• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

A64 (s939)

S

SpedeRacer

Member
I noticed the A64 3500+ (s939, 90nm) is priced at ~$350 and the A64 3200+ (s939, 90nm) is priced at ~$200. Does anyone know why these two chips are priced $150 apart?

Prices obtained from Monarch.
 
because they are 2 different cpu's and ones faster then the other?

i noticed a honda civic at a nearby dealership for $14k and an acura nsx there for $90K. does anyone know why these two cars are priced $76k apart?
 
Originally posted by: Mik3y
because they are 2 different cpu's and ones faster then the other?

i noticed a honda civic at a nearby dealership for $14k and an acura nsx there for $90K. does anyone know why these two cars are priced $76k apart?
Click to expand...

Thanks for um...stating the obvious.
 
Probably the same reason with the A64 3800+ (939 non-90nm) and the A64 3500+ (939 non-90nm). Although, this one has a $300+ difference for its retail.

The simple reason probably is "you pay a premium for the latest and greatest/fastest technology."

For alittle indepth reason: Cost of production, supply & demand, etc.

 
Originally posted by: SpedeRacer
Originally posted by: Mik3y
because they are 2 different cpu's and ones faster then the other?

i noticed a honda civic at a nearby dealership for $14k and an acura nsx there for $90K. does anyone know why these two cars are priced $76k apart?
Click to expand...

Thanks for um...stating the obvious.
Click to expand...

any time 😀
 
Originally posted by: santa590
Probably the same reason with the A64 3800+ (939 non-90nm) and the A64 3500+ (939 non-90nm). Although, this one has a $300+ difference for its retail.

The simple reason probably is "you pay a premium for the latest and greatest/fastest technology."

For alittle indepth reason: Cost of production, supply & demand, etc.
Click to expand...

The 3800+ has a 0.2Ghz advantage over the 3500+ but if the 3200+ (90nm) and 3500+ (90nm) stay the same frequency as their 130nm counterparts, they will have the same freq. What gives?
 
Originally posted by: SpedeRacer
I noticed the A64 3500+ (s939, 90nm) is priced at ~$350 and the A64 3200+ (s939, 90nm) is priced at ~$200. Does anyone know why these two chips are priced $150 apart?

Prices obtained from Monarch.
Click to expand...

The price to performance ratio is horrendous for that $350 chip! Especially if you overclock!

Anyway bone stock. You have chips that cost half as much and are only 10-15% slower like the, 3.0C, 3.2C, 3.0E, 3.2E, A643000, A643200...



The way I define price to performance is, if something costs twice as much it better be twice as good, or fast in this case. Any chip above $200 fails to fullfill this matrix. And the failue gets higher and more disproportionate the more expensive the chip. They rely on people making emotional decisions for these sales.
 
Huh? The 3200+ is 2.0GHz and the 3400+ is 2.2GHz. If your talking about the 3400+ and the 3500+, then they are at the same frequency. Although the later has dual channel memory controller.
 
Opps. Your right. I was thinking about the 1MB ones.

But how do you know the 90nm is going to be the same freq? I couldn't find any site that shows the specs for the 90nm. Amd could have lowered the freq with the 3200+ because of the dual channel. Do you have any source on it?
 
No matter how you cut it, the 3500+ is way overpriced for its performance.

The new 90nm 939 chips seem to be closer in price to their equivalent 754 counterparts.

Hopefully, the 3500+ will come down to about the same price as the 3400+, which is where it belongs.

-D'oh!
 
Hey you think it's overpriced now, I bought that thing when it was priced at $500 and recieved it in the mail like 3 days before AMD slashed prices to $350🙁 Anyway I'm happy with it, and just to clarify - the difference between it and socket 754 is a 128bit dual channel memory controller. More importantly, the difference between it and the FX-53 is $450, .2GHZ and 512MB L2 cache (which isnt really that important anyway with the high memory bandwith). So the best buy is definitely the 3500!!!!🙂
 
Oh and guys, clock speed isnt everything, you should know that. The A64s have an integrated dual channel memory controller which makes a huge difference. The 2.4GHZ FX-53 beats the P4 3.4GHZ in many benchmarks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top