Intel Says CPU Prices Irrelevant in Ultrabooks

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
about 40 percent of the consumer PC market may be occupied by ultrabooks by the end of next year
Click to expand...
40 percent?!?!?
Maybe if they sold for under $600 and became a replacement for low-end notebooks.
I just don't see the need for a super-netbook in a world where tablets are becoming the media-consumption device of choice.
 
... sorry as i forgot to add this but what about the price of your sandy bridge ulv's being a nice big chunk of the 600-700 cost estimate ? add to that the thin requirement resulting in stringent designs , lets just see how they do it . being able to pull off another MB Air show is not something trivial especially at those selling price targets .
 
If CPU prices are irrelevant, does that mean they are giving them away for free when a computer is labeled an ultrabook? Weird...


(More likely, Intel will have a sliding price that keeps Ultrabooks hovering at the target price).
 
[citation][nom]jacobdrj[/nom]If CPU prices are irrelevant, does that mean they are giving them away for free when a computer is labeled an ultrabook? Weird...(More likely, Intel will have a sliding price that keeps Ultrabooks hovering at the target price).[/citation]No, they're saying that they won't be able to hit target prices even if they give them away for free.
 
With Apple Air 11" at $999 so much for high-priced Apple HW rant.
Same for the iPad. The Apple competitors can't meet Apple prices. Hmm....
 
That a great idea! Intel should set a good example for the rest industry by lower the prices of their cpus
 
Another pointless piece of tech, if ultrabooks want to compete with regular laptops they must have lower prices.
Its everything about price.
Who the hell wants a laptop less powerfull and more expensive just becasue its little thinner? Its just dumb
 
[citation][nom]tmshdw[/nom]With Apple Air 11" at $999 so much for high-priced Apple HW rant.Same for the iPad. The Apple competitors can't meet Apple prices. Hmm....[/citation]Unlike apple their competitors don`t use cheap slaves to manufacture their computer insides ... they actually have to pay those guys. Sheesh.
 
Apple is selling the 13" MB Air for $1300 with a CPU that has a "Recommended Channel Price" of $250.

Is Intel trying to tell us that nobody can do it cheaper than Apple?

[citation][nom]ohim[/nom]Unlike apple their competitors don`t use cheap slaves to manufacture their computer insides ... they actually have to pay those guys. Sheesh.[/citation]
lol.
U can be 100% sure that in every computer u own there is something made by a Chinese worker, who's woefully underpaid by western standards.
Doesn't mean it's slave labour though. The guys at Foxconn earn decent money by Chinese standards.
 
[citation][nom]molo9000[/nom]Apple is selling the 13" MB Air for $1300 with a CPU that has a "Recommended Channel Price" of $250.Is Intel trying to tell us that nobody can do it cheaper than Apple?lol.U can be 100% sure that in every computer u own there is something made by a Chinese worker, who's woefully underpaid by western standards.Doesn't mean it's slave labour though. The guys at Foxconn earn decent money by Chinese standards.[/citation]
Chill i know that .. actually every giant in the world uses cheap labor ...was more like a joke but still ... something is not being payed much so that apple can still produce something "cheap" and get shit loads of profit after it anyway.
 
What is Intel's deal? If they want an ultra book so bad want don't they figure out how to build one instead of harping on manufacturers. They want them so bad, (to sell more processors I assume) but they don't seem to be doing a whole lot to help.
 
Let us not forget that Intel already has an Ultrabook in that hands of many a user, the Macbook Air. Intel simply wants its other partners to up the anty.

I think that there is a significant market for the Ultrabook. I would much rather have a higher quality PC based Macbook air with an i7 then any tablet device. Just my preferred method of interface.

-CB
 
I'm pretty sure if they gave them away for free they could hit 1000 bucks pretty easy. Intel's trying so hard to push their new design, and while it's a good design, they need to help out somehow. They can't just expect manufacturers to do what they say because Intel told them to.
 
[citation][nom]tmshdw[/nom]With Apple Air 11" at $999 so much for high-priced Apple HW rant.Same for the iPad. The Apple competitors can't meet Apple prices. Hmm....[/citation]

Ok, I'll bite. Amazon Kindle Fire android tablet $199.99 - iPad $499.99
 
[citation][nom]dalethepcman[/nom]Ok, I'll bite. Amazon Kindle Fire android tablet $199.99 - iPad $499.99[/citation]Not a bad example.
You do have to consider though that the Kindle Fire is going to be subsidized by ads and ebook purchases. I think I read that Amazon is going to lose money on the sale of the device itself.
Also, the Fire is a far inferior device in terms of every spec.

That said, I'd rather have 2 Kindle Fires and a steak dinner than an iPad. :)
 
CBFELTERBUSH,

What if the Ultrabook IS NOT an Intel laptop?

Remember, in the decade long monopolist stuff that got Intel in trouble, Intel was using bribes and threats against both manufacturers and retailers to keep AMD's market share in the single digits, AND they were determined to keep AMD in the low margin product category.

Since the Consent Decree got issued to Intel last year, did Apple get ballsy and just pull an "AMD INSIDE" the Air?

Seems to explain why Intel is bent on cutting into Mac Air's sales by paying manufacturers to underprice the ULtrabooks.

Trinity, 17 watts - which includes discrete graphics power.

Right now, 18-watt Intel processor which sucks at graphics.
 
Maybe intel saw that its market share is more in danger now than it has ever been since 2006. Right now AMD has the low end notebook market, and server market if adoption of AMD solutions is adopted better. AMD just has the better product in these markets. Right now the only market for Intel are devices that will have a discrete graphics card and cost over $1000. That market has been shrinking every year and Intel has let everyone know that they don't plan on changing that in the next few years.
 
OK, it's like this:

Laptop chassis: $30
Smaller chassis made of aluminum: $200. Raw material cost of aluminum: $20

Laptop motherboard: $60
Virtually identical ultrabook motherboard: $200

Laptop display: $100
Virtually identical ultrabook display: $200

Pentium CPU: $60
CPU binned for a UB that came off the same wafer: $300.


Yeah, some people will actually believe that smaller amounts of material manufactured in extremely similar ways just HAVE TO BE very different in price, and not just because Intel's management chose to arbitrarily charge that much...
 
Its seems like a case of little competition if you ask me. You can't tell me that the CPU price is irrelevant. Somebody has to give up something somewhere. Either they all come down together or they lose out.
I've found "ultrabooks" that offer a better feature set than the macbook air for the price. My next notebook will probably be an ultrabook.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom