Jump to content

Best x86 HW for OS X 10.4.3

catmistake

By catmistake,
in OSx86 10.4 (Tiger)

 Share
15 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

catmistake
catmistake
Posted
Posted

The HCL <http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/HCL> is huge.

 

I'm not an expert in any sense on PC hardware. In fact, as a longtime mac owner, I find PC Hardware vendors to be confusing in describing their hardware specs. PC owners, apparently, are not as confused. I've read over the instructions for installation, and I'm not intimidated by it, and I'm confident that if I had the hardware necessary, I could do it.

 

I am considering getting PC hardware for the sole purpose of running the last stable version of x86 OS X 10.4.3 (or any subsequent version) for use as a server (possiblilities include one or any of web/proxy/file/ftp/DNS/DHCP/mail and others... ).

 

1) Is there any hardware in the HCL that sticks out as being the best so far (most functional/most stable) for running OS X?

 

2) Is a preferably (less costly) method recommended for building a PC from components to this end? Which motherboard? Which processor?

 

Comments are appreciated!

Link to comment
https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/6864-best-x86-hw-for-os-x-1043/
Share on other sites
sam_the_killer
sam_the_killer
Posted
Posted

hi there,

 

basically the actual Mac box contains Intel Core-Duo Processor with either 945/975 Intel chipset board.

But as the processor and the motherboard have just released by Intel , expect very high initial cost. But, as far as the strategy of electronic business goes u can wait 2 to 3 months to get the prices halved by the manufacturers.

 

Also it is advisible to stay as close as u can with the specs of the actual iMac (Intel), in order to get the most from the OS.

hence it is my suggestion that if u can spend around $400- $500 only on the motherboard and processor(combined), then u can easily avail the best.

else u can opt for 945 motheboard and Pentium D 820/830 series processor.

 

Also u should also use Radeon X1600 graphics card if u really want to get the beauty of Mac OS X 10.4.4.

munky
munky
Posted
Posted (edited)

uhh.. well lets not get ahead of ourselves here. 10.4.4 Intel does support the ATI X1000 series cards, but as we as yet have no sign of 10.4.4 working on anything other than real macs, we shouldnt assume anything.

 

10.4.3 works well with a good range of ATI cards, and the onboard intel GMA 900. The GMA 900 works flawlessly and gives full acceleration (OpenGL, Core Image and Quartz Extreme) tho its not exactly a powerful card, while many ATI cards (9550 and above, iirc) give accelleration with some (minor) graphical artefacts and/or tearing.

 

afaik the highest-end ATI card confirmed working is the X800. i have heard of problems with the X700 and the X850 (ie no acceleration). i have yet to see reports of any X1300, X1600 or X1800 working or giving acceleration (feel free to speak now if you're running one of these cards!)

 

HOWEVER, in the (reasonably likely) event of 10.4.4 being hacked to work, i'd bet its very likely these cards will be the best bet for 'hackintosh' setups, given that the new intel macs are using them. all i'm sounding here is a note of caution - you might be better to wait and see how the efforts at hacking 10.4.4 go first. afaik nobody even has a leaked build of it yet. (again, PLEASE put me right if this is not the case!)

 

personally, i too am waiting to see how things go. my hackintosh setup is currently running on a GeForce 6800, and i have a horrible feeling apple are going to go ATI-exclusive on us, and never bother compiling proper nVidia drivers. I really hope that doesnt happen.

 

cheers and big ups.

Edited by munky
Olivier
Olivier
Posted
Posted

You should buy a real Mac, and you can install also Windows on it.

 

If you get an Intel box, Windows will run, but it will mostly impossible to get OS X running on it.

 

And because the price are simmilar ...

 

Best regards,

  • 2 weeks later...
catmistake
catmistake
Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks, munky, for your well thought out post. I should thank sam_the_killer, too, as he also has tried to answer my questions. Thanks for the graphics card recommendations.

 

Olivier and Templeton Peck... not so much. Your posts are either wildly inaccurate or just not adding anything to the conversation. (not much of a conversation, I admit... took me a week to find my post again).

 

I'm just gonna paste my questions here again in the hopes that someone will actually answer them:

 

 

1) Is there any hardware in the HCL that sticks out as being the best so far (most functional/most stable) for running OS X?

