Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 12th Jan 2013 22:53 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 548595
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Comment by Nelson
by ze_jerkface on Sun 13th Jan 2013 18:49
in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Nelson"
Yawn.... a comparison to ARM, how surprising.
$50 over 10 years = $5 per year. Businesses spend more on toilet paper.
How many industries offer you products that exponentially increase in power while decreasing in price?
Calling Intel cpus overpriced is the epitome of First World Problems.
http://first-world-problems.com/
Yawn.... a comparison to ARM, how surprising.
$50 over 10 years = $5 per year. Businesses spend more on toilet paper.
How many industries offer you products that exponentially increase in power while decreasing in price?
Calling Intel cpus overpriced is the epitome of First World Problems.
http://first-world-problems.com/
$50 over 10 years = $5 per year. Businesses spend more on toilet paper.
How many industries offer you products that exponentially increase in power while decreasing in price?
Calling Intel cpus overpriced is the epitome of First World Problems.
http://first-world-problems.com/
($50-$21) x 50 million units = $1.45 billion. You try explain to your company execs why you want to spend an extra billion and a half dollars on a project with little to no added benefit, and you'll get laughed out the door.
Edited 2013-01-13 19:36 UTC
RE[5]: Comment by Nelson
by Vanders on Sun 13th Jan 2013 23:46
in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Nelson"





Member since:
2007-04-18
That's about twice what nVidia charges for a 1.3GHz Tegra 3 quad-core CPU: http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/pages/Low-End-Google-Nexus-7-...
So yes, $50 is overpriced.