Re:Intel knows it's no longer inside
by redtuesday on Wednesday June 01, 2016 @02:39PM
(#11817009)
I would guess frik probably means this: in 2010/2011 you had to pay ~350 euros for AMDs 5870 when it launched, or ~450 euros for nvidias GTX 580. Now you have to pay ~700 euros for AMDs Fury X or ~800 euros for nvidias GTX 980ti at launch. That's not 400% more expensive but they are not cheaper either.
In the US, release price of GTX 580 was $500 and release price of the 1080 at launch is $600. Converting the 580's price to 2016 dollars gives about a 10% increase in price.
The 980 TI I'm not sure is the best comparison to a GTX 580. It was intentionally a very expensive ultra-high end card. The GTX 590 debuted at $700.
There does seem to be a problem with prices being ridiculously high in most non-US regions, though.
Because that's physically impractical (if not impossible) with today's technology. Intel themselves actually have a good article[0] on the topic. Besides, there's way more to CPU performance than clock speed—today's Intel CPUs are several times faster than the Penitum 4, for instance, even at lower frequencies.
> @nVidia: how about thinking about affordable high end GPUs? The GPUs got 400% more expensive since 2011.
What are you talking about? GPU performance is plateauing a little bit, but the cards are only getting cheaper and more energy efficient, especially the high-end ones. Both Nvidia and AMD have announced new high-end cards coming soon that will give you the performance of the current high-end cards (Titan X and Fury X) at a little over half the price. Edit: Apparently they won't be that much cheaper than previous generations, but certainly within the grasp of any enthusiast or professional who really wants/needs them.
Plus, isn't "affordable high end" kind of an oxymoron? "High end" is almost by definition not affordable for most people.
[0]: https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2014/02/19/why-has-cp...