How do I finish my computer build?

The Problem

For what seems like an eternity, but what has actually been 4-5 years, I have been planning to build a computer to replace my 12-year-old Apple Mac Mini. The problem has been each time I have even so much as thought about buying a part for it something comes up and it ends up not happening.

I thought I’d take a break from writing the next part of my Rigging for Events series (Latest posts below) and do a bit of research into some of my options.

I have three options I’m looking at just now:

• Continue the build as is,
• Build an ARM system
• Sell my Case and AIO Water Cooler and buy a new Mac Mini

As I’m going to have to research this all anyway I thought I’d take you all along for the ride.

Continuing The Current Build

The goal for my current build is to create a powerhouse that will not only excel today but will also stand the test of time, remaining highly functional for the next 10-15 years. I prefer investing in technology that endures, rather than updating my setup annually.

At present, my setup includes an NZXT H210i case, which is designed for a mini-ITX motherboard, complemented by a Kraken X53 AIO Liquid Cooler and 16GB of DDR4 RAM. Initially, I had my sights set on a larger case, but these components were thoughtful gifts from my wife, and they’re absolutely appreciated.

The initial blueprint was to pair a mini-ITX motherboard, compatible with the 10850K and a motherboard equipped with Thunderbolt, with a mid-to-high-end GPU. However, technology has marched on since then, and the industry has seen several advancements.

Motherboard

Asrock Z790 PG-ITX/TB4 (LGA 1700) DDR5 ITX – £369.95

In the future, I plan to use external PCI-e devices such as video capture or graphics generation, so I’ll require an ITX motherboard with Thunderbolt. The most affordable option I found, not on sale, was the ASRock Z790 PG-ITX/TB4 during a quick search.

This motherboard features an Intel LGA1700 Socket compatible with 12th & 13th Gen Intel Core, Pentium Gold, and Celeron Processors. It offers two DIMM slots supporting up to 64GB of DDR5 memory at 4800MHz, which can be overclocked to 6800MHz, and supports Dual Channel Memory and XMP (Intel’s Extreme Memory Profile).

Should I choose to use the CPU’s integrated GPU, I could utilize the motherboard’s HDMI 2.1 port, DisplayPort 1.4, or the two Thunderbolt 4 ports. However, since my intention is to produce rendered 3D models and perform previsualization for shows, I will opt for a dedicated GPU.

Regarding storage, the motherboard includes three M.2 slots and three SATA 6Gb/s ports, offering ample options for setting up a NAS, especially with the onboard 1 x 2.5Gb Ethernet port and WiFi 6E. I appreciate the extensive storage capabilities as I plan to run ProxMox to access multiple operating systems simultaneously.

CPU

Intel Core i9 – 12900K – £399.95

As I’ve indicated earlier, my intention is to keep this system operational for many years, which is why I’m opting for a robust CPU that can handle potential hardware advancements over the next decade. This led me to choose the 12th-generation i9 Intel 12900K.

This processor boasts 16 cores, split between 8 Performance-cores and 8 Efficient-cores, and offers 24 threads due to its hyper-threading capability. It’s compatible with both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, in addition to supporting Thunderbolt 4. Furthermore, it includes a Gaussian and Neural Accelerator, which opens up possibilities for dabbling in AI down the line.

RAM

Corsair Vengeance RGB 64GB (2x32GB) DDR5 PC5-52800C32 6600MHz Dual Channel Kit – £269.99

To ensure the system’s longevity, I’ve selected the highest quality RAM compatible with the motherboard and CPU. Although RGB wasn’t my first choice, it’s a feature I can simply disable if necessary.

GPU

Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Gaming OC 16GB GDDR6 – £329.99

As someone who has never purchased a graphics card before, the decision was somewhat challenging. I don’t need a powerhouse, just a reliable card that can handle my rendering tasks, even if it’s not the fastest on the market.

The Intel A770 caught my attention initially due to its positive buzz as a new entry in the GPU arena, but I encountered reports of minor issues. Consequently, I’ve decided on the AMD RX 7600XT for now.

With its 32 compute units, 32 Ray accelerators, 64 AI accelerators, and 129 Texture Units, I believe the AMD RX 7600XT will serve me well for at least the next five years. Since I’m not an avid gamer and primarily use it for rendering still images or short video clips in Blender, I’m okay with longer render times, especially since I’m not doing professional-grade work at the moment.

Storage

WD Black SN770 2TB SSD M.2 2280 NVME PCI-E Gen4 Solid State Drive – £104.99

WD 6TB Red Pro 7200rpm HDD 256MB Cache Internal NAS Hard Drive – £194.99

I’ve devised a strategy for my storage setup. The three M.2 SSD slots will be allocated to SSDs for different operating systems; I plan to run four OSes, each with 1TB of dedicated storage. Another SSD will serve as a repository for OS ISOs and act as a cache for transferring data to the “long-term” storage provided by the hard disk drives. As for the three HDDs, I’ll divide them up so that the first two are dedicated to NAS storage, while the third will hold larger projects, which can be transferred to the SSDs whenever necessary for active work.

Power Supply

be quiet! Pure Power 12 M 1000W ATX 3.0 80 Plus Gold Power Supply – £169

To power the entire setup, I’ve utilized the power supply calculator provided by BeQuiet to estimate the required capacity of the power supply unit (PSU). The recommendation is for a 1000W PSU. The positive reviews, coupled with the frequent mentions on Linus Tech Tips, bolster my confidence in their offerings.

Custom Build Summary

If the computer build were to proceed, the total expenditure would amount to £2,269.82. When this sum is distributed over an 8-year period, it equates to approximately £285 annually. While this represents a manageable yearly investment, the initial outlay is considerably substantial..

ARM Build

Ampere Altra Developer Platform – £2,045.89

Exploring the ARM architecture could be a viable alternative. ARM-based desktops are gaining popularity, and my experience with the Oracle Cloud ARM system, equipped with 4 Ampere Altra cores and 24GB RAM, has been largely positive, save for a significant hurdle: software compatibility. This issue, while substantial, is expected to diminish as the technology matures, albeit at a gradual pace. To mitigate this, I have utilized Docker containers, which offer a selection of precompiled options for ARM64. Despite this, occasional compatibility challenges persist.

In conducting thorough research, it would be remiss to overlook ARM desktops in favour of Apple’s offerings without due consideration. Adlink has introduced several ARM development solutions that merit attention. The Ampere Altra Developer Platform stands out as particularly relevant to this research, providing a comprehensive package that includes a case, power supply, cooling system, motherboard, and the SoC itself.

The SoC is available in various configurations: 32, 64, 96, or 128 cores, paired with 32GB, 64GB, or 96GB of DDR4 ECC RAM, depending on the selected SoC model, and comes with a 128GB NVMe M.2 SSD.

Pricing for the 32-core model with 32GB of RAM is approximately £2,045.89, which is about £200 less than a fully custom-built system (excluding the case and CPU cooler). Spread over eight years, the cost averages to about £255.74 per year, which is quite reasonable.

Apple’s M Powered Computers

In November 2020, Apple unveiled their first desktop-class ARM processor, a surprising move that outpaced much of the industry. Reflecting on it, I can’t recall the last time I was so thrilled about an Apple product launch. Since then, the M series chips and their accompanying software have advanced significantly.

I won’t conceal my enthusiasm for Apple; I’ve been a fan since my high school days, nearly a quarter of a century ago. However, the “Apple Tax” is a real concern—their products have always commanded a premium. Apple markets not just devices, but experiences, and I must admit, I’m enamored with the experience. The Apple ecosystem is unparalleled, despite the EU’s regulatory ambitions.

Setting aside my Apple aficionado musings, I’m looking to compare three desktop Macs to determine the best fit for my needs. The Mac Pro, in essence, is a Mac Studio with additional PCI-e slots and a significant price hike. I’m confident that an external Thunderbolt PCI-e enclosure could be procured for less than the cost difference between the two.

At first glance, the Mac Studio appears to be on par with the custom-built setup we considered earlier. In contrast, the iMac seems to lack power and, in my view, fits better for users who stick to fundamental tasks like document processing, spreadsheet management, and social media engagement.

The Mac mini represents a middle-ground solution, catering to users who are looking to engage in modest gaming or dip their toes into creative pursuits such as Photoshop, video editing, or elementary 3D modelling.

On the other hand, the Mac Studio is evidently designed for the professional sphere, targeting users who have advanced beyond the rudimentary use of creative software, or those requiring additional power for activities like streaming on YouTube or Twitch.

For my purposes, I’ll primarily use this for 3D rendering with Blender and various lighting design software. Additionally, I occasionally earn income by providing live video for events. The extra capacity of the Studio would be a significant advantage, as it would allow me to handle multiple camera feeds simultaneously and process them in real-time for display on venue screens, live streams, or both. This capability also has the pleasant side effect of reducing render times.

In true Apple (and Dell) style, there are several customization options for our new computer, which, unsurprisingly, can increase the cost. The initial decision is whether we need two M2 Pro chips or four. Do we opt for the M2 Max or the M2 Ultra? The M2 Ultra essentially combines two M2 Max chips, doubling everything you get from the M2 Max chips. Although the technology is impressive, it also doubles the starting price. The additional 12 CPU cores, 30 GPU cores, 16 Neural Engine cores, and 32GB of RAM would be beneficial, but they’re not within a reasonable budget. Therefore, we’ll select the M2 Max version of the SoC for this setup.

