Note: No mobile X86 results up yet, so I had to compare Android to Windows, mobile to desktop, so note this is not fully Apples to Apples. Still, chose two CPU's as close in performance as I could. That being said:
The Quad Core Snapdragon in my Galaxy S4 looses badly to a slower Dual Core Pentium. Memory wise, its worse. Intel easily has more then double the memory performance.
Again, I am comparing a mobile chip to the closest possible Desktop counterpart due to lack of samples. Ideally, we'll get some X86 Android results thrown in, or maybe some Windows Phone samples. But I think this highlights the performance gap ARM will need to eventually make up.
I paid $35 for a GTS 450 from a guy on here awhile back. It is faster than IGP still. That would work right? I am a cheapskate and not afraid to buy used hardware. Have a GTX 460 heading my way from a friend out west, soon. Only have to pay shipping. :lol: Enough shopping around you can get yourself something better than a new APU, unless you have a Microcenter nearby.
I don't take seriously any suggestion that includes rebates, discounts, special offers or personal sales, only official market prices are acceptable. This is because we do generic across the board comparisons and builds in attempting to gauge the performance acquired for the money spent. It's far too easy to skew that number when members of either team are allowed to cheat. The golden rule is always "do what's best for you".
If buying a 0 upgrade path system, would be better off trying to find you a used Sandy bridge or Phenom II rig and slapping a GTX 750ti in it.
A zero upgrade system would always provide the best value for the consumer. Why buy a $70 USD pentium only to replace it with a $200 USD i5. That just means you have a $270 USD i5 as your CPU, a 35% markup. All your doing is pushing the true costs to some future date so you can win an argument. If your short on cash then use $130 in credit at a 13~20% APR (super high credit card) and purchase the i5 initially for $200. Assuming you have sh!t credit score, are getting ripped with a 20% APR and take one year to pay it off, your total CPU cost comes to $226 with the $26 USD being that 12 month interest on the additional $130 you needed.
Your way: $270 CPU cost and only get the i5 CPU after twelve months
My way: $226 CPU cost and get the i5 CPU immediately.
This formula works for every "upgradeable" component in your system, the CPU, the MB or the dGPU. Though the dGPU gets special note as you can often re-utilize those due to PCIe compatibility. In which case you can offset your dGPU replacement cycle. You still shouldn't plan with "upgrade" mentality, but you can replace your dGPU at different times then the rest of the system.
This is smart use of credit to "right size" your system from the get go. Use that system for three to four (or five) years, then rinse and repeat.
Well in that case i would not recommend that i don't even have all that stuff running on my 8 core. Just not me to have stuff open that doesn't need to be open the most i do is run Pandora and a game or maybe video capturing and a game(which a 4 core would be better on).
However i recommend people with such builds to not do that and go for max GPU performance with doable CPU performance and the dual core Pentium+7770(250X) does the work great and under my testing does better then the A10 7850K but in general performance it even feels slower to me but for gaming its better. Some newer games like watch dogs show the Pentium next to a quad core steamroller.
Also for the combo part that is a nonsense comparison since your part is highly weaker in GPU performance you are more talking about 350$ gaming rigs not 400$, anything under 400$(to weak) i don't do except for the new Amd Athlon AM1 for HTPC
"256 Radeon (shader) cores"
Lol not even GCN doesn't support directx 12 or mantle. [/quotemsg]
You might not like it but that is how the market works. it is based on price. a 250x is 100 dollars pushing the pentium build difference to 60 dollars. great if money is not a issue but for most it makes a big difference. I can even shift lower if need be , something intel cannot do. [/quotemsg]
Money is not an issue(we are talking about gaming rigs for budgets and 400$ is the set price i can not recommend a Amd at that price range. Anything under 400$ seems worthless for most games. Even 400$ is pushing it, won't start enjoying PC gaming until 550$ at that price you can get a 6300 and a 265 from Amd and a ok board.
you mean like comparing a 99 dollar apu to a 300 dollar apu 3770k, is it a nonsense comparison since your part is highly weaker in GPU performance ? See i can do it too.
For one Intel never claimed they have a APU that is a Amd term. For number 2 what case are you even talking about?
He probably turned it on windows and said hey look it booted without running any stress test's hell i can get my 8350fx to probably hit 6ghz on air into windows but it will have a BSOD in a second.
I don't take seriously any suggestion that includes rebates, discounts, special offers or personal sales, only official market prices are acceptable. This is because we do generic across the board comparisons and builds in attempting to gauge the performance acquired for the money spent. It's far too easy to skew that number when members of either team are allowed to cheat. The golden rule is always "do what's best for you".
If buying a 0 upgrade path system, would be better off trying to find you a used Sandy bridge or Phenom II rig and slapping a GTX 750ti in it.
A zero upgrade system would always provide the best value for the consumer. Why buy a $70 USD pentium only to replace it with a $200 USD i5. That just means you have a $270 USD i5 as your CPU, a 35% markup. All your doing is pushing the true costs to some future date so you can win an argument. If your short on cash then use $130 in credit at a 13~20% APR (super high credit card) and purchase the i5 initially for $200. Assuming you have sh!t credit score, are getting ripped with a 20% APR and take one year to pay it off, your total CPU cost comes to $226 with the $26 USD being that 12 month interest on the additional $130 you needed.
Your way: $270 CPU cost and only get the i5 CPU after twelve months
My way: $226 CPU cost and get the i5 CPU immediately.
This formula works for every "upgradeable" component in your system, the CPU, the MB or the dGPU. Though the dGPU gets special note as you can often re-utilize those due to PCIe compatibility. In which case you can offset your dGPU replacement cycle. You still shouldn't plan with "upgrade" mentality, but you can replace your dGPU at different times then the rest of the system.
This is smart use of credit to "right size" your system from the get go. Use that system for three to four (or five) years, then rinse and repeat.
Ah the credit thing again
Really then why stop at 200$? Why not just buy everything on credit we can always pay more later. I will probably never ever buy a credit card my whole entire life. I would rather save money and use a debit card.
Really then why stop at 200$? Why not just buy everything on credit we can always pay more later. I will probably never ever buy a credit card my whole entire life. I would rather save money and use a debit card.
Yet your not saving anything, your spending more. Your system had you spending $270 total for a CPU while the credit had you spend $226, and that's assuming you have horrible credit score.
You only had $70 for a CPU but wanted to eventually put in a $200 CPU. This means you would need to spend $70 now then another $200 in twelve months for a grand total of $270. Or you could of used $130 in credit along with your $70 in cash to spend $200 now, then pay it off the exact same time period and spend a total of $226.
Your not saving anything, you spending $44 more for the exact same system. 270 > 226.
Really can't break it down any further then that. Mathematically your making a poor financial decision, and worse your recommending others make similarly poor financial decisions.
You can rant and rave all you want, doesn't change the hard numbers. If a user requires X system to use for three to four years, then they should just purchase that X system and replace it after those years. The user, should not, purchase an X -2 system with the goal to spend more money (upgrade) and make it into that same X system. If the user does not have the required cash to purchase X system then it is financially advantageous to use credit to make up the difference rather then spending even more money total on the X -2 to X "upgrade path". You never save money going the "upgrade path" route.
Really then why stop at 200$? Why not just buy everything on credit we can always pay more later. I will probably never ever buy a credit card my whole entire life. I would rather save money and use a debit card.
Yet your not saving anything, your spending more. Your system had you spending $270 total for a CPU while the credit had you spend $226, and that's assuming you have horrible credit score.
You only had $70 for a CPU but wanted to eventually put in a $200 CPU. This means you would need to spend $70 now then another $200 in twelve months for a grand total of $270. Or you could of used $130 in credit along with your $70 in cash to spend $200 now, then pay it off the exact same time period and spend a total of $226.
Your not saving anything, you spending $44 more for the exact same system. 270 > 226.
Really can't break it down any further then that. Mathematically your making a poor financial decision, and worse your recommending others make similarly poor financial decisions.
You can rant and rave all you want, doesn't change the hard numbers. If a user requires X system to use for three to four years, then they should just purchase that X system and replace it after those years. The user, should not, purchase an X -2 system with the goal to spend more money (upgrade) and make it into that same X system. If the user does not have the required cash to purchase X system then it is financially advantageous to use credit to make up the difference rather then spending even more money total on the X -2 to X "upgrade path". You never save money going the "upgrade path" route.
That is why "upgrade path" is a joke.
What about the fee's with credit cards? What about the monthly amounts you obviously can't pay it off that month if you only had lets say 400$ for a build(that might of already taken you 10 months to save for). Interest rates alone are 15% and then you might only be able to pay 40$ a month on a credit card with interest rates and other fee's the put in their it would be nonsense. Credit cards should only be used for emergency's for you to recommend otherwise is just wrong i think.
Perhaps read why most American idiots are in debt credit cards come up several times. http://financialplan.about.com/od/creditdebtmanagement/a/The-True-Cost-Of-Credit-Cards.htm
People buy budget hardware over money issues i'm sure everyone would love to have a 8350fx-I5 or 6 core I7 with 32GB of ram and 295X but that would cost upto 3500$ do you expect that?
Made a great example from real credit card sites
600$ Build instead of old 400$ build
40$ only amount saving's for computer(now used for credit card)
15% interests
Hidden fee's 35$ a year(3$ a month)
20 months or 1 year and 8 months to pay of debt
Saving 15 months to buy it with no debt
Paying extra 200$ in the long run with a credit card
Now 400$ build with Pentium instead of I5
Upgrade to I5 240$
640$ investment instead of 800$ HMMMMMMM
Oh and that 640$ would be paid off for in 16 months
Really then why stop at 200$? Why not just buy everything on credit we can always pay more later. I will probably never ever buy a credit card my whole entire life. I would rather save money and use a debit card.
The way credit ratings work you're better off having a few credit cards and use them sparingly. Otherwise when you go to get a loan for a house or something meaningful you'll be denied for having 0 credit history. Just make sure the cards have no annual fee. I wouldn't CC the whole PC either but a small loan over the course of a year is less than the electric bill for the PC.
you mean like comparing a 99 dollar apu to a 300 dollar apu 3770k, is it a nonsense comparison since your part is highly weaker in GPU performance ? See i can do it too.
For one Intel never claimed they have a APU that is a Amd term. For number 2 what case are you even talking about?
replace apu with igfx, , second i was just parroting what you said before. "Also for the combo part that is a nonsense comparison since your part is highly weaker in GPU performance"
the i7 is a cpu monster but is beat by a cheap apu in gpu performance if that is how you gauge system
Na that is invalid comparison since my total price for both the CPU and GPU is 160$ and you get a GPU 3-4 times better GPU performance. What you used was a fallacious argument a strawman one as well
Really then why stop at 200$? Why not just buy everything on credit we can always pay more later. I will probably never ever buy a credit card my whole entire life. I would rather save money and use a debit card.
Yet your not saving anything, your spending more. Your system had you spending $270 total for a CPU while the credit had you spend $226, and that's assuming you have horrible credit score.
You only had $70 for a CPU but wanted to eventually put in a $200 CPU. This means you would need to spend $70 now then another $200 in twelve months for a grand total of $270. Or you could of used $130 in credit along with your $70 in cash to spend $200 now, then pay it off the exact same time period and spend a total of $226.
Your not saving anything, you spending $44 more for the exact same system. 270 > 226.
Really can't break it down any further then that. Mathematically your making a poor financial decision, and worse your recommending others make similarly poor financial decisions.
You can rant and rave all you want, doesn't change the hard numbers. If a user requires X system to use for three to four years, then they should just purchase that X system and replace it after those years. The user, should not, purchase an X -2 system with the goal to spend more money (upgrade) and make it into that same X system. If the user does not have the required cash to purchase X system then it is financially advantageous to use credit to make up the difference rather then spending even more money total on the X -2 to X "upgrade path". You never save money going the "upgrade path" route.
That is why "upgrade path" is a joke.
What about the fee's with credit cards? What about the monthly amounts you obviously can't pay it off that month if you only had lets say 400$ for a build(that might of already taken you 10 months to save for). Interest rates alone are 15% and then you might only be able to pay 40$ a month on a credit card with interest rates and other fee's the put in their it would be nonsense. Credit cards should only be used for emergency's for you to recommend otherwise is just wrong i think.
Perhaps read why most American idiots are in debt credit cards come up several times. http://financialplan.about.com/od/creditdebtmanagement/a/The-True-Cost-Of-Credit-Cards.htm
People buy budget hardware over money issues i'm sure everyone would love to have a 8350fx-I5 or 6 core I7 with 32GB of ram and 295X but that would cost upto 3500$ do you expect that?