 

2) Is a preferable (less costly) method recommended for building a PC from components to this end? Which motherboard? Which processor?

ripcord
ripcord
Posted
Posted
You should buy a real Mac, and you can install also Windows on it.

 

If you get an Intel box, Windows will run, but it will mostly impossible to get OS X running on it.

 

And because the price are simmilar ...

 

Best regards,

 

I agree that they should buy a real Mac (even if it means waiting for something more affordable), but have to differ on something here - at the moment it looks like getting Windows to run will probably be almost as much of a hacking job as getting OS X to run on a non-Apple box. Vista may change this, but XP won't "just run" without a hacked CD, boot assister, etc.

crazymonkeypants
crazymonkeypants
Posted
Posted
I am considering getting PC hardware for the sole purpose of running the last stable version of x86 OS X 10.4.3 (or any subsequent version) for use as a server (possiblilities include one or any of web/proxy/file/ftp/DNS/DHCP/mail and others... )

 

Comments are appreciated!

 

With one single exception, I can't see anything in the above list that would not be more than adequately handled by a low-end Mac Mini. I realise that it doesn't have quite the same "Yarr!" factor, but a Mini will be cheap, quiet, reliable and fully supported.

 

The one exception is file service, and then only if you are talking about needing gigabit throughput. If you're really serious about needing fast disk space on your network though, you're better off getting yourself an Infrant X6; it will stack nicely with your Mini, too.

catmistake
catmistake
Posted
  • Author
Posted

OK...

please stop suggesting that I get mac hardare. I have mac hardware, and I will be getting more mac hardware.

 

The questions I'm asking are regarding OS X 10.4.3 (NOT 10.4.4) running on non-mac hardware. IMO, just being able to run 10.4.3 and no other revision on non-mac hardware would be interesting to say the least.

 

There is so much listed on the hardware list that it is difficult for me to filter it...

 

What hardware (that is not Mac), all things considered, is the best, supports the most options, is the most stable, right now for 10.4.3? If its recommended building my own machine, then please specify what mobo, what processor (and please be as specific as possible... the way PC sites advertise their hardware is vomit in html... its difficult to see what the specs are, so I imagine it would be far easier to search for a specific board and a specific processor).

 

TIA

Olivier
Olivier
Posted
Posted

Stop to say that I do not gave recommandation.

 

Just look my config in the signature, and you will have something working very well.

 

I made few experciences, like other people, to reach this results, and I cannot suggest something else.

 

You will never have a real "Compatibility List", because it's not supported by Apple.

 

My config is good for this version, but I know OS X 4.4 will NEVER works ont it.

 

Planing to use OS X without Mac hardware is impossible. We are just some few geeks that play with intermediate release of a new OS, just to be on the train before other, and for FUN !

 

But most geek people here will buy a Mac (As I already did) to continue on the x86 experience, because it is much chipper than buy new not-certified hardware after each new release, and whait, if, maybe, someone will trick it to run on our box.

 

More of that, we do not believe that Maxxuss will continue to hack the Mac OS X. It was very funny and pleasant to do it BEFORE the official delivery, but not so significant actually.

 

All the best (And by a Mac)

catmistake
catmistake
Posted
  • Author
Posted
I have some tips for you:

Mother Board: An Intel Based with 945 chipset.

Processor: Intel Celeron D320 (has SSE 3 and NX on the 754 pins version)

ATI Randeon X800 Graphics Card

1 Gb DDR 400 Ram

 

It's not that expesive, and is very stable

THANK YOU Amazondani!!

 

You fscking reign supreme.

 

 

Olivier, and the rest of you wastes-of-my-time, take a lesson from my boy Amazondani, here. No one cares what you think about this and that and such and such. If you're going to post, just keep it simple and answer the question. Short of that... go read some Wittgenstein (Re: Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen).

 

Moderator: Please lock this post... question answered.

Olivier
Olivier
Posted
Posted

If you doesn't want to know what we think, just read the messages on the forum and go by your way...

 

Many people spend money to did some test, and many of them run the same hardware and encouter many problems to instal

 

What people think can be important.

 

It 's not like runing a cofee machine

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...