Stability : Hackintosh vs. Mac Pro

[Fb2003]

Hi All,

 

How stable is a Mac Pro compared to a Hackintosh? I want to built a core i7 hackintosh for professional video/photo- editing and webdesign.

 

How long will I run MAC OSX86 on this machine before switching to Vista?

 

It would be great if a user with Hackintosh aswell as Mac Pro experience can answer this question

 

Thanks.

[crazybyte]

Test by yourself, I use OSX daily with no problem...

 

Hi All,

 

How stable is a Mac Pro compared to a Hackintosh? I want to built a core i7 hackintosh for professional video/photo- editing and webdesign.

 

How long will I run MAC OSX86 on this machine before switching to Vista?

 

It would be great if a user with Hackintosh aswell as Mac Pro experience can answer this question

 

Thanks.

[borisbadenov]

I use my Hackintosh as my main computer. I go have used Mac Pros and I own a dual core Powermac and I just love the configurability I have on my Hack No loss of performance at all

[projekt k]

i believe it al depends on the hardware. a core i7 should compare well. dont believe the stable mac hype, osx is stable no matter where it's installed, I have seen mac pros go to {censored} quick. if you'd rather waste your money on apple i'd buy a used Powermac G5 Quad because all of the mac pro's i ever saw at guitar center started freaking out bad. i worked at guitar center. i suggest a hackintosh. i have no hackintosh experience yet but my experience with apple is why I am building a hackintosh now.

 

one last thing, if hackintosh experience is bad no matter what you do dont install 64 bit vista, it is hell. i had to reformat for uninstalling something. i gues it deleted a file it should, it was like yahoo messanger, and practically new. XP is waaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy betta

[Zaap]

Every day, I use a MacPro (the last model, single Xeon) at work, and my main signature Hackintosh, at home.

 

Performance and stability is nearly the same- in fact, my Hack is a bit faster at many things because it has a faster video card. Also, pound for pound a Xeon processor is slightly slower than a comparable Core2 processor, because the server code of the Xeon actually runs a bit slower double-checking instructions for stable server/workstation environments.

 

But of course, as the last poster stated, all of this with a Hackintosh depends on the quality of the hardware one selects. If people don't do their homework and go trying to install OSX on just any hardware, with little thought as to how to set it up properly (IE: retail install, decent guide, etc), your millage may vary.

[xrays]

How stable is a Mac Pro compared to a Hackintosh? I want to built a core i7 hackintosh for professional video/photo- editing and webdesign.

 

I ran a MacBook Pro as my main machine for 2.5 years (bought first version), and it was amazing for what I got (portable for work and cottaging, powerful enough for video/audio editing, etc.), but I found it was cumbersome to add more peripherals, and I wanted more drive space, faster video, faster CPU, and all the stuff a new MacPro would give me.

 

The prices of a MacPro are just outrageous for what I want (Core 2 Duo suits me just fine), and honestly, there's not a lot of upgrades that 'work' with Macs (like adding more than 2-3 drives, wider variety of video cards, case modifications, etc.), so I took the plunge last fall. After researching for a month (mostly this forum and the wiki pages), I came up with a solution that practically worked out of the box (after assembly, of course!). I've since upgraded my motherboard seemlessly, upgraded my video card, and added liquid cooling and more drives, all without changing anything in software, and not compromising anything in my configured system.

 

As a testiment to stability... I 'need' my system to be operational every day because I have clients that email me with updates and changes to their projects all the time (web-based programming stuff usually), and I was skeptical about using a hackintosh for this purpose. I installed OSX on a Friday night, did some tweaks for the video card on Saturday, and by Monday I had my machine running 95% of my apps and software just like on my MacBook Pro. I haven't had my laptop turned on for more than an hour a day since, and that's mostly just for grabbing passwords, remote work situations, and the like. I have left my computer running for 10 days straight without a problem, it handles my demanding audio production work (24-36 ch. with heavy FX), as well as serious gaming (80fps in CoD4), and it IS stable.

 

As others will tell you, it is very important to know what you're doing. You can't just buy a Dell and expect it to be as sweet as a new MacPro. However, with the money I spent on my rig, I feel it suits me better than a true Apple product (at this point in time), and I am very happy with it. Would I prefer a MacPro? Only for prestige, not for actual usefullness, because I'm running a 2x4GHz machine right now, something I can't even get from Apple!

 

Think it over, make the right decisions with regards to hardware, and you'll be rewarded with a pleasant experience. Don't buy cheap parts because it's a PC! You wouldn't (or couldn't) buy cheap parts for a MacPro, so keep that mentality.

 

x.

[marliwahoo]

Let me try another angle.....

 

 

My Hacintosh runs great ! With the right hardware and kexts you should be able to have a very stable/fast OS. If you get your system set up properly, your only issue will be updates.

