It seems to me that the HP ZD7000 series is more than just marginally slower. I've been browsing through the benchmarks on the HP forums, and I've had some trouble coming up with specs similar to the 8790. I would imagine the reason for that is because when you configure the 7000 to competitive specs with the 8790, you might as well just buy it for the very slim price difference. Anyway, here's what I found as far as benchmarks.
|3dMark03 score: 2570
CPU score: 705
3.2HT - 2x512MB PC3200 - 80GB 5400 - 128MB NVidia 5600 - DVD/CDRW - 17" WXGA+ - XP Pro
This made by flashram:
|Stock was right at 20k. However, HP really has this thing underclocked. I am at 350/650 with no problems. Aquamark is 24,716.
flashram correct me if I'm wrong but that was posted in a thread asking for scores for the go5700. Could you post your system specs, please? Also it appears those scores are overclocked, am I correct?
8790@ 500/300 31,819
8790@ 515/300 32,420
So the 8790, which comes in from Sager extremely underclocked is still almost 3,000 marks above the 7000. And with the Sager equally overclocked it runs approximately 8,300 marks higher. Seems to me that the Sager is quite a bit more powerful, but if you can prove me wrong flashram, please do so. It would actually be nice because I can get the 7000 at a fairly discounted price, but for the performance difference there's no reason to go with it.