Description

Used a tonymacx86 Hack Pro guide, unibeast install to Mountain Lion 10.8.2, upgraded to 10.8.3; Running the Mac Pro 3,1 system definition. Used guides and feedback from /r/hackintosh, as well as http://www.tonymacx86.com/

Uses OWC 120GB 6G sata for system drive, with automated weekly mirror to 160GB backup drive in case something goes haywire. I can boot to the backup drive, and write over the SSD.

The CPU is running overclocked to 3.8GHZ with no issues in stability or overheating on air cooling. Graphics aren't quite clocking where they should, but Steam \ CS GO runs full res at 120fps, so it's good enough. Thunderbolt works, although hot-swap doesn't work - the system needs to be powered on with a device attached. Plugging-in while running causes a hard freeze.

5 system fans, all 120\140mm. 1SSD, 4 HDD, no optical drives. 13" wide \ medium format printer, standard sized scanner, large wacom tablet. Old Sony DAV S300 home theatre system for sound - hooked up via optical.

Video editing is OK - going to upgrade to the i7 3770k. Didn't see Micro Center's deal on it before I bought the i5. Screenshots show idle and under load temps, which peak around 66-68C. This is during video conversion, with valleys between files. Right side shows activity monitor with load spread between the four cores.

Update: Decided to hold off on the i7 for now. Bought a Corsair H55i watercooling unit - I realize this is entry level, but I'm not trying to go crazy with the overclock. Stepped it up to 4.2 Ghz, and the voltage capped at 1.24v. With ambient air temp around 25, idle is around 35-38, with full load hitting 72. Prime 95 torture test ran it up to 80 degrees, but I doubt I would ever see that under normal circumstances. 4.2 Ghz was worth 15% performance boost over the stock clock, with no stability issues.

Log in to rate comments or to post a comment.

Comments

  • 81 months ago
  • 3 points

Please tell me that you actually bought an i5-3570k but accidentally listed the i5-3570....you're not suppose to overclock the 3570.

  • 81 months ago
  • 3 points

That's correct - the 3570k..

  • 81 months ago
  • 1 point

What video editing software are you using, and what is your rendering time on a 2 minute video?

  • 81 months ago
  • 1 point

Final Cut Pro X. Rendering happens in the background, so on something as short as 2min, I'm never waiting on rendering. Longer (15-60min) HD clips might take 5-10min to render if I let it sit for a bit and focus on background tasks.

I can do final file HQ render and saving at 90sec of 720p per min; or 1min of 1080p per min (@ 1GB per Min written to disk).

  • 81 months ago
  • 1 point

Thanks for the details!

  • 81 months ago
  • -1 points

Eww...Gross! You have a Mac!? I can deal with a Hackintosh, but a real Mac?Icky. ;D

For $1.1k this is a pretty good build. Congrats!

  • 81 months ago
  • 2 points

Thanks.

My first actual Mac was the last of the 17" Powerbook G4s. It was the overall best computing experience I had ever had, and I was quickly a mac convert.

I started using PCs when I was 13 or 14. My first builds were 386SX\DX era machines. My last personal Intel build before this was a Pentium 1 \ 200Mhz. After that it was all AMD. I've run Dos\Windows since Win 3.1, and Linux desktops and servers since '99.

I've now had 4 work-supplied Mac laptops personally, and procured\supported another 20-25 over the years for work, and if I have the choice, I likely will never go back to Windows. For what I do - Macs just are better. If I had cash and patience I would have gotten a real Mac Pro, but I didn't have enough of either.

  • 81 months ago
  • 0 points

I hate the ideology that a lot of Mac users have though. Things like "Mac is inherently superior." I like that you've had experience with both and chose Mac OS but not Apple's pricing.

  • 81 months ago
  • 2 points

Ironic that you hate the Mac users' ideology but started your comment with 'Eww...' ;)

A lot of mac users don't know the difference, or why it's better. A lot of PC users, especially gamers, look at it and go 'but I can go in the registry and change anything I want'. Both are flawed. You shouldn't NEED to go in the registry for jack ****. It should just work. But since OSX is *nix based, if you're comfortable with a terminal, you can do as much or more than you can on a windows box. I've definitely had problems come up with my Macs, but I've had 100x more problems with my PCs, and the problems have been significantly worse.

I don't necessarily reject Apple's pricing. An iMac wasn't going to suit my needs, and the Mac Pros haven't been updated in far too long. They will have new Pros out this year, but I couldn't wait - my old PC bit the dust.

The Macs are more expensive, but most of the time, you do get what you pay for. When you actually factor in hardware \ specs, build quality, warranty, support, OS, low cost of OS upgrades, resale value, etc - I think they're a better value than 90% of PCs. Take a look at used Apples vs used PC prices on eBay.

Their OS upgrades are $30. The OS, and apps like iWork don't even have a licensing system built in, let alone come with a serial number. And the interoperability between their hardware can't be beat. I can mirror my desktop to my Apple TV wirelessly, just bit hitting an icon. When I play my music on my desktop and Apple TV at the same time - it automatically accounts for the network buffer in the TV so there isn't an echo. (Great for parties and filling the whole house with music) I can use my iPhone to control my computer that's streaming music throughout the house, from anywhere in the house. Generally the devil is in the details, and they tend to be really good at the details.

