Icyculyr
I'm a Mac
- Reaction score
- 68
Haha, so, I wrote an incredibly long comparison, I'd like to hear all of your thoughts on it. Remember, this has nothing to do with building your own rig, we all know that is going to be cheaper (except maybe for iMac).
This is a spec for spec (or as close as) comparison between a Mac and a pre-built PC or laptop.
Desktop systems
Mac Mini vs Zino HD
Note that I'm unfamiliar with AMD CPUs, whether this is the equiv. to the C2D or not, I am unsure.
21.5" iMac vs 21.5" HP all-in-one 200xt series
27" i5 (quad) iMac vs 21.5" HP All-in-One Quad series
Now the iMac's 5750 absolutely destroys the GT 230M, so if you add that in, the price is about the same.
2.8GHz Mac Pro vs 2.8GHz Dell Precision T3500
I believe the saving is about the same for the SP 3.2GHz and 3.33GHz Mac Pro as well.
My theory on why they are $1000 more expensive:
Dual Hexa Xeon Mac Pro @ 2.66GHz vs Dual Hexa Xeon Dell Precision T7500
Laptop systems
13" MacBook Pro vs Envy 13 and Envy 14
Now the Envy 14 offers a slightly larger screen and resolution, a newer (but same clock speed) CPU, a better GPU which gets ~55 FPS w/ a 1600x900 res on Low in Metro 2033 vs 25 FPS w/ a 1280x800 res on low for the 320M -- according to notebookcheck, and a faster RPM HD for a slightly lower price.
So, you can clearly see that the MacBook Pro isn't overpriced, although it is in both cases $200 more expensive.
15" MacBook Pro vs Envy 15 vs Sager 5125
17" MacBook Pro vs Envy 17
Overall you can see that the "Mac costs 2x more for half the hardware" argument is false, even the 17" MacBook Pro costs no more than 50% more than it's equivalent and it has a lot more battery life compared to the Envy 15.
You can see that the value of battery life by comparing the Envy 14 and 13, in that spoiler -- you can see how much better the Envy 14 is, but the 13 offers significantly better battery life with which the MacBook Pro's exceed.
Yes, I wrote this on another forum, I thought it was so good, that I just had to post it here -- we've not had a Mac discussion in a while -- some of you might've been happy about that
If you'd like to know where I get my information about which GPU is better, it is notebookcheck.
Please let me know if you find any mistakes.
EDIT: Added the Sager 5125, it kills both the 15" MBP and the Dell.
EDIT: Removed the 15" Envy (no longer exists), and added the 17" for comparison with the 17" MBP.
Btw, anyone can post a link to a laptop or all-in-one or desktop, etc., and I'll put it up the top (assuming it is a reasonable comparison) -- I.E, if you've found an equiv. all-in-one to the iMac for like $300 cheaper, etc.,
This is a spec for spec (or as close as) comparison between a Mac and a pre-built PC or laptop.
Desktop systems
Mac Mini vs Zino HD
- $699 Mac Mini
- C2D @ 2.4GHz, 2GB 1066MHz RAM, GeForce 320M 256MB, 320GB HD
- ^ $350 Inspiron Zino HD
- AMD Athlon II X2 P340 Dual Core @ 2.2GHz, 3GB 1333MHz RAM, ATI 4250 integrated graphics, 320GB HD
Note that I'm unfamiliar with AMD CPUs, whether this is the equiv. to the C2D or not, I am unsure.
- $1199 iMac
- 21.5" 1920x1080, i3 @ 3.06GHz, 4GB 1333MHz, 4670 256MB, 500GB HD
- ^ $999 HP All-in-One 200xt series
- 21.5" 1920x1080, i3 @ 3.06GHz, 4GB 1333MHz, GeForce GT 230M 1GB, 750GB HD
- $1999 iMac
- 27" 2560x1440, i5 760 @ 2.8GHz, 4GB 1333MHz, 5750 1GB, 1 TB HD
- ^ $1110 ($1909) HP All-in-One 200 Quad series
- 21.5", i5 760 @ 2.8GHz, 4GB 1333MHz, GT 230M 1GB, 1 TB HD
Now the iMac's 5750 absolutely destroys the GT 230M, so if you add that in, the price is about the same.
- $2499 SP Mac Pro
- Quad Xeon @ 2.8GHz, 3GB 1066MHz, 5770 1GB, 1 TB HD
- ^ $1504 Dell Precision T3500
- Quad Xeon @ 2.8GHz, 3GB 1333MHz, ATI FireMV 2260 256MB, 1 TB HD, 3 year basic warranty
I believe the saving is about the same for the SP 3.2GHz and 3.33GHz Mac Pro as well.
My theory on why they are $1000 more expensive:
Now, you might say think that Apple is adding that extra $1000 just to get more money, however, it seems more likely that they are trying to separate the high end 27" iMac ($1999) from the base Mac Pro ($2499), if they dropped the price of the Mac Pro, few would buy the iMac, if any.
My theory is also supported by the fact that the dual processor (six-core models) Mac Pro's are actually cheaper than Dell's equivalent (see below), so that extra $1k they are making on the single processor model disappears.
Obviously the $4999 Mac Pro isn't going to cannibalise the $1999 iMac, but as I said, a $1499 Mac Pro would (or even a $1999), and Apple certainly doesn't want to drop the price of their 27" iMacs down $500-$1000.
Not that I'm saying Apple isn't enjoying that extra $1000 of baby fat on the single processor Mac Pro's
My theory is also supported by the fact that the dual processor (six-core models) Mac Pro's are actually cheaper than Dell's equivalent (see below), so that extra $1k they are making on the single processor model disappears.
Obviously the $4999 Mac Pro isn't going to cannibalise the $1999 iMac, but as I said, a $1499 Mac Pro would (or even a $1999), and Apple certainly doesn't want to drop the price of their 27" iMacs down $500-$1000.
Not that I'm saying Apple isn't enjoying that extra $1000 of baby fat on the single processor Mac Pro's
- $4999 DP Mac Pro
- Dual Hexa Xeon @ 2.66GHz, 6GB 1333MHz, 5770 1GB, 1 TB HD
- ^ $5224 Dell Precision T7500
- Dual Hexa Xeon @ 2.66GHz, 6GB 1333MHz, ATI FireMV 2260 256MB, 1 TB HD
13" MacBook Pro vs Envy 13 and Envy 14
- $1199 MacBook Pro
- 13" 1280x800, C2D @ 2.4GHz, 4GB 1066MHz, GeForce 320M 256MB, 250GB 5400 RPM HD, 10 hour battery
- ^ $1000 HP Envy 13 series -- designed more for battery life, like the MacBook Pro
- 13.3" 1366x768, C2D SL9300 @ 1.6GHz, 3GB (MHz ???), ATI 4330 512MB, 250GB 5400 RPM HD, up to 7.5 hours battery life (4-cell)
- ^ $1000 HP Envy 14 series
- 14.5" 1366x768, i3 @ 2.4GHz, 4GB (MHz ???), ATI 5650M 1GB, 320GB 7200 RPM HD, up to 3.75 hours battery life (8-cell)
Now the Envy 14 offers a slightly larger screen and resolution, a newer (but same clock speed) CPU, a better GPU which gets ~55 FPS w/ a 1600x900 res on Low in Metro 2033 vs 25 FPS w/ a 1280x800 res on low for the 320M -- according to notebookcheck, and a faster RPM HD for a slightly lower price.
So, you can clearly see that the MacBook Pro isn't overpriced, although it is in both cases $200 more expensive.
- $1799 MacBook Pro
- 15" 1440x900, i5 @ 2.4GHz, 4GB 1066MHz, GeForce GT 330M 256MB, 320GB 5400 RPM HD, 8-9 hour battery
- ^ $899 Sager NP5125
- 15.6" 1366x768, i5 @ 2.4GHz, 4GB 1066MHz, GT 330M 1GB, 320GB 7200 RPM HD, battery life (???)
- $2299 MacBook Pro
- 17" 1920x1200, i5 @ 2.53GHz, 4GB 1066MHz, GeForce GT 330M 512MB, 500GB HD, 8-9 hour battery
- $1479 Envy 17
- 17" 1920x1080 Full HD Ultra Brightview, i5 @ 2.53GHz, 6GB (??? MHz), 5850 1GB, 500GB 7200 RPM HD, up to 2.5 hours of battery life (6-cell)
Overall you can see that the "Mac costs 2x more for half the hardware" argument is false, even the 17" MacBook Pro costs no more than 50% more than it's equivalent and it has a lot more battery life compared to the Envy 15.
You can see that the value of battery life by comparing the Envy 14 and 13, in that spoiler -- you can see how much better the Envy 14 is, but the 13 offers significantly better battery life with which the MacBook Pro's exceed.
Yes, I wrote this on another forum, I thought it was so good, that I just had to post it here -- we've not had a Mac discussion in a while -- some of you might've been happy about that
If you'd like to know where I get my information about which GPU is better, it is notebookcheck.
Please let me know if you find any mistakes.
EDIT: Added the Sager 5125, it kills both the 15" MBP and the Dell.
EDIT: Removed the 15" Envy (no longer exists), and added the 17" for comparison with the 17" MBP.
Btw, anyone can post a link to a laptop or all-in-one or desktop, etc., and I'll put it up the top (assuming it is a reasonable comparison) -- I.E, if you've found an equiv. all-in-one to the iMac for like $300 cheaper, etc.,