What operating system should be installed on a powerful computer: macOS, Windows, or Linux?

If you’re comfortable with putting together your own environment, and you have free time to look up and read the specifics; you should use some kind of Archlinux. That’s not elitist — linux just has a lot of optimizations for servers and multiple users and such, and the trade-off sacrifices speed and apparent stability. Even with ryzen chips and GTX4900 cards — X11 tears and stutters like crazy (Wayland is a lot better, but still not very good), video lags, and sound is bad (yes, even in Nobara and Pop).

The distros that let you hammer those out with the least number of quirks are: Archlinux, Artix, and Parabola. If you aren’t willing to build and tune a linux, you shouldn’t be running one.

That being said, if it’s for someone else; you can set a Debian install’s apt.sources to the stable branch, set up a few cron jobs for updates and maintenance, and tune it for desktop use. The barrier to entry is the configuration — so if YOU do it for them; they get the benefits of a lightweight system, without needing the skill of system administration.

Windows is (as everyone knows) extremely bloated and very resource heavy with poor drivers, but it’s optimized for desktop use out of the box.

You will NEVER see what your machine can do with Windows, but you will ALWAYS have a good setup to start with. Games are also developed and compiled FOR Windows, so you also get the advantage that you won’t need to make them work on your computer.

Windows also goes the extra mile in presentation; by doing a lot of things to cover up tearing and artifacts, and by pre-loading GUI elements to make it feel faster. People don’t notice that, but they definitely do appreciate it.

MacOS has two advantages.

If you don’t know system administration, but would like to learn — macOS is the easiest. It’s a very good gateway to linux and BSD. Which brings me to the fact that:

macOS was built on BSD 4.3, and still runs BSD drivers. Those drivers are the cleanest, most accurate, and the all-around best in the commercial ecosystem of computing. If you want the highest quality sound, or the best picture, or the best input (in a drop-in, out-of-the-box system) — you have to use Apple.

The downside is, macOS isn’t written to support anything that Apple doesn’t ship. If you don’t check ahead of time, you could very easily end up with a system with no CPU, or no graphics card, or no disk. (calm down, it doesn’t destroy them. it just can’t see them)

Also, macOS has the weakest compatibility with the Windows ecosystem out of any of the major operating systems — so that could be a significant drawback if you want to play games and such.

Note, I said macOS is the best DROP-IN, OUT-OF-THE-BOX system, for picture and input and sound quality. This is because you forgot to ask about its upstream — freeBSD.

If your hardware is fully supported by its drivers, and you’re comfortable administrating it — freeBSD will make itself a clear winner at all tasks. The only place where it will lack will be in running a virtual desktop, because it relies on VNC displays to connect screens to virtual machines.

But of course, as with all the greatest things — you need strong admin skills to get a desktop, that most Arch users don’t even have. And they also don’t like writing security updates.

If I was a normie, I’d pick Windows. If I could verify the driver support and bring NO LESS than my current understanding, I’d do freeBSD. If it’s for someone else, I’d give them Debian and not tell them.