Hello all In terms of performance, which is better, a PC or a Mac of the same cost? Like, in terms of overall speed. I know that software wise, PC is more compatible, but I was wondering about performance.
This thread is pointless. You cannot compare them directly, as there are certain things they both outshine eachother at. I won't game on a Mac, but I will video/audio edit with one for example.
This thread is pointless. You cannot compare them directly, as there are certain things they both outshine eachother at. I won't game on a Mac, but I will video/audio edit with one for example.
Rhamsus
I said in performance and speed, not in gaming, or features.
PC's can use he latest CPUs, the newest graphics and the fastest RAM. The Mac is locked at whatever Apple choses to support.
belboz
And whatever they choose to support costs alot more money generally. When you spen that much on the hardware you would figure that they would give you the software updetes for free.
This thread is pointless. You cannot compare them directly, as there are certain things they both outshine eachother at. I won't game on a Mac, but I will video/audio edit with one for example.
bcroger2
I said in performance and speed, not in gaming, or features. How can you come up with a judgment of performance without first determining how you are going measure it? Your thread is pointless and stupid.
This thread is pointless. You cannot compare them directly, as there are certain things they both outshine eachother at. I won't game on a Mac, but I will video/audio edit with one for example.
Rhamsus
I said in performance and speed, not in gaming, or features. How can you come up with a judgment of performance without first determining how you are going measure it? Your thread is pointless and stupid. Sigh.... please understand what am trying to say. If you have no way to measure it in speed than do it in performance. How often something freezes, how easy it it to install programs, etc.
PC by far. But honestly since they switched to intel there really is zero difference between the two. You can install windows on a MAC and vice versa. The crazy pricing is what really makes MACs garbage imo.
Sigh.... please understand what am trying to say. If you have no way to measure it in speed than do it in performance. How often something freezes, how easy it it to install programs, etc. bcroger2
Then ask about reliability, stability, functionality or user friendliness. Performance, when used in this context, is generally perceived to be about speed.
[QUOTE="bcroger2"] Sigh.... please understand what am trying to say. If you have no way to measure it in speed than do it in performance. How often something freezes, how easy it it to install programs, etc. belboz
Then ask about reliability, stability, functionality or user friendliness. Performance, when used in this context, is generally perceived to be about speed.
Well that's what I meant, everything besides features.
[QUOTE="bcroger2"] Sigh.... please understand what am trying to say. If you have no way to measure it in speed than do it in performance. How often something freezes, how easy it it to install programs, etc. bcroger2
Then ask about reliability, stability, functionality or user friendliness. Performance, when used in this context, is generally perceived to be about speed.
Well that's what I meant, everything besides features. #
This thread is pointless. You cannot compare them directly, as there are certain things they both outshine eachother at. I won't game on a Mac, but I will video/audio edit with one for example.
Rhamsus
I said in performance and speed, not in gaming, or features. How can you come up with a judgment of performance without first determining how you are going measure it? Your thread is pointless and stupid.
That and he says to compare them at the same cost. You can make a much more powerful Windows Pc for the same price as a Mac. So that arguement is moot to.
Same cost, you get a better PC. but the mac OSX imo is better than that vista piece of crap. And the design is a lot sweeter from a macbook. 4gb 1066MHz DDR3 RAM dude.
[QUOTE="Rhamsus"][QUOTE="bcroger2"] I said in performance and speed, not in gaming, or features. Fuseking
How can you come up with a judgment of performance without first determining how you are going measure it? Your thread is pointless and stupid.
That and he says to compare them at the same cost. You can make a much more powerful Windows Pc for the same price as a Mac. So that arguement is moot to.
Its all relative to the type of user you are, and what you intentions for the machine are. you cannot tell someone "a 2000 dollar PC is always better than a 2000 dollar" MAC because its simply not true. You need to state what your intentions are. Speed, Performance those are empty words. Especially when you look at from different angles. That 2000 dollar mac will most likely suck at games vs the win based 2000 machine, but smoke the win PC in video/audio, photoshop etc. hence why this thread lacks any relevance, and exactly why every reply to it has been empty and useless.
[QUOTE="Rhamsus"] How can you come up with a judgment of performance without first determining how you are going measure it? Your thread is pointless and stupid.Rhamsus
That and he says to compare them at the same cost. You can make a much more powerful Windows Pc for the same price as a Mac. So that arguement is moot to.