It all comes down to preference, but for me, and what I'm doing these days - Apple wins hands down. They just need to give the Mac Pros a bit more love.

  • 81 months ago
  • 1 point

The mac pro's just got updated. They are pretty cool!

  • 81 months ago
  • 1 point

Yep. Be interesting to see when they actually come available \ what kind of performance you see out of them. On the surface I'm disappointed in the loss of more standardized parts being swappable, and moving to a gargantuan mini-esque architecture - but if companies like OWC make parts available, they may be pretty slick machines.

  • 81 months ago
  • 0 points

"Eww..." meaning gross. As you say, it all comes down to preference. As I like to game, I go the PC route for easier upgradability, yada, yada, yada. What I was trying to say was that I don't hate Macs, I hate the whole "elitist" approach. For me, their pricing is too much for what you get but that's because my needs are different. As long as it works for you and you're happy, idgaf! :)

[comment deleted by staff]
  • 81 months ago
  • 4 points

As you can probably tell, it's not a gaming build so he won't need such a strong gpu.

  • 81 months ago
  • -3 points

No, even worse, a GT 640. There is no GTX 640. And, yeah, having the motherboard be the most expensive part of the build is never a good thing, especially when you have a locked processor.

  • 81 months ago
  • 7 points

Processor was listed incorrectly. Keep in mind this was a build specifically to run Mountain Lion on. I don't do much gaming - basically just the steam games that have been ported to mac, and those are running at 120fps with graphics turned up.

I am a photographer \ videographer \ web designer. I got this particular board for upgradeability and thunderbolt (more relevant on the mac side as of now - and I can share peripherals with my retina Macbook Pro).

  • 81 months ago
  • 4 points

That's a really poor way to judge a build. In AMD builds it's hard NOT to get a mobo more expensive than your CPU since AMD CPUs are rarely more than $150. Whereas Intel processors on the other than are typically a bit more pricey.

Expensive motherboards exist for a reason. Sure you could buy an ASrock Extreme4 for $140, but they have poor overclocking ability and don't have a lot of features that some people may want/need.

  • 81 months ago
  • 1 point

But a gigabyte z77 ud3h has great overclocking ability and is usually in the same price range. The whole reason you do a hackintosh build is so that you can better allocate the money to parts that actually make a difference. He could have used the money he saved by getting the ud3h to get a better video card or an SSD. An then if he actually has any thing that has thunderbolt, he could have bought a PCIe thunderbolt card.

  • 81 months ago
  • 1 point

He did state he wasn't using it for anything gaming related. And if you read that you'd also see he did state (though not listed in his parts list) that he DOES have an SSD.

Also for what it's worth, if PCIe Thunderbolt cards even exist, I sure can't find them. If they exist and can be found, it sure isn't easy, and probably isn't cheap. And he said he has a Macbook Pro and is using the thunderbolt to share peripherals between the two devices now.

The mobo makes COMPLETE sense to me.

  • 81 months ago
  • 0 points

Could of sworn I've seen an add in thunderbolt solution. Maybe it was for a specific motherboard which makes what I said pointless.

I don't know, for editing and things like that, I've seen other builders make a similar budget and have an nvidia card that would actually make a difference in editing like a 660 or 660ti. I guess since he needs thunderbolt and doesn't want to use usb 3.0 for data transfers (if that's what he uses it for), this was his only choice in motherboard.

  • 81 months ago
  • 1 point

I think you are misunderstanding me. I'm not saying that expensive motherboards do not have their place. As a general rule of thumb the mobo should not be the most expensive part of your build. There is obviously exceptions to this, most notably web browsing/general use builds with low budget parts. This does not fit the bill of most builds that would be posted to this site. My point is that you don't get an expensive mobo and then cheap out on the rest of your parts, mainly GPU. In this build specifically the mobo was a poor choice because they got an expensive z77 overclocking mobo with a locked processor that will not be able to overclock past its turbo clock. OP could have saved money on a cheaper H77 mobo with similar features. Now that OP has revised the build and listed the 3570k instead of the 3570 changes everything. A more expensive mobo is now justified. Also since the OP mentioned Steam in the description I assumed this would be used for gaming, making the GT 640 a bad choice. Skimping on the GPU makes sense in a budget gaming build with <$100 mobo. Buying an expensive mobo and a cheap GPU in a gaming build is terrible. Given the extra clarity that the OP has given on the build the mobo choice is justified. I made some assumptions based on the build and the description.

  • 81 months ago
  • 1 point

For what it's worth - Hackintosh builds have really specific requirements - for best results you work within a tight list of parts that are very close to what Apple uses in their native hardware. I was choosing from basically 7 mobos that would work for my build - and this was the only one with Thunderbolt.

The fact that this build doesn't fit the bill of most builds on the site is precisely why I posted it. There's a lot more to computer building than just gaming beasts.