Good Gawd. $625 for 2.2GHz Northwood and $391 for 2.0GHz Northwood!

[AGodspeed]

Those are the current prices for the 2.2GHz and 2.0GHz Northwood processors as per pricewatch.com

Now tell me if I'm wrong, but I thought Intel was going to be able to fab Northwood at much cheaper prices since it's die size is much smaller than the Willamette, 146 mm^2 instead of 217mm^2? Also, the Athlon XP 2000+ is just $332 on pricewatch. What's up with the pricing here, I thought we'd see some decently priced Northwoods.

EDIT: I know there's a price cut on the 27th of this month, but how much of a difference will that make.

 

[JellyBaby]

Ignoring the fact new products are always high-priced especially Intel CPUs I would guess Intel would prefer to pocket the money it saves from waffer efficiency. Wouldn't you?

Back in 2000 I bought a P3-650E and overclocked it to 866 Mhz. Back then the 650 was $270 while the 866 was $750. ASPs are going up, no doubt about it. Overclocking to save bucks might make a comeback this year.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Who is selling the 2.0A for $391???

 

[dullard]

I told you yesterday to wait, Agodspeed. Intel is selling the 2.2 GHz model for $562 and the 2.0a GHz model for $364. It will take a while for the prices to reach that level. Although if you really want, you can buy 1000 from Intel at those prices. Even right now, pricewatch has the 2.2 GHz for $625. That is a $10 drop in the few minutes from the time you posted.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

i forget the term, it's called monopolistic something (has nothing to do with the business itself, it's just the term). it's that some...insert naughty word here...are willing to pay a premium for the fastest chip. there are enough people that are willing to pay top dollar for the best thing. they make more of selling to these people than if they were to reduce the price of the chip. same goes for each new chip from either AMD or Intel (though 650$ is kinda high...). the 2000xp is in now way worth 100$ more than the 1900. would you pay more than 1$ per mhz? most people wont. but there are people out there who demand it and are willing to pay the price, no matter how absurd

basically, they are charging 635$ because people will buy it at that, but i'm happy with my xp1800

 

[GTaudiophile]

WHO IS SELLING A RETAIL P4 2.0A NORTHWOOD FOR LESS THAN $400??? I want to spend!

 

[dullard]

AMD is charging $339 for the just released 2000+ XP in lots of 1000. Pricewatch has it listed at $332. Obviously those companies aren't making much of a profit from selling that AMD chip. On the other hand, the resalers are making a nice $63 profit on the Intel 2.2 GHz processor. Intel cannot control the final price, just like AMD cannot control the final price. If someone wants to sell the top AMD processor at a loss, they can. If someone wants to make a $63 profit on the top Intel processor, they can.

 

[Diable]

Cheapest I've found the 2.0AGHz is $440 at DallasMicro but Upgrade Source has the 1.6GHz Northwood for $188 and the 1.8GHz for $254 but thay want have them in stock until the 22th.

 

[JellyBaby]

<< but there are people out there who demand it and are willing to pay the price, no matter how absurd >>

There will always be people who'll do it for just a few weeks worth of bragging rights and being "on top". To me they're on top alright....of the stupidity pile.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Ok, AGodspeed is not telling me where he found the 2.0A for $391 because he doesn't want people buying Intel!

 

[dullard]

<< WHO IS SELLING A RETAIL P4 2.0A NORTHWOOD FOR LESS THAN $400??? I want to spend! >>



Krex has it listed at $390.75. Intel is selling it at $364. There are two companies that I found in a few minutes.

Edit: I would be suspicious of the Krex site though. It listed it as having 512k cache (Thus it would be Northwood), however they didn't place the 'A' after the 2.0 GHz. It may be a typo. Call before you order.

 

[GTaudiophile]

I want the retail version! What is taking Newegg and Mwave so long to get this thing in stock???

 

[christoph83]

5.6 on Resellerratings for that place too. I think I'm going to hold out a little bit longer.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

<< AMD is charging $339 for the just released 2000+ XP in lots of 1000. Pricewatch has it listed at $332. Obviously those companies aren't making much of a profit from selling that AMD chip. On the other hand, the resalers are making a nice $63 profit on the Intel 2.2 GHz processor. Intel cannot control the final price, just like AMD cannot control the final price. If someone wants to sell the top AMD processor at a loss, they can. If someone wants to make a $63 profit on the top Intel processor, they can. >>

afaik there is no grey market for intel processors is there? but there is for amd.

