Why is 2.7 GHz $250 more than 2.6?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by gmanist1000, Aug 22, 2012.

  1. gmanist1000 macrumors 68030

    gmanist1000

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    #1
    So why does a spec bump from the 2.6 GHz option to the 2.7 GHz justify a $250 increase? A measly 100 MHz of processing power and 2MB more of L3 Cache doesn't seem to be worth $250 to me.

    I opted for the 2.6 GHz, and I love it... don't get me wrong. But I was thinking about the highest end model but when I saw that it was $250 for basically nothing I didn't even have to think about my decision.
     
  2. calderone macrumors 68040

    calderone

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle
    #2
    I think it isn't too far out of line with what Intel prices them at in bins of 1000.
     
  3. terraphantm macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #3
    Because intel charges approximately that much extra.
     
  4. Orlandoech macrumors 68040

    Orlandoech

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Location:
    Salt Lake City, UT
  5. Hakone macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Location:
    Southern California
    #5
    That increase is a bit more than a new i5-3570K CPU :eek:
     
  6. Interstella5555 macrumors 603

    Interstella5555

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    #6
    I agree, but isn't it actually a 400MHz bump?
     
  7. NewbieCanada macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    #7
    Ever since I've been buying computers within a processor line there's usually been a low-end model, a middle one that's substantially faster at a modest increase, and a top of the line that's minimally faster and absurdly more expensive. It's not an Apple thing, it's an Intel thing.
     
  8. psykick5 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
  9. gmanist1000 thread starter macrumors 68030

    gmanist1000

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    #9
    No it's a 0.1 Increase. Which is 100, therefore it's a 100 MHz increase.
     
  10. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #10
    It is. No one told you it was worth it. Intel and Apple priced things that way. If Apple figured no one would buy it, they would not have even offered the option. In no way are most cpu upgrades cost effective in terms of real performance or machine longevity.
     
  11. Hakone macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Location:
    Southern California
    #11
    It's basically a bragging 'tax' for those who want to say they have something a tad bit faster
     
  12. bobcan macrumors 6502a

    bobcan

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Location:
    Sunny but Cold.. Canada
    #12
    If you NEED it, then Buy It.. if not, don't.. :rolleyes:

    It is no different in other industries.. if you buy a 'high end' BMW the costs Add Up pretty quickly with minor additions..

    As stated, if no one wanted it then they wouldn't offer it.. :D
     
  13. dade247 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    #13
    It worth it if you are doing some heavy processing apps, in the end the time ends up which.. Time is money :D
     
  14. Orange Furball macrumors 65816

    Orange Furball

    Joined:
    May 18, 2012
    Location:
    Scranton, PA, USA
    #14
    100MHz isn't enough to spend more money on. As you said, time is money, but money is money too.
     
  15. Stetrain macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    #15
    That's pretty much the way it always is with going to higher end processors and graphics cards. It's diminishing returns as you get towards the upper limits of the current generation.

    This is true when configuring systems from Apple, other PC manufacturers, or even when buying components yourself. Going after that top 10% of currently available performance is going to cost you a lot more than settling for 90%.
     
  16. daneoni macrumors G4

    daneoni

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    #16
    Because the production line is mainly focused on the mainstream chips/board and it cost more to build out the 2.7GHz board since its an outlier part. That cost is being shifted on to the consumer.
     
  17. sofianito macrumors 65816

    sofianito

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2011
    Location:
    Spain
    #17
    If you ask people to choose a number between 1 ant 10, most will probably choose 7. The mystery of prime numbers subconsciously attract people... Apple and Intel marketing strategists and mentalists know that people like the number 7, and 2.7Ghz looks and sounds nice...:cool:. They know they are gonna sell it even if the performance improvement is minimal... These corporations are money making machines...
     
  18. terraphantm macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #18
    Well that's not a good analogy. If the mid-range model (335i) offered 99% of the performance of the top end model (M3) and was manufactured with the exact same components, then that'd be a valid analogy. But that's not the case. In reality, you'd need quite a few modifications for a 335 to match an M3, and even then the experience is never really the same.

    CPUs used to be somewhat similar. In the past, one needed to overlock a fair deal to match the top end CPU - but not anymore. In 99% of all cases, the extra cache and 100MHz won't have a meaningful impact.

    ----------

    Which is why the 2.6GHz model is called the 3720QM?
     
  19. sofianito macrumors 65816

    sofianito

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2011
    Location:
    Spain
    #19
    I was referring to cpu speed not the model ;). When you mention speed, people think Formula 1, Maserati Quattro, Ferrari,.... You know whaa I mean (saying it in mancunian accent :D)...
     
  20. Lance-AR macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Location:
    Little Rock, AR
    #21
    100 MHz per core increase but still diminishing returns.
     
  21. brentsg macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #22
    Intel tax.
     
  22. iaymnu macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    #23
    $250 is pocket change when you are already going to spend over 2k on a laptop. So I opted to fully load everything.
     
  23. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #24
    There is also 2MB more cache and the 100MHz bump. 8MB vs the rest of the fleets 6MB. It showed no performance benefit over the 100MHz advantage though. May be worth it to some specific users.
     
  24. gmanist1000 thread starter macrumors 68030

    gmanist1000

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    #25
    For me it was worth saving and I spent it on Apple Care with student discount for $240.
     

Share This Page