You obviously didn't even read my posts and are now just word vomiting.
I already accounted for interest at an atrocious 20% APR paid over a twelve month period. I deliberately overestimated the financial impact of the credit costs just to give your side more weight and it still came in cheaper to use credit rather then buy "upgrades".
You keep up with this straw man facade and you'll find yourself on a vacation. I put out a very logical argument and the best you can do is straw man it by creating a ton of assumptions that have nothing to do with your original argument. If a user needs system X, why on earth would having credit make them purchase X +2? If they don't have credit then they are forced to purchase X -2 and then later spend significantly more money to "upgrade" it to X. Having credit does not force them to spend more then the cost of X.and is cheaper in the long run then being forced to "upgrade".
I've already demonstrated, with numbers, that you should never purchase a system with a plan on upgrading at a later date. It's always, without fail, a poor financial decision. Determine what you need for the next three/four/five years then purchase approximately 10% higher then that. After the elapsed time, replace system with another one that you deemed necessary for another cycle.
There is a professional term for this system, it's called "Life Cycle" and big business's use it for revenue generating systems. The only time we ever "upgrade" anything is if there is an unforeseen emergency situation where a particular system needs more capacity in order to keep generating revenue. The usual culprit is an unpredicted explosion in customer utilization and upgrading it results in a net positive financial gain because your generating revenue with it.
Really then why stop at 200$? Why not just buy everything on credit we can always pay more later. I will probably never ever buy a credit card my whole entire life. I would rather save money and use a debit card.
The way credit ratings work you're better off having a few credit cards and use them sparingly. Otherwise when you go to get a loan for a house or something meaningful you'll be denied for having 0 credit history. Just make sure the cards have no annual fee. I wouldn't CC the whole PC either but a small loan over the course of a year is less than the electric bill for the PC.
Get a CC from the same bank that you have your checking and savings account with. They often will provide you with a line of credit that the CC is attached to. The problem is people getting credit from banks they aren't affiliated with and thus incurring yearly charges and other if they are really stupid, variable rate APR.
13~15% is common with most CC's, I did the numbers using 20% as it's atrocious and typically the rate of a company sharking their customers. I also over estimated the amount of interest paid as I assumed it being paid off lump sum at the end of the twelve month period rather then having the principle reduced over time via incremental payments.
Really then why stop at 200$? Why not just buy everything on credit we can always pay more later. I will probably never ever buy a credit card my whole entire life. I would rather save money and use a debit card.
Yet your not saving anything, your spending more. Your system had you spending $270 total for a CPU while the credit had you spend $226, and that's assuming you have horrible credit score.
You only had $70 for a CPU but wanted to eventually put in a $200 CPU. This means you would need to spend $70 now then another $200 in twelve months for a grand total of $270. Or you could of used $130 in credit along with your $70 in cash to spend $200 now, then pay it off the exact same time period and spend a total of $226.
Your not saving anything, you spending $44 more for the exact same system. 270 > 226.
Really can't break it down any further then that. Mathematically your making a poor financial decision, and worse your recommending others make similarly poor financial decisions.
You can rant and rave all you want, doesn't change the hard numbers. If a user requires X system to use for three to four years, then they should just purchase that X system and replace it after those years. The user, should not, purchase an X -2 system with the goal to spend more money (upgrade) and make it into that same X system. If the user does not have the required cash to purchase X system then it is financially advantageous to use credit to make up the difference rather then spending even more money total on the X -2 to X "upgrade path". You never save money going the "upgrade path" route.
That is why "upgrade path" is a joke.
What about the fee's with credit cards? What about the monthly amounts you obviously can't pay it off that month if you only had lets say 400$ for a build(that might of already taken you 10 months to save for). Interest rates alone are 15% and then you might only be able to pay 40$ a month on a credit card with interest rates and other fee's the put in their it would be nonsense. Credit cards should only be used for emergency's for you to recommend otherwise is just wrong i think.
Perhaps read why most American idiots are in debt credit cards come up several times. http://financialplan.about.com/od/creditdebtmanagement/a/The-True-Cost-Of-Credit-Cards.htm
People buy budget hardware over money issues i'm sure everyone would love to have a 8350fx-I5 or 6 core I7 with 32GB of ram and 295X but that would cost upto 3500$ do you expect that?
You obviously didn't even read my posts and are now just word vomiting.
I already accounted for interest at an atrocious 20% APR paid over a twelve month period. I deliberately overestimated the financial impact of the credit costs just to give your side more weight and it still came in cheaper to use credit rather then buy "upgrades".
You keep up with this straw man facade and you'll find yourself on a vacation. I put out a very logical argument and the best you can do is straw man it by creating a ton of assumptions that have nothing to do with your original argument. If a user needs system X, why on earth would having credit make them purchase X +2? If they don't have credit then they are forced to purchase X -2 and then later spend significantly more money to "upgrade" it to X. Having credit does not force them to spend more then the cost of X.and is cheaper in the long run then being forced to "upgrade".
I've already demonstrated, with numbers, that you should never purchase a system with a plan on upgrading at a later date. It's always, without fail, a poor financial decision. Determine what you need for the next three/four/five years then purchase approximately 10% higher then that. After the elapsed time, replace system with another one that you deemed necessary for another cycle.
There is a professional term for this system, it's called "Life Cycle" and big business's use it for revenue generating systems. The only time we ever "upgrade" anything is if there is an unforeseen emergency situation where a particular system needs more capacity in order to keep generating revenue. The usual culprit is an unpredicted explosion in customer utilization and upgrading it results in a net positive financial gain because your generating revenue with it.
530/40 Credit 15% interest rates with 3$ a month maintenance fee
40-3$=37$ *.15=5.55$ 37-5.55= 31.45$ Paid for the principle
This would take 16.85 Months to pay off instead of my option
640/40 Debit 16 Months to pay it off
How are these numbers wrong again? "and then later spend significantly more money to "upgrade" it to X"
Edit and yes i know i used a fallacious argument their sorry its just i can't find your current evidence convincing(also state i do not like banks either and credit cards to me seems like you pay more so to be fair i'm biased but it kinda sounds like you work at a bank anyways so maybe you are to.)
One other thing i keep forgetting about is you can always sell that pentium for 30$ and current hardware does get cheaper 280X is like 260$ now instead of 300$. 8350fx is 180 a lot now. Technology gets cheaper. Heck when my Phenom II x6 1100T came out it was like 280$ i think when i got it it was only 180$(athlon II x4 i had before it was 100$) To be honest it seems better to upgrade on Amd platforms if memory serves me right. I also sold that phenom ii x6 for 100$ in less then a week online on craigslist.
Really then why stop at 200$? Why not just buy everything on credit we can always pay more later. I will probably never ever buy a credit card my whole entire life. I would rather save money and use a debit card.
Yet your not saving anything, your spending more. Your system had you spending $270 total for a CPU while the credit had you spend $226, and that's assuming you have horrible credit score.
You only had $70 for a CPU but wanted to eventually put in a $200 CPU. This means you would need to spend $70 now then another $200 in twelve months for a grand total of $270. Or you could of used $130 in credit along with your $70 in cash to spend $200 now, then pay it off the exact same time period and spend a total of $226.
Your not saving anything, you spending $44 more for the exact same system. 270 > 226.
Really can't break it down any further then that. Mathematically your making a poor financial decision, and worse your recommending others make similarly poor financial decisions.
You can rant and rave all you want, doesn't change the hard numbers. If a user requires X system to use for three to four years, then they should just purchase that X system and replace it after those years. The user, should not, purchase an X -2 system with the goal to spend more money (upgrade) and make it into that same X system. If the user does not have the required cash to purchase X system then it is financially advantageous to use credit to make up the difference rather then spending even more money total on the X -2 to X "upgrade path". You never save money going the "upgrade path" route.
That is why "upgrade path" is a joke.
What about the fee's with credit cards? What about the monthly amounts you obviously can't pay it off that month if you only had lets say 400$ for a build(that might of already taken you 10 months to save for). Interest rates alone are 15% and then you might only be able to pay 40$ a month on a credit card with interest rates and other fee's the put in their it would be nonsense. Credit cards should only be used for emergency's for you to recommend otherwise is just wrong i think.
