The end of an era - get em while you can

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
R

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Damn, guess I'll have to buy one soon for my new computer. I hope they last until next week when I'll have enough money for a new rig.

Oh, and by the way, I think a translation of the reason in the PDF file (Demand is moving towards higher performance processors) would be, "We're not making enough money off of these chips, so let's stop selling them so all the poor slobs will be forced to buy much more expensive (but only slightly faster) parts."
 
S

Shagger

Golden Member
Feb 12, 2001
1,046
0
0
Oh, and by the way, I think a translation of the reason in the PDF file (Demand is moving towards higher performance processors) would be, "We're not making enough money off of these chips, so let's stop selling them so all the poor slobs will be forced to buy much more expensive (but only slightly faster) parts."
Click to expand...

I am guessing you are about right. I oc'ed a 1.6A on an ASUS P4B266-C up to 2.4 last night with nary a hiccup. Since I spent $137 on the retail chip and the 2.4 is selling for ~ $240 MORE!!! then yeah, I am guessing they want a more profitable chip in the pipeline...
 
DAPUNISHER

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
32,090
32,629
146
TCWO.com has the 2.26B for 259$ so I'll probably get 1 of those soon To replace my 1.6A that will be worth what I bought it for(maybe a little more) when there all gone I should think.
 
P

ProviaFan

Lifer
Mar 17, 2001
14,993
1
0
Aww crap, I was going to get one of these suckers later this summer w/ a new motherboard and ram for a nice upgrade. Oh well, hopefully the 2.26ghz part will come down in price by then (probably not, though) :(
 
F

farstar

Senior member
Oct 19, 1999
505
0
0
whoohooo nailed mine earlier this month. What a beauty, thinking of picking up another to replace an old Celery 600e
 
Thor86

Thor86

Diamond Member
May 3, 2001
7,888
7
81
I highly recommend people pick these up while you still can. Just awesome overclockability with these suckers. :) Even when I upgrade my 1.6a eventually, I'll still keep mine!
 
Zap

Zap

Elite Member
Oct 13, 1999
22,377
7
81
Why not get a 1.8A for $25 more? Those do nicely, don't they? I think the Willamette Celerons were the death of the 1.6A Northwood. The 1.8A is next. Just too much MHz overlap (not performance, but the number that sells to average Joes).
 
B

Barrei

Senior member
Mar 21, 2002
514
0
0
Yeah the 1.6a were classics , but so are the 1.8a's , I run mine @ 2740mhz no problem. :)
 
Z

zxcv

Member
Mar 21, 2002
37
0
0
So how long until we expect them to vanish from the stores? They won't disappear that fast will they? I wanted to buy a 1.6A system (and still plan to) at the end of summer. Just don't have the cash to get an entire system right now.

So should I quickly go get me one of these 1.6As right now and wait until I purchase my other parts later or wait to see what the future holds?
 
P

pm

Elite Member Mobile Devices
Jan 25, 2000
7,419
22
81
Oh, and by the way, I think a translation of the reason in the PDF file (Demand is moving towards higher performance processors) would be, "We're not making enough money off of these chips, so let's stop selling them so all the poor slobs will be forced to buy much more expensive (but only slightly faster) parts."
Click to expand...

How do you figure? Taking the pricelist that as of this moment is listed on the front page summary list at pricewatch (these are the ones listed as sock 478 as of this moment)

$597 Pentium 4 2.53GHz
$227 Pentium 4 2.2GHz
$249 Pentium 4 2.26GHz
$183 Pentium 4 2.0GHz
$161 Pentium 4 1.9GHz
$136 Pentium 4 1.8GHz
$126 Pentium 4 1.7GHz
$121 Pentium 4 1.6GHz
$118 Pentium 4 1.5GHz
$123 Pentium 4 1.4GHz

If I were the average consumer, I would buy a 1.8GHz since that's 200MHz more for $15. Or if I were really cheap, I'd get a 1.7GHz. But why pay $5 less for a 1.6GHz? The majority of consumers don't know anything about overclocking so if you leave this out of the picture, then the comment in the .PDF is probably right on the mark. The manufacturing bin split for Intel has clearly moved higher than 1.6GHz and this is shown in the very small price delta between all of the CPU's under 1.8GHz. Why, if you were a typical consumer, would you want to get a 1.6GHz CPU when you can pay just a few dollars more and get a faster one? It seems obvious to me that the demand is probably in the 1.8GHz, 1.9GHz, and 2.0GHz CPU's right now and demand for the 1.6GHz and 1.7GHz CPU's is probably pretty low.
 
DAPUNISHER

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
32,090
32,629
146
Great post and info as always pm :cool:
 
C

CrazySwede

Member
May 3, 2002
53
0
0
Damn it!

Why do they always stop producing the best stuff so quickly?

ahw, I got my 1.6A already anyways.. :)
 
R

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: pm
Oh, and by the way, I think a translation of the reason in the PDF file (Demand is moving towards higher performance processors) would be, "We're not making enough money off of these chips, so let's stop selling them so all the poor slobs will be forced to buy much more expensive (but only slightly faster) parts."
Click to expand...

How do you figure? Taking the pricelist that as of this moment is listed on the front page summary list at pricewatch (these are the ones listed as sock 478 as of this moment)

$597 Pentium 4 2.53GHz
$227 Pentium 4 2.2GHz
$249 Pentium 4 2.26GHz
$183 Pentium 4 2.0GHz
$161 Pentium 4 1.9GHz
$136 Pentium 4 1.8GHz
$126 Pentium 4 1.7GHz
$121 Pentium 4 1.6GHz
$118 Pentium 4 1.5GHz
$123 Pentium 4 1.4GHz

If I were the average consumer, I would buy a 1.8GHz since that's 200MHz more for $15. Or if I were really cheap, I'd get a 1.7GHz. But why pay $5 less for a 1.6GHz? The majority of consumers don't know anything about overclocking so if you leave this out of the picture, then the comment in the .PDF is probably right on the mark. The manufacturing bin split for Intel has clearly moved higher than 1.6GHz and this is shown in the very small price delta between all of the CPU's under 1.8GHz. Why, if you were a typical consumer, would you want to get a 1.6GHz CPU when you can pay just a few dollars more and get a faster one? It seems obvious to me that the demand is probably in the 1.8GHz, 1.9GHz, and 2.0GHz CPU's right now and demand for the 1.6GHz and 1.7GHz CPU's is probably pretty low.
Click to expand...

I doubt demand for any of the P4s is low right now, and 1.6 is by no means a slow chip (especially to Joe Sixpack). But as far as I can tell almost all Northwoods seem to be able to run at reasonably high clockspeeds. And if Intel can sell a 1.6A as a 2.0A, wouldn't all of that extra price be profit? My guess is that the reason we are seeing such high overclocks is because Intel's process is so good now that their chips almost all run at high speeds, and selling them "downclocked" so to speak is loosing money for Intel.

Of course I'm just guessing here. But if I was running Intel, and I could sell the same exact chip for more money by slapping a different sticker on it, I'd do it.
 
C

CrawlingEye

Senior member
May 28, 2002
262
0
0
Originally posted by: pm
Oh, and by the way, I think a translation of the reason in the PDF file (Demand is moving towards higher performance processors) would be, "We're not making enough money off of these chips, so let's stop selling them so all the poor slobs will be forced to buy much more expensive (but only slightly faster) parts."
Click to expand...

How do you figure? Taking the pricelist that as of this moment is listed on the front page summary list at pricewatch (these are the ones listed as sock 478 as of this moment)

$597 Pentium 4 2.53GHz
$227 Pentium 4 2.2GHz
$249 Pentium 4 2.26GHz
$183 Pentium 4 2.0GHz
$161 Pentium 4 1.9GHz
$136 Pentium 4 1.8GHz
$126 Pentium 4 1.7GHz
$121 Pentium 4 1.6GHz
$118 Pentium 4 1.5GHz
$123 Pentium 4 1.4GHz

If I were the average consumer, I would buy a 1.8GHz since that's 200MHz more for $15. Or if I were really cheap, I'd get a 1.7GHz. But why pay $5 less for a 1.6GHz? The majority of consumers don't know anything about overclocking so if you leave this out of the picture, then the comment in the .PDF is probably right on the mark. The manufacturing bin split for Intel has clearly moved higher than 1.6GHz and this is shown in the very small price delta between all of the CPU's under 1.8GHz. Why, if you were a typical consumer, would you want to get a 1.6GHz CPU when you can pay just a few dollars more and get a faster one? It seems obvious to me that the demand is probably in the 1.8GHz, 1.9GHz, and 2.0GHz CPU's right now and demand for the 1.6GHz and 1.7GHz CPU's is probably pretty low.
Click to expand...

1.7 is a williamette core (.18u) which doesn't OC at all. Your northwood core 1.6GHz will OC much better (1.6a) and has nearly twice the cache. As a rule of the thumb, all cpu's have the same limit on them that have the same core. The lower multiplier cpu should be able to acheive the same speeds as one with a higher multiplier. The reason people want lower is to have a higher fsb which allows better RAM speeds. That's why your 1.6a (with the 16x mult) and 2.26b (with 17x mult) are better OCing cpu's than the 1.8a and 2.53b. :p

I hope that clarifies things for you.
 
T

THUGSROOK

Elite Member
Feb 3, 2001
11,847
0
0
i just bought 1 from neweggy :D

<EDIT> ill report on its pack date asafp! (im hoping for a June chip)
 
C

CrazySaint

Platinum Member
May 3, 2002
2,441
0
0
Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
i just bought 1 from neweggy :D
Click to expand...

Thugs, do you know how the 1.8As compare to the 1.6As? I'm not sure I'll be able to order the parts for my computer before they run out of 1.6As and need to know if I should go ahead and buy a 1.6A now, or wait and possibly have to get a 1.8A (hopefully at the same price as current 1.6As with price drops).
 
T

THUGSROOK

Elite Member
Feb 3, 2001
11,847
0
0
the 1.8A overclock almost as well.

rest assured - whatever the "baby" cpu is at the time, that will be the best overclocker ;)
 
O

oldfart

Lifer
Dec 2, 1999
10,207
0
0
Add it in to the legendary Intel overclockers list! (no Thugs, I mean the CPU not you!) ;)

C300A
C366
C566
PIII550E
PIII700
Tualeron 1.0A - 1.2
P41.6A

Seems like I'm missing a few. Anyone else?
 
W

Wingznut

Elite Member
Dec 28, 1999
16,968
2
0
I hope that clarifies things for you.
Click to expand...
Heh. ;)

But remember, he's talking about the average consumer who generally buys OEM systems (which is by far, the vast majority of Intel's customers). Overclockers are such a teeny-tiny demographic, that they don't really figure into the marketing strategy.

Every cpu eventually gets discontinued. As pm pointed out, there's a natural evolution to when a particular bin speed's cost just doesn't make much sense for the vast majority of customers.


oldfart, you forgot about the P3-550@733 and especially the P3-700@933mhz (or often a ghz). Those inital CuMines were very succesful overclockers, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom