quietglow Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 It seems that the vast majority of our discussion centers around getting X running on hardware we have lying around--sorta "trying-OSX-out type stuff" For some people, especially people who are probably already mac users, there is some attraction in being able to build a mac more powerful than they could have owned before now. I for one would LOVE to have a pimped G5 for my photography, but have not been able to justify the $3k or whatever--I'm semi-pro and it would take years for me to recoup the investment. Even my current sub $1k desktop is faster than any of my macs, and I imagine with a bit of creativity I could put together a really fast system. Anyone else in this boat? Is there a discussion going on that I have been missing: making a screamer of a workstation? What would this entail? I'll be first in line for a Macbook if they are announced tomorrow, but when it comes time to replace my desktop, if everything else is the same, I'll likely build my own again. Anyone else want to chat high-end machines? Let's just assume that I am 100% happy building a system which will run 10.4.6 and never again upgrading it for the life of the machine--I'm aware that is a strong possibility. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenman100 Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 It seems that the vast majority of our discussion centers around getting X running on hardware we have lying around--sorta "trying-OSX-out type stuff" For some people, especially people who are probably already mac users, there is some attraction in being able to build a mac more powerful than they could have owned before now. I for one would LOVE to have a pimped G5 for my photography, but have not been able to justify the $3k or whatever--I'm semi-pro and it would take years for me to recoup the investment. Even my current sub $1k desktop is faster than any of my macs, and I imagine with a bit of creativity I could put together a really fast system. Anyone else in this boat? Is there a discussion going on that I have been missing: making a screamer of a workstation? What would this entail? I'll be first in line for a Macbook if they are announced tomorrow, but when it comes time to replace my desktop, if everything else is the same, I'll likely build my own again. Anyone else want to chat high-end machines? Let's just assume that I am 100% happy building a system which will run 10.4.6 and never again upgrading it for the life of the machine--I'm aware that is a strong possibility. I run dual xeons at 3.2ghz, is that high end enough? Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109709 Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietglow Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 I run dual xeons at 3.2ghz, is that high end enough? Niiiice...see thats what I'm talking about. So maybe we could have a "here's my badass rig" with specs thread? Like either "I made the G5 killer" or "here's what would be a g5 killer." Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109718 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 It seems that the vast majority of our discussion centers around getting X running on hardware we have lying around--sorta "trying-OSX-out type stuff" Yes, but there definitely is a significant minority of people here who are buying hardware specifically for OS X compatability. I expect that this group will grow in significance as once people run OS X on the their existing hardware, they will be much more likely to build perfectly speced OSx86 boxes in their next upgrade cycle. Anyone else in this boat? I am planing on builiding some Woodcrest (next generation Xeon) machines when that becomes possible in a few months. Intel says Woodcrest will be shipping in June, but until motherboards are available I really do not see what there is to discuss. How about this? When do we think Woodcrest motherboards will be available? I am guessing that it will be about August and about the same time the Apple introduces the "Mac Pro Quad" (or whatever) that the will have two Woodcrest chips (dual-core). Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109747 Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietglow Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 Yes, but there definitely is a significant minority of people here who are buying hardware specifically for OS X compatability. I expect that this group will grow in significance as once people run OS X on the their existing hardware, they will be much more likely to build perfectly speced OSx86 boxes in their next upgrade cycle. Yeah I'm fully in agreement, and I guessed that you'd be one of those. In fact, I think that while lots of attention is focused essentially troubleshooting existing hardware, that stuff is all moot when it comes to upgrade time. You may get X running on your dv4000 that you already have, but why would you buy another one in the future is the macbook is $1.1k? A higher-end tower is a different story--I think the markup is more significant there. I know I speced out a desktop (I think it was from your sig) that was very high end and it was still a fraction of the price of a nice G5. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109754 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 You may get X running on your dv4000 that you already have, but why would you buy another one in the future is the macbook is $1.1k? Yes, laptops are a different story. I will likely buy another Apple, a MacBook Pro, but not until Merom arrives. A higher-end tower is a different story--I think the markup is more significant there. I know I speced out a desktop (I think it was from your sig) that was very high end and it was still a fraction of the price of a nice G5. Here is my take on what we can except from Apple with Woodcrest: Mac Pro Quad with dual Xeon 5160's (3GHz) for about $3300. Now given that this chips would cost us about $850 each: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=29510 and perhaps $400 for the motherboard, it looks like it may be possible to build something comparable to what Apple will offer for significantly less. But it certainly is not going to be 50% off, more like 25%. In short, Apple's Quad Xeon may be a fair deal. But I think low end Woodcrest machines will be a bargain. I will likely use Xeon 5110's (1.6GHz) which will be about $230 apiece. So it should be possible to build Quad Xeon Macs for under $1500. I do not expect Apple to offer a Quad for less than $2500. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109768 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigboss Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 It's unfortunate that AMD isn't supported as well as Intel because I'd like to see how a Quad-Dual Core Opteron with 4 7900 GT cards and 32 gigs of ram would perform in OS X. Also, to build a comparable rig (Dual Dual-Core) go to www.hypersonic-pc.com and click on workstations. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109815 Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietglow Posted May 8, 2006 Author Share Posted May 8, 2006 Also, to build a comparable rig (Dual Dual-Core) go to www.hypersonic-pc.com and click on workstations. Hey good link bigboss--I like using those custom builder sites as general guidelines when putting a system together. Bofors, what do you plan on using for a mobo for the xeon system? There isn't much info around about using em. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109822 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted May 8, 2006 Share Posted May 8, 2006 It's unfortunate that AMD isn't supported as well as I'd like to see how a Quad-Dual Core Opteron... AMD is supported, just not as well as Intel. I was looking into building a Quad Opteron box a while back and if I needed something now, I would much sooner do that than buy currently availible Xeons (Paxville or whatever). It seems that OS X works best on AMD with nForce 4 chipsets. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109870 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 Bofors, what do you plan on using for a mobo for the xeon system? There isn't much info around about using em. Exactly, that is why we do not have much to talk about yet. But assuming the graphics driver situation is basically the same, I would certainly favor a board with some Intel GMA 950 (or whatever the next generation is). I am pretty happy with my current Intel motherboard but given that Xeon 5110's on clocks at 1.6GHz and for almost 4x the price the 5160 clocks 3.0GHz, I would also be interested in boards with overclocking features as well. But I am not sure if we can expect overclocking motherboards for the Xeon line, as they are a gamer item. I guess that means, I will also be looking at Conroe boxes as well. My work is distributable, so I do not need one one super fast box, but rather rack of the best value machines. Here is another question I have: How many watts of power supply should be needed to run a dual-Woodcrest system? Will something like a high-quality 450W PC power supply be enough? Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109876 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigboss Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 AMD is supported, just not as well as Intel. I was looking into building a Quad Opteron box a while back and if I needed something now, I would much sooner do that than buy currently availible Xeons (Paxville or whatever). It seems that OS X works best on AMD with nForce 4 chipsets. Thats what I meant (that AMD isn't supported as well as Intel in OS X). The only thing is that if you grab yourself an nForce 4 chipset, you will need to buy an IDE drive since SATA (maybe sound and LAN too) isn't supported in OS X with the NF4 Chipset. Also, the Quad 7900 cards are useless as there is no QE/CI for nVidia cards yet and I doubt that the drivers will be optimized for SLI. But, all in all, a Dual or Quad Dual-Core would be a pretty mean rig and would surely destroy any piece of Apple hardware (but you would end up paying $$$). Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109938 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 Thats what I meant (that AMD isn't supported as well as Intel in OS X). Sorry, my reading comprehension has been bad today. Anyways, there is another issue that I want to raise in this thread and that is the importance of EFI. This is appears to be required to use Apple's graphics card drivers and may also be necessary for other devices. I have made the case for EFI work in this thread, but was not very persuasive: http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=13493 Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109957 Share on other sites More sharing options...
blinksilver Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 I really don't have much in the way of this may help, but I do have a (Oc'd) 3.8Ghz Pentium D with a GMA950 on an asus board, everything works, even sleep : ). like you could not tell it was not a real mac. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109959 Share on other sites More sharing options...
gooki Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 Solution 1 - get a core duo laptop, and solve the second core enabled bug/stutter. Solution 2 - wait until adobe release their apps in universal format, then look at making a killer machine (new processor shoudl be out by then). Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-109960 Share on other sites More sharing options...