Perhaps read why most American idiots are in debt credit cards come up several times. http://financialplan.about.com/od/creditdebtmanagement/a/The-True-Cost-Of-Credit-Cards.htm
People buy budget hardware over money issues i'm sure everyone would love to have a 8350fx-I5 or 6 core I7 with 32GB of ram and 295X but that would cost upto 3500$ do you expect that?
You obviously didn't even read my posts and are now just word vomiting.
I already accounted for interest at an atrocious 20% APR paid over a twelve month period. I deliberately overestimated the financial impact of the credit costs just to give your side more weight and it still came in cheaper to use credit rather then buy "upgrades".
You keep up with this straw man facade and you'll find yourself on a vacation. I put out a very logical argument and the best you can do is straw man it by creating a ton of assumptions that have nothing to do with your original argument. If a user needs system X, why on earth would having credit make them purchase X +2? If they don't have credit then they are forced to purchase X -2 and then later spend significantly more money to "upgrade" it to X. Having credit does not force them to spend more then the cost of X.and is cheaper in the long run then being forced to "upgrade".
I've already demonstrated, with numbers, that you should never purchase a system with a plan on upgrading at a later date. It's always, without fail, a poor financial decision. Determine what you need for the next three/four/five years then purchase approximately 10% higher then that. After the elapsed time, replace system with another one that you deemed necessary for another cycle.
There is a professional term for this system, it's called "Life Cycle" and big business's use it for revenue generating systems. The only time we ever "upgrade" anything is if there is an unforeseen emergency situation where a particular system needs more capacity in order to keep generating revenue. The usual culprit is an unpredicted explosion in customer utilization and upgrading it results in a net positive financial gain because your generating revenue with it.
530/40 Credit 15% interest rates with 3$ a month maintenance fee
40-3$=37$ *.15=5.55$ 37-5.55= 31.45$ Paid for the principle
This would take 16.85 Months to pay off instead of my option
640/40 Debit 16 Months to pay it off
How are these numbers wrong again? "and then later spend significantly more money to "upgrade" it to X"
Because they are completely fictitious and your basically lying.
If you only had $40 for a PC now, how on earth are you buying that $400 PC using debit right now? Your not. You also invented the yearly fee which doesn't exist if you use a CC from your own bank.
You have $400 cash on hand (the proper term).
You want $600 build
You can either use $200 in credit, or spend more then $200 in a period of time. You keep moving the goal posts but the period is twelve months. Taking $200 in credit at 15% APR with a twelve month payment time (the period where you would purchase your upgrades) costs ~$16.60 USD.
Balance: $200
Interest Rate: %15
Desired Months to pay off: 12
Per Month Payment: $18.05
Total Payment: $216.60
The costs of that $200 in credit is going to be less then the costs of upgrading. I used the Pentium to i5 as a good example because it demonstrates how that initial $70 USD is a wasted cost. You didn't actually list what you were "upgrading" and instead use's invented numbers with a very bad understanding of how credit works.
You just typed in number spaghetti like what Juan does.
If you really want to run the numbers, this is how you do it realistically.
Do a projected "end build". (This is what you have determined you want within one years time) This is known as COA 1
Then do a "starting build". (This is what you have with cash on hand) This is known as COA 2
Note the the costs between them ($600 vs $400 / ect..). (This is the amount of credit you'll need)
Write down the costs of the additional hardware you need to upgrade the "starting build" to the "end build". (the new CPU, MB, or GPU)
Use the above calculator to calculate the costs of credit for just starting with the "end build", add this cost to the cost of the "end build" to create Total Cost for COA1
Add the costs of the "upgrade hardware" to the "starting build". This is the Total Cost for COA2
Now compare costs. COA1 gets you the desired system immediately, COA2 gets you the desired system in twelve months time.
The end build will win every time. It's cheaper and gets you want you need sooner.
Edit and yes i know i used a fallacious argument their sorry its just i can't find your current evidence convincing(also state i do not like banks either and credit cards to me seems like you pay more so to be fair i'm biased but it kinda sounds like you work at a bank anyways so maybe you are to.)
Your bias is preventing you from thinking rationally and objectively. You have an emotional investment in the dislike of credit and thus will never allow yourself to recognize a beneficial usage of it.