Its all relative to the type of user you are, and what you intentions for the machine are. you cannot tell someone "a 2000 dollar PC is always better than a 2000 dollar" MAC because its simply not true. You need to state what your intentions are. Speed, Performance those are empty words. Especially when you look at from different angles. That 2000 dollar mac will most likely suck at games vs the win based 2000 machine, but smoke the win PC in video/audio, photoshop etc. hence why this thread lacks any relevance, and exactly why every reply to it has been empty and useless. umm Audio Video Photoshop etc will run the same whether it's on a Mac or a PC. Companies use macs over PC, simply because the risk of losing your data on a mac is much much less than that of a PC. However if you installed Adobe Photoshop, and Premiere pro on both systems, You wouldn't really notice a difference. In fact the PC would probably run it better. Now stock software of course Mac is better but we are talking about the systems not the software being used.
Pc is better comparatively speaking, and it can play a lot of games, while the mac is dry on that. With mac you are only paying for the name because you can build a much better pc for less. The components on a mac are not really any different and you end up paying through the roof for a Mac. You could always use Hackintosh if you are keen on using Mac OS X, and save big bucks by doing so.
[QUOTE="Rhamsus"] How can you come up with a judgment of performance without first determining how you are going measure it? Your thread is pointless and stupid.Rhamsus
That and he says to compare them at the same cost. You can make a much more powerful Windows Pc for the same price as a Mac. So that arguement is moot to.
Its all relative to the type of user you are, and what you intentions for the machine are. you cannot tell someone "a 2000 dollar PC is always better than a 2000 dollar" MAC because its simply not true. You need to state what your intentions are. Speed, Performance those are empty words. Especially when you look at from different angles. That 2000 dollar mac will most likely suck at games vs the win based 2000 machine, but smoke the win PC in video/audio, photoshop etc. hence why this thread lacks any relevance, and exactly why every reply to it has been empty and useless. OK good I get it.
This thread is pointless. You cannot compare them directly, as there are certain things they both outshine eachother at. I won't game on a Mac, but I will video/audio edit with one for example.
Rhamsus
Professional Video software is made for PC also, and does not have the price premium buying a mac has. Windows wins. Games + Media!
This thread is pointless. You cannot compare them directly, as there are certain things they both outshine eachother at. I won't game on a Mac, but I will video/audio edit with one for example.
SinfulPotato
Professional Video software is made for PC also, and does not have the price premium buying a mac has. Windows wins. Games + Media! Yup, adobe after effects, 3dsmax all work on a PC, if not better.
If you want performance, and usefulness then go for a PC, otherwise go for a Mac, and enjoy your iced mocha frapucino at Starbucks and discuss how you plan to fit into your sisters jeans for that party later tonight.
PS- Nothing against Mocha Frappucinos i do enjoy them when im waiting for a flight at the airport.
Just throwing this out but eVGA is making a GeForce GTX 285 which is a non-Steve Jobs rip off graphics card that is replaceable in Mac Pro systems. So you guys can fight over that info anyway you want.
I saw the Mac version of the 285, Not only is it more expensive. How many people actually have Mac Pro over the iMac, and of those people, How many of them have ever took apart their mac and added another part to it?
I saw the Mac version of the 285, Not only is it more expensive. How many people actually have Mac Pro over the iMac, and of those people, How many of them have ever took apart their mac and added another part to it?Deadly_Fatalis
True but the problem with the iMac is that it basically has laptop components on the inside, the only difference is that it is using a MMX slot base loading interface for putting in the graphics card. I've taken them a part many times but to me the news about eVGA doing this is showing that at least somebody is trying to bridge that gap between the Apple and Windows world with upgradeable parts that are not proprietary. Only time will tell if eVGA is starting something new and others will follow or if it something that just won't happen.
If the Mac is an iMac or Mac mini, then you can obviously get a PC that will blow either away component-wise for the same price. However, said computer will inevitably be much larger, lack niceties like FireWire Target Disk Mode, and if compared to the iMac, may not include a monitor or speakers. (Then again, if you have a perfectly good monitor and speakers, why buy some extra ones for your new computer?) If you're talking about dual Nehalem Mac Pros (basically dual Core i7), however, things start getting much more competitive. When it comes to dual-CPU workstations, Apple is surprisingly price-competitive with the other OEMs, though you'll probably save significantly less money trying to custom-build a machine of that caliber. (Face it-dual CPU configurations are not cheap, especially of the Nehalem/i7 Xeon variety.) Only problem is, Macs aren't exactly known to be overclockable, whereas such options in the BIOS are expected on any PC that isn't some pre-built POS. However, that's getting into the 2500+ US$ range, and most people here would go Tri-SLI or whatever well before considering a second CPU since most games don't even leverage four cores to their max potential, let alone eight. (I'm just one of those folks who wants as many CPU cores as possible within my budget, to a degree.)
Log in to comment