The M2 Max version of the Mac Studio offers a 12-core CPU, a 30-core GPU, and a 16-core Neural Engine to start with. It includes 32GB of Unified Memory, 512GB of SSD storage, 2 USB-C ports, and an SDXC card slot on the front of the computer (at last!). The rear features four Thunderbolt 4 ports, 2 USB-A ports, one HDMI port, a 10Gb Ethernet port, and a 3.5mm headphone jack. All this is available at a starting price of £2,099.

The first upgrade option we’re looking at is the trio of SoC enhancements. The initial upgrade boosts the GPU core count to 38 for £200. The second option is a leap from the M2 Max to the M2 Ultra SoC, which doubles everything in the base configuration for £1,500. The final tier adds an extra 12 GPU cores to the ultra chip for an additional £1,000. However, if my calculations are correct, this last upgrade seems overpriced at £1,000 when the previous increase from 30 to 38 cores was only £200.

Moving on from that point, I’ve decided to opt for the extra GPU boost on the M2 Max SoC. This should significantly benefit live production by handling multiple video feeds more efficiently.

As for memory, the choice is between sticking with 32GB or upgrading to 64GB for £400. While £400 is quite steep for 32GB of RAM, it’s worth considering the highest possible upgrade since the Mac’s memory isn’t user-upgradable post-purchase.

Lastly, let’s talk about storage. The base model of the Mac Studio includes a 512GB SSD, and just like the RAM, it’s not possible to upgrade this later. Upgrade options at purchase include 1TB for £200, 2TB for £600, 4TB for £1,200, or 8TB for £2,400. While these SSD upgrade prices may seem steep, it’s crucial to choose your Mac’s permanent storage capacity now. Alternatively, external storage is an option, connecting via USB or Thunderbolt, which may be more economical. That’s the route I plan to take.

So, the base Mac Studio, with upgrades to 38 GPU cores and 64GB of RAM, totals £2,699. It’s quite an investment. Spread over eight years, the cost averages out to approximately £337.38 annually, which is about £50 more than the DIY setup above.

For comparison, a top-tier Mac mini featuring the Apple M2 Pro with a 12-core CPU, 19-core GPU, 16-core Neural Engine, 512GB of storage, and 32GB of RAM costs £2,099. With the additional £600, you gain 19 more GPU cores, double the RAM, and two extra Thunderbolt 4 ports.

Decision Time

Now we reach the challenging decision. Should I opt for the DIY build and save £429.18? It’s time to compare the specifications:

To balance the specifications, we could reduce the storage on the DIY build to 2TB, which would decrease the price by £689.96, bringing it down to £1,579.86. That’s a significant saving, but it’s worth considering the less obvious advantages that aren’t immediately apparent from the specs alone.

For instance, the Mac Studio operates faster thanks to its Unified Memory architecture, which allows the CPU, GPU, and Neural Engine (NE) to share the same memory pool. Since the data resides in this Unified Memory, it doesn’t need to be transferred between different components for processing, which also means the overall memory requirement for the computer is reduced.

Additionally, the ARM architecture uses fewer instructions to process tasks, enabling quicker execution of commands sent to any of the processors, be it the CPU, GPU, or NE. Think of it as the difference between using a basic calculator and a scientific one—the fewer instructions mean there’s less that can potentially malfunction.

ARM devices are known for their power efficiency, which is a significant factor even when both devices are connected to the mains. The Mac Studio, for instance, will consume less energy, leading to a lower electricity bill. To put it into perspective, 1000W is substantially more than 370W. Based on my current energy rate of 13.26p/kWh, the savings could amount to approximately £73 annually if I were to run both machines non-stop, as is my usual practice. This is £13 less per year compared to fully equipped computers, which is certainly worth considering.

Apple’s Walled Garden Ecosystem is brimming with features: seamless copy-pasting between devices, iPad’s Screen Expander mode, accessing your phone’s interface on your Mac, and the Continuity Camera feature that turns your phone into a webcam. Not to mention the myriad collaborative and standalone app features that enhance the interoperability of your devices.

Conversely, a DIY setup, particularly with a lower storage specification, is undeniably more cost-effective and boasts a robust AI core interfacing the CPU and GPU, despite the absence of unified memory. Additionally, the CPU’s superior thread count may translate to faster performance in certain tasks.

After weighing all factors, my preference leans towards the Mac Studio setup. Despite the higher cost, it integrates seamlessly with my existing Apple devices, such as iPhones, iPads, and an Apple Watch, making it a logical extension of my ecosystem. Additionally, it allows me to maintain my current live production workflow, thanks to mimoLive—a Mac-exclusive software that excels in creating live graphics and streams, offering a sleeker experience than OBS. The Blackmagic hardware I’m considering also reportedly performs more reliably on MacOS than on Windows, based on several reviews I’ve encountered.

While I’m aware that some may strongly oppose my decision, I’m still interested in hearing your thoughts. Feel free to share your opinions in the comments section below or respond to the social media post that got you here.