 

If you don't update properly you can (and will) hose you install. It is REALLY easy to foul this up and it can be very time consuming, frustrating etc. My brother was interested in a hack - i talked him out of it because of this very issue.

[MaaseyRacer]

I now have both. My Mac Pro is more stable than any Hackintosh I have ever built, hands down no argument about that. I have built half a dozen hacks now, and each have quirks and issues that my MacPro simply does not have. However, for the most part they are quirks I can live with, and if not swap the board out and the issues are usually fixed.

[Konami®]

I never own a MacPro, but I just want to tell you that the performance of a well configured hackintosh can surpass a MacPro very easy, depends the motherboard, processor and memory. I am very happy with my hackintosh (see my signature) as my main computer, very stable and faster than XP or Vista. I am really glad that now we can put OS X in PC's.

[rupps]

I never own a MacPro, but I just want to tell you that the performance of a well configured hackintosh can surpass a MacPro very easy, depends the motherboard, processor and memory. I am very happy with my hackintosh (see my signature) as my main computer, very stable and faster than XP or Vista. I am really glad that now we can put OS X in PC's.

 

Nobody doubts about performance... But we talking about stability here. They are two different sports.

 

If you decide to go the hackintosh way to compete with MacPro, you are also spending big bucks... Would you spend $4000 in a 64Gb RAM, multi terabyte HD space, multi hi-res screens .... only to realize that you can't really trust it? Come on guys! One thing is getting OS/X to boot... another very different thing is to see the whole thing not exploding when under stress.

 

I'd like to see serious posts talking about stability

[JaE-V]

My hack pro is amazing, thought i'd add this in lol...I spent a pretty penny on everything and saved a few thousand. Your buying a real mac pro for design aesthetics pretty much. Having to come back here and read around before you update your system is pretty much all there is to nag about, i've been on here forever it seems

[noNix]

I haven't built anything that competes with a MacPro (although I am just about to). I have built two Hacks. The first is an HTPC that has been supper reliable, but is powered on and off daily. The second is a low power iTunes and bit torrent server that I have had running non-stop for 90 days at a time without a single stability issue. At 90 days I tend to do a re-start, not because anything is going wrong, but just to flush out the memory. I would say that reliability is based on the quality of the hardware you use, and how clean your install is.

 

Reliability, is not the same as bug free. Both of my systems have bonjour (networking) problems where I can not access files remotely with AFP but I can do screen sharing. I have a very small NAS attached to an Airport Extreme that I use for file sharing so the network issue is relatively minor for me. The biggest issue is that software updates are not guaranteed to work in the same way that they are with Apple branded hardware, as a result my two hacks are still on 10.5 because I am to lazy to research what it will take to update them to 10.6.

[KariNeko]

I'm running a Hackintosh as my primary machine since the day I sold my PowerMac G5 Dual when Apple announced that they were migrating to Intel hardware. Since then I used Tiger, Leopard and now Snow Leopard all hackintoshed. My last build with an Intel i7, X58 mobo works perfect.

Even my mom uses a hackintosh now.

[EricM]

The people on here who are having doubts just need to read up. These systems can be as stable or even more stable than a retail Apple product. Just do your research on the parts you choose. My old e8400 system didn't have a SINGLE problem back in the day when I was running kalyway 10.5.4. As of now, there aren't any problems that I haven't been able to figure out on my current system. To the guys who are saying don't buy a hackintosh, own one first, then give your buying advice please.

 

As for performance, I ran geekbench in windows 7 at 32bit (slower) and compare those to the mac pros. I spend $770 TOTAL on my machine.

 

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/216216

 

http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/mac-benchmarks/

 

Notice that mine is the fastest 4 core? Everything else is 8 cores or above. Those cost basically 3 times as much as mine.

[Zaap]

I think those that complain most about stability either haven't really built a Hackintosh, or tried to hack a PC without using known-compatible parts, or didn't follow a proper guide, just futzed some old distro install together. Like the previous post said, do your research (and get real experience with both) before making a comparison.

 

And personally, I get tired of the comparison to the MacPro all the time anyway. Realize that the vast majority of Apple customers don't buy MacPros, and that most people building Hacks aren't trying to replicate a $3,000 computer. Look at Apple's lineup, and realize that even now, in Feb 2010, 98% of Apple's desktop computer lineup features stats that weren't any big 'wow' even two years ago when a lot of us Hack builders were building Quad-core machines that most of Apple's lineup STILL doesn't match.

 

Let's keep things in perspective: you've got to spend $2k with Apple to even get to i5-land- there's NO i5 option below the 27" iMac.

 

You've got to spend $2200 with Apple to get to single i7 land, and the price of admission for the much ballyhooed dual i7 Xeon is $3300.

 

Most of us aren't interested in spending these amounts on ANY single computer. We're mostly interested in $600 to $1200 towers that get us the type of performance those sums of money SHOULD buy you in 2010. Some are interested in task-built OSX systems in the $200-$400 range that offer tremendous value for the task (like an HTPC for example).

 

I'm not putting down the MacPro, because it is a good deal for what you get. I've personally recommended many times for people who absolutely feel they need a dual quad Xeon workstation, absolutely, don't try to out-do Apple for that, get a MacPro. For what it is, it's not a bad deal.

 

But for the other 98% of Apple's desktop lineup- building a decent hack can be a better option.

[flyingturtle]

From my short time with a Hackintosh, they seem fairly stable as long as you get parts that are supported well. If it's a home computer, then I think it's worth it.

 

If you're running a company, it's probably better to get a real Mac as you can use Mac customer support. We had several expensive Mac Pro at work and while those are scary expensive, whenever we have problems that aren't easily fixable, we will just send an intern or junior staff member to take it to our local Apple store

 

Of course for myself at home, I can use my own time to fix and dabble with hackintoshes. At work, I don't have the luxury to deal with that.

 

If you are working at home, you could just build a Hackintosh that rivals a Mac Pro AND then get a Mac Mini or some cheap MacBook laptop as an emergency, back-up machine.

[TomCom]

From my humble experience, Hackintosh ain't so stable, but it depends a lot on your personal skills and expectations. I had KPs on a regular basis with my first motherboard, an EP35-DS4. Still a few ones last year, when I swapped it for the much better P45-UD3P, usually because of the hotswapping of my removable backup - I guess internal HDDs are not made for this in OS X. One bug came from iStat Pro, not 10.5, but nonetheless it was pretty upsetting.

I don't have encountered any KP for several months now. 10.5.8 is very stable update, but I had to reset after a mysterious freeze, not later than yesterday. I've got a few ones each month, but my Hack is on at least 15 hours a day and you get used to it.

 

My PC is much more stable with Leo than it was with (a cracked) XP 32 bits, but Windows 7 64 bits runs better. Yeah, it's a misery to write such a thing, but it's legit this time, a Hackintosh is cracked, even if you purchase the software, as I did with 10.5 and 7. That might explain a lot.

 

PS: And anyway, Mac Pros have bugs two, and Macs' main bug is called Adobe Flash plug-in.

[mrdelurk]

Actually, OS updates are not guaranteed to work on a Hackintosh quite the same as they are not guaranteed on a genuine Mac. In my case, I use a genuine dual G5 for music now. I still run 10.4.11 on it because there's no telling how many of the 600+ VST and AU plugins won't work on 10.5. (And/or Intel.)

 

So upgrading to a HackMac or to a genuine Intel Mac from a G5 is a major hurdle to a quite similar extent. That's why I lurk around this site, preparing to post a "WTB i7 Hackintosh" ad soon. The migration is going to s*ck either way, I might as well save 2-3 grand.

 

The biggest issue is that software updates are not guaranteed to work in the same way that they are with Apple branded hardware, as a result my two hacks are still on 10.5 because I am to lazy to research what it will take to update them to 10.6.

[TomCom]

Apple is not as supportive as MS with its old architectures. It may be a pain for users sometime, but also a warranty not to get stuck in ol' dirty hi-tech swamps.

[mrdelurk]

Apple is not as supportive as MS with its old architectures. It may be a pain for users sometime, but also a warranty not to get stuck in ol' dirty hi-tech swamps.

 

Old' dirty hi-tech swamp or new dirty hi-tech swamp, same swamp. The way I keep slashing software dragons on my handful of Macs and PCs while new ones pop endlessly up, it feels like I'm stuck in it 24/7/365 already.

 

40 years from now, they'll refer back to this period as "the pioneer era when computers still s*cked". You don't have drastic hardware changes in nature like these Motorola to Intel CPU switches. A tree doesn't turn into an elephant when it reaches 6 ft height, in order to "not to get stuck in ol' dirty DNA". I look forward to a time when OS's can mimic nature in this regard, that's when computers will stop s*cking in my book.

 

Whenever a CPU switch like PowerPC to Intel happens where old architectures stop being supported, *someone* will get stuck in ol' dirty hi-tech swamps. Apple's choice of not supporting old architectures basically boils to: let that be the users. It's not solving the problem, it's just pushing it over to the users.

[onosan]

Bought my first ACER almost 25 years ago. Havent seen anything up till now that indicates that things will be any different in 40 years 8^)

 

 

Old' dirty hi-tech swamp or new dirty hi-tech swamp, same swamp. The way I keep slashing software dragons on my handful of Macs and PCs while new ones pop endlessly up, it feels like I'm stuck in it 24/7/365 already.

