Why tech is dead

[KarathKasun]

2 minutes ago, CharminUltraStrong said:

But as generations progress, your mid range cards become so good that they're, effectively, the high end replacement. 980ti was top of the product stack at one point for gaming, the 1070 has the same or better performance.  1070's were the same price or LESS than a 980ti. Hell, 1070's beat out the old Titans which cost 1,000+ USD back when they were new in 2013 with only the Titan X putting up a fight against the 1070. Even better is that the 1080 beats out a Titan X so with ever progressing performance comes ever progressing pricing and evolving product stacks.

This happened in the late 2000's and early 2010's (100% performance increases gen to gen).  Prices still did not go up.  Top of the product stack was still $500, even though it was double the performance of the old $500 card.

[CharminUltraStrong]

1 minute ago, KarathKasun said:

This happened in the late 2000's and early 2010's (100% performance increases gen to gen).  Prices still did not go up.

Next gen mid range cards almost always replace the top tier lolwat.

[solarflare]

On 1/10/2019 at 6:58 AM, KarathKasun said:

Wages in general are stagnant since 2009, and actually went down from 2004 to 2008.

Very true. 

And thats IF those people still can even find a comparable job or have any $$ left at all since the crashes that started in late 2008

[KarathKasun]

3 minutes ago, CharminUltraStrong said:

Next gen mid range cards almost always replace the top tier lolwat.

Not in 2016 or 2018 they didn't.  1060 was not equal to a Maxwell Titan, 2060 isn't the same as a 1080 Ti, and prices went up on the parts that increased performance.

[Blademaster91]

14 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

 

High end is literally top of the product stack components.  At that time, the "titan" tier graphics cards cost $500 (2080 tier was $250) and i9 tier CPUs topped out at $999.  You could put together a budget gaming rig for $350.

 

If you want to claim inflation, the difference is only about 33%.  Titan should cost ~$700 and the top HEDT i9 should cost ~$1400.  Entry level systems are about spot on for inflation, high end rigs are not.

High end hardware is like most high end things, there is less of a demand so prices don't decrease and companies can usually charge what ever the consumer is willing to pay.

[CharminUltraStrong]

Just now, KarathKasun said:

Not in 2016 or 2018 they didn't.  1060 was not equal to a Maxwell Titan, and prices went up on the parts that increased performance.

1060 destroyed the lower end 960 and 760's from what I remember. There was incredible GPU pricing inflation because of the crypto rush but 1060's should've been around 250+ USD under normal economic climates. Ti cards are mere refreshes and don't count since they maintain the same pricing scheme. RTX cards have much more in them and the RTX 2060 will out perform a 1070ti  at the same/a lower price point

[solarflare]

I will say I agree and disagree to some points. 

At the moment i could never do complete work off my phone. 

I've tried , it can do a lot but it cant do everything i need "yet". 

I wish it could at-least for work and a Bluetooth monitor/kbd/mouse would go along way to making it work ready.

For the most part the apps have caught up so i can do quite a bit on the phone already but its not quite there yet for me and what i do. 

 

I also kind of agree on console gaming vs Pc gaming at the moment. 

 

1.The amount of BETTER GAMES that have come out vs the price and effect of new PC hardware is absurd to keep investing in a gaming pc atm. At the same time i can use my pc fine to play all titles and its getting fairly long in the tooth so hes quite right about the inflation in pricing vs the performance and quality differences you actually get from those price increases. 

2. almost all my gaming friends and even the ones that didn't game at all now own and play console. there is only maybe a couple left that still pc game and most of us dont play the same games anymore. 

3. Consoles are definitely a buy every 6 ish years and get what you need kind of thing that appeal to the average people is quite strong. 

 

It would be nice if pc gaming become somewhat affordable again, I have also ran into that feeling lately that its super super hard to justify myself investing in any new PC hardware. 

[KarathKasun]

11 minutes ago, CharminUltraStrong said:

1060 destroyed the lower end 960 and 760's from what I remember. There was incredible GPU pricing inflation because of the crypto rush but 1060's should've been around 250+ USD under normal economic climates. Ti cards are mere refreshes and don't count since they maintain the same pricing scheme. RTX cards have much more in them and the RTX 2060 will out perform a 1070ti  at the same/a lower price point

RTX 2060 is $100 more than the GTX 1060.  It is now at RECENT historical X70 pricing.

 

The Entire product stack is being moved up by about $100.  The 900 series moved pricing up by ~$50.  The 600 series moved pricing up by ~$50 to ~$500 depending on the part of the stack you looked at.

 

If this continues, getting an entry level gaming GPU will soon be in the $500 ballpark.

 

More $ for more performance with every generation is how you end up with a dead PC gaming scene.

[CharminUltraStrong]

3 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

RTX 2060 is $100 more than the GTX 1060.  It is now at RECENT historical X70 pricing.

 

The Entire product stack is being moved up by about $100.  The 900 series moved pricing up by ~$50.  The 600 series moved pricing up by ~$50 to ~$200 depending on the part of the stack you looked at.

 

If this continues, getting an entry level gaming GPU will soon be in the $500 ballpark.

You realize that the GTX 1160 is a thing too, right? It will be much cheaper than the RTX cards because it will lack Ray Tracing lmao. Also, the RTX 2060 beats the 1070ti at a similar or cheaper price point, like I said before. They're competing with their own lineup. This gives you the ability to go back and buy their last gen cards .

[solarflare]

14 minutes ago, CharminUltraStrong said:

1060 destroyed the lower end 960 and 760's from what I remember. There was incredible GPU pricing inflation because of the crypto rush but 1060's should've been around 250+ USD under normal economic climates. Ti cards are mere refreshes and don't count since they maintain the same pricing scheme. RTX cards have much more in them and the RTX 2060 will out perform a 1070ti  at the same/a lower price point

What hes talking about is series. 

 

You dont compare a 8800GTX with a 280GTX  they are both flagships and they both sold for relatively similar prices. 

Same as a 2700k vs 3770k they are both flagship K series of their generation they should be similarly priced. 

 

A TITAN was a top tier card , the 980TI was also a top tier card respectively they should be similarly priced. 

 

If technology didn't innovate or get faster with each generation then why would anyone ever pay for new hardware? 

 

I'm also of the same mindset that we have all been getting price gouged for no other reason than consumers keep buying.. that is until no one is willing anymore and then the market turns sour similar to how it has been. 

 

when the investment cost vs the innovation/performance differences are not even people start just holding on to older tech until they cant possibly do so anymore. 

 

Too many markets are been pushed into a mostly monopolized status and thus your seeing the effects of this in general. 

 

Even when say AMD has something solid on the horizon you still hear talk of them "PRICE MATCHING" with intel/nvidia instead of actually competing with them. 

 

The memory manufactures have already been sued a few times for doing similar things. 

 

thats my last 2 cents on this topic. 

[KarathKasun]

2 minutes ago, CharminUltraStrong said:

You realize that the GTX 1160 is a thing too, right? It will be much cheaper than the RTX cards because it will lack Ray Tracing lmao. Also, the RTX 2060 beats the 1070ti at a similar or cheaper price point, like I said before. They're competing with their own lineup. This gives you the ability to go back and buy their last gen cards .

Which is blatantly anti-consumer.

 

Buying a last gen card is not a valid option for a NEW build.  If you have to go last gen to afford decent performance in a NEW build, something is very wrong.

[CharminUltraStrong]

3 minutes ago, solarflare said:

What hes talking about is series. 

 

You dont compare a 8800GTX with a 280GTX  they are both flagships and they both sold for relatively similar prices. 

Same as a 2700k vs 3770k they are both flagship K series of their generation they should be similarly priced. 

 

A TITAN was a top tier card , the 980TI was also a top tier card respectively they should be similarly priced. 

 

If technology didn't innovate or get faster with each generation then why would anyone ever pay for new hardware? 

 

I'm also of the same mindset that we have all been getting price gouged for no other reason than consumers keep buying.. that is until no one is willing anymore and then the market turns sour similar to how it has been. 

 

when the investment cost vs the innovation/performance differences are not even people start just holding on to older tech until they cant possibly do so anymore. 

 

Too many markets are been pushed into a mostly monopolized status and thus your seeing the effects of this in general. 

 

Even when say AMD has something solid on the horizon you still hear talk of them "PRICE MATCHING" with intel/nvidia instead of actually competing with them. 

 

The memory manufactures have already been sued a few times for doing similar things. 

 

thats my last 2 cents on this topic. 

But we will always have alternatives of the same price point just in different series. 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, solarflare said:

I will say I agree and disagree to some points. 

At the moment i could never do complete work off my phone. 

I've tried , it can do a lot but it cant do everything i need "yet". 