 

[dullard]

<< it's die size is much smaller than the Willamette, 146 mm^2 instead of 217mm^2 >>



I may be wrong here, but isn't the cost of the raw materials in the die about $1 per processor? So cutting the die in half will save roughly 50 cents. I don't think that is a big deal to you, however if Intel saves 50 cents for several million processors, the savings is substantial. Thus Intel probably isn't passing that 50 cents on to you. I could be off by a little bit, but those dies aren't very expensive (if complete processors can be sold for about $50 then the die cannot cost even close to $50).

Edit: There are many additional "production costs". However it isn't the silicon die that is significantly cheaper. I didn't include the "production" costs, such as the higher likelyhood of having a bad processor with a large die, since I wanted to make a point. Intel's costs are raw materials, productions, and research. The raw materials are a buck or two per processor. The production costs are often up to $100. It is the research cost that can be $200-$300 or more. I focused only on the smallest, since I want to point out that the major cost is research, not raw materials or production. Suppose Intel saves $50 in production and a buck in raw materials. That is relatively minor still when compared to a $600 processor cost to us consumers. If that $50 is passed on to us, the final price is roughly $550. The consumer price of a top of the line processor will NOT cut in half like some of you imply.

 

[Diable]

Dullard, Intel's prices are for a 1000 cpu's not one.

 

[dullard]

<< Dullard, Intel's prices are for a 1000 cpu's not one. >>



Correct, that is why I stated that you must buy them in lots of 1000. Re-read my above posts. However, AMD also sells in lots of 1000. Resalers are pricing INDIVIDUAL units at less than the 1000 price. It always ends up that way. Companies will sell the processor for less than Intel's and AMD's 1000 price. It just takes a few days/weeks to reach that level. Almost all processors on pricewatch are selling for less than the 1000 price.

Edit: the 1000 price level is close to the final price that you will see on pricewatch. Want examples:

product/1000 price/pricewatch price
1.9 GHz P4/$273/$246
1.8 GHz P4/$225/$202
1.7 GHz P4/$193/$177
1.6 GHz P4/$163/$147
1.5 GHz P4/$133/$131
1.13 GHz P3/$173/$162
850 MHz P3/$143/$119
1.0 GHz Celeron/$74/$58

In fact all Intel processors except the top in each category sell individually for less than the 1000 processor price.

 

[Texmaster]

<< I want the retail version! What is taking Newegg and Mwave so long to get this thing in stock??? >>



Newegg has the 2.2 retail Box. GT. Just bought one myself


And that brings up another point.

All of these nancy cry babies who don't want to spend the money, GROW UP.

Some people dont mind spending it and for you to call them stupid just makes you look incredbily jealous.

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Dullard, I don't know where you may have heard that, but it seems rediculously low...
$100 per Willamette die vs $55 per Northwood die seems much more believable

Linky

-Ice

 

[68GTX]

<< Xbit quotes a Mr Kevin Krewell as saying that the .18 micron die costs $100 in production costs, while the .13 micron die costs around $55 to produce. >>

 

[GTaudiophile]

Tex, $670 is too rich for my blood. A retail 2.0A for $400 would be nice; one for around $375 would be perfect!

 

[JellyBaby]

Overpaying for something you don't need is stupid. Trying to put down people who point that out is stupid and a bit juvinile.

I was young once, too. I remember spending $100 for a few extra kilobytes of L2 cache just so I could have a PC that was 1% faster in certain benchmarks. Didn't even think twice about doing it, either. But looking back I freely admit that was stupid.

 

[AGodspeed]

Overpaying for something you don't need is stupid. Trying to put down people who point that out is stupid and a bit juvinile.

Very good point Jelly.

But looking back I freely admit that was stupid.

I still feel the exact same way about the two 1.4GHz T-birds I bought back in the beginning of last June, when they had just debuted. I probably spend a good 2 times more than I would have if I had waited another 2-3 weeks. Not only that, but I would probably be doing just fine with 1.2GHz T-birds instead, since they were much cheaper by the time the 1.4GHz T-birds had debuted last June. Oh well.

 

[Texmaster]

<< Overpaying for something you don't need is stupid. >>



So you never buy anything you dont need huh LOL spare me



<< Trying to put down people who point that out is stupid and a bit juvinile. >>



Whats juvenille is trying to make someone who has the money to buy the latest and greatest feel bad because you dont have the money.



<< I was young once, too. I remember spending $100 for a few extra kilobytes of L2 cache just so I could have a PC that was 1% faster in certain benchmarks. Didn't even think twice about doing it, either. But looking back I freely admit that was stupid. >>



Its no excuse for slamming people who have the money to spend.

 

[dowxp]

<< Its no excuse for slamming people who have the money to spend. >>

thats true, if u have money, spend it. some people see $600 as nothing. but u have to realize theres a limit =)