Mac Pro: The Ultimate pre-built gamer PC?

[alizee]

I was poking around on newegg and "building" myself a nice system, and I wanted to see what it may cost if I purchased it from elsewhere, and the first place I checked was Alienware. I built a similar system and then looked at the pricetag, $4400!!! (to be fair, that was including a 24" display, 5.1 speakers, the works). I know that people give Apple guff for their high-priced systems, so I went and customized a Mac Pro with similar specs (the closest I could get), and here's what I came up with:

Mac Pro - $2599 + $99 for Vista home premium
Alienware - $2829

Mac Pro specs:
2.8 GHz quad-core Xeon, 1600 MHz FSB
2x1 GB DDR2 FB-DIMMs, 800MHz
Intel 5400 Chipset
500 GB Hard Drive
DVD Burner
GeForce 8800GT 512 MB
Bluetooth
Mighty Mouse and Apple keyboard
Macintosh OS X 10.5

Alienware specs:
2.83 GHz Core 2 Quad 1333 MHz FSB
2x1 GB DDR3, 1333 MHz
nForce 790i Ultra SLI chipset
500 GB Hard Drive
DVD Burner
GeForce 8800GT 512 MB
Standard Alienware keyboard (Logitech Deluxe 250) and mouse
Windows Vista Home Premium

Each system has it's own advantages and disadvantages. The Alienware has an SLI motherboard, and even though the Mac Pro uses almost the same chipset as SkullTrail, it's missing that nvidia chip, so it's not SLI, right? But, it is still Crossfire compatible (just leave the default 2600XT option and buy a pair or more of ATi cards). The Mac Pro has a 1600 MHz FSB, which should make up for the slower, higher latency memory (1333 vs 800 MHz and unbuffered vs fully-buffered). The Mac Pro also has quad-channel memory vs dual channel, and it can accept up to 32GB vs 8GB. Also, you'll need to get a Vista or XP key for the Mac Pro, which would add $99 to the cost. Even so, and even more so with the education discount, the Mac Pro comes out ~$130 cheaper.

And for some subjective opinions, I hate the way the Alienware case looks, and I think the Mac Pro case is really nice. I've used the first rev Mac Pro (2x2.66) and it was really quiet, almost as quiet as my P180 setup. I imagine this rev is as quiet. I don't know if the Alienware is as quiet.

So, to sum it up...

Mac Pro pros:
Higher FSB
Accepts more RAM
Crossfire compatible
Option for 2nd processor (SkullTrail anybody?)
Internal Bluetooth, option for internal 802.11n
Nice case (very subjective)
Lower price tag

Mac Pro cons:
Slower, higher latency memory
No SLI
Need to purchase a Vista or XP license
No PCI slots
No overclocking

Alienware pros:
Faster memory
SLI compatible
Windows installed and setup out of the box
PCI expansion slots
Overclocking galore

Alienware cons:
Lower FSB
Max. 8GB RAM
No option for built-in wireless
Ugly case (very subjective)
Higher price tag

What does everybody think?

 

[IlllI]

just a guess but FB-DIMMs are probably more expensive (if you ever think of upgrading one day)

 

[alizee]

Originally posted by: clandren
just a guess but FB-DIMMs are probably more expensive (if you ever think of upgrading one day)

That's true for DDR2, but not for DDR3.

2x2GB DDR2-800 FB-DIMMs - $210
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820349019

2x2GB DDR3 DIMMs - $335
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820220278

 

[996GT2]

I don't understand how you can think EITHER of those can be considered "The ultimate pre-built gamer PC" when you can get one of many better equipped systems for over $1000 less...IMO both of the systems you posted are blatant rip-offs.

Prime example of something better equipped at a much lower price:

Dell XPS 630 with the following specs for $1463.20 with a 20% coupon available from Techbargains:

Specs:

XPS 630 w/ Red Chassis
Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz 8 MB Cache
3 GB Corsair Dominator DDR2
1 TB RAID 0 (2x500GB drives)
Dual 8800GT 512mb in SLI
7.1 Channel Audio


Pros:
Costs over $1000 less than either of the systems you posted
Has 2 8800GT 512mb cards in SLI compared to the single card setups you posted
Has more memory than either of the systems you posted
Has double the storage capacity of either of the posted systems


Cons:
CPU speed is a bit slower than a 2.8 GHz Xeon, but the truth is that CPU speed matters very little in most games compared to graphics power...also, FSB speed essentially has zero impact on CPU performance in 99% of cases. Memory speed also matters VERY little in gaming and everyday performance, so DDR3 doesn't give a computer much of an advantage in gaming.

If I had to buy a pre-built gaming system, I would take that Dell and pocket the $1000+ difference ANY DAY versus getting either of the system configs you posted above. Better gaming performance by far and $1000+ in pocket ftw.

If you actually wanted to spend $2500-3000...you could get something much better, such as this Gateway FX for $2750

Intel® Core?2 Extreme Processor2 QX6850 (3.00GHz, 1333MHz, 8MB L2 Cache)
4096MB 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM (4-1024MB module)5
1000GB 7200rpm Serial ATA II/300 hard drive w/ 16MB cache & Raid 0 (2-500GB hard drives)
(2) 16X Super MFDVDRW/DVD-RAM+/-R Double Layer
Hybrid Blu-Ray/HD DVD Player and SuperMulti Format DVD-RW DL Drive (Vista ONLY)
NVIDIA® GeForce® 8800GTX 768MB with Dual DVI, VGA adapter and TV Out (Factory Overclocked)
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer PCI Sound Card
9-in-1 Memory Card Reader
Logitech® X-240 2.1 Speakers

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: 996GT2
I don't understand how you can think EITHER of those can be considered "The ultimate pre-built gamer PC" when you can get one of many better equipped systems for over $1000 less...IMO both of the systems you posted are blatant rip-offs.

QFT. I wouldn't bother with FBDIMM systems unless I were going dual socket 771, and I wouldn't bother with DDR3 for... anything at this point.

Both the XPS 630 and Gateway FX you (996GT2) posted seems kick-ass compared to either the Apple or the Alienware.

 

[Adn4n]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: 996GT2
I don't understand how you can think EITHER of those can be considered "The ultimate pre-built gamer PC" when you can get one of many better equipped systems for over $1000 less...IMO both of the systems you posted are blatant rip-offs.

QFT. I wouldn't bother with FBDIMM systems unless I were going dual socket 771, and I wouldn't bother with DDR3 for... anything at this point.

Both the XPS 630 and Gateway FX you (996GT2) posted seems kick-ass compared to either the Apple or the Alienware.

QFT yet again.

 

[alizee]

Ok, I'll concede the point that people should only buy Dell PCs, people that purchase boutique PCs should not. Falcon Northwest, Alienware, VoodooPC and others like them should stop competing on quality and instead focus on price as their number one concern. I'll also concede that people should not embrace new technology, and instead buy older hardware to save money (65nm instead of 45nm, DDR2 instead of DDR3).

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: alizee
Ok, I'll concede the point that people should only buy Dell PCs, people that purchase boutique PCs should not. Falcon Northwest, Alienware, VoodooPC and others like them should stop competing on quality and instead focus on price as their number one concern. I'll also concede that people should not embrace new technology, and instead buy older hardware to save money (65nm instead of 45nm, DDR2 instead of DDR3).

you sound bitter about the answer you received.
*taps sarcasm meter*

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: alizee
Ok, I'll concede the point that people should only buy Dell PCs, people that purchase boutique PCs should not. Falcon Northwest, Alienware, VoodooPC and others like them should stop competing on quality and instead focus on price as their number one concern. I'll also concede that people should not embrace new technology, and instead buy older hardware to save money (65nm instead of 45nm, DDR2 instead of DDR3).

It's your choice to buy whatever system you want to buy with your own money. If you want to buy a $10,000 gold plated Voodoo system and have money laying around, that's great for you. Just don't start touting your system as "ultimate" simply because you paid thousands more to have a few extra checks in the build box (DDR3, 45nm Yorkfield, etc)...in reality, those "newer technologies" you are paying thousands more to embrace will give you maybe a 2% performance gain in everyday use. You might think that 2% is worth a 50% mark up...the rest of us don't.

 

[alizee]

Originally posted by: xSauronx

you sound bitter about the answer you received.
*taps sarcasm meter*

Bitter at the answer? Not directly...
Bitter at how cliché the answer is? Very much so.

Perhaps I'm a "Mac Guy", but I think it's funny how focused people are about price and raw gaming performance. I'm sorry for posting this post here because I didn't realize how limited the thinking of most of the members were about pricing and gaming. I think of an ultimate machine as something that will do well at gaming and then do well when I throw HD video editing at it as well. Perhaps I mis-titled my post, I should have said "Ultimate all-around machine".

I also think it's a sorry state of affairs when people think of price 1000% more than anything. It's as if build-quality and aesthetics don't mean a thing.

I left the XPS out of my original comparison because I didn't feel as if it met the same standards of quality. Granted, I've only personally seen about 4 XPS machines, but the build-quality and cable management was nowhere near even Dell's subsidiary Alienware (of which I've only seen two personally).

I realize I have a different mindset than many people here at AT. I don't buy Tier-1 computers because they don't fit my ideal of a perfect PC. I try to build a cost-effective, powerful, but, most importantly, a quiet PC. The 4 XPS computers that I've seen were much louder than what I would call ideal, and the Alienware's that I've seen were much closer. The one Falcon-Northwest was as close as the Mac Pro, in that particular regard.

I think it also comes down to an improper mindset, as highlighted by this comment here:

Originally posted by: 996GT2
It's your choice to buy whatever system you want to buy with your own money. If you want to buy a $10,000 gold plated Voodoo system and have money laying around, that's great for you. Just don't start touting your system as "ultimate" simply because you paid thousands more to have a few extra checks in the build box (DDR3, 45nm Yorkfield, etc)...in reality, those "newer technologies" you are paying thousands more to embrace will give you maybe a 2% performance gain in everyday use. You might think that 2% is worth a 50% mark up...the rest of us don't.

I doubt the only performance gain we could see is 2%, I'll let benchmarks prove my point. Feel free to google your own so they aren't tainted by my outsiders opinion, but benchmarks conducted by Our Favorite Hardware Enthusiast Site show a 7.4% increase by going from a 65nm Q6600 to a 45nm Q9300. Speaking of which, the Q9300 is about $60 more than the Q6600, far from the "thousands more" figure quoted. If you'd like to prove me wrong, please feel free. Or, more importantly, be accurate in your figures. Perhaps DDR3 is "thousands more" than the same capacity DDR2, I'll have to check Newegg...

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: alizee

Originally posted by: 996GT2
It's your choice to buy whatever system you want to buy with your own money. If you want to buy a $10,000 gold plated Voodoo system and have money laying around, that's great for you. Just don't start touting your system as "ultimate" simply because you paid thousands more to have a few extra checks in the build box (DDR3, 45nm Yorkfield, etc)...in reality, those "newer technologies" you are paying thousands more to embrace will give you maybe a 2% performance gain in everyday use. You might think that 2% is worth a 50% mark up...the rest of us don't.

I doubt the only performance gain we could see is 2%, I'll let benchmarks prove my point. Feel free to google your own so they aren't tainted by my outsiders opinion, but benchmarks conducted by Our Favorite Hardware Enthusiast Site show a 7.4% increase by going from a 65nm Q6600 to a 45nm Q9300. Speaking of which, the Q9300 is about $60 more than the Q6600, far from the "thousands more" figure quoted. If you'd like to prove me wrong, please feel free. Or, more importantly, be accurate in your figures. Perhaps DDR3 is "thousands more" than the same capacity DDR2, I'll have to check Newegg...

Thousands more as in the systems you posted versus what I posted...nice try in changing the argument

This was your original argument as stated in the first post:

"OMG 11!! MAC PRO IS T3H PWN!!! BEST PREBUILT GAMING COMPUTER EVAR!! 1600MHZ FSB!!! SKULLTRAIL!! ZOMG A SECOND XEON!!"

We've proven that argument completely untrue already...you can stop trying to change the argument and just accept the fact that the Mac Pro is BY NO MEANS the best pre-built gaming computer ever.

 

[alizee]

Originally posted by: 996GT2

Thousands more as in the systems you posted versus what I posted...nice try in changing the argument

This was your original argument as stated in the first post:

"OMG 11!! MAC PRO IS T3H PWN!!! BEST PREBUILT GAMING COMPUTER EVAR!! 1600MHZ FSB!!! SKULLTRAIL!! ZOMG A SECOND XEON!!"

We've proven that argument completely untrue already...you can stop trying to change the argument and just accept the fact that the Mac Pro is BY NO MEANS the best pre-built gaming computer ever.

I thought I had already conceded that point. Argument done. (see post 7)

I don't think what I said sounded like this:
"OMG 11!! MAC PRO IS T3H PWN!!! BEST PREBUILT GAMING COMPUTER EVAR!! 1600MHZ FSB!!! SKULLTRAIL!! ZOMG A SECOND XEON!!"

It sounded more like this:
"Could the Mac Pro be a really good gaming system, perhaps even the best?" Notice the question mark in the title. I do try to make my posts as readable as possible and do not use leet-speak, and I'm offended by the insinuation.

I also don't think the two systems were thousands more, they were approximately $1000 more than your discounted Dell system (and the same price as your Gateway). I purposefully didn't include all the discounts you could get, but meh.

 

[Chapbass]

I suppose, in a quick summary, that "ultimate" would be considered either the best value (meaning the computer where, if you step down you take a steep drop in performance, but if you increase you gain a lot in cost for not that much performance), OR the best value at a given price point (the most performance for x dollars).

The overall "value" machine is a subjective beast. What one person is willing to pay for x% of an increase in y application, be it games, 3d rendering, whatever, might be totally different from the next person.

At the same time, the value at a specific price argument is one that is much more objective. While your needs might vary from person to person (a computational machine might not need that 8800gt SLI setup, but would love a faster proc), in general, finding the best computer for the price point is the goal. In this case, the other posters have posted both a computer that offers better value, as well as a faster computer at the same price point. Sure, things like asthetics can be important for some, but in general people are looking for function over form.

to each their own, I suppose, but by saying "they weren't thousands more, but approximately 1000 more" than a machine of similar performance, clearly puts you in a different category than I am as far as customers are concerned .