|
Post by svart on Jun 5, 2019 19:51:01 GMT -6
Bill, I "think" a few people are essentially saying "Yes, the SAME ram in a PC would cost as much as it does in the Mac, but why would I put that same exact ram in a PC when I can get better ram than what Apple specs and also for cheaper?" So I understand what you're saying about apples to apples comparisons, but I would agree with others here that even with unlimited money, I still wouldn't necessarily put that same ram in my PC if I could better ram for cheaper. Maybe I'm misreading what others are saying, but that is my interpretation of the basic argument. Oh man you got it, and stated it more eloquently than I would have, although I was going to refrain from replying for the peace.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jun 5, 2019 20:28:27 GMT -6
By the way, I know I'll probably be stoned to death for saying this, but that "Today we build our PC" (or however it's similarly titled) thread over on GS is a GREAT resource for getting info on what parts to use for a PC build for DAW use.
Those type of threads are hard to find on there these days, but that's one of the good ones, and it's been going for a long time and has managed to stay pretty constructive.
Building a PC is NOT hard. It's like putting together Lego these days. In that thread on GS (and threads on other PC build sites), a lot of people post their builds and state everything they had to do. It's almost become paint by the numbers if you prefer to just copy someone else's build that has already been shown to work.
After that, it's just tweaking the OS for audio, just like you would normally do for any off the shelf PC.
|
|
80hz
Junior Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by 80hz on Jun 5, 2019 21:34:10 GMT -6
Bill, I "think" a few people are essentially saying "Yes, the SAME ram in a PC would cost as much as it does in the Mac, but why would I put that same exact ram in a PC when I can get better ram than what Apple specs and also for cheaper?" So I understand what you're saying about apples to apples comparisons, but I would agree with others here that even with unlimited money, I still wouldn't necessarily put that same ram in my PC if I could better ram for cheaper. Maybe I'm misreading what others are saying, but that is my interpretation of the basic argument. Oh man you got it, and stated it more eloquently than I would have, although I was going to refrain from replying for the peace. Hey it's been a good discussion! There's been no animosity which is nice and drbill communicated just fine, but of course its hard to sometimes put a bunch of thoughts down in text and still convey the same intentions. I certainly find this forum civil and positive, whereas GS, well.... I'm sure I dont need to explain to anyone here lol.
|
|
|
Post by jampa on Jun 6, 2019 2:24:42 GMT -6
The $18k number people are quoting for 1.5TB of RAM - is that purchased from a third party or through Apple?
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jun 6, 2019 5:19:22 GMT -6
The $18k number people are quoting for 1.5TB of RAM - is that purchased from a third party or through Apple? 3rd party. The point Bill is making is that these are 128GB sticks, not 32GB sticks. svart is saying that 32GB sticks can be found cheap. You're not going to find a machine to load up with 48 x 32GB sticks. The price of 128GB sticks is high no matter what machine their going in. www.google.com/search?q=128gb+ram+stick
|
|
|
Post by veggieryan on Jun 6, 2019 11:03:52 GMT -6
Correct. The reason RAM gets more expensive for high capacities is that you are always limited by the few slots available on the motherboard. You can't just buy 48 sticks of RAM and proclaim that you got the job done cheaper than Apple. You have to buy ever more exponentially increasingly expensive matching individual sticks to get the end capacity you are wanting. Quality of RAM can vary wildley and bad sticks can be a pain to deal with so it's nice to have this quality control done for you if you are a professional with limited time. The other source of confusion is that ECC RAM for Xeon based systems is much more expensive than RAM for i7 or i9 based systems. This is true for both Mac and PC based Xeon systems. When its all said and done the new Mac Pro is a great deal compared to an equivalent PC but not many people need such a machine. It has a wonderfully simple and effective cooling design, much more desirable operating system and it will hold its value far better. For the video industry, it will likely become a standard due to the afterburner hardware alone.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jun 6, 2019 11:11:28 GMT -6
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,940
|
Post by ericn on Jun 6, 2019 11:30:41 GMT -6
One of those can be found at the dollar store and it shreds!