 

40 years from now, they'll refer back to this period as "the pioneer era when computers still s*cked".

[mrdelurk]

Bought my first ACER almost 25 years ago. Havent seen anything up till now that indicates that things will be any different in 40 years 8^)

 

My first computer, more than 25 years ago was a ZX Spectrum. (Ah man, I see it already... once start on this, there's no stopping until someone chimes in, "I used an Enigma 1 in 1920!" ) I do see computers getting clues from nature gradually... becoming somewhat self-healing via HD checking, System Restore/Time Machine etc., they slowly, gradually began to s*ck less.

 

Just as the first anything - cars, grand pianos, whatever - s*cked, and a lot of people sacrificed a lot of hours of their lives back then to make them as useable and stable as we take for granted today, there is no denying that a lot of people around us are sacrificing a lot of hours of their lives now to make these first generations of computers s*ck less. Ours is the "computer-afflicted" generation, if you wish.

[RugbyPete]

Nobody doubts about performance... But we talking about stability here. They are two different sports.

 

If you decide to go the hackintosh way to compete with MacPro, you are also spending big bucks... Would you spend $4000 in a 64Gb RAM, multi terabyte HD space, multi hi-res screens .... only to realize that you can't really trust it? Come on guys! One thing is getting OS/X to boot... another very different thing is to see the whole thing not exploding when under stress.

 

I'd like to see serious posts talking about stability

 

If you have regular backups, you can trust it. It's when you change things that mac becomes.. not unstable as that signifies a slow breakdown, but 'potentially hazardous' to your data.

 

Hey, even Macs get KP's after updates, just evaluate if the update is needed on your day to day system and test your back/restore options

 

i7 setup would save a lot of cash too

 

After a few weeks of messing, booting OS xis no longer a gamble, its a working process, its getting the niggly things to work that you end up fine tuning (bridging for xbox, getting slepe to work, etc.) whereas day to day tasks become 'norm'.

 

im seriosuly considering upgrading my HAcked Gateway to a nice i7 desktop with OSX Lion (that gives away my timescale!)

 

My laptop works better as OSX than it does in Windows7, the graphics card works smoother too.

 

I see it as the Linux distro we never had - Compatible, Easy to install apps, reliable (eventually), and slick. Plus, its 'not windows' - which is refreshing on the eyes after a long day supporting/implementing Microsoft products all day. I feel OSX is my relax at Home system... windows is my 'at work' os

[MaaseyRacer]

I feel I should make an update to this thread, as I commented on my experience almost two years ago. I still have a hackintosh, but I no longer own a Mac Pro.

 

There has been some amazing work by the OSX86 devs, which I feel has greatly improved the functionality and feasibility of owning a hackintosh. I am currently running a P45 based Gigabyte board with the now cancelled Cartri BIOS, Core 2 Quad 2.8GHz, 8GB of RAM, and a GeForce 9800GTX+.

 

The Cartri BIOS has solved most of my issues with OSX86, system updates happen without having to replace KEXT files, no sound glitches, sleep works, ethernet works 100% of the time, airport works 100% of the time (in 32bit mode, still no cure for 64bit for my dlink N card).

 

That is not to say that I am 100% glitch and bug free. My video cuts out to a blue screen if an app or game trys to change the screen resolution on me. Screen resolution changes in general are not always the easiest thing, a quick restart will remedy the problem though. My fans and come on early and run high it seems that temp control is something that may vary from board to board.

 

Overall my experience has gone from 92% as flawless as my old Mac Pro to 98.9%. I have a couple hiccups and glitches here and there (which is not to say the Mac Pro was perfect it had its own issues (mostly the ATI card)), but nothing that prevents from my getting my work done.

 

Cheers to all who have donated their time and efforts to helping me make my hack more stable and reliable.

 

PS I built a hack for my 67 year old father using the Cartri BIOS 6 months ago, I have not had any complaints from him yet.

[projekt k]

its the same depending on what you are comparing. as for stability it's the same the only real difference is a real mac pro is a lot easier to update. it's not hard to update your hackintosh you just may run into KP's and find yourself performing a few extra steps but overall thats the only real issue. Also when Apple releases Lion I doubt you will be able to upgrade right from snow it will need to be a fresh install more than likely. Mac Pro has less technical headaches but more financial headaches. Also I have seen Logic Boards go quicker, like die before a hackintosh board does. if you buy a real mac get apple care because chances are you will run into problems right around the 3 year point and the best part is I have seem them replace an old mac pro for the most recent model compared to what they payed for. Not getting apple care, make sure your room temperature is f'n perfect lol, don't smoke don't even let the smell of alcohol near it lol jk just be careful is all.

 

when building a hackintosh or pc remember your warranties are all separate it's not like buying a dell. so keep all your receipts and everything necessary just in case bad things happen.