Apple Vs Dell Price comparison...

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by cwalton, Jun 24, 2003.

  1. cwalton macrumors member

    May 2, 2003
    Thought I'd make a quick comparison of a high end G5 vs Duel Xeon machine. A lot of people have been saying that the G5's are overpriced, however, when you consider the alternatives the results are suprising:

    Apples offering:
    Dual 2GHz PowerPC G5
    4GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 4 DIMMs
    2x250GB Serial ATA
    ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB, ADC/DVI
    Apple Keyboard
    Mac OS
    Apple Cinema HD Display (20" LCD)
    One FireWire 800 port
    Two FireWire 400 ports
    Three USB 2.0 ports
    Apple Mouse

    Dells offering:
    Dual Intel® Xeon Processors 3.06GHz
    4GB (4X1024MB DIMM) 266MHz DDR ECC SDRAM Memory
    2x 120GB (7,200 rpm) ATA/100 IDE Hard Drive with DataBurst Cache™
    ATI Fire GL X1 Dual-Monitor Capable (128MB DVI/VGA) Graphics Card
    Dell 20" UltraSharp™ Flat Panel Monitor
    4x DVD+RW Drive
    Enhanced Quietkey™ (Spacesaver) keyboard
    Dell/Logitech 2 Button PS/2 Mouse
    Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional

    With a saving of over a grand and a half on a similar spec'd machine, I know where my money's going ;)
  2. robbieduncan Moderator emeritus


    Jul 24, 2002
    Yes but the Fire GL card is in a different class. It is a pro level open GL accelerator - it's not a consumer gaming card. If you take that out I'm sure you can save 200-300 off the Dell (still way more expensive).
  3. Ryan1524 macrumors 68000


    Apr 9, 2003
    Canada GTA
  4. reflex macrumors 6502a

    May 19, 2002
    Who ever said Dell was cheap (except for Dell themselves)?
  5. cwalton thread starter macrumors member

    May 2, 2003
    "Dell's aggressive pricing and ability to react quickly to changing market conditions allowed the market leader to further distance itself from competitors," according to IDC.
  6. NavyIntel007 macrumors 65816


    Nov 24, 2002
    Tampa, FL
    I never get these PC junkies. "Well I can build my own for cheaper..." That's great son... however a kit car is nothing but a kit car. The TCO of a mac I believe is way lower when you factor in upgrades, maintaining (man hours) and the big one... Setup time.

    It took my dad about a month to move over from his old laptop to his new one. Meanwhile there's another employee who needs the laptop but dad is still working on it. It took me a day to move over my ibook to my powerbook.

    The lost man hours, although very tough to accurately count, probably make up for a good chunk of the price difference on even the entry level cheap PCs.
  7. cwalton thread starter macrumors member

    May 2, 2003
    Who's a PC Junkie? Not quite sure who your post is aimed at...

  8. cubist macrumors 68020

    Jul 4, 2002
    Muncie, Indiana
    It is odd that the top-of-the-line G5 only supports a Radeon 9600 graphics card, which is a very good card but not a professional card in the FireGL class. Apple ought to consider having some high-end graphics options.

    As for the Geforce FX 5200 in the lower G5's, that's a good card, too, but for $2K+ machines it's a bit weak.

    My guess is these machines have a lot of margin in them initially. The prices will come down later. Right now, since Apple couldn't refresh the entire line, they needed to leave price points for the older hardware below the G5's. The G4's have been substantially discounted; look for a price drop on the G4 iMac soon.
  9. VIREBEL661 macrumors regular

    Feb 24, 2003
    I think he means PC weenies in general, not anybody on this board, right NavyIntel?
  10. wirewyrm macrumors newbie

    Jun 18, 2003
    Dell... Cheap????

