Moral dilemma over CPU QX9650 price

[Soubriquet]

I would also like to thank everyone who voted.

FYI In case anyone else in interested I decided to live down the anti-materialist reputation I acquired in this thread and ordered a QX9650 and even some OCZ DDR3 1800 etc so .

But the discussion was worthwhile as it helped me personally make progress towards finding a compromise for my two ambivalent notions in that I have looked after myself but I wont neglect to look after others either and have instated a personal rule of a minimum 1% donation (per annual income), split between local and overseas projects (since national pride seems to create another 'ambivalence' of a similar kind!)

 

[sourthings]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Soubriquet
US healthcare I only know from what I read, I live in the UK and citizens here pay for the NHS through the nose with high taxes. Here though the NHS has to refuse certain top dollar treatments because they are too expensive and would mean that it couldnt afford to provide the basics.

I understand the UK's method of patient stacking in ambulances waiting outside full ER's is the envy of the world!

If only we could all have such luxuries of dying in an ambulance 50 feet from the hospital after waiting for a few hours.

Health care is not ideal, government is not ideal, putting the government in charge of healthcare is doubly non-ideal. You have my pity.

Keep believing the propaganda you get shoveled down your throat daily in the US. I live in Canada, healthcare is free, easily on par and in many cases superior to the care you get from your health insurance in the US. Wait times in a hospital are one hour at the longest. Oh, did I mention it's free, well not truly free, paid for by our taxes, along with other programs that help to take care of ALL our citizens. We also have a higher standard of living than the us and crime rates exponentially lower on a per capita basis. Keep believing that rubbish you're told though, it's what keeps you in line and a loyal party man, aka sheep.

 

[M1A]

WOW that sounds nice, what do you say all of us poor US folks flock to Canada and corrupt things....
HAHAHA.....
I have been to Canada and its nice but its the US for me that I call home.
Just wait until Canada needs the US again and again and again, history has proven it many times.

 

[nyker96]

The reason for this high price is simple - they got zero competition on the high end so there ya go. They can charge what they like in this case.

 

[piasabird]

Intel Prices have nothing to do with the Free Market. They are a monopoly. It is questionable about whether we need a Ford Expedition or a Hummer, but people keep buying them. Someone feels they need to have the best so they go out and buy it.

 

[piasabird]

Wal-mart has $4 Prescriptions so go to Wall-Mart. Tell the overpriced pharmacies to drop dead.

 

[piasabird]

Whatever chip I buy will not be overclocked. I will just buy the quality I can afford and be happy. Spending too little money will just make me unhappy. I have seen what happens if you are a tightwad. You end up with a system that will not do what you want it to do. Dont really think X38 and X48 are worth it at the moment. I have never paid over $200 for a motherboard and dont plan on doing so any time soon.

Calcutta created its own slums. Not my problem.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: sourthings

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: Soubriquet
US healthcare I only know from what I read, I live in the UK and citizens here pay for the NHS through the nose with high taxes. Here though the NHS has to refuse certain top dollar treatments because they are too expensive and would mean that it couldnt afford to provide the basics.

I understand the UK's method of patient stacking in ambulances waiting outside full ER's is the envy of the world!

If only we could all have such luxuries of dying in an ambulance 50 feet from the hospital after waiting for a few hours.

Health care is not ideal, government is not ideal, putting the government in charge of healthcare is doubly non-ideal. You have my pity.

Keep believing the propaganda you get shoveled down your throat daily in the US. I live in Canada, healthcare is free, easily on par and in many cases superior to the care you get from your health insurance in the US. Wait times in a hospital are one hour at the longest. Oh, did I mention it's free, well not truly free, paid for by our taxes, along with other programs that help to take care of ALL our citizens. We also have a higher standard of living than the us and crime rates exponentially lower on a per capita basis. Keep believing that rubbish you're told though, it's what keeps you in line and a loyal party man, aka sheep.

384,000 hits on google, the most hit are for articles published by UK sites.

How does citizens of the UK publishing reports on their government's patient stacking policies (these exist, do you deny the reality that exists in the UK?) constitute me having propaganda shoveled down my throat in the US? Truly you try too hard to be an ass.

Do you really believe the bile you spew from your keyboard? Such an angry hateful person you so desparately try to be. I'm saddened for your family, they have to live with your assinine attitude 24x7. The rest of us here just get to move along ignoring you as yet another sheep of the anti-media flock.

 

[Soubriquet]

Bear in mind that is a highly politicised "story" though Idontcare, it is an attack on Labour's methods of handling the NHS primarily, using burocratic targets that encourage perverse behaviour is not seen as the fault of the NHS but the government and is being used by the Tories and Liberal Democrats to make Labour look stupid so they can win the next election.

The NHS is a political football because it is so precious to the British people but Lib Dems have a very different strategy for public services compared to the Tories and while the enemy of my enemy is my friend it doesnt mean they agree about the future of the NHS nor are they criticising the NHS, just its management.

Brits are very defensive of the cradle to grave healthcare the NHS offers, because we all know someone who got unexpectedly ill and we know next year it could be us. In the midst of youthful vigour and personal success people tend to think of themselves as untouchable, but it seems a fact of life that this never lasts. Labour as the erstwhile party of the working class created the NHS for the sake of the relatively poor majority in the UK, which is a perfectly legitimiate democratic step IMHO, akin to the development of community granaries that may have lead to development of the first cities in antiquity. So it makes sense we like to have a safety net for health care (now that the witch doctors' mumbo jumbo actually does something useful lol), but the political waters are muddied by the benefits system which is a distinct type of financial safety net which means we need ways to detect malingerers and scroungers because it can be abused. I dont think a majority in the UK would trust a private company/s to make the right decisions for universal health care, they just dont have the incentive as zsdersw was saying but they do believe there are scroungers among their fellow Brits.

In the USA there is a lot of anti British polemic anyway, when it suits certain parties, the fact that the Brits have an NHS is almost reason enough not to have one, or at least those who dont want an NHS for the USA use that kind of argument. The question is whose interests does that argument serve and what are the interests of the majority of US citizens. Its really nothing to do with the UK and I fully respect that. Eventually it comes down to democratic math and if the current health services do not serve the majority effectively there will be a repercussion in due course I dont doubt.

 

[Keysplayr]

Get back on topic please. Before this thread goes too far astray.

Anandtech Moderator - Keysplayr2003

 

[Captante]

(1) It is what the market will stand and is set to maximise profits.

(2) It is Intels decision, customers are also free to choose.

(3) Buy a better value chip and invest the difference in hardware, software or media.


Frankly even if I had money to burn I'd still feel like an idiot for buying any "extreme" version product at that kind of price premium, especially considering how easy it us to overclock modern Intel CPU's.

And if you don't plan on overclocking it makes buying the extreme edition an even worse idea considering most of the price premium is paying for the unlocked multiplier.

 

[TheJian]

Comments deleted per user request ! (TheJian)

Markfw900 Anandtech Moderator

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Get back on topic please. Before this thread goes too far astray.

Anandtech Moderator - Keysplayr2003

Second warning, please don't quote the previous off-topic posts !!!

Anandtech Moderator Markfw900

 

[TheJian]

<snip>

You are MISUSING this forum. It's about CPU's NOT political issues OR morality BS. .

<snip>

Edited per user request

Markfw900 Anandtech Moderator

 

[TheJian]

Originally posted by: zsdersw

Microsoft has no competition on the desktop, and Apple doesn't count.. truly an apples-oranges situation (pardon the pun). Intel, however, does have competition. Why else would Intel lower prices shortly after AMD does.. or price its newer and faster chips similarly to existing chips even though they currently have the technology advantage?

Is AMD really considered competition now? Don't get me wrong I made some good money on the stock (uh...ok, and lost a bunch of it after...LOL). I've always had a love affair with their underdog status and bought lots of their chips (the good overclockers that is). But they are at 2.4ghz (I don't count 2.5/2.6 if I can't readily buy them), while Intel is running chips that hit 4ghz+. On top of that even mhz to mhz they are slower by 15-25%. Even if they put out a 3.2ghz today it would be behind Intel's 3ghz. Intel makes $10B in a year and AMD loses 3-4B. I really hope they get 45nm out quick to stop the bleeding. Otherwise we'll be asking ourselves why the next great bang for buck chip is $599 instead of $80-170. Never mind the lofty price of the QX9650. Not to say I wouldn't own one if I had the cash

 

[TheJian]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Get back on topic please. Before this thread goes too far astray.

Anandtech Moderator - Keysplayr2003

oops...Just got to this post...You can delete mine since it was completely off topic too...

Been so long since I've been in these forums I don't remember how to delete it myself.

TheJian, Glad to see we are of the same mind, I have complied with your request....

Markfw900 Anandtech Moderator

 

[dino26]

Somehow I feel that the price performance ratio is better on my E8400@3.8ghz (paid $215)

 

[aigomorla]

okey i can fully participate in this thread now that my QX9650 was mailed out to me.

My justification. I want a high overclock which the Q9550 cant provide me unless i stress a lot of hardware.

Also, another justification, i bought it because i feel that its probably the first and only QX series which actually is worth the price difference.

8.5x vs 60x mmmmm not much competition there.

Also, i figured the price difference between this one chip which will most likely get what i want, vs the 2-3 Q9450's i would of probably gone though to find my cherry one. The price difference would = out.

Basically i am being lazy in testing out Yorkfield quads this round. I think i had my share with kentsfields. :T

Do i think the price is fair? Not on your life, because im really upset intel decided to bring back the .5 multi' and cap the highest quad at 8.5x Boo intel.

But i do know there will always be people who buy X series chips. This will be my second one, if you count AMD's FX series.

 

[drebo]

And people laughed at me when I praised AMD for releasing cheap Black Edition (unlocked multiplier) chips and spited Intel for refusing to do the same.

The reason for the price difference is that Intel demands a premium for giving their customers the best possible potential. That a Q9450 could probably perform as well at the same multiplier/fsb combo, i have no doubt...However, Intel can't very well sell two identical chips at different prices.

It also needs to be said that Intel isn't selling chips to overclockers. They're selling chips to the public at large, and 99% of people who buy computers don't even know what the word "overclock" means. The percentage of computer owners who do not run their computer at stock settings is miniscule.

I'd much rather we have far fewer models of processors...however, more models means more choice for the vast majority of consumers. As always, the upper echelon of performance is reserved for the most expensive chips.

 

[Roy2001]

Originally posted by: drebo
And people laughed at me when I praised AMD for releasing cheap Black Edition (unlocked multiplier) chips and spited Intel for refusing to do the same.

The reason for the price difference is that Intel demands a premium for giving their customers the best possible potential. That a Q9450 could probably perform as well at the same multiplier/fsb combo, i have no doubt...However, Intel can't very well sell two identical chips at different prices.

It also needs to be said that Intel isn't selling chips to overclockers. They're selling chips to the public at large, and 99% of people who buy computers don't even know what the word "overclock" means. The percentage of computer owners who do not run their computer at stock settings is miniscule.

I'd much rather we have far fewer models of processors...however, more models means more choice for the vast majority of consumers. As always, the upper echelon of performance is reserved for the most expensive chips.

I can't stop laughing that AMD is selling FX series for $1000 not long ago. Seems people are easy to forget.

If you don't get the money, they are good CPUs asking for much less, why do you bother to judge if EE and formerly FX series worth XXX dollars?

I just got my QX9650, as I want to play it without multiplier locked and I have the money.

 

[TheJian]

Originally posted by: dino26
Somehow I feel that the price performance ratio is better on my E8400@3.8ghz (paid $215)

Somehow? You freaking crazy That's what I call bang for buck. Well, I mean if my X3110 hits 3.8 when it gets here next week...LOL. I paid $209 from eWiz 12th. They were out a few hours later (they clearly didn't know they were e8400's).

Actually I'll probably run 3.6 24/7. But will test to see semi-limits for future reference when I think it's slow. I have to at least PEEK behind door #2. I mean how many people can call a core2 duo with 6mb cache at 3.6 slow? Not many apps can bring that to it's knees on regular desktops/gaming stuff (most of us aren't running finite analysis stuff or proe etc). Think about just a year ago saying 3ghz Core2 with 4MB was a monster. Oh and at what price was that? Not $210 or so! SMOKED today for $210 (er...$270 now that it's rocketed up). That monster 4mb extreme was $1000 back then.

I remember paying $363 the month the Athlon X2 3800+ was released. 1.75yrs later it's $60 new sold after an RMA, came in a brand new box from AMD. How many of you just got depressed...:Q

HAHAHA. I can't believe I'm laughing about that. Yes, I was a sucker for about $150 of that price. I couldn't wait and had to have it. $363 was my breaking point (In my mind, not so much the wallet), and it was 2.4 on air in seconds out of the box. With 2.6 reachable after changing the heatsink from retail.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
Also, another justification, i bought it because i feel that its probably the first and only QX series which actually is worth the price difference.

The QX6700 when it first came out in Nov 2006 was pretty decent considering it was the only way to get a quad for about 2 months if you wanted one.

In that sense there simply was no price difference, you either bought it or you lived with a dual-core.

And with those gawd-awful FSB holes at the time, and B3 stepping, you pretty much were required to have a multi-unlocked B3 if you wanted to clock it over 3.2GHz. Which on phase cooling was easier than sleeping after being awake for 3 days.

 

[Owls]

After buying the FX-55 for $900 back in the day I can't justify a QX under any circumstances. Even if you have the money to buy it you'd be better off investing that 800 (and use the other $200 to get yourself an E8400/E3110) or use it towards a vacation.

 

[Soubriquet]

Well, having spent a large amount of money on a QX9650 "because I could" for once and also to give me overclocking freedom and a platform that will stand for a good long time, I also got a Maximus Extreme and some OCZ DDR3 1800 to permit overclocking.

However FYI there is a problem with temperature reporting holding me back, as my Max'X cannot give me accurate temperature reports. It states that the CPU is at 18'C when the mobo is at 40'C and ambient is about 20'C so I know its just not so. A third party app called Core Temp 0.97 gives readings of 40'C per core at the same time which is about right IMHO, (I have been in touch with Asus and they seem to be aware of the problem and working on it) but I dont want to or need to push it at this juncture and so because I dont know if the mobo emergency shutdown will work right I am not taking risks. Also I am using stock Intel HS/F for the QX9650 which is actually quite nice now it is lapped and using Arctic Silver 5 and a spare backplate mount I had (ahem!) however this was because I could not fit the Thermalright Ultra 120 extreme into my TwinEngine case ! lol ! because the huge side fan takes up too much space inside the case. (doh)

Here is an image of the box so you can see what I mean.

So far I have clocked it to 3.6GHz with ease just by raising the FSB to 400 x9 and running the DDR3 at 1600 timings. However speedstep takes the multiplier down to 6X when not in use. This is puzzling me, since I paid for an unlocked chip, but wont all penryns be able to use speedstep, regardless of whther they are unlocked or not ? And if that is so then does that mean that there may be a software route towards <<hacking oops sorry I mean modifying the multiplier of the locked chips?

If so then doesnt that make the price premium less justified ?


Checkout the mod's sticky at the top of the forum.
Markfw900 Anandtech Moderator

 

[Idontcare]

All chips, locked or unlocked, allow for the multiplier to be lowered.

What you are paying for with an extreme edition chip (QX for Intel, BE for AMD) is the ability to raise the multiplier above stock.

So yes, when your computer is idle the power saving features such as EIST will reduce the clock multiplier of your QX chip.

Checkout the mod's sticky at the top of the forum.