QOTD: Do You Think CPUs are Overpriced?

[jaragon13]

Overpriced, yes, but the motherboard prices IMHO should stay the same.

 

[jaragon13]

[citation][nom]cheapithink[/nom]Having grown up with computers where just the processor for the bottom line 386 (board and processor) was well over $1000 (heck even bottom line 486/Pentium processors were 500+ when they came out) I would say no, they are fairly cheap now a days in comparison.[/citation]
Yes, but Intel didn't have a bajillion dollars back then and designing chips to actually run a a couple mhz was "hard, time/money consuming" with little profits, so they obviously had to have high prices.
"Nowadays" we have several fabs, many places to outsource, developed businesses, newer manufacturing technology, and more yields.

 

[KT_WASP]

I think it comes down to the difference between need and want...

If you go to buy the CPU that you need to run your system, then your going to end up paying on the lower price scale...

If you go to buy a CPU you want to run your system, your going to end up on the higher price scale...

Everyone wants the latest, greatest, faster CPU out there, but not everyone needs that. Most users, and a think a large majority, don't need anything near the top of the line expensive CPUs. You cant use gaming as an excuse either... modern games are more GPU specific, then CPU specific. So it comes down to being honest with yourself and buying the CPU that you need, not the one you want.

Take the AMD Athlon X2 7850 Black Edition KUMA 2.8 GHz AM2+ CPU... it is selling for $69 with free shipping at Newegg right now... That is more then enough processing power then most users need and for a bargin price. I am still running a Athlon 64X2 5200 Windsor that is hanging in fine, playing modern games and all... BTW, I paid $205 for that 5200 when it was new....so Pricing is better then it was, that is for sure.

 

[hundredislandsboy]

Entry level are faily priced at $50 to $80 but mid range and high end are unfairly priced and too big a price gap for mere 266 Mhz frequency increase. A good example of this is between the e8400 and e8600 ($100 price difference and between the 17 920 and 940 ($280 price difference).

 

[Guest]

I think I read somewhere you shouldn't budget your GPU buy above $150 or something, here if I remember right; same extends to CPU, with a number of something of $100 or less, above that we are buying marketing and R&D, not technology, and the thingy is just too expensive with little benefit. Ignoring gamers and those "have-to-have-it" people what is the incentive for going a $300 unit compare to $100 unit if they all can run Crysis or whatever? Follow that thought it is too over-priced.

 

[siliconchampion]

I think that the i7 920 is far too overpriced, mostly because through a deal with intel for employees of tech stores, I can buy a 920 for $129, and that is with a license of Vista Ultimate (with free upgrade to Win 7). Or I can get it with Intel's DX58SO and the proc. and vista for $289.

Just goes to show how much markup is on processors and other components.

 

[spunks]

I consider this topic laughable because all the readers of this site are either ethusisats or at the bare minumum have a moderate interest in pc's and tend to love high performance. The problem with this is the vast majority of PC users today arent and tend to ask everyone (including the misinformed) advise on computer hardware when they feel the need to upgrade or think they are behind the times from all the talk they hear or read. The truth is, for most users, imho, all they need at most is a low end athlon 64 x2 or an intel 5200 with 2gb of ram and something other than intergrated graphics. That will give them most of what moderen software can muster. Yes, a quad core can be faster. Yes 3ghz will be faster. Yes to all the arguments you can imagine to be of higher end parts will be faster. But the encoding time of a rip and burn noadays is held up by the speed of the burner, and the highest end cpu will only save you a few minute. Moderen games still scale down to give playable framrates. Most web based or simple games runs fine on hardware ten years old. And you can only type so fast when writing an email or an MS Word document. Youtube runs fine on netbooks with an intel atom processor . Social networking or messaging programs work on some of the slowest of machines. And I think you can get by on email with dial up and a 386 class machine.
the only people who could really need a souped up machine are gamers or people with very demanding programs that want things done immediatly. I know people who hit their power button on there computer then go brew a pot of coffee and pour a cup before they return. When I suggest they upgrade, they simply ask what for?. The low end processors are responsive enough to make most people to not have any inkling at all to faster pc's. I have upgraded many people to these low end modern processors (usally when their old P4 motherboard quits) and they are happy as a kite exclaiming they cant beiieve how much faster there computers are after what is a $150 upgrade (motherboard, processor, memory - no labor cost) and dont see any need to pursue faster systems. The moral of this commit is, most people are just fine with a $50-$70 CPU, which are the low end of modren processors, and at that price, they are a great deal because they excel a lot of peoples expecations when they finaly get one.

spunks

 

[powerbaselx]

[citation][nom]spunks[/nom]I consider this topic laughable because all the readers of this site are either ethusisats or at the bare minumum have a moderate interest in pc's and tend to love high performance.
(...)
The moral of this commit is, most people are just fine with a $50-$70 CPU, which are the low end of modren processors, and at that price, they are a great deal because they excel a lot of peoples expecations when they finaly get one.spunks[/citation]

All you wrote is true but i think you miss the question objective with your explanation.
The issue here is the Price of the processors, not what kind of processor do you really need.
As i stated in my previous answer, i find these low end Intel E5x00 great buys, despite they can't run VMWare ESX... ;-)

 

[wolferunners]

Cpus are a great price, I wouldnt mind at all paying $280 for an I7. My problem is same as skook9's. I will not pay $250 for a motherboard that has a $100 markup on the cpu socket. So I will wait for my i7 upgrade.

 

[wolferunners]

Cpus are a great price, I wouldnt mind at all paying $280 for an I7. My problem is same as skook9's. I will not pay $250 for a motherboard that has a $100 markup on the cpu socket. So I will wait for my i7 upgrade.

 

[jwl3]

Heck no. The heart and soul of a computer can be had for under $100. Amazing. And most of the chips out there are great overclockers. I've bought Intel chips (D805, E2160) that have been overclocked to nearly +75% of its stock speed. Now that's value.

Think of how much manufacturing know-how and capital expenditure is required for Intel and AMD to manufacture such a marvel. And then you've got case makers charging $200 for a piece of metal shaped into a case. Are you kidding me?

The best valued items for a computer build are (in order):

1) the DVD recorders for under $35.
2) Motherboards (not i7's anyway) for less than $100
3) CPU's
4) Hard drives - 1 TB for $80
5) ram


The worst valued items are (in order):

1) heat sinks - $60+ for a hunk of metal? Really?
2) PSU - please, a glorified power adapter made in China for $100???
3) cable connectors - biggest margins for the mfrs.
4) computer cases - again, a hunk of shaped metal for $100?
5) video cards - high tech but also high-priced

 

[joefriday]

*facepalm* It's not efficient though, I'm not saying CPU's are expensive in general , AMD throws out great deals and they're prices is what I'd expect , but Intel is just plain... bad.

I don't think you know what you're talking about in the slightest. My ENTIRE Celeron 420 rig has a total power consumption of just 49 watts idle and 65 watts under full CPU/IGP load. That's overclocked to 2.66GHz. It is WAY more efficient than anything of equivalent performance from AMD. After all, that's what I build my computers for: power efficiency. Tell me, do YOU have a kill-a-watt and a DC clamp ammeter? No? Didn't think so, so shove it back where it came.