Why is 2.7 GHz $250 more than 2.6?

I think it isn't too far out of line with what Intel prices them at in bins of 1000.

 

Because intel charges approximately that much extra.

 

Not worth it at all imo.

 

That increase is a bit more than a new i5-3570K CPU

 

I agree, but isn't it actually a 400MHz bump?

 

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.

 

More L3 cache, and that crap is expensive.

 

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.

 

It's basically a bragging 'tax' for those who want to say they have something a tad bit faster

 

If you NEED it, then Buy It.. if not, don't..

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..

 

It worth it if you are doing some heavy processing apps, in the end the time ends up which.. Time is money

 

100MHz isn't enough to spend more money on. As you said, time is money, but money is money too.

 

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%.

 

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.

 

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.... They know they are gonna sell it even if the performance improvement is minimal... These corporations are money making machines...

 

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?

 

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 )...

 

Apple tax.

 

100 MHz per core increase but still diminishing returns.

 

Intel tax.

 

$250 is pocket change when you are already going to spend over 2k on a laptop. So I opted to fully load everything.

 

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.