# interesting Mac Pro versus HP Elite comparison



## boxlight (Mar 20, 2008)

I'm looking for a powerful new desktop computer. I'm a big Mac, so don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to do the "Mac's are more expensive thing". But I saw this interesting comparison, and I have a couple questions:

HP Elite $1249 (futureshop)
HP Elite Intel Core i7-860 Computer (HPE-372F) - Future Shop 

Mac Pro $2599 (apple.ca)
Configure - Apple Store (Canada) 

Specs wise, both machines are very very close. The main difference are the CPUs.

cpubenchmark.net rates them like so ...

Intel Core i7 860 @ 2.80GHz	5,544	$279.99*
Intel Xeon X5560 @ 2.80GHz	5,451	$1,372.49*

... the significantly cheaper CPU (in the HP) actually beats the Mac's CPU. Obviously the Mac's CPU is the more expensive item, and is pushing the price of the Mac Pro up $1000 higher than the HP Elite.

My question for ehmac is why would Apple choose to put the significantly more expensive CPU in the Mac -- Is the CPU actually better is some way that is not obvious to me (and cpubenchmark.net)? 

I mean, it seems extremely illogical to build with a $1300 item when a $300 performs just as well.

What am I missing here? 

I prefer the Mac for all the reasons we know the Mac's are better, but the CPU issue puzzles me.

boxlight


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

xeon processors are server/workstation class chips. they're built to be run under heavy load 24/7 and not flinch. they also support ECC memory.


----------



## ldphoto (Jul 9, 2009)

The primary concern is that the i7 chips do not support multi-processor configurations, so for most Mac Pro configurations, an i7 would not be useable.

Apple could use an i7 chip in the base quad-core model, but that would most likely make pricing inconsistent and cannibalize sales of higher-end models.

Luc


----------



## pcronin (Feb 20, 2005)

to add to what the others have said, the Core i7 is a consumer chip where the Xeon is a Prosumer chip. Which is why i7 is in iMac 

The benchmarks run we both more than likely run on non mac hardware, and who knows if they used the exact same "everything else" to test. 

Either way. if you get the HP, you're going to be running Win 7 out of the box. Linux is an option, but OS X is not. (legally, not talking hackintosh)


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

i-rui said:


> xeon processors are server/workstation class chips. they're built to be run under heavy load 24/7 and not flinch. they also support ECC memory.





ldphoto said:


> The primary concern is that the i7 chips do not support multi-processor configurations, so for most Mac Pro configurations, an i7 would not be useable.
> 
> Apple could use an i7 chip in the base quad-core model, but that would most likely make pricing inconsistent and cannibalize sales of higher-end models.
> 
> Luc


What they said... 

Plus a Mac Pro is way beyond just what CPU it uses. Look at the differences in the cases and the ease of accessibility/upgrade ability and the level of fit and finish, they aren't even close. Then there is the whole OSX thing. When you buy a Mac you are also buying the OS and paying for it's development costs, that is why OS upgrades are so cheap relatively speaking with Macs because they primarily fund the OS dev through hardware sales and not software sales like MS.


----------