munky Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 hi guys. this thread seems to be slipping off-topic into the arena of EFI, so i've taken the liberty of starting a new thread for you here: http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=17067 meanwhile, back on topic - quietglow, i beleive we both have the same goals for our osx86 machines - for uber Aperture / iPhoto goodness to feed a photography obsession i recently built a machine very similar to bofor's, but added a radeon X1800XL to the mix, to beef up the graphics performance. i'm not having any success in getting anything more than 1280x1024 so far, and omni's driver crashes at anything other than 1024x768 (though its still early days, and im hoping it'll work soon). i'm also trying to obtain a MacBook Pro for my portable needs, but I agree with you that at the high end, a self-build is probably always going to be more powerful and cheaper than an off-the-shelf machine. if only apple considered installing OSX to such a machine as 'unsupported' rather than actively trying to prevent it, we'd be laughing - ie those folks technically competent enough to support their own machines could just buy an OSX license, whereas those wanting 'the whole package' could buy a (real Apple) Mac. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-110223 Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietglow Posted May 9, 2006 Author Share Posted May 9, 2006 meanwhile, back on topic - quietglow, i beleive we both have the same goals for our osx86 machines - for uber Aperture / iPhoto goodness to feed a photography obsession Right, and now I have become so enamoured with Lightroom (and aperture to a lesser extent) that I rarely resort to photoshop--they can take their sweet time with CS 3 as far as I'm concerned. While my current box does a pretty good job of cranking through big batch jobs (astoundingly better than my dual 1.4 g4), my intention in starting this thread was to look ahead to an upgrade/replacement in the next year or so. To throw out another potential variable, how does 64 bit processing fit in with the high-end systems? Current intel versions of X are not compiled to take advantage of 64 bit machines right? If the new towers out in august (as predicted) are 64 bit processors, how would that potentially impact the osx86 endeavour? Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-110407 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 To throw out another potential variable, how does 64 bit processing fit in with the high-end systems? Current intel versions of X are not compiled to take advantage of 64 bit machines right? If the new towers out in august (as predicted) are 64 bit processors, how would that potentially impact the osx86 endeavour? I do not think 64-bitness is a major issue. Most of the PPC OS X is still compile for 32-bit with the exception that of some math libraries and perhaps Core Foundation. This means that Cocoa and Carbon applications, which are what we run, are all 32-bit will likely stay that way. Although we can expect Apple to gradually move the rest of OS X to 64-bit over and taking another small step in that direction with Leopard (10.5). The key point is that 64-bit only offers that ability to address more the 2GB of memory in a single process. But it does doing so requires memory pointers that are twice as big, 64-bits versus 32. This means that a lot of memory bandwidth and cache space is lost and performance is hurst. Furthermore, by spawning multiple 32-bit processes, a single application can address more than 2GB of memory anyways. I think the big news for processing media is that Intel will be upgraded SSE3 for 64-bit to 128-bit. Combined with the addition of more processing units, shared cache, inter-core communication and higher memory bandwidth, the new Intel chips should really kick ass. These diagrams sum up the differences between Woodcrest et al., Yonah and the P4: http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?Arti...30906143144&p=3 Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-110419 Share on other sites More sharing options...
munky Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 quietglow - i havent checked out lightroom yet. is it any good then? how does it compare to aperture in terms of features and ease of use? Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-110607 Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietglow Posted May 10, 2006 Author Share Posted May 10, 2006 munky-- oh man is it. this reminded me I hadn't posted anything about it in the applications forum, so I just did: http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=17114 It already what Aperture is trying to be I think. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-110625 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 The Inquirer is reported that Woodcrest performance is better than Intel expected: http://theinquirer.net/?article=31789 The Register is reporting that Woodcrest will be shipping June 25: http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/05/19/in...t_speeds_feeds/ Now, given the June 25 date, I think we have to wonder if Apple will wait until the WWDC in August to announce it's Woodcrest machines (the "Mac Pro"). Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-115789 Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietglow Posted May 19, 2006 Author Share Posted May 19, 2006 I haven't been keeping up with Woodcrest--will they be socket 775? Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-115840 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I haven't been keeping up with Woodcrest--will they be socket 775? I do not know for sure, but I doubt it as Xeons currently require something different. It does not really matter much either because they will require a special chipset anyways. Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-115880 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigboss Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I haven't been keeping up with Woodcrest--will they be socket 775? usually when intel launches a new chip, you'll need to grab a new mobo (with a new chipset). Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-115900 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Right, Woodcrest looks to require the unreleased Blackford (or GreenCreek) chipset: http://www.2cpu.com/review.php?id=109&page=3 Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-115927 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 Here is some more new on Woodcrest. This details it's numerical performance, which is pretty awesome: http://theinquirer.net/?article=31836 The Chinese are now claiming that Woodcrest will ship in less than a month, June 19: http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/9978 Link to comment https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/16996-high-end-x-workstation-thread/#findComment-116401 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts