Would I be better off in a PC or a Mac?

[Vilandra]

This is one of those things that comes down to personal choice.

Both Mac's and PC's can do the same thing. Neither has any advantage over the other, unless you need to run OSX and Windows on one machine, then the obvious choice is Mac.

Personally, im running a Boxx workstation dual booting XP and 7 (64bit) and I think its an awesome machine! Its been very reliable and stable.

[scrimski]

If you don't need Mac Os based software don't buy a Mac. Simple as that. There is no point(in my opinion) in buying a certified and optimized system for a higher price than a comparable PC and replace everything afterwards.
I'm not even sure if it is possible to use any graphic card you like. Changing HDs on the other hand is quite easy and a matter of seconds.

[705]

if youre going for a 8 core mac pro then it worth the price. other than that, if you dont use osx, i think its a little bit waste.

[cgbeige]

If you don't intend to run OS X, don't get a Mac. It's a sweet case (and quiet under load) but it's definitely not as easy to get parts for as it is with a generic build. If you ever intend to run OS X, you need graphics cards with a dual EFI/BIOS ROM, which are more expensive and there are not nearly as many options. You can run generic cards and drivers in them if you only boot Windows (BIOS) though.

I love my Mac Pro and OS X but if I was going to go with Windows and I wanted stability and upgradeability, I'd probably look at Dell or HP or something. BOXX maybe.

[mick8]

Thanks for the insights guys! I've been a PC user all my life and the main 2d/3d softwares I use along with its plug-ins are mostly windows based. Yeah, you guys right, it will cost me more in the long run if/when I plan to upgrade parts such as video cards and if a Mac will support any particular card from mid range to high range.

Certain artists have told me in the past that for Graphics/3d they prefer a Mac since the colors in the monitor are more vivid & more sharper. A friend told me that Windows has a tendency to crash more and sometimes dealing with the system registry can be a bit of a pain, for instance when certain programs in Windows are deleted, there are stubborn orphanage registry entries that are left behind unlike in a Mac when you want to delete something, you just drag and drop it in the recycle bin and that's it. Also, Windows based machines can sometimes take a while to load as the system has to go through its registry. A Mac does otherwise.

Any thoughts on that? Thanks!

[Vilandra]

I think part of the problem is bloatware... which is all those programs that come preinstalled by the OEM. For example, my cousin bought a Dell notebook and it had tons of stuff preinstalled on it that slowed it down. That will make a big difference when starting up a machine.

However in my case, my Boxx did not come with anything installed on it other than Windows and the appropriate drivers. Thats it. Nothing else. Boots up in about 30 seconds, and shuts down in about 15 seconds. The only crash I had was related to my own error of installing the wrong driver for the graphics card.

[cgbeige]

well you're inviting a flame war by talking about the platform differences and benefits. First, this:

Certain artists have told me in the past that for Graphics/3d they prefer a Mac since the colors in the monitor are more vivid & more sharper.

This is probably just because they were running crap PCs or something. There is nothing in OS X that is inherently better for colour. It used to be that it was easier to calibrate Macs because hardware calibration is built into the OS (Colorsync) but that's no longer a problem with Windows.

No, there's no registry on OS X - things are more plug-in based (contextual menu plug-ins for example). If you have to start from scratch with a program, delete its preferences in ~/Library/Preferences. There is no ghastly win32 folder where things are just tossed.

As for the other benefits, here is why I prefer OS X:

- Better for graphics apps (32-bit image format previews built-into the desktop, full font previews, PDF support everywhere, etc). This has always been the case but Apple's been constantly adding more things like EXR, HDR, Collada support, etc.
- Generally more stable. It's not without its issues but they are easier to fix than Windows hardware issues since there are fewer variables
- A lot better at multitasking than Windows. Here's a benchmark of Maya 2011 x64 on OS X 64-bit and Windows 7 64-bit: http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost.php?p=6403012&postcount=811
- no security crap to worry about. It's security by obscurity but it doesn't matter.
- Generally consistently high-quality software, even for the cheap shareware. There's always been a high standard for Mac apps.
- easier to script, whether for the GUI or command line
- Unix and all the command line stuff. screen, stdout, grep, and the custom OS X command line apps like mdfind (Spotlight), sips, etc.
- Spotlight and metadata (this is searching both embedded image keywords and filenames):

http://grab.by/3FPc

Windows 7 is a big step up for MS. It's not bad but it's not making me envious of anything. Anyway, it runs fine on the Mac Pros - I play Mass Effect 2 in it with no issues.

[meleseDESIGN]

Paying $10K for an High-End Mac Pro and $6K for Maya 2011 isn`t worth at all for the mentioned improvements imo, not for home users neither for studios. You can't even run Max with OSX!

You're saying "A lot better at multitasking than Windows" and "Generally more stable".
What do you actually understand by saying "a lot" and "more"?
Calling 1 second speed improvement "a lot" is really a stupid marketing argument, you won't get me there to buy Maya 2011 just because it renders 1 second faster! Your statement sounds a bit like the Geforce vs. Quadro marketing paper.

I say, get a nice PC and a nice gfx card.
If you need render speed then buy Octane for only $99 and you will be able to have 5x-10x more speed improvement as with any CPU render engine. You can even export animation and render a sequence in batch with the upcoming Octane Beta3.

But if you have money to burn go for an Mac.

;)





As for the other benefits, here is why I prefer OS X:

- Better for graphics apps (32-bit image format previews built-into the desktop, full font previews, PDF support everywhere, etc). This has always been the case but Apple's been constantly adding more things like EXR, HDR, Collada support, etc.
- Generally more stable. It's not without its issues but they are easier to fix than Windows hardware issues since there are fewer variables
- A lot better at multitasking than Windows. Here's a benchmark of Maya 2011 x64 on OS X 64-bit and Windows 7 64-bit: http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost.php?p=6403012&postcount=811
- no security crap to worry about. It's security by obscurity but it doesn't matter.
- Generally consistently high-quality software, even for the cheap shareware. There's always been a high standard for Mac apps.
- easier to script, whether for the GUI or command line
- Unix and all the command line stuff. screen, stdout, grep, and the custom OS X command line apps like mdfind (Spotlight), sips, etc.
- Spotlight and metadata (this is searching both embedded image keywords and filenames)

[sentry66]

IMO macs are finally a viable option for graphics now that the major apps are finally becoming 64 bit on the platform.

I have never seen a real world benefit with a mac or OSX helping me reach a deadline faster, but I have noticed a difference when I had an extra rendering machine or two.

PC workstation + 1 or 2 rendering machines vs 1 mac workstation is a no-brainer for me, but to each his own.

IMO XP64 and win7 are tanks. Between the two of them, they've maybe crashed once or twice in the last 4 years with me. Maybe OSX wouldn't have crashed, but then again I wouldn't have been able to run the huge "64-bit required" files I was using in the first place.

IMO the HP workstations are rip offs, but then again I think any xeon and pro-graphics card system are.

[meleseDESIGN]

Don't think they are.
But they don't follow the standards, same as Mac's!
The z800 needs a special PSU and uses a none-standard Mainboard too.
You will have a hard time to find a Mainbord or PSU for the z800 if one of them get broken.

;)


IMO the HP workstations are rip offs, but then again I think any xeon and pro-graphics card system are.

[Srek]

I plan to upgrade parts such as video cards and if a Mac will support any particular card from mid range to high range.
Mac on OS X won't support any card but the very few ones released by apple for this specific system. You aren't even free to choose if you take a newer or older card since OS X dicriminates much more than Windows here, a new Apple Graphics Card will not work under OS X in a first generation Mac Pro, something that would pose no problem at all on Windows.

Certain artists have told me in the past that for Graphics/3d they prefer a Mac since the colors in the monitor are more vivid & more sharper.
Thats garbage from long bygone times. The quality of the image depends on basic screen quality and what effort you make to calibrate. You can get good and bad results on both systems.

A friend told me that Windows has a tendency to crash more
Your friend might like to rexamine the facts, nowadays a well build PC with matching and current drivers is no more crash prone than any Apple OS X system.

and sometimes dealing with the system registry can be a bit of a pain, for instance when certain programs in Windows are deleted, there are stubborn orphanage registry entries that are left behind unlike in a Mac when you want to delete something, you just drag and drop it in the recycle bin and that's it.
This is one of the things where i never understood what the problem is. Yes, it's true that it happens that registry entries are left behind when removing software. However, i completely fail to see the problem. The registry is a database and not a huge file like it was with Windows 9x and before. The database couldn't care less if there are a couple of dozen or even a couple of thousand unneeded entries in it. It doesn't have any impact on speed and the use of memory for those unneeded entries can easily be measured in kilo bytes.

Also, Windows based machines can sometimes take a while to load as the system has to go through its registry. A Mac does otherwise.
The registry is a database that delivers information when queried. So it's not the registry that is delaying anything but those things that ask for information from it. Those things are usualy services, tools and drivers that are started. It's exactly the same on OS X, except that services are called deamons and that most OS X users don't install as many garbage tools as many windows users do.

Personaly i would evaluate if a Mac Pro can make sense for you as a Windows PC. You should compare prices with other manufacturers of high end Xeon workstations of course.
In all cases don't plan to upgarde your machine later on with more than memory, harddisks and a new graphics card. For the Mac Pro you won't be able to find any replacement motherboard if you want to step up there, and chances are that you won't be able to do that with any of the brand Xeon workstations either.

Cheers
Björn

[cgbeige]

melese - I'm not using that only example as proof that OS X is better at multitasking (look at the dual scene render times - the time difference is significant for such a short render). Try comping in Nuke while rendering in Maya and see which OS is better...

But, like I said, the OP probably should get a cheap PC if he wants Windows.

[sentry66]

use Ccleaner on a regular basis to keep windows running well. It'll clean up the messed up registry bits and the misc temp files.


look into alienware computers, specifically since they sell overclocked 3.73-4ghz 6 core i7 980 computers backed by a full warranty.

Almost half the price of the most powerful mac yet still has equatable speed (roughly 12-21% faster at most things, but 11-16% slower at rendering depending on if you get 3.73 or 4ghz)

save that extra money or buy a couple rendering slave machines and you'll easily have twice the overall computing power that even the best mac offers.

OSX really is better at multitasking than windows. The kernal is just better, though switching the priority of an app in windows isn't much of a problem, but it's surprising how many people don't know how to do that or why they should. But if you have a rendering slave or two that you can use to render your 3D scenes, then it's even less of an issue and you'll get more work done in the long run

[SheepFactory]

For the price of a macpro you can build a custom pc to work on and a renderfarm to render on. Before windows 7 I would have said go with the mac pro (been a mac user for 4 years) but honesty there is not a single benefit to it right now imo.

Go to NCIX.com and build yourself a nice system. There are quite a few guides out there to pick good components not to mention it has been discussed to death in this forum as well. I honestly wouldnt get a dell\alienware\etc. Build it yourself and spend the money you save on whatever you want.

[sentry66]

I'd absolutely recommend building it yourself over any vender-based solution because you'll get better parts for less money, but not everyone wants to go down that road or wants to spend the time/energy doing it

[meleseDESIGN]

We had this discussion many times allready and it isn't long ago since the last thread.
Do you remember?

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=23&t=866102

;)

[meleseDESIGN]

Yeah, it's quite funny how Mac users react when it comes to a discussion like this.
Like I said, the argumentations from Mac users reminds me allways a bit on the marketing paper Geforce vs. Quadro. But I understand, they have to find an excuse because of the money they have spend, otherwise they would look stupid.

Nuke is available for OSX, same as Maya, but not Max.
So all runing on both platforms, except for Max.

It's about marketing only, not really about hugh performance improvements, NOT anymore since a few years now! Spending $15K for an high end system is no option if you can do the same with an $5K system, in no way.

;)


melese - I'm not using that only example as proof that OS X is better at multitasking (look at the dual scene render times - the time difference is significant for such a short render). Try comping in Nuke while rendering in Maya and see which OS is better...

But, like I said, the OP probably should get a cheap PC if he wants Windows.

[cgbeige]

you really don't see a word I've said. I'm not recommending the guy buys a Mac. He asked what the benefits are and I told him. Spewing crap about how I've drank the Apple Kool-Aid doesn't prove me wrong. Read my Quadro FX 4800 Mac or Aperture 1.0 review. I'm more than willing to call a bad Mac product bad but he wanted the facts so I gave it to him.

But keeping talking in rhetoric, without backing up any of your statements. Someone might end up listening.

meanwhile here is what Sentry says:

OSX really is better at multitasking than windows. The kernel is just better...

That was my point. Now I'm saying "buy a cheap PC" because, unless you intend to run OS X, there's no benefit other than a well-designed case with more limiting parts.

[imashination]

Macs are awesome. Who wants to buy mine? ;-)

[cgbeige]

at least someone would. Anyone want to buy my Athlon 1.2GHz with Geforce 6800?

No? I didn't think so.

[meleseDESIGN]

I don't say you're wrong - even if you are.
It's just the point of view. I use Windows now since many years and with Win 7 I haven't noticed any stability issues here. Personaly I don't trust your reviews either, since you're only a BETA Tester and not a guy who is working on a daily basis in a comercial production pipeline.

I'm not willing to spend $15K for Maya 2011 and an Mac just to prove rendering needs 1 second lesser for each frame on OSX with Maya 2011. That would be just stupid. C4D's Advanced Renderer 3 is probably 2x times faster as Mental Ray. That would be at least a meaningful argument what lets me think twice to change the pipeline. You're talking the Apple Kool-Aid - take it like you want - but that's how I see you're talking in every Mac related thread.

You're satisfied with your Mac?
That's OK! I'm more satisfied without OSX, no compatibility issues anymore (Soft- and Hardware), Win 7 is stable like an rock, faster rendering over GPU (I couldn't even run my Asus Mars on OSX, what a mess!).

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Mac's are worse nore do they are more better. I would buy an Mac at anytime for the half price as they're listed, but I wouldn't use the OSX, because through the hugh compatibility issues.


;)




you really don't see a word I've said. I'm not recommending the guy buys a Mac. He asked what the benefits are and I told him. Spewing crap about how I've drank the Apple Kool-Aid doesn't prove me wrong. Read my Quadro FX 4800 Mac or Aperture 1.0 review. I'm more than willing to call a bad Mac product bad but he wanted the facts so I gave it to him.

But keeping talking in rhetoric, without backing up any of your statements. Someone might end up listening.

meanwhile here is what Sentry says:



That was my point. Now I'm saying "buy a cheap PC" because, unless you intend to run OS X, there's no benefit other than a well-designed case with more limiting parts.

[sentry66]

I've been happy with the stability of NT 4.0, 2000, xp64, and win 7

win 95, 98/SE, ME, xp 32, all forms of vista, Mac OS's 8-9, and OSX 10.0 cheetah were all horrible OS's in terms of stability/features/speed in a production environment back in their day.

[cgbeige]

Melese - look at my portfolio and web sites and tell me I'm not a professional who knows how to use the tools (I just made a bunch of money over the weekend doing jobs for Bell Canada and Bombardier while writing a review of Photoshop CS5). I'm not beta tester by trade. I've art directed a number of magazines and have been doing Photoshop, design and 3D professionally for almost 20 years. Think of me as a consultant - I'm not a guy who sits in a basement eating Doritos. I'm a freelancer who makes good money because he's put in enough time working in the field working at various companies and I know my shit.

You really don't know what you're talking about - CUDA and OpenCL are basically immune to bad drivers so even Nvidia's weaker OS X driver doesn't make a difference for CUDA speeds. People have said as much on the Octane server - but you're too busy talking about how YOU'VE GOT THREE ****ING MONITORS. Go make something with your three monitors. Stop talking - it's making you look bad.

[SheepFactory]

This thread has reached the max allowed drama limit.