I'm an Systems Engineer at a major multi-national corporation. Part of my job is developing Course of Actions (COA) for our customers that outline the various costs associated with building systems. These are people who spend hundreds of thousands of USD to sometimes millions of USD on solutions. One of the most common idea's we see floated by "good idea fairy's" is to purchase cheaper hardware then necessary upfront, and "upgrade" that hardware to what they really need in a years time. And every time I must sit down and explain to them, the same way I'm explaining to you only with much bigger numbers, how they always end up spending more in the long run doing that. Their idea of "saving money" only works in the extreme short term, they get to report less expense in that quarter, but in the long run they always end up spending more.
This concept is no different in the PC world. If you need an i5, then buy an i5. Don't buy a Pentium and plan on spending more to buy an i5.
Ideally you would purchase everything with cash on hand. If you don't have cash on hand, then credit works as the next best solution. The worst solution is to spend what you have on hand on an inferior system with the plan to save up and spend more on replacement parts. Total cost is what's important here.
Really then why stop at 200$? Why not just buy everything on credit we can always pay more later. I will probably never ever buy a credit card my whole entire life. I would rather save money and use a debit card.
Yet your not saving anything, your spending more. Your system had you spending $270 total for a CPU while the credit had you spend $226, and that's assuming you have horrible credit score.
You only had $70 for a CPU but wanted to eventually put in a $200 CPU. This means you would need to spend $70 now then another $200 in twelve months for a grand total of $270. Or you could of used $130 in credit along with your $70 in cash to spend $200 now, then pay it off the exact same time period and spend a total of $226.
Your not saving anything, you spending $44 more for the exact same system. 270 > 226.
Really can't break it down any further then that. Mathematically your making a poor financial decision, and worse your recommending others make similarly poor financial decisions.
You can rant and rave all you want, doesn't change the hard numbers. If a user requires X system to use for three to four years, then they should just purchase that X system and replace it after those years. The user, should not, purchase an X -2 system with the goal to spend more money (upgrade) and make it into that same X system. If the user does not have the required cash to purchase X system then it is financially advantageous to use credit to make up the difference rather then spending even more money total on the X -2 to X "upgrade path". You never save money going the "upgrade path" route.
That is why "upgrade path" is a joke.
What about the fee's with credit cards? What about the monthly amounts you obviously can't pay it off that month if you only had lets say 400$ for a build(that might of already taken you 10 months to save for). Interest rates alone are 15% and then you might only be able to pay 40$ a month on a credit card with interest rates and other fee's the put in their it would be nonsense. Credit cards should only be used for emergency's for you to recommend otherwise is just wrong i think.
Perhaps read why most American idiots are in debt credit cards come up several times. http://financialplan.about.com/od/creditdebtmanagement/a/The-True-Cost-Of-Credit-Cards.htm
People buy budget hardware over money issues i'm sure everyone would love to have a 8350fx-I5 or 6 core I7 with 32GB of ram and 295X but that would cost upto 3500$ do you expect that?
You obviously didn't even read my posts and are now just word vomiting.
I already accounted for interest at an atrocious 20% APR paid over a twelve month period. I deliberately overestimated the financial impact of the credit costs just to give your side more weight and it still came in cheaper to use credit rather then buy "upgrades".
You keep up with this straw man facade and you'll find yourself on a vacation. I put out a very logical argument and the best you can do is straw man it by creating a ton of assumptions that have nothing to do with your original argument. If a user needs system X, why on earth would having credit make them purchase X +2? If they don't have credit then they are forced to purchase X -2 and then later spend significantly more money to "upgrade" it to X. Having credit does not force them to spend more then the cost of X.and is cheaper in the long run then being forced to "upgrade".
I've already demonstrated, with numbers, that you should never purchase a system with a plan on upgrading at a later date. It's always, without fail, a poor financial decision. Determine what you need for the next three/four/five years then purchase approximately 10% higher then that. After the elapsed time, replace system with another one that you deemed necessary for another cycle.
There is a professional term for this system, it's called "Life Cycle" and big business's use it for revenue generating systems. The only time we ever "upgrade" anything is if there is an unforeseen emergency situation where a particular system needs more capacity in order to keep generating revenue. The usual culprit is an unpredicted explosion in customer utilization and upgrading it results in a net positive financial gain because your generating revenue with it.