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jun 6, 2019 11:42:12 GMT -6
This one's even better
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jun 6, 2019 12:56:29 GMT -6
Correct. The reason RAM gets more expensive for high capacities is that you are always limited by the few slots available on the motherboard. You can't just buy 48 sticks of RAM and proclaim that you got the job done cheaper than Apple. You have to buy ever more exponentially increasingly expensive matching individual sticks to get the end capacity you are wanting. Quality of RAM can vary wildley and bad sticks can be a pain to deal with so it's nice to have this quality control done for you if you are a professional with limited time. The other source of confusion is that ECC RAM for Xeon based systems is much more expensive than RAM for i7 or i9 based systems. This is true for both Mac and PC based Xeon systems. When its all said and done the new Mac Pro is a great deal compared to an equivalent PC but not many people need such a machine. It has a wonderfully simple and effective cooling design, much more desirable operating system and it will hold its value far better. For the video industry, it will likely become a standard due to the afterburner hardware alone. yes, thank you. much more eloquently stated than I could have said it. To the point I was trying to make. <thumbsup>
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jun 6, 2019 12:59:20 GMT -6
but why would I put that same exact ram in a PC when I can get better ram than what Apple specs and also for cheaper?". See veggieryan 's post or the post I quoted him above. That's what I was trying (and evidently failing) to say. Apple obviously created this beast for a reason. It may be (probably is) a reason that elude's most of us audio guys, but if you build a PC to the same spec, you're also going to get an outrageous price.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jun 6, 2019 13:08:53 GMT -6
but why would I put that same exact ram in a PC when I can get better ram than what Apple specs and also for cheaper?". See veggieryan 's post or the post I quoted him above. That's what I was trying (and evidently failing) to say. Apple obviously created this beast for a reason. It may be (probably is) a reason that elude's most of us audio guys, but if you build a PC to the same spec, you're also going to get an outrageous price. With the same exact parts? Then yes it would be the same price, but I don't think that's what was being disputed by those on the other side of the argument.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jun 6, 2019 13:15:07 GMT -6
See veggieryan 's post or the post I quoted him above. That's what I was trying (and evidently failing) to say. Apple obviously created this beast for a reason. It may be (probably is) a reason that elude's most of us audio guys, but if you build a PC to the same spec, you're also going to get an outrageous price. With the same exact parts? Then yes it would be the same price, but I don't think that's what was being disputed by those on the other side of the argument.Way back when....I think that's exactly what was happening. At least that's how I read it. In other words, Apple ramping up their pricing for "product name" even with same / similar parts. Other wise I wouldn't have bothered to say anything. I hate Apple AND MS. The conversation later in the thread was then pulled off in a different direction to make the PC with different (better?) parts for cheaper.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jun 6, 2019 13:28:36 GMT -6
With the same exact parts? Then yes it would be the same price, but I don't think that's what was being disputed by those on the other side of the argument.Way back when....I think that's exactly what was happening. At least that's how I read it. In other words, Apple ramping up their pricing for "product name" even with same / similar parts. Other wise I wouldn't have bothered to say anything. I hate Apple AND MS. The conversation later in the thread was then pulled off in a different direction to make the PC with different (better?) parts for cheaper. I believe the argument was basically, "Yeah, but so what?". (I don't mean that in a disrespectful way, just to be clear. ) I DO think Apple charges a premium for upgrade pricing on things like ram when someone looking to upgrade their PC could get an equivalent amount of better spec'ed ram for less money. If trying to make an apples to apples comparisons of specs instead of parts (since specs are what really matters), I know that I built a PC last year that would blow the doors off any Mac that can be purchased for the same amount of money I spent. So I guess instead of worrying about using the same parts, the better argument would be to look at it using some sort of spec/$ price quotient or something. How much performance can I get per dollar spent? That's where I think things begin to diverge, certainly at least for PCs/Macs in the price and performance range that your average audio guy would need or use.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jun 6, 2019 13:53:29 GMT -6
Way back when....I think that's exactly what was happening. At least that's how I read it. In other words, Apple ramping up their pricing for "product name" even with same / similar parts. Other wise I wouldn't have bothered to say anything. I hate Apple AND MS. The conversation later in the thread was then pulled off in a different direction to make the PC with different (better?) parts for cheaper. I believe the argument was basically, "Yeah, but so what?". (I don't mean that in a disrespectful way, just to be clear. ) I DO think Apple charges a premium for upgrade pricing on things like ram when someone looking to upgrade their PC could get an equivalent amount of better spec'ed ram for less money. If trying to make an apples to apples comparisons of specs instead of parts (since specs are what really matters), I know that I built a PC last year that would blow the doors off any Mac that can be purchased for the same amount of money I spent. So I guess instead of worrying about using the same parts, the better argument would be to look at it using some sort of spec/$ price quotient or something. How much performance can I get per dollar spent? That's where I think things begin to diverge, certainly at least for PCs/Macs in the price and performance range that your average audio guy would need or use. "So what" is perfectly fine if you define it that way instead of trying to use an apples to oranges argument to prove an apples to apples statement. Apple absolutely charges a premium for HD's, RAM, etc.. It's their prerogative, and they seem to get away with it. Personally, I buy aftermarket for the most part. Unfortunately, if I don't want to run a Hackintosh, there is no apples to apples comparison. At least not a 100% comparison. The average audio guy would not use probably 1/10th of this new computer - probably 1/20th. It would be nice if Apple had something similar instead of the iMac or Mac Mini - neither of which suit my needs, but they could care less about my (our) market. They would make WAY more money selling 3% more iPhones than they would addressing our -actual- needs.
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Jun 6, 2019 14:17:20 GMT -6
Yeah, all this talk about the RAM has been a bit silly to me. I have added RAM and HDs and SSDs to my Macs for years, and I've never once used Apple-branded stuff.
One of the biggest areas of divergence here is in the video market needs for a computer vs. the audio market needs for a computer. I'm sorry for all of us that this is true, but there is just a lot more money going around in the video market. There just is. I wish Apple would make a more affordable version of the new Mac Pro that suits us audio creators more, but at least as of now, they haven't announced such a beast, nor do I expect them to at this point.
And the Xeon vs. i7/i9 thing is huge from a cost standpoint. For the most part, people are not capturing video to their computer in realtime, using realtime DSP effects. Clock speed is going to affect us audio people in a different way than it does video people, especially video people that use Final Cut.
|
|
|
Post by cyrano on Jun 6, 2019 20:03:51 GMT -6
The HP Z8 works out around the same price for similar specs. You can hackintosh for the same price as a PC anyway. And I can build one for 1500$.. You'll never have the Afterburner or the T2... Besides, try finding a mobo with these specs and the mobo alone (without CPU) will be around 1200$. Add CPU, PSU, 32 GB ECC ram and all the other goodies and you're around the price point of most other workstations. Someone already mentioned HP. For the heck of it, I tried configging one too. It ended with a 800$ higher price, less ram and PCI slots. I don't know yet what the Afterburner does, exactly, but I just suppose it 'll mean something to someone. This machine isn't meant for audio. Get a Mini. What is utterly ridiculous, however, is the monitor stand. 5k for an excellent monitor is expensive. Especially when the stand isn't included and adds another 1k. Even a simple Vesa mount is like 200$. Are they trying to create an opportunity for 3rd part manufacturers? Oh, and BTW, wheels and rackmount will be available, I've been told.
|
|