Board index › Topical Discussion › Computers, Math, Science, and Technology

PC vs. MAC

Page 7 of 7 [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Previous topic | Next topic

Feralucce
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2012
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,143
Location: New Orleans, LA

12 Feb 2014, 4:30 pm

Oh, I know... but it was the best for artists and musicians at the time... hence the reason that Babylon 5 and seaquest were rendered on one


_________________
Yeah. I'm done. Don't bother messaging and expecting a response - i've left WP permanently.


mr_bigmouth_502
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Dec 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 7,028
Location: Alberta, Canada

12 Feb 2014, 5:57 pm

The way I see it, PCs are good for gaming, while Macs are good for things like audio/video production and photo editing. Of course, that's just looking at it from an OS-based perspective; hardware wise, PCs are better since they're actually made to be upgradable and repairable, unlike Macs which are made to look fancy and be disposable. :P



Feralucce
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2012
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,143
Location: New Orleans, LA

12 Feb 2014, 6:07 pm

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:
The way I see it, PCs are good for gaming, while Macs are good for things like audio/video production and photo editing. Of course, that's just looking at it from an OS-based perspective; hardware wise, PCs are better since they're actually made to be upgradable and repairable, unlike Macs which are made to look fancy and be disposable. :P


Not any more... Macs ignore any processing cycles over 2.5 ghz... These days - video production works PC with AVID Media Composer and Adobe Premiere much faster... Final cut x is geared towards the apple crowd... but powerhouses of design are all pc based.


_________________
Yeah. I'm done. Don't bother messaging and expecting a response - i've left WP permanently.


mr_bigmouth_502
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Dec 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 7,028
Location: Alberta, Canada

12 Feb 2014, 7:21 pm

Feralucce wrote:
mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:
The way I see it, PCs are good for gaming, while Macs are good for things like audio/video production and photo editing. Of course, that's just looking at it from an OS-based perspective; hardware wise, PCs are better since they're actually made to be upgradable and repairable, unlike Macs which are made to look fancy and be disposable. :P


Not any more... Macs ignore any processing cycles over 2.5 ghz... These days - video production works PC with AVID Media Composer and Adobe Premiere much faster... Final cut x is geared towards the apple crowd... but powerhouses of design are all pc based.


Just wondering, but what's considered an adequate PC nowadays for those tasks? I'm guessing like a quad-core Core i7 and 16GB of RAM. :P



Feralucce
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2012
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,143
Location: New Orleans, LA

12 Feb 2014, 11:05 pm

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:
Feralucce wrote:
mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:
The way I see it, PCs are good for gaming, while Macs are good for things like audio/video production and photo editing. Of course, that's just looking at it from an OS-based perspective; hardware wise, PCs are better since they're actually made to be upgradable and repairable, unlike Macs which are made to look fancy and be disposable. :P


Not any more... Macs ignore any processing cycles over 2.5 ghz... These days - video production works PC with AVID Media Composer and Adobe Premiere much faster... Final cut x is geared towards the apple crowd... but powerhouses of design are all pc based.


Just wondering, but what's considered an adequate PC nowadays for those tasks? I'm guessing like a quad-core Core i7 and 16GB of RAM. :P


Depends on what version of what software... that will run CS4 easily... but would stutter on cs6... I am running an over clocked 8 core amd running at 5.26 ghz per core with a water cooler, 64 gb ram (went with a server board) and 10 TB of online storage... I don't know what the minimum is... but this more than meets my needs...


_________________
Yeah. I'm done. Don't bother messaging and expecting a response - i've left WP permanently.


Max000
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,547

13 Feb 2014, 1:01 am

Feralucce wrote:
Not any more... Macs ignore any processing cycles over 2.5 ghz...


Do you have a source for that? Because when I Googled it, you seem to be the only source. :chin:



LupaLuna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 2013
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,551
Location: tri-cities WA

13 Feb 2014, 1:42 am

Kurgan wrote:
Feralucce wrote:
And was produced up til 1994... 20 years ago...

As for the coding... yes and no... when the amiga came out... it's video and sound capabilities were far beyond that of anything else on the market... coded for or no


It's sound was roughly on par with the first generation Soundblatser, so yes, the sound was more advanced than that of most computers at the time. In terms of raw CPU power, it wasn't more powerful than a 286 CPU, though. Most x86 computers had VGA in the late 1980s, but it wasn't used in games before the early 1990s. By 1991, upper-mid-range computers had surpased it in both graphics and sound.

If you look at the Amiga version of Test Drive 1, I'll admit that it was very advanced when it hit the shelves, though.


It didn't need a whole lot of CPU power. Most of the power was in it's custom chips.



Feralucce
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2012
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,143
Location: New Orleans, LA

13 Feb 2014, 2:49 am

Max000 wrote:
Feralucce wrote:
Not any more... Macs ignore any processing cycles over 2.5 ghz...


Do you have a source for that? Because when I Googled it, you seem to be the only source. :chin:


experience, benchmarks, render times using the same versions of software on both mac and PC


_________________
Yeah. I'm done. Don't bother messaging and expecting a response - i've left WP permanently.