    Why are we wondering whether Dell machines are cheap or not. They are the company with the most similar reliability to Apple, and the most similar support and build quality. If you want to compare the apple with a PC from, then I expect the PC would be cheaper. For once the Mac is faster AND cheaper when comparing like for like. Similar company, similar specs, both twin prcessors, both the fastest available, both 4 GB memory (Dell's is slower) and the Mac even has serial ATA disks. Although I must admit the Fire GL is nearly twice the price of a Radeon 9800 Pro, though the PC is still more expensive.
  11. cwalton thread starter macrumors member

    May 2, 2003

    TCO was not mentioned, read the initial post, Apple costs less than a similar Dell to buy. That was the point of the post. For a long time Apple have not been competetive as far as raw power goes, now they offer a better machine for less, without even taking TCO into account.
  12. The Shadow macrumors regular

    Mar 25, 2003
    Sydney, Australia
    Re: Dell... Cheap????

    Very interesting. This scenario you describe is not new. I had a big argument with an editor of PC Authority magazine about 18mths ago. They compared the DP800 to a range of workstations and concluded one edged out the Mac purely on a price for performance basis.

    But they "forgot" to factor in that the mac had a 17"LCD and Superdrive, amongst other things (All quite expensive back then), and the PC had a CRT and CD ROM! When I factored in these and a few other things, the Mac was WAAAAAAY cheaper!

    And that was about 18 mths ago, back when the G4 still had life in it.

    Anyway, if these facts aren't unbelievable enough, the magazine had the DP800 representing the best Apple had to offer, when the DP1Gig had just been announced.

    I couldn't believe the dishonesty.:mad:

    Hey CWalton - good thread man! Good to mix some facts in with the rumors every now and then.
  13. wirewyrm macrumors newbie

    Jun 18, 2003
    Average User???

    I would agree that Apple need a cheaper machine somewhere in thair lineup. They are removing on rather large demographic group from their product placement. GAMES PLAYERS and THE ENTHUSIAST MARKET. They would need something along the lines of..... A single 1.6 or 1.8Ghz G5, Single Channel DDR 400 (4x Slots) so the memory doesn't go in pairs, Radeon 9800 Pro or even Geforce 5900fx 256mb. They could get away with 60/80Gb ATA133 HDD's and probably a combo drive. It wouldn't compete with the iMac or eMac because it wouldn't have a screen, or DVD-R or any of those other "Hot" Items that people want, but would offer upgradability, and good performance. I suppose an ideal Price would be about $1399. If the 1.6 went down to the price of the old G4, that would probably suffice. I suppose they will in time.
  14. iGav macrumors G3

    Mar 9, 2002
    For £6,498 you could max the RAM to 8GB... :D

    That Dell wouldn't stand a chance in the real world... and it's still more expensive as well... :eek: :eek: :p
  15. jxyama macrumors 68040


    Apr 3, 2003
    Re: Average User???

    i don't think such a machine would be in apple's business plan... apple survives on fat margins and by making their machines not a commodity - things where price is the decisive factor in sales.

    for games, more game makers would have to port to mac before apple can commit to making hardwares for "gamer machines." i dunno what kind of "enthusiast" you are talking about, but most mac "enthusiasts" are probably fine forking $2K+ for these new power macs. :D

    as much as we all would love to see lower end power macs, it hasn't happened thus far and i wouldn't hold your breath waiting... (or fuming about it)
  16. klozowski macrumors newbie

    Jun 24, 2003
    Re: Apple Vs Dell Price comparison...

    But those machines aren't similarly speced! Ignoring Apple's claims about their processors, why not fit the Dell with 2 2.4GHz Xeons, which would realistically perform similarly to Apple's Dual 2GHz G5s.

    Now Add 3 years of Applecare protection plan to bring Apple's warranty up to Dells, then remove one of Apple's Hard Drives for a similar capacity to the Dell, and finally replace the ATI Fire GL GX 1 with a Quadro FX500 to give it performance more commensurate with the Radeon 9800.

    Pricing these new configurations out on Dell and Apple's respective sites gives:

    Apple's machine: $6,722
    Dell's machine: $6,572

    Surprise surprise, two machines with performance and features as close as can realistically be compared cost about the same.

    It's already been stated that the arena in which Apple can't compete (and likely never will) pricewise is with the budget PC.
  17. gopher macrumors 65816

    Mar 31, 2002
    Maryland, USA
    You can build to order a higher end card at
  18. SoonToGetAMac macrumors 6502

    Jan 27, 2003
    Re: Re: Apple Vs Dell Price comparison...

    Yes, the but there are optimized apps for the G5, so performance on some apps is much better on the mac.
  19. klozowski macrumors newbie

    Jun 24, 2003
    Re: Re: Re: Apple Vs Dell Price comparison...

    Indeed, an app like, say, Photoshop has almost always had better performance on Macs despite their overall lagging behind PCs performance-wise in recent years.

    However, it would be nice to see an independent 3rd party do these tests instead of Apple trumpeting their own superiority.

    The bottom line about vendor-commissioned benchmarks: They mean nothing, good or bad.
  20. pseudobrit macrumors 68040


    Jul 23, 2002
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    Load up a top of the line 15" Dell laptop as close as you can to a 17" inch PowerBook.

    I came to $3052:

    with only one FW 400 port (PB has one of each)

    without a 15" screen

    without a DVD burner (not an option)

    without Bluetooth

    without 333MHz DDR RAM (266 is max)

    without an L3 cache

    no spiffy lightup keyboard

    same amount of RAM, HD space and speed...

    and with a 2.0 GHz P4 (not exactly what I'd want to invest in given the pace of PC speed bumping. Of course you could choose the 2.5GHz model but that'd be an extra $500, and the PB would be cheaper altogether then)

    So by saving $200 you lose 2" of widescreen, a DVD burner, Bluetooth, FireWire 800, speedy RAM and a functioning OS. ;)

    What you get over the PB is a chip with 2x the clock speed, an L2 cache of 512K instead of 256K, a bay for an extra CD-ROM drive (why???), a floppy drive (really, why?!?!?) over a pound of extra weight and 3/4" more thickness (almost double) while still mamaging to be deeper than its 2" bigger counterpart.

    Oh, yeah, and this is all Apple's last generation chip here. Wait until the G5 goes mobile and see all the differences crumble.

    Of course, you could add AppleCare to the bundle and push the Mac up another $350, but since the Dell is a piece of junk, it's going to need fixin' before three years, while the Apple should be fairly trouble-free past the one-year warranty.

    The wisdom of Tommy Boy: "I can take a dump in a box and mark it guaranteed... but all I sold you was a guaranteed piece of s***!"
  21. MrJamie macrumors member

    May 7, 2003
    Jobs stated that the new G5 computers both support and power professional cards, although they do not ship with them.
  22. jxyama macrumors 68040


    Apr 3, 2003
    if you really want to do a fair comparison, you can't do this. a warranty is a warranty. as if we weren't already biased in favor of an apple, let's not make it too blatant.
  23. NavyIntel007 macrumors 65816


    Nov 24, 2002
    Tampa, FL
    I was referencing the article partially just in case some PC jerk came along to say... "yeah but you can get the bottom line for $600..." I was merely adding strength to your arguement.

    By the way, add TCO and everything else to those prices and you could probably buy two macs for every one dell.
  24. Abstract macrumors Penryn


    Dec 27, 2002
    Location Location Location
    Re: Dell... Cheap????

    I agree. I also hate it when people say that they could easily build a PC that's better than any Apple product. Of course it's true, but then they're not buying from a large company, and could dust any PC from a major manufacturer as well. If the parts were available to build my own dual 2.0GHz G5, I'd probably be able to build it cheaper as well just by purchasing my RAM and other components somewhere else. The argument itself holds no water.

    W3rd. :cool:
  25. nuckinfutz macrumors 603


    Jul 3, 2002
    Middle Earth
    Says who? An arguement could probably be made for a Dual 2.8 but 2.4Ghz Xeons are not likely to beat 2Ghz 970s in a Dual config. Time will tell but I think you comparison just went up in smoke when you backed down to 2.4s.

Share This Page