On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:09:50 -0400, keith <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 00:26:53 -0400, Tony Hill wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:03:09 -0400, keith <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>Amazing, but true.
>>>
>>>http://www.apple.com/powermac/
>>
>> What's perhaps even more amazing is that a PowerMac with a single
>> dual-core chip really just isn't much cheaper than a similarly
>> configured PowerMac with 2 single-core chips in it.
>
>I'm not sure why you would expect the box to be priced all that much
>differently. Though, I'm not sure why there is a choice either.
>OTOH, there *is* a difference in the chipsets.
Well, in the PC world a system with a single dual-core chip tends to
be quite a bit cheaper than one with a pair of single-core chips. I
would have expected Apple to at least make an effort at lowering their
costs, but they really haven't at all.
For example, if you compare a Dell Precision 380 with a single
dual-core Pentium D chip to a Precision 470 with a pair of single-core
Xeon chips you get a savings of almost $400.
Precision 380 with 1 dual-core Pentium D 840 (3.2GHz): $2,251
Precision 470 with 2 single-core Xeon 3.2GHz: $2,642
Now obviously there's more too it than just that. However the basic
fact is that it SHOULD be a lot easier/cheaper to build a system with
a single dual-core chip than an otherwise similar system with a pair
of single-core chips.
With Apple's pricing though their system with a single dual-core chip
is basically the same as an equal clock speed pair of single-core
chips. Sure they've made some improvements from the old system to the
new one, but they're fairly few and far between.
-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca