish..for not being a gamer.
Only concern I have about your build is the 450 watt PSU..Thats a little small...well..yea..its small..If your doing a custom built system your gonna want room to upgrade in the future and a 450watt is not gonna cut it.
I would suggest a PC&P 650-800 watt psu. they'll run about 100-150 but with Newegg and there mail in rebates, you might be able to get a good one for about 75$.I wouldn't go below 650..At the least 600.
And as for the Mac/PC debate..Just get a PC that will run Mac.I've got an HP Workstation xw8200 with dual xeons,4 gigs ddr2 and an Nvidia Quadro fx 540 gpu and I can install with a retail disk..lol..all I gotta do is load a bootloader and I'm good to go.I'm running Leopard right know and will be upgrading real soon.Mac is the bomb and want go back to Windows(evven though I love Windows 7)
~SMurf
PS3: smurfgod22
XBL: comicalLobster
Am an active game sharer on PSN.
<a href="http://us.playstation.com/playstation/psn/visit/profiles/smurfgod22"><img src="http://fp.profiles.us.playstation.com/playstation/psn/pid/smurfgod22.png" width="230" height="155" border="0" /></a><br/><a href="http://www.us.playstation.com/psn/signup">Get your Portable ID!</a> |
Member
|
11. September 2009 @ 21:24 |
Link to this message
|
So here is what I am looking for in a nutshell a PC with 6 gb ram, a fast processor, hd compatible, 1 terabyte of memory, bluray drive,nice case, quite power supply, I want good overall speed, for instance I have very fast internet ,but my computer cannot use it because it is so old. Do you need a special card to install Mac OSX. Also how much would the new pc cost, because I told my friend today and he thought I wanted a gaming computer? I am right that buy building your own computer you save money right?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. September 2009 @ 21:32
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
11. September 2009 @ 21:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
If you're going to upgrade in future to a bigger CPU, the 450W PSU is ample - it's even sufficient to add a reasonably powerful GPU. The majority of people out there have no idea what power supply is needed to run a system. PCP&C units lik the ones you list do the job, and aren't outlandishly expensive, but are still a waste of money, and make almost enough noise to raise the dead.
Given that the PC i've listed only uses around 130W at full load, even a 200W PSU would suffice, let alone a 450. There's ample room for improvement there.
|
Junior Member
|
11. September 2009 @ 21:33 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Decodem:
So here is what I am looking for in a nutshell a PC with 6 gb ram, a fast processor, hd compatible, 1 terabyte of memory, bluray drive,nice case, quite power supply, I want good overall speed, for instance I have very fast internet ,but my computer cannot use it because it is so old. Do you need a special card to install Mac OSX
What do you mean by'special card'..your best bet for a hackintosh is a core 2 duo,quad,i5,i7..etc,etc..a Gigabyte or Asus board..know..That right there is about 350$..theres also 6 gigs of ram(what do you need it for)what apps do you run?Since the new i5's and i7's runn ddr-3 its not as cheap as ddr-2 but its about 100$ for 6 gigs.maybe cheaper.and one treabyte of memoy(don't you mean hard drive)lol..willll run about 80$.I suggest a Western Digital..there the only ones that havent crapped out on me yet..got 3 of em and there awesome.
Blue ra...wanna burn??200$..wanna just watch..60$..
Graphics card..hmm..what are you gonna be doing with your comp??editing movies??Maybe a Gforce 9800 or a gts 250??either way..maybe 150$ for it.
In a nutshell,your lloking at about 700-800$ for a kick ass system that you dont have to worry about for an extremely long time. If you want a more precise buil list or am curious about hackintosh, pm me and i can get you a list of the best parts for building a "hack pro"
~SMurf
PS3: smurfgod22
XBL: comicalLobster
Am an active game sharer on PSN.
<a href="http://us.playstation.com/playstation/psn/visit/profiles/smurfgod22"><img src="http://fp.profiles.us.playstation.com/playstation/psn/pid/smurfgod22.png" width="230" height="155" border="0" /></a><br/><a href="http://www.us.playstation.com/psn/signup">Get your Portable ID!</a> |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
12. September 2009 @ 07:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
That post gives me a headache just looking at it.
In short, you don't need a graphics card like a 9800 or GTS250 when you're not going to be playing games.
If using i5, memory is dual channel, so 4 or 8GB not 6.
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
14. September 2009 @ 01:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
Member
|
14. September 2009 @ 17:01 |
Link to this message
|
I will look into that build, can it run hacintosh? It is in my price range,and it should last me a couple years my only decision now is between, buying an I7 or saving 300$ and getting cheaper stuff? Six gigabytes of ram is enough right?
Edit: I found a deal
[url=http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4945626&sku=B69-4006]here [/url]
for the i7 is it any good?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 14. September 2009 @ 17:27
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. September 2009 @ 19:58 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
That post gives me a headache just looking at it.
In short, you don't need a graphics card like a 9800 or GTS250 when you're not going to be playing games.
If using i5, memory is dual channel, so 4 or 8GB not 6.
We were all thinking it, thank you for saying it >.<
Actually that was three individual things, but all the same.
Sam's build is perfect (or there abouts) if you're sure you're not going to want to game.
Originally posted by Decodem:
I will look into that build, can it run hacintosh? It is in my price range,and it should last me a couple years my only decision now is between, buying an I7 or saving 300$ and getting cheaper stuff? Six gigabytes of ram is enough right?
Edit: I found a deal here for the i7 is it any good?
The i7 920 isn't really worth it any more with the i5 750 jumping up and down like an overexcited puppy :/
Six gigs is MORE than enough. Someone show me where a normal user is ever going to need six gigs of ram.
And deal? What deal? I'm trying to get my head round how it costs so much... Waaait for it... No.
(And psst, FYI; the code tags shouldn't be there)
PSP, all the way from 1.00 to 5.50 GEN D2 - DS Lite w/ M3DS Real (M3 Sakura v1.34)
PS3 3.01 - iPod Touch 2G 16GB Jailbroken - Xbox 360 60GB - PC, Q6600, 3GB DDR2, GTX260 (216) 896MB This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 14. September 2009 @ 19:59
|
|
Xplorer4
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
19. September 2009 @ 00:46 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Shokz:
Six gigs is MORE than enough. Someone show me where a normal user is ever going to need six gigs of ram.
Even for those hard on a PC, like me who do ALOT of multitasking, I only use about 3 GB(give or take) of RAM at any given time. So I couldnt agree more, 6 GB is far more then enough. If its one thing that annoys me its people who slap 8 GB of RAM in a computer when there not going to use but about 3 GB of it. If there going to use it, which I find hard to believe in the vast majority of cases, then I can understand it. Otherwise why waste the $100+ when you could just put it towards a faster cpu, better gpu, better mobo, monitor, etc.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. September 2009 @ 00:49
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
19. September 2009 @ 08:20 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Xplorer4:
Originally posted by Shokz:
Six gigs is MORE than enough. Someone show me where a normal user is ever going to need six gigs of ram.
Even for those hard on a PC, like me who do ALOT of multitasking, I only use about 3 GB(give or take) of RAM at any given time. So I couldnt agree more, 6 GB is far more then enough. If its one thing that annoys me its people who slap 8 GB of RAM in a computer when there not going to use but about 3 GB of it. If there going to use it, which I find hard to believe in the vast majority of cases, then I can understand it. Otherwise why waste the $100+ when you could just put it towards a faster cpu, better gpu, better mobo, monitor, etc.
While the NORMAL user may not use 6GB of ram, there are some programs that will use this much or more. Most program suites available in x64 versions can easily use 6GB of ram all by themselves. I know this is true from personal experience with Photoshop, Solidworks, and AutoDesk. Most people do not use these programs, but it should be clear that more and more of such programs will become available in the near future as x86 operating systems have become non-existant on high-end computers. 6GB is the minimum I would recomend to anyone, as this allows for a 32-bit program to use it's full 4GB potential, while leaving 2GB for the OS and multitasking. 12GB is still overkill for most everyone, although adding 3 more 2GB sticks to an I7 system that already has 3 2GB sticks will just about double the total speed of the memory (by letting two programs use the full speed of three sticks each).
|
|
Xplorer4
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
26. September 2009 @ 01:55 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
Originally posted by Xplorer4:
Originally posted by Shokz:
Six gigs is MORE than enough. Someone show me where a normal user is ever going to need six gigs of ram.
Even for those hard on a PC, like me who do ALOT of multitasking, I only use about 3 GB(give or take) of RAM at any given time. So I couldnt agree more, 6 GB is far more then enough. If its one thing that annoys me its people who slap 8 GB of RAM in a computer when there not going to use but about 3 GB of it. If there going to use it, which I find hard to believe in the vast majority of cases, then I can understand it. Otherwise why waste the $100+ when you could just put it towards a faster cpu, better gpu, better mobo, monitor, etc.
While the NORMAL user may not use 6GB of ram, there are some programs that will use this much or more. Most program suites available in x64 versions can easily use 6GB of ram all by themselves. I know this is true from personal experience with Photoshop, Solidworks, and AutoDesk. Most people do not use these programs, but it should be clear that more and more of such programs will become available in the near future as x86 operating systems have become non-existant on high-end computers. 6GB is the minimum I would recomend to anyone, as this allows for a 32-bit program to use it's full 4GB potential, while leaving 2GB for the OS and multitasking. 12GB is still overkill for most everyone, although adding 3 more 2GB sticks to an I7 system that already has 3 2GB sticks will just about double the total speed of the memory (by letting two programs use the full speed of three sticks each).
Never had a need for SolidWorks but I to run 3ds x63 and Photoshop Cs4 x64 at the same time, some times with multiple images open in photoshop. Like I said before 75% is usually about the most I use. I cant see SolidWorks taking up a whole gig. Not to mention on top of 3ds and ps, at any given time firefox is always open with lots of tabs. Vista Sidebar running in Win 7 with Core Temp, utorrent, nod32, vmware, riva tunner, comodo firewall, and 4 GBs gets the job done. Just for fun i loaded up CS4, and 3 copies of 3ds, with all the always on apps above, plust mirc,several instances of notepad 2, smart ftp x64, calculator, putty, and 2 windows open and only using 80 % as we speak.
Like I said the vast majority will not use 4 GB.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. September 2009 @ 07:04 |
Link to this message
|
A lot of x64 programs will happily use 2GB each, that's simply how it is. Also don't forget vista typically draws as much from the hard disk as possible and not from the RAM when it approaches the limit of memory. It's not inconceivable to still only be using 3.5GB of RAM when you should in fact be using 6.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Member
|
26. September 2009 @ 11:28 |
Link to this message
|
So here are my new specs I will be running OSX and overclocking the I7 a bit. Would you suggest using Raid 5 or 1? I know Raid 5 takes one whole hardrive which backups everything nad has slower loading speeds. On the other hand if one hardrive crashes you still have all your files. Also my friend is trying to convince me that it is sheaper to buy a pc already made, is this true, I'm pretty sure it isn't?
Specs:
HEC 6C28BB8S Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - Retail
3 of the Western Digital Caviar Blue WD5000AAKS 500GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive - OEM
SAPPHIRE 100234HDMI Radeon HD 3450 512MB 64-bit GDDR2 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card - Retail
CORSAIR CMPSU-550VX 550W ATX12V V2.2 SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS Certified Active PFC Compatible with Core i7 Power ... - Retail
GIGABYTE GA-EX58-UD3R LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
Intel Core i7 920 Nehalem 2.66GHz LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Processor Model BX80601920 - Retail
GELID Solutions FN-SX08-16 80mm Silent Case Fan - Retail
GELID Solutions FN-SX12-10 120mm Silent Case Fan - Retail
COOLER MASTER Intel Core i7 compatible Hyper N 520 RR-920-N520-GP 92mm Sleeve CPU Cooler - Retail
After all this talk about ram how much do you think I should get to do justice to the processor.
|
