Shameful CPU Pricing

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

aether <vercingetorix@hotmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80829&ps=ho3
>
> Is this suppose to make sense to customers? Nearly a grand for a single
> processor? Is this some sort of joke?

If it's a joke, it's a very old joke. Top of the line chips have been going
for around that for quite some time now.

The good thing for those of us who don't need the absolute highest
performance is that those same top of the line chips get cheaper, and the
price-performance curve is wayyy nonlinear... you can get 90% of that
performance for half the price, 84% of the performance for 1/3 the price,
and 79% of the performance for 1/4 the price. (There's also 95% of the
performance for 3/4 of the price.)

3800mhz = 4.4 mhz/$
3600mhz = 5.9 mhz/$
3400mhz = 8.333 mhz/$
3200mhz = 11.6 mhz/$
3000mhz = 13.2 mhz/$

Now, that's all comparing P4 600-series 2mb cache parts, so there should be
no difference besides the core clock speed. Prices via Pricescan, except for
the 3.8ghz part which I used the price you provided.

--
Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/

"This is not a humorous signature."
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

It's a disgrace. As I've said before, I hope some third world country
begins mass-producing processors of their own volition, pressuring
these pig corporations to reconsider their price gouging, and
eventually forcing prices down. For it's greed and shortsightedness,
'The West' deserves to lose it's industry. It's gotten out of control.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 19:15:47 -0700, aether wrote:

> It's a disgrace. As I've said before, I hope some third world country
> begins mass-producing processors of their own volition, pressuring
> these pig corporations to reconsider their price gouging, and
> eventually forcing prices down. For it's greed and shortsightedness,
> 'The West' deserves to lose it's industry. It's gotten out of control.

If you think it's so easy to design and manufacture a processor, stop
whining and have at it. I'm sure you like to get paid for (whatever
little) you do too.

--
Keith
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"aether" <vercingetorix@hotmail.com> writes:
>It's a disgrace. As I've said before, I hope some third world country
>begins mass-producing processors of their own volition, pressuring
>these pig corporations to reconsider their price gouging, and
>eventually forcing prices down. For it's greed and shortsightedness,
>'The West' deserves to lose it's industry. It's gotten out of control.

If you don't REALLY need the latest and greatest parts, you can use
trailing edge technology for a tiny fraction of the price.

Consider how much cheaper it is to have a processor that is 25%
slower than that part. It is far more than 25% cheaper.

I remember when the new 32 bit parallel execution DSP parts first
came out. They were almost a thousand dollars each. And now after
a few years those parts are in the twenty dollar range.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 17 Jun 2005 19:15:47 -0700, "aether" <vercingetorix@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>It's a disgrace. As I've said before, I hope some third world country
>begins mass-producing processors of their own volition, pressuring
>these pig corporations to reconsider their price gouging, and
>eventually forcing prices down. For it's greed and shortsightedness,
>'The West' deserves to lose it's industry. It's gotten out of control.

Here ya go:

http://www.directron.com/epia800.html

Enjoy...

Ok, Taiwan is hardly a 3rd world country, not to mention the fact that
the VIA processor design team is actually located in Texas, but still
they are cheap. Of course, the performance stinks when compared to
even the bottom-of-the-barrel AMD or Intel chips...

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

aether wrote:

" Nearly a grand for a single processor? Is this some sort of joke? "


How about some for more than a grand?

AMD Dual-Core Opteron 270 Italy 1GHz FSB Socket 940 Processor Model
OSA270CBBOX - Retail $1,229.00
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103552

intel Pentium Extreme Edition 840 Smithfield 800MHz FSB LGA 775 Dual
Core, EM64T Processor Model BX80551PGH3200F - Retail $1,154.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116214

intel Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.4 Gallatin 800MHz FSB Socket 478
Processor Model BX80532PG3400F - Retail $1,077.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116169

intel Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.46 Gallatin 1066MHz FSB LGA 775
Processor Model BX80532PH3460FS - Retail $1,045.00
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116189

intel Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.4 Gallatin 800MHz FSB LGA 775
Processor Model BX80532PG3400FS - Retail £1,029.00
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116187
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 17 Jun 2005 18:05:57 -0700, "aether" <vercingetorix@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80829&ps=ho3
>
>Is this suppose to make sense to customers? Nearly a grand for a single
>processor? Is this some sort of joke?

Why? They charge as much as the market bears. Evidently someone is
willing to pay that price (or at least they think so). Supply and
demand... In a word - CAPITALISM. Don't like it? You are free to go
to some place like Cuba or N.Korea. Though I doubt you will have any
kind of a CPU there, and definitely not a Net connection.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 17 Jun 2005 18:05:57 -0700, "aether" <vercingetorix@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80829&ps=ho3
>
>Is this suppose to make sense to customers? Nearly a grand for a single
>processor? Is this some sort of joke?

Just history repeating itself,

06/30/1997
Intel Pentium Pro® processor 200Mhz-512k $1055.00
Intel Pentium® ll processor 266/512k (Box) $865.00

Ed
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

>>>>> "Ed" == Ed <spam@hotmail.com> writes:

Ed> On 17 Jun 2005 18:05:57 -0700, "aether"
Ed> <vercingetorix@hotmail.com>
Ed> wrote:

>> http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80829&ps=ho3
>>
>> Is this suppose to make sense to customers? Nearly a grand for a
>> single processor? Is this some sort of joke?

Ed> Just history repeating itself,

Ed> 06/30/1997 Intel Pentium Pro® processor 200Mhz-512k $1055.00
Ed> Intel Pentium® ll processor 266/512k (Box) $865.00

Those were some very good processors. Still have a ppro running smooth
as silk expect have to replace a fan every now and then. I didn't pay
no where here the starting price ;-)).

Later
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Tony Hill wrote:
> http://www.directron.com/epia800.html

Part Number: MB-EPIA-800
Regular price: $109.00
On Sale: $105.00

Are these US dollars?!?

ASRock and Asus (to name a few) sell Socket-A MicroATX motherboards with
integrated graphics.

e.g. http://www.asrockamerica.com/Products/K7S41.htm

Pair such a board with a Sempron 2200.

ASRock K7S41 = 38 EUR
Sempron 2200 = 42 EUR

AFAICT, this system will murder the C3-based system, and it's cheaper.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

> Is this suppose to make sense to customers? Nearly a grand for
> a single processor? Is this some sort of joke?

Can you imagine the price of the latest Xeon MP?

http://www.intel.com/products/processor/xeon/

90 nm, EM64T, 1MB L2, 8MB (*) L3, 3.33 GHz, 667 MHz FSB.

Boy, I feel dizzy just thinking about the price.

By the way, WHAT'S YOUR POINT?


(*) Xeon wants to challenge Madison ;-)
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

aether <vercingetorix@hotmail.com> wrote:
> It's a disgrace. As I've said before, I hope some third
> world country begins mass-producing processors of their own
> volition, pressuring these pig corporations to reconsider
> their price gouging, and eventually forcing prices down. For
> it's greed and shortsightedness, 'The West' deserves to
> lose it's industry. It's gotten out of control.


No need. Intel and AMD are their own stiffest competition.
They sell lots of low-end processors. They have these
extremely expensive CPUs for those few customers who think
they can justify the power. A good thing, because they
probably can't make many. The pricing is mostly to shape
their curves and hold up the high end.

-- Robert
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

I see prices going up for one purpose: profit, and the pleasing of
shareholders (one and the same)

The bigwig shareholders should just be shot. These are men who are
already million and billionaires many times over, but enough is never
enough for them. Such people should be removed from the planet.

The prices will continue to rise. Eventually, very few people will be
able to afford top of the line computers. Everyone else will be using
old hardware.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Grumble <devnull@kma.eu.org> wrote:
> > Is this suppose to make sense to customers? Nearly a grand for
> > a single processor? Is this some sort of joke?
>
> Can you imagine the price of the latest Xeon MP?
> http://www.intel.com/products/processor/xeon/
>
> 90 nm, EM64T, 1MB L2, 8MB (*) L3, 3.33 GHz, 667 MHz FSB.
>
> Boy, I feel dizzy just thinking about the price.

I'm really surprised to see that that one's only 129W.

--
Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/

"This is not a humorous signature."
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 14:28:51 -0500, Alan Walpool <awalpool@onzedge.net>
wrote:

>>>>>> "Ed" == Ed <spam@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> Ed> On 17 Jun 2005 18:05:57 -0700, "aether"
> Ed> <vercingetorix@hotmail.com>
> Ed> wrote:
>
> >> http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80829&ps=ho3
> >>
> >> Is this suppose to make sense to customers? Nearly a grand for a
> >> single processor? Is this some sort of joke?
>
> Ed> Just history repeating itself,
>
> Ed> 06/30/1997 Intel Pentium Pro® processor 200Mhz-512k $1055.00
> Ed> Intel Pentium® ll processor 266/512k (Box) $865.00
>
>Those were some very good processors. Still have a ppro running smooth
>as silk expect have to replace a fan every now and then. I didn't pay
>no where here the starting price ;-)).
>
>Later

Their now $8.00 with free S&H. ;p
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

They've always done this. The top of the line CPU has always been priced
very high at introduction. The lower speeds are much more reasonable.

"aether" <vercingetorix@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119056757.268141.123140@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80829&ps=ho3
>
> Is this suppose to make sense to customers? Nearly a grand for a single
> processor? Is this some sort of joke?
>
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

David Wang wrote:
> aether <vercingetorix@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I see prices going up for one purpose: profit, and the pleasing of
> > shareholders (one and the same)
>
> > The bigwig shareholders should just be shot. These are men who are
> > already million and billionaires many times over, but enough is never
> > enough for them. Such people should be removed from the planet.
>
> Chairman Mao proposed a similar theory as you're expressing here.
> Chairman Mao believed that essentially 95% of the people were
> "good", meaning inherently altruistic, and 5% of the people were
> inherently "bad", meaning greedy and thus incompatible with the
> ideals of communism. Chairman Mao believed that you just had to
> kill the 5% of the "bad" people, and the rest of the "good" people
> can form an ideal communist system.
>
> Unfortunately, Chairman Mao's theories were put into practice,
> and millions of people were killed.
>

But not all theories that sound crazy are crazy

http://www.jsonline.com/alive/news/apr04/223117.asp

> > The prices will continue to rise. Eventually, very few people will be
> > able to afford top of the line computers. Everyone else will be using
> > old hardware.
>
> A friend of mine and I actually talked about processor development
> in terms of the capitalist/communist system.
>
> In terms of a communist system, the central planning commision
> dictated that this year, Intel's fabs will produce 70 million 80386
> processors, and AMD will produce 30 million 80386 processors.
> There is no need to produce faster processors, GUI's or GPU's.
> Playing games is not productive to the greater glory of the state.
>
> The price of each processor has been set at $40. Next year, the
> production quota will be increased by 5%, and costs will be reduced
> by 10%. Finally, the engineer that designed the faulty multiplier in
> the 80387 MathCo has been determined to be an enemy of the state,
> and he will be shot as a warning to all sabateurs.
>

Of course, your correspondent here has to be very young even to have
made such comments. Did any of us who paid for (or authorized payment
for) time on an IBM 360 ever expect computing to be so ubiquitous or so
inexpensive? Never mind the CPU. Did anyone who struggled to fill a
frame buffer, which itself cost a fortune, ever expect commodity
graphics cards to pump out high-resolution frames in real time?

No, a computer hardware list is not the place to be probing the
weaknesses of capitalism.

RM
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

In article <1119139644.748636.191150@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
vercingetorix@hotmail.com says...
> I see prices going up for one purpose: profit, and the pleasing of
> shareholders (one and the same)
>
> The bigwig shareholders should just be shot. These are men who are
> already million and billionaires many times over, but enough is never
> enough for them. Such people should be removed from the planet.

How about we shoot all the socialists first? Starting with...
>
> The prices will continue to rise. Eventually, very few people will be
> able to afford top of the line computers. Everyone else will be using
> old hardware.

Are you really that pig-ignorant or are you just trolling? The price
of computers has been coming down for the past forty+ years, in case
you hadn't noticed. Yeah, mainframes today still cost more than $299.
GO figure.

--
Keith
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

>>>>> "Ed" == Ed <spam@hotmail.com> writes:

Ed> Just history repeating itself,
>>
Ed> 06/30/1997 Intel Pentium Pro® processor 200Mhz-512k $1055.00
Ed> Intel Pentium® ll processor 266/512k (Box) $865.00

>> Those were some very good processors. Still have a ppro running
>> smooth as silk expect have to replace a fan every now and then. I
>> didn't pay no where here the starting price ;-)).
>>
>> Later

Ed> Their now $8.00 with free S&H. ;p

Wow! Talk about a price drop ;-)). From $1,000.00 to $8.00. Anyway
wait long enough and you probably can get what you want for free ;-)).
At least with CPU's.

Later,

Alan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

aether <vercingetorix@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I see prices going up for one purpose: profit, and the pleasing of
> shareholders (one and the same)

> The bigwig shareholders should just be shot. These are men who are
> already million and billionaires many times over, but enough is never
> enough for them. Such people should be removed from the planet.

Chairman Mao proposed a similar theory as you're expressing here.
Chairman Mao believed that essentially 95% of the people were
"good", meaning inherently altruistic, and 5% of the people were
inherently "bad", meaning greedy and thus incompatible with the
ideals of communism. Chairman Mao believed that you just had to
kill the 5% of the "bad" people, and the rest of the "good" people
can form an ideal communist system.

Unfortunately, Chairman Mao's theories were put into practice,
and millions of people were killed.

> The prices will continue to rise. Eventually, very few people will be
> able to afford top of the line computers. Everyone else will be using
> old hardware.

A friend of mine and I actually talked about processor development
in terms of the capitalist/communist system.

In terms of a communist system, the central planning commision
dictated that this year, Intel's fabs will produce 70 million 80386
processors, and AMD will produce 30 million 80386 processors.
There is no need to produce faster processors, GUI's or GPU's.
Playing games is not productive to the greater glory of the state.

The price of each processor has been set at $40. Next year, the
production quota will be increased by 5%, and costs will be reduced
by 10%. Finally, the engineer that designed the faulty multiplier in
the 80387 MathCo has been determined to be an enemy of the state,
and he will be shot as a warning to all sabateurs.

--
davewang202(at)yahoo(dot)com
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

The industry is price gouging. That processor
(http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116203) should
be priced at $500, tops. This is done, as I said, explicitly for profit
-- and it's worsening. It'd be a wonderful day, if such people as are
responsible for this (see: international bankers, wall street tycoons,
scumbag shareholders, prick CEO's and CFO's such as Kozlowski and Mark
Swartz, etc..) were rounded up and hanged.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:38:38 +0200, Grumble <devnull@kma.eu.org>
wrote:

>Tony Hill wrote:
>> http://www.directron.com/epia800.html
>
>Part Number: MB-EPIA-800
>Regular price: $109.00
>On Sale: $105.00
>
>Are these US dollars?!?
>
>ASRock and Asus (to name a few) sell Socket-A MicroATX motherboards with
>integrated graphics.
>
>e.g. http://www.asrockamerica.com/Products/K7S41.htm
>
>Pair such a board with a Sempron 2200.
>
>ASRock K7S41 = 38 EUR
>Sempron 2200 = 42 EUR
>
>AFAICT, this system will murder the C3-based system, and it's cheaper.

The original poster wanted a system that was made by a non-American
company. As such, with only 4 companies producing x86 CPUs and three
of them being in the US, I thought he might prefer the underperforming
VIA solution!

You are quite correct though, the Sempron/ASRock solution would be
significantly faster than the VIA solution. On the flip side, the VIA
board is a nifty little Mini-ITX design, about 1/4 the size of the
ASRock board.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 17 Jun 2005 18:05:57 -0700, "aether" <vercingetorix@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80829&ps=ho3
>
>Is this suppose to make sense to customers? Nearly a grand for a single
>processor? Is this some sort of joke?

No its not a joke at all. The CPU you pointed out there has the
following features not seen in regular CPUs:

1. It has 2 MBs of cache right on the chip. (a cheap celeron might
have 512K, but probably has 256K, or even less)

2. It can run on motherboards that have more than one CPU. (a cheap
celeron cannot)

3. 3.8 GHz is unheard of. Only the cream of cut circuits can run
stable at this speed. This CPUs physical circuitry is nearly perfect
in terms manufacturing flaws.

On the other hand, the 800Mhz FSB seems slow to me. If I'm going to
pay a grand for a CPU im going to get one that can run with a 2.0 GHz
front side bus. And yes, they have those now.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

David Wang wrote:
> Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> wrote:
> > David Wang wrote:
> > > aether <vercingetorix@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I see prices going up for one purpose: profit, and the pleasing of
> > > > shareholders (one and the same)
> > >
> > > > The bigwig shareholders should just be shot. These are men who are
> > > > already million and billionaires many times over, but enough is never
> > > > enough for them. Such people should be removed from the planet.
> > >
> > > Chairman Mao proposed a similar theory as you're expressing here.
> > > Chairman Mao believed that essentially 95% of the people were
> > > "good", meaning inherently altruistic, and 5% of the people were
> > > inherently "bad", meaning greedy and thus incompatible with the
> > > ideals of communism. Chairman Mao believed that you just had to
> > > kill the 5% of the "bad" people, and the rest of the "good" people
> > > can form an ideal communist system.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, Chairman Mao's theories were put into practice,
> > > and millions of people were killed.
>
> > But not all theories that sound crazy are crazy
>
> > http://www.jsonline.com/alive/news/apr04/223117.asp
>
> I believe that you may have missed the point entirely.
>
> It matters little whether or not Chairman Mao's theory,
> or any such social theory is crazy.
>
I think it matters. Even the drastic measures taken failed manifestly
failed to eliminate greed from the society.

One might conclude from the failed Twentieth Century experiments in
socialism and communism that greed is immutable. The baboon troop
story is an example of changing what might seem to be immutable
behavior by changing the composition of the group. If one were
optimistic, one might hope that some step other than liquidation of the
aggressive males could achieve the same effect.

> Chairman Mao may well be right, and upon elmination of the
> "bad" people, society would be much better. The problem is,
> as always, in the implementation of the social theory.
>
But it wasn't the only problem. "The measures taken" (title of a
militantly-Communist play by Brecht) didn't achieve the desired effect.

We don't really know in what ways it is possible to arrange human
societies. It may be possible to arrange a society that doesn't run on
greed.

RM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom