Why Mac ? Isn't PC just as good ?

K

KEYBOARD GURU

New member
Hello my Fellow Musicans,

I have heard that PC is actually faster and less expensive than the Mac.

I have also heard that Pro Tools will work with PC just as perfectly as it does with the Mac. Is it True ?

Thanks for your time and insight. I will await your response(s)

Keyboard Guru

music4theheartt@aol.com
 
yes, these days for the price of a dual G4 you can get a pc with almost 2x the power...

digidesign is starting to support PC's and WinXP more and more..soon enough ppl should be using PC's over macs.. right now they're neck and neck.. me.. perfer a pc. i build custom pc's for my dad's company so i know what a $3000 pc can do vs a $3000 mac.. 1 thing i do like about macs.. mixdowns and graphic..

you can have a dual 1.25gig G4 vs a athlon XP2600+.. the 2600+ will handle more.. but when it comes to graphic manipulation and mixing down audio.. the mac will do it faster.. thats the one and only thing i like about macs
 
KingstonRock said:
for the price of a dual 1.25 mac you could build a dual 2400+ amd pc
Click to expand...

Yeah, but AMD's suck. Especially for audio. If your gonna go PeeCee, get an Intel. You'll keep more of your hair.;)
 
M.Brane said:
Yeah, but AMD's suck. Especially for audio. If your gonna go PeeCee, get an Intel. You'll keep more of your hair.;)
Click to expand...
speak for yourself man.. :p My DAW works great (while running two servers on it) and I've only got an XP 1900+. Never a problem.



I've heard that most PC problems are due to PEBKAC... I wonder if there's any truth to that...


:D


WATYF
 
for people that don't care to learn anything about computers, but really want to produce music/video/publishing/photos/etc, a mac is often ideal, because by its design, users don't have to understand much of anything about anything to get started. that said, theory and application are two different things. i'd rather save the money and get the pc, though if i had gobs of cash, i'd probably also have a mac to play on. YMMV.
 
AMD sucks for audio? I think not. try to sound a little smarter when replying. it helps. at least give reasons.
 
participant said:
The G4 chip (a Motorola, IIRC) is a R.I.S.C. chip (reduced instruction set). Faster on the FLoPs (floating point operations)
Click to expand...

RISC vs. CISC doesn't mean absolutely squat anymore - maybe 6 to 10 years ago, especially now that Intel's newer P4's come with Hyperthreading tecnology. Even if they execute more instructions than a G4, the P4's can execute multiple tasks at a time.
 
lucid said:
AMD sucks for audio? I think not. try to sound a little smarter when replying. it helps. at least give reasons.
Click to expand...

Well, I've seen a lot more people having problems with AMD's than Pentiums or Motorolas. Just a personal observation. If you want to do a scientific study to disprove that, knock yourself out.

I bet a lot of it has to do with PEBKAC. YMMV.

BTW is your shift key flakey, or you just don't know how to type? :D
 
Well, I've seen a lot more people having problems with AMD's than Pentiums or Motorolas. Just a personal observation. If you want to do a scientific study to disprove that, knock yourself out.

I bet a lot of it has to do with PEBKAC. YMMV.

BTW is your shift key flakey, or you just don't know how to type?

problems with AMD doesn't mean that AMD sucks for audio. basically if you do your research you can put together a kickass AMD system that rivals a pentium system for much less cash. AMD does NOT suck for audio.

no, my shift key is not flakey. i am just lazy. spending time typing up formal reports and stuff for school makes my shift-key-finger get tired. and now i am on holiday so capitals and stuff don't apply any more :D but seriously, i just can't be bothered to use the shift key when communicating on the net. i won't get marked off here :D
 
M.Brane said:
Yeah, but AMD's suck. Especially for audio. If your gonna go PeeCee, get an Intel. You'll keep more of your hair.;)
Click to expand...
my amd daw is working just perfect, and has been ever since i built it.... o and out perform my moms dual G4 and 2.4gig P4..
 
Don't be frightened off of AMD products by non-users. They are the king of bang-for-your-buck performance. the new AMDs are faster at the same speeds. Intel and AMD have been neck and neck for years in performance.

Sweetnubs is right if you have an extra $12,000 go for it, and then get an AMD for editing and mastering.

Nubby is an ass.
 
All the reviews I read before buying my DAW said AMD Thunderbird/Palomino chips are better than Pentiums for audio applications.

Cant remember the geekspeak, something to do with floating points I think. ;)
 
I think the reason AMD has a bad rep for audio is that some AMD boards use VIA chipsets, and THOSE have been problematic, introducing pops and clicks and other crap. I have an amd 1.5ghz with some other chip set, i forget which, but ive had no problems as far as the CPU or chipset...

D
 
FWIW, ive read jsut as many posts on the forum say what great FP processor the AMD athlon has, which is intergral to a DAW.....i guess.........

D
 
deadleafecho said:
FWIW, ive read jsut as many posts on the forum say what great FP processor the AMD athlon has, which is intergral to a DAW.....i guess.........

D
Click to expand...

If you only look at that to base your decision on, you will be setting yourself up for trouble.

If you skimp on the motherboard and memory, the system will perform poorly regardless of what CPU you choose. All you will do in the end is create a huge bottleneck once the data leaves the CPU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top