View Full Version : Motorola's 7450 Processor
Jul 23, 2001, 12:49 PM
With the release of Apples new 867mhz G4, there was a concurrent press release by Motorola (http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=MOT&script=410&layout=-6&item_id=192183) announcing the availability of these chips. Of interest, pricing is revealed:
The advanced 867MHz MPC7450 processors are available today at a suggested unit list price of $435 in quantities of 1000.
Jul 23, 2001, 04:53 PM
How does this price compare to the best chips Intel and AMD can put out?
Jul 23, 2001, 05:09 PM
from CDW - AMD Athlon 1.4ghz processor (http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.asp?edc=302853) - $265.
Quantities of 1.
Jul 23, 2001, 05:40 PM
You don't go buying CPU's at CDW.
A quick look at http://www.sharkyextreme.com CPU price list reveals (as of right now):
AMD Athlon T-bird 1.4GHz = $162
AMD Athlon T-bird 800MHz = $59
Intel P III 1GHz = $179
Intel P 4 1.4GHz = $172
Intel P 4 1.7GHz = $336
...quite the cheaper chips (and those are single unit rates). Arn -- what was the cost of the new L3-disabled G4 733?
Jul 23, 2001, 08:42 PM
$144-ish for the L3-less 733.
though - according to Xlr8yourmac... the 733's in the new machine are the same revision as the old... not sure how the L3-less version would show up.
Jul 23, 2001, 09:00 PM
Does that mean apple is overcharging us?
Jul 23, 2001, 09:12 PM
Well, you can't really say... who's to say how much Apple should add on for R&D/profit.
Apple seems to be charing an extra $600 for the Dual 800mhz over the single 867.
Figure the cost of the chip $435... you're paying a premium of $165.
Now... Apple _is_ overcharing for memory... :) If you buy a Mac - get it with minimal memory and upgrade with a 3rd party.
Jul 23, 2001, 10:10 PM
You can't say that Apple is really overcharging on processor prices much if you consider that the multiprocessor version has more controller electronics. There is also the issue of the cache. I assume each 2MB L3 cache is a separate cost, since it is not on the die. I am also assuming that they raised the L3 to 2MB to partially make up for the megahertz gap.
Looking at the whole computer, the processor is just one of many components that make up the final price. You are right about the memory charge... but they have contracts. It helped keep prices down during the shortage, but now that memory is dirt cheap, the deal doesn't quite look so good.
I think I'm going to buy a dual 800 and overclock it to 1 GHz. I'm okay with a little fan noise for a workhorse. :)
Jul 23, 2001, 10:58 PM
Third party processor companays, such as Sonnet, Powerlogix, XLR8, among others, are still stuck at 500MHz. I think they are going through the above-500 troubles that Apple had prior to this year, but lets hope not.
Jul 24, 2001, 12:48 AM
you're right - the 2MB L3 cache adds something to the price. Overall, I'm pleased with the dual 800mhz... i'm very excited about the Dual Processor machines...
Plus, they do have to price differetiate the models somewhat... and make a profit too.
I've got a dual-800 cooking now at the Apple factory... we'll see when it gets to me... :)
Jul 24, 2001, 08:50 AM
I'll give you a head's up when my dual-800 gets here, Arn. (Arnold and I are in a bit of a competiton on the orders...I beat him by about a day with the initial order, taking place moments after the keynote, but ole' Arn had to cancel and re-order wanting to change his spec to 60GB (7,200RPM) vs. 40GB (5,400RPM) drive setup...putting him about 3 days behind me.) We'll see how those days translate into week-age for shipping.
(My free Lexmark printer was delivered Friday.)
Jul 24, 2001, 08:59 AM
Apple has a damn 66.6% profit on all machines. They seem to be on the greed side with there money $$. Plus never buy the memory from apple, they overcharge you a bundle :-)
Okay let me change that.
I seeing how all of you don't think that apple doesn't overcharge us.
[Edited by MrMacman on 07-28-2001 at 09:56 AM]
Jul 26, 2001, 06:23 AM
do you think a 15% profitmargin is too big?? consider advertising, free shipping, demo machines for resellors etc. i think 15% is quite fair.
The memory is a rip-off though, no argument there.
Jul 26, 2001, 10:47 AM
15% aint too bad, not considering how last week i worked out i could build a PC for half the cost it is in the shops....erk!
i dont understand why mac processors are so expensive compared to pc ones? any1 got an idea why?
Jul 26, 2001, 11:02 AM
its all a question of the basic economic principle of "economies of scale", the more you can sell the more you can produce the lower the unit cost/price becomes.
Jul 26, 2001, 02:23 PM
One of the reasons is becuase Motorola processors are simply more expensive than Intel ones. However, Motorola also has deals with Apple, so they may be getting the processors cheaper. Additionally, Apple buys some of the processors from IBM. Motorola processors are not necessarily designed with Apple in mind. PowerPC processors are designed for high demand applications such as superfast telecom, embeded sectors, etc. Intel chips are only designed for PCs. Furthermore, the 128 bit path has a much lower yeild that Intel's 32 bit path. Getting superfast G4s requires almost unprecedented technology at fabrication time – technology which is not cheap by any means. However 32 bit paths have been around forever, so no super new fabrication techniques need to be used. G4 chips are also copper based whereas the Intel chips are Aluminum based. Quite simply, it costs more to manufacture. But honestly, which would you rather use?
Jul 28, 2001, 08:59 AM
Most of us, no I think I can say all of us are mac users. This is macrumors.com , not pcrumors.com