/3/ - 3DCG

Neither. Macs aren't built for 3D.

Why?

>>786897
OP obviously loves to throw money out the window

>>786880
M1 trashcan was always shit. It might on paper look better but those thinks throttle the fuck out of you. Just make sure to go 16gb if you go M1.

>>786880
>using Macs
>ever

>>786880
Is this a joke.

>>786880
>mac
>work

I am sure there are people on /3/ who make money and use Macs.

why would you use something that was not made for 3d for 3d

>>786880
Wait for their new iMac, considering the performance of the M1, a Desktop version might be decent - if it's not just the M1 Mac Mini attached to a display.

>>786974
ur basically paying premium for software not for hardware.

>>786978
Exactly. Apple might be overpriced when you count hardware only. But for example with 5k iMacs, it's actually hard to get a display and all the components cheaper. Just look at the cost of 5k monitors.
macOS is very optimised and it performs better than Windows on same specs. In architecture school I was laughing to people using Macs due to their low specs, but once I tried I realised it works better than my workstation PC.

>>786985
You are wrong on so many levels...

>>786880
Mac is good for video editing, photoshopping, maybe even compositing, but for 3D you want a pc

>>786998
The old mantra still reigns true:

Mac: good for art and video
PC: good for anything else(including art and video)

Mac used to be the premium not-quite-workstation workstation hardware but that hasn't been true for a long time

>>787028
I own a Lenovo ThinkStation, with better specs and for a lower price.

>>787031
>buy pre-built PC
>says he got a lower price

>>786943
>I am sure there are people on /3/ who make money serving Macs.
FTFY

>>787031
Again, you buy a whole system, not just components.

>>787064
Fair enough, but that's pointless if the whole system is inadequate for 3D tasks.

As things stand currently, buying Apple products for 3D is shooting oneself in the foot.

>>787066
But I am sure that apple silicon is going to change the game also for 3D. Once it supports eGPU's it's a very good bargain.

>>786943
I use Mac for administration around my projects and a Windows machine for all the actual work in software, it's really the best combo

>>787067
>apple silicon is going to change the game also for 3D.
Not gonna happen.

If you get a mac, how will you ever run Redshift? Oh wait...

If you want to use MacOS you have two viable options:
>get a Mac Pro for 5000-10k$
>Build a Hackintosh for 1000-3000$
Which one will it be OP?

>>787060
Yes. I'm not paying extra for the name of my product, just for lifetime servicing.

>>787103
>he fell for the Lenovo lifetime servicing meme.

>>787109
I'm buying Lenovo for the past 10 years now. So far I'm happy with their systems. We also use them at work.

>>787095
Hackintosh is unstable and nobody is gonna build it for serious work. It is also dead since all Macs are gonna be based on Apple silicon in over 1 year, and they will ditch support for Intel based Macs. Probably they will support it for few years, but who wants to build a system that he knows is dead.

This nigger is actually buying a Mac.

>>786997
He's not. You've just never used Mac, it just feels better.

>>786880
Avoid Mac Pro, it's 7 years old and soon support will be finish, AMD GCN today are trash, no good support for OpenCL,OpenGL or Metal.

Top Dual D700 is inferior to Polaris RX 480(4 years old mid range GPU).

M1 get full support and new GPU Apple.

>>787327
Good point, especially about graphics cards. I don't know why "workstation" cards are 10 times more expensive while offering 5 times worse performance, in the name of stability, hogwash.

>>787450
>while offering 5 times worse performance
lie
>stability
stability and studio drivers are top priority

>>787450
>I don't know why "workstation" cards are 10 times more expensive
Drivers for CAD,CAM or Other complex visualization(medicine) software,ECC memory, but now is almost about virtualization for Server to client(Like videogame streamer but with professional software).

Mac OS don't support any professional workstation software.

>>787451
Okay, it is a lie, it's not 5 times worse, but it's significanlty worse. I don't know who buys Quadro meme for CAD or rendering these days.

>>787454
It's true, they don't support anything super high end. Probably robotic surgery machine uses some kind of ports that can not be put in a Mac, but that really wasn't the point.

The only true think I like about PC is the fact that you have control about your hardware, and repairs are much much easier. You build a PC, GPU dies, you change the GPU, with Apple, well, it's gonna cost you a lot. It's also important to say that Apple tends to kill 3rd party reparis.

In terms of laptops, no one can compete with Apple. Workstations, you'll be better with PC. But it's interesting how people who use PC workstations and buy a MacBook start to do all their job on Mac sooner or later.

With more and more rendering and calculating tasks moving to cloud and development of M1 chip, which promises better GPU performance in the future there really is an interesting game comming up.

It is also worth mentioning that next gen of M processors is going to fully support eGPU system. I don't see any reason to buy a PC after that.

>>786880
The money you would be spending on a Mac that can handle a 3D rendering pipeline can get you a hyper roided Windows rig that can do so much more.

PLUS you have the added benefit of being able to save money overtime by just swapping parts instead of shilling fat money for Mac proprietary bullshit.

>>787312
This thread looks like it's already dead but having used a mac for work it only "feels better" when your using software that was made specifically for it. Spending an extra few thousand because you like the pretty animation when you launch your software or switch from one window to another is a questionable decision. But hey. If it actually makes you more productive and for some reason you can't get past it go for it.