Forums | MacLife

Here's a Hackintosh how to:

http://lifehacker.com/software/hack-att … 321913.php

They use an ASUS P5W DH Deluxe motherboard.

ukimalefu wrote:

They use an ASUS P5W DH Deluxe motherboard.

Newegg shows that as 'deactivated;' likely discontinued. Google:

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=n … +DH+Deluxe

It's pricey.

How about this one?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6813131348

The nForce 9000 is the desktop version of what the MacBooks use, iirc.

LLEVIATHANN wrote:

dvpierce wrote:

How about this one?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6813131348

The nForce 9000 is the desktop version of what the MacBooks use, iirc.

FYI that board is a micro, uATX board. Not that it's bad but just to point out. Either it won't fit in a ATX case or will look ridiculously small in it. Depends on the case.

My last Intel box had a Intel mobo. The two (Intel mobo and cpu) seemed to work flawlessly, even when overclocked. A great stable pair. The kids have it now and to this day the only crashes have been the result of video errors (ATI X800XT).

If ya don't mind 'open box'. It's a $250 board for $173

Reviews for it are oddly mixed. Not sure if it's enough to put me off.

It will fit fine in an ATX case. It will look small: I don't think that's a concern here.

OTOH, a microATX case with 3 5.25" and 6 3.5" drive bays would work too, and be more compact in the bargain.

Quad. Core. Seriously.

Mine is the only PC I have ever used that doesn't ever seem to lag out. Why? I'm guessing it's because 99% of the time, it's got a spare 2.5GHz CPU to throw at the problem.

My performance problems are HD limited now. RAID-time.

Also, I have to suggest compgeeks.com as an alternate source for stuff. I've made a couple purchases from them this last couple weeks and their prices seem to be even lower than I remembered.

Booksley wrote:

Oh, getting a quad core would be absolutely awesome, but we don't know Pariah's budget. He said a C2D in his OP, so maybe he needs single-threaded performance over multi-threaded performance?

Besides, dual cores should be enough for anyone

A Q6600 shouldn't be too expensive. Admittedly, it's not quite Intel's current shipping tech, but it's close.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6819115017

$190 w/ OEM cooler. Not ridiculously expensive. In fact, the range for Core 2 Duos on Newegg is $120-$270, which puts the Q6600 right in the middle. Admittedly, the Q6600 gives up 266 MHz to the least expensive of the bunch. But overall performance will depend on application, as these benchmarks illustrate.

I think it depends on the kind of computer Pariah is interested in building, and what he wants to use it for. It's worth pointing out that Photoshop makes pretty good use of multiple CPUs.

And I would be remiss if I didn't pimp for it, since I know the high-clock dual cores will get plenty of representation from a crowd of gamers.

I have two recommendations for a dual platform mobo:

1. The Asus P5Q series is speedy and not too expensive.  I have the P5Q-E version and it supports a 1600Mhz FSB nativity without overclocking (easily taking my Q6600 to 3.6Ghz), as for OS X compatibility you may have to do some digging as I just own one license and that's in use on the next machine. 

2. Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3R I have had no compatibility issues with it under OS X, it also overclocks very easily (I have had the FSB up to 1500 with the previous processor).  It currently runs a Pentium E5200 at 4.0 Ghz with a GeForce 9800GT on video duties.  This is my primary Folding at Home box.

And yes, I like overclocking things.

Good luck out there,

Pariah wrote:

Some good looking recommendations . I should have said in my original post that anything with integrated video is right out. I dont swing that way.

Very few motherboards don't have integrated video, and paradoxically, the ones that do are often more expensive. The IGP & non IGP chipsets perform pretty much identically otherwise.

Usually an IGP deactivates itself when you pop in a video card. Sometimes you need to do it in BIOS. Can you survive having an unused VGA port on the back of the machine to save some $$?

edit: and yeah, go Quad.

Pariah wrote:

It was my understanding that IGP boards were more problematic if you chose to use a card.
I guess I am just trying to keep it simple. If standard PC IGP boards worked like the old Apple boards where adding a card made it so you could run both, without a hitch, that would be one thing, but from what I gather that aint the case usually.

I haven't had a serious problem from any of mine. Worst one was an old Celeron board, probably about 12 year old equipment now, that I couldn't turn the IGP off (It was actually a discrete chip, an old ATI Rage, but used shared VRAM.) Even with a PCI video card, it still used a minimum of 1MB of RAM and probably 15% of my memory bandwidth. I guess that qualifies as a hitch, but it didn't bother stability or anything.

I've used several boards with IGPs since, with and without discrete cards, and never had so much as an extra hiccough, at least that I could trace to the IGP. My last couple boards even worked quite well with monitors plugged into both the onboard and the AGP or PCI-E video card - including the one in the eMachine I bought (A T3506, similar to your wife's.)

It used to be that IGP boards cost a little more, or skimped on other features, but that's really not the case any more. Nor have I heard anybody try to claim that "IGP boards were more problematic if you chose to use a card" in a long, long time.

Ya gotta give me a break. I been 20+ years inside the Mac sheltered workshop and all this diversity is a bit daunting.

Yes indeed.

I aint particularly thrilled about having to deal with all this smurf but I dont have much choice really. It's either learn now things, which is good, or settle for the crap Apple is offering anymore.
I been realizing I have been a sheltered geek, I did know alot but what I knew only pertained to Apple product. Heck I even made good money off that for awhile but when it comes to the larger world of computer tech I am as ignorant as the greenest n00b.
Outside of knowing some criteria the whole PC arena is a whole new world to me.

Time for me to finally grow up, toss off the elbow pads and gimp head gear and get on with really learning computers. Really, a move I should have made 7 years ago.

You have had that G4 for a while now. Incidentally, I built my first PC in 2001. I didn't know what I was doing either, but it worked pretty well nonetheless.

If you're bored, get an A+ certification training book (usually $20-$30 for just the book) and memorize it. Most of the first exam is hardware, so they cover it pretty well.

Pariah wrote:

I been 20+ years inside the Mac sheltered workshop and all this diversity is a bit daunting.
I aint particularly thrilled about having to deal with all this smurf but I dont have much choice really. It's either learn now things, which is good, or settle for the crap Apple is offering anymore.

Sounds like you may be most comfortable with an Intel brand board.

Seriously, Intel boards do cost more but they are generally considered top quality and a good choice where reliability and stability are the important factors. As a long time Mac user this should sound like the way things should be. You limit that nasty diversity by picking one (top quality) brand as well. As for features, I'm sure Intel must produce something that will meet your needs, though the cost may end higher than your $200 price point.

Just something to consider.

test wrote:

Pariah wrote:

I been 20+ years inside the Mac sheltered workshop and all this diversity is a bit daunting.
I aint particularly thrilled about having to deal with all this smurf but I dont have much choice really. It's either learn now things, which is good, or settle for the crap Apple is offering anymore.

Sounds like you may be most comfortable with an Intel brand board.

Seriously, Intel boards do cost more but they are generally considered top quality and a good choice where reliability and stability are the important factors. As a long time Mac user this should sound like the way things should be. You limit that nasty diversity by picking one (top quality) brand as well. As for features, I'm sure Intel must produce something that will meet your needs, though the cost may end higher than your $200 price point.

Just something to consider.

Hmmm,
That is some quality reasoning. I know that the heart of a good system is the MoBo and maybe I should consider going premium there and looking for savings elsewhere.
Yeah, that makes alot of sense cuz I sure dont wanna end up with a buggy, crappy system and I am a spoiled MoFo being that I have a damn near 9 year old Mac that works as good or actually better than it did new.
On consideration I agree. I need to buy the best quality MoBo I can afford and figure out the other bits as the budget allows, everything else is a snap in part, the MoBo is the foundation.
I really should have thought of that myself, thanks.

I second the Intel motherboard suggestion.

I have built umpteen computers and have ALWAYS used Intel boards. Sure, they don't allow the same level of overclocking (if possible at all) as other higher priced boards but I find them to be stable, fast enough, and overall a joy to work with.

And with the warranty that they offer on their boards it is easy to swap them out if anything should ever fail.

Oh, and having the documentation in English helps a lot too.