530/40 Credit 15% interest rates with 3$ a month maintenance fee
40-3$=37$ *.15=5.55$ 37-5.55= 31.45$ Paid for the principle
This would take 16.85 Months to pay off instead of my option
640/40 Debit 16 Months to pay it off
How are these numbers wrong again? "and then later spend significantly more money to "upgrade" it to X"
Because they are completely fictitious and your basically lying.
If you only had $40 for a PC now, how on earth are you buying that $400 PC using debit right now? Your not. You also invented the yearly fee which doesn't exist if you use a CC from your own bank.
You have $400 cash on hand (the proper term).
You want $600 build
You can either use $200 in credit, or spend more then $200 in a period of time. You keep moving the goal posts but the period is twelve months. Taking $200 in credit at 15% APR with a twelve month payment time (the period where you would purchase your upgrades) costs ~$16.60 USD.
Balance: $200
Interest Rate: %15
Desired Months to pay off: 12
Per Month Payment: $18.05
Total Payment: $216.60
The costs of that $200 in credit is going to be less then the costs of upgrading. I used the Pentium to i5 as a good example because it demonstrates how that initial $70 USD is a wasted cost. You didn't actually list what you were "upgrading" and instead use's invented numbers with a very bad understanding of how credit works.
You just typed in number spaghetti like what Juan does.
If you really want to run the numbers, this is how you do it realistically.
Do a projected "end build". (This is what you have determined you want within one years time) This is known as COA 1
Then do a "starting build". (This is what you have with cash on hand) This is known as COA 2
Note the the costs between them ($600 vs $400 / ect..). (This is the amount of credit you'll need)
Write down the costs of the additional hardware you need to upgrade the "starting build" to the "end build". (the new CPU, MB, or GPU)
Use the above calculator to calculate the costs of credit for just starting with the "end build", add this cost to the cost of the "end build" to create Total Cost for COA1
Add the costs of the "upgrade hardware" to the "starting build". This is the Total Cost for COA2
Now compare costs. COA1 gets you the desired system immediately, COA2 gets you the desired system in twelve months time.
The end build will win every time. It's cheaper and gets you want you need sooner.
However i used the cost of 530$ for the I5 build using credit with the fee's and then my version for 640$ with NO cash on hand(for either) and many credit cards have monthly maintenance fee's its not like every single person on the planet uses their own bank and heck the bank my friend has charges him extra a month for a credit card he doesn't even use. Its a smaller bank a lot of people don't even trust the bigger banks anymore after everything they did.
Plus i fail to see how computer hardware doesn't get cheaper every year? Computer hardware does not always stay at a fixed price for ever. As always you can sell your older stuff
How the hell did you purchase a $640 system with no cash on hand and not use credit? Did you rob the store for the parts or something?
All the numbers you did were bullsh!t, they didn't even make logical sense. I just outlined exactly how you go about calculating total system cost, it's very easy to follow.
You just don't like credit and refuse to understand it, even when it's beneficial. At this junction it's impossible to hold a rational discourse with a true believer.
How the hell did you purchase a $640 system with no cash on hand and not use credit? Did you rob the store for the parts or something?
All the numbers you did were bullsh!t, they didn't even make logical sense. I just outlined exactly how you go about calculating total system cost, it's very easy to follow.
You just don't like credit and refuse to understand it, even when it's beneficial. At this junction it's impossible to hold a rational discourse with a true believer.
Why are you getting so defensive i already stated that it was over saving's not robbing a bank saving not pulling money out of no where. You also seem to be claiming i don't understand(you know who you are talking to a math addict) yet you don't even look at what i'm saying then you use some fallacious example(bold) to support your statements. With credit you get it NOW but with saving you get it later. This is why i claim saving to buy a gaming rig is better then using credit you save money overall. And you just ignore the selling parts and technology is not always at a fixed price.
How can you just refuse to look at that site i gave you that proved that upgrading to a 50$ I7 920 from a what ever the person owned before is a good idea? Sorry but come on i'm so confused on your "reasoning which is not biased since its your job"
I am a cheapskate and not afraid to buy used hardware. Have a GTX 460 heading my way from a friend out west, soon. Only have to pay shipping. :lol: Enough shopping around you can get yourself something better than a new APU, unless you have a Microcenter nearby.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram