Quote Originally Posted by .Tret View Post
Because of what history? When in history has Intel charged $1000 for a low end cpu and $2000 for mainstream? I don't recall that happening; even in the early pentium pro days (the time when intels prices were highest).

In the pre-k8 days, Intel's prices weren't as high as people think they remember them to be. In the pentium 1 through pentium 3 days Intel always priced thier processors the same. $200-300 for the low-end and $800 or $900 for the high-end.

Even if Intel was a true monopoly, they could not sell cpu's at very high prices because not enough people would buy them to cover the cost to make the cpu's. The market is what determines prices. If AMD were to die right now I doubt Intel would raise their prices much at all. The problem we would face with Intel being a monopoly is lack of inovation not pricing.

That is why when someone says that Intel would price thier low-end processors at $1000 if they were a monopoly or when someone says that nehalem cpu's would cost $2000 if they were a monopoly, they are either stupid fanboys or are just plain ignorant. (too many people)
Never said low end cpu would cost $1000, said the PC itself.

Since amd is now both video and proc, its safe to say, if they go bottoms up, that the price of a low end pc could rise from $400 to more around $1000 again.

This is because, intel won't need to produce such a large line of processors to compete, and their can just be like 5, 2 low end , 2 mid range, and a EE.

Anyway, wasn't trying to imply anything in my post, was just saying what I have seen over the years since 1995 in computer prices, and how that could go in reverse w/o competition.

Not a fan boy or whatever, only really 1 company I don't like with good reason and its not amd or intel ,love them both, amd I still use for low end cheaper gaming machines, that can just focus on the video card, then rest of system is done for under $300