I wish it could at-least for work and a Bluetooth monitor/kbd/mouse would go along way to making it work ready.

For the most part the apps have caught up so i can do quite a bit on the phone already but its not quite there yet for me and what i do. 

 

I also kind of agree on console gaming vs Pc gaming at the moment. 

 

1.The amount of BETTER GAMES that have come out vs the price and effect of new PC hardware is absurd to keep investing in a gaming pc atm. At the same time i can use my pc fine to play all titles and its getting fairly long in the tooth so hes quite right about the inflation in pricing vs the performance and quality differences you actually get from those price increases. 

2. almost all my gaming friends and even the ones that didn't game at all now own and play console. there is only maybe a couple left that still pc game and most of us dont play the same games anymore. 

3. Consoles are definitely a buy every 6 ish years and get what you need kind of thing that appeal to the average people is quite strong. 

 

It would be nice if pc gaming become somewhat affordable again, I have also ran into that feeling lately that its super super hard to justify myself investing in any new PC hardware. 

The mentality alone is enough to say your completely wrong. if you want to use a p.c. as a console go right ahead but.. that will cost you dearly. The wrong use of tech is just as helpful to the downfall of tech as is wrong inspiration. I guess the story of native locals coming in contact with a higher technologised civilisations still does apply in a certain way.

 

[CharminUltraStrong]

Just now, KarathKasun said:

Which is blatantly anti-consumer.

 

Buying a last gen card is not a valid option for a NEW build.  If you have to go last gen to afford decent performance in a NEW build, something is very wrong.

No it's not. People do it all the time. There are plenty of people who can't afford the latest gen and better options are found in the last gen because of one reason or another. The 1070ti is obsolete because of the RTX 2060, you can grab a used 1070/1070ti for 250$ or new for 300. Cheaper than the RTX 2060 with similar performance. It doesn't make sense that something as good as the 2060 should be priced like a 1060, it keeps the market alive for previous gens. Your last gen or 2 gen old system would have 0 resale value otherwise. You can build a 1,500 USD system with an RTX 2080 as previously mentioned but you can buy a 1070 system for 1,200 USD. If the pricing brackets didn't evolve the 1070 system would be worth less than 800 USD for something that could handle VR gaming. I'm all for the change in pricing, it keeps my component protected(price-wise) for when I go to sell them via second hand markets.

[GoldenLag]

11 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

At the time those systems existed, 120-200hz was a thing, your statement seems to imply otherwise.  A $1500 system back then could push over 100hz and the display would support it.

and a 700$ system today can push over 100hz easily...... also color etc became way more important over the years aswell as formfactor.

13 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

Titan should cost ~$700 and the top HEDT i9 should cost ~$1400.

you do know we seperate HEDT from regular consumer yes? mostly because the HEDT line is aimed at Prosumers. the top cream of the line (its more like server grade) CPU a regular consumer can get their hands on is the 2990wx which is a server CPU gone consumer. its 1700$. sooooo.............. the actual top of the line regular HEDT is 900$. 

18 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

If you want to claim inflation, the difference is only about 33%

hey, you brought this up earlier. ever heard of research cost, wage increases etc? oh btw there was a tiny depression in 2008 aswell. 

19 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

High end is literally top of the product stack components

actually, no. its not really, that there is a highly subjective term. 

21 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

120-200hz was a thing

show me an interface that pushes 10bit color at 120 hz 4k from that time period....... that is the standard set today........ hz is great and all, but we do enjoy a bit of color at the bleeding edge. or high end as you would call it. 

14 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

This happened in the late 2000's and early 2010's (100% performance increases gen to gen).  Prices still did not go up.

i mean. the monter chips put out by Nvidia at the time werent exactly cheap. 

15 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

This happened in the late 2000's and early 2010's (100% performance increases gen to gen).  Prices still did not go up.

node stepping and at the time high overhead in architectural improvements is why. its almost like researchcost and limits of physics are limiting us to go faster. but that would be silly.....  also i havent payed too much attention at the time, but in the monolithic period prices went up. also at the time thermal constraints as well as silicon limits were showing their ugly head. 

14 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

Not in 2016 or 2018 they didn't.  1060 was not equal to a Maxwell Titan, 2060 isn't the same as a 1080 Ti, and prices went up on the parts that increased performance.

Gtx 1060 was a leap. and if you were actually going to compare midrange. why not compare the 1080 ant the Titan. architecturally the 1080 is midrange to the titan. 

 

the RTX 2060 didnt go the standard way of rastarization. you should know this. Visuals have taken a slowdown in the industry. the Move to Pathtracing and Raytracing has begun. the Die area that could have made the 2060 equal to the 1080ti (hang on, suddenly you arent counting the titan p has highest end? are you being inconsistant?) that die area was spent on Raytracing ASICS and the other tid bits. when looking at it that way its a leap, but not in the way you are used to. 

 

6 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

RTX 2060 is $100 more than the GTX 1060.  It is now at RECENT historical X70 pricing.

and? are you moving the goalpost? we know the 2060 is expencive and people have made an outcry about it. but you know the 1160 is rumoured yes?

7 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

If this continues, getting an entry level gaming GPU will soon be in the $500 ballpark.

you know if pricing moves what is considered entry level moves aswell? dont think the status of "entry-level" is static. that will change. what high end Core i9 did you have back in the day. what there was no Core i9? what pesky pentiums were the deal and Athlons were bleeding edge?

2 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

Buying a last gen card is not a valid option for a NEW build

it very much is.........

2 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

Which is blatantly anti-consumer.

heck its not my fault consumers kept paying the price of the bleeding edge and demanded more. you are part of the problem labeling the Titan cards as highest end Consumer when they should be Prosumer (i mean Nvidia isnt helping).

3 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

If you have to go last gen to afford decent performance in a NEW build, something is very wrong.

if last gen is sold in stores new then its fully valid. First gen Ryzen is still somewhat popular due to its low price for budget buyers who can then shift their cashflow from the CPU to the GPU. also current gen is still fully viable for decent performance. and by decent i mean really good. 

 

 

 

This is just giving me nostalgia-bot feels. i get that people long to the old days of 4 companies fighting over market share and node changes were rapid and the thermal constraints werent hit yet along with silicon limits. but to say tech is dead today because you blatantly think those days were better you can continue to think so. meanwhile im gonna live in the current market and see how it flows. Rastarization has slowed down, and we are currently taking babysteps towards rastarization

[TempestCatto]

(mods love to remove things, don't they?)

 

Can we all just agree pricing is high but still clearly worth it for the performance we see? Can we all just agree that different people have different workloads which require different platforms and hardware? Can we all just be happy we can still game at high resolutions with fast refresh monitors, and also take the internet with us in a tiny little aluminium and glass box in our pocket? There's always someone in the background, some huge team of engineers, some group of people who's only job was to make coffee for said engineers, some poor sap who had to sit there and test every little node before they built a machine to do it, the list goes on. These people are always forgotten about, put in the shadows and left to the dust. No one realizes how many people go into conceptualizing, making, testing, marketing, and releasing something like a new generation of gpu. They gotta get paid for something somehow, that's why prices seem high. Honestly, prices do seem to be a bit higher than they should in most areas. Presumably because there used to be no competition from anyone else. But regardless, let's all just sit back, relax, and enjoy what we have. Please?

[GoldenLag]

2 minutes ago, TempestCatto said:

Allow me to intervene here

 

penis

 

Now that I have your attention...can we all just agree pricing is high but still clearly worth it for the performance we see? Can we all just agree that different people have different workloads which require different platforms and hardware? Can we all just be happy we can still game at high resolutions with fast refresh monitors, and also take the internet with us in a tiny little aluminium and glass box in our pocket? There's always someone in the background, some huge team of engineers, some group of people who's only job was to make coffee for said engineers, some poor sap who had to sit there and test every little node before they built a machine to do it, the list goes on. These people are always forgotten about, put in the shadows and left to the dust. No one realizes how many people go into conceptualizing, making, testing, marketing, and releasing something like a new generation of gpu. They gotta get paid for something somehow, that's why prices seem high. Honestly, prices do seem to be a bit higher than they should in most areas. Presumably because there used to be no competition from anyone else. But regardless, let's all just sit back, relax, and enjoy what we have. Please?

nah, gotta meaninglessly discuss how stuff back in the day was X instead of discussing the clear issue with the current market of people willingly paying whatever to get the bleeding edge. 

 

 

 

 

BY THE EMPRESS

 

 

i think its time for a Crusade and put this to an end. such herecy as this meaningless thread shall not be tollerated.

 

our Empress and Savior Komi-san just wants us to be good friends. 

 

let us be friends to please our savior and may the wholesome be with you

 

 

Spoiler

this is enough right?

 

[rijzen]

19 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

nah, gotta meaninglessly discuss how stuff back in the day was X instead of discussing the clear issue with the current market of people willingly paying whatever to get the bleeding edge. 

 

 

 

 

BY THE EMPRESS

 

 

i think its time for a Crusade and put this to an end. such herecy as this meaningless thread shall not be tollerated.

 

our Empress and Savior Komi-san just wants us to be good friends. 

 

let us be friends to please our savior and may the wholesome be with you

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

this is enough right?

 

But the OPs discussion is valid for the older ones of us, In the mid 90s a mid range computer without graphics card was 2000-5000 dollars without inflation. If you wanted a standard desktop to do word processing and print out documents you were easily going to spend over 1500. today its cheaper than ever but the performance ceiling is just much higher and as far as parts go they are about the same price relatively because the scale of low to high end has grown massively/

TL:DR its about the same or cheaper considering the workloads of then and now

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/06/22/cost-of-a-computer-the-year-you-were-born/36156373/

Edited January 14, 2019 by rijzen
added link to average pricing

[2SidedPolygon]

I really dislike threads like this. The types where people make wild claims like "tech is dead!" and their only backing is that they don't need high-end hardware for what they do. Tech isn't dead. PC gaming is growing faster than it ever has, we're getting great and interesting new product launches right and left, and there are more and better options for budget user than ever before. To say that tech is dead is wrong in just about every regard.

[Canada EH]

On 1/10/2019 at 6:56 AM, Hiya! said:

How? how do you define peasant?

It is diminutive response, instead of saying "Normal PC" they want their ego stroked to put themselves above what they really are. Its a typical human response, has to do with ego and power.

[ATTWIFI87.6]

Spoiler

Technology isn't dead. Soap is technology, yet we still use it. It sounds like you feel that year after year after year cycles of technology, we don't need, or want, it, in your case.

 

[Jtalk4456]

On 1/13/2019 at 9:32 PM, KarathKasun said:

1. Divide what he has there by 2 to get how many modules worth that is.  Workstations can come with 16+ total modules, giving 32 finger sets as he had them prepared (you get a set of 2 fingers from a single module).

 

2. When the workstation has ~12 SATA headers, you end up with as much as ~2 DIMM slots.  I have trash server boards with 24+ DIMM slots.  Many servers can have 4 modules per channel or more.

 

3. Servers have more than 8 DIMMs, especially old ones...  https://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/archive/Xeon1333/5400/X7DWN_.cfm

 

6. 1st gen Core 2 quad based Xeon CPUs go for less than $10 on the open market.

 

8. The link is there, you just need to click on it.

 

9. Two CPUs, double the memory slots, double the x16 slots (possibly quadruple), usually multiple HDDs, larger PSUs, multiple GPUs, RAID controllers... so yeah, double the components and thus double the interconnect (where the gold is) count.

 

 

10. Unless you are talking about consumer goods, the gold plating thickness has been relatively static for the reasons I listed for the past 20 years.  You can go back to very old mainframes from the 70's and 80's and find significantly more gold per square mm, but that is 40-50 years ago.

 

11. Talking about ALL of the IC's, including NB/SB, internal CPU package, FETs... everything.

 

12. 

This implies that the price of a full computer should be similar to the market price of gold, which has not been anywhere near the truth.

 

The BOM for a basic PC (business desktop, just the PC) today is under $150, If you take all of the margins out of it.  I mean, I can buy a NEW business desktop for ~$220 at a brick and mortar store.  With monitor and peripherals the total cost is maybe $300.

1,2, and 3. So you're talking high end servers. First off I mentioned a typical workstation, not a high end server. I am not well enough acquainted with servers to fact check you on how typical those kinds of numbers are, so I won't bother arguing there, but what I will say is all this was in comparison to a hypothetical $100 full fledged computer you still haven't shown me, not a several thousand dollar server setup with 128 gb of ram. if you're going to try and claim I can pull $100 in gold out of a consumer PC don't use a enterprise server as an example, that doesn't match.

6. And $10 is much more than you'd get for the gold on the chip, not taking into account the price of the chemicals used to extract that gold.

8. I clicked on the link and I and others have quoted your own article which refutes your own numbers. So not helpful for your argument.

9. Again using a high end server, not a "typical workstation" as I said. In even a high end "typical workstation" we might have 2 cpus if they went for a server board, but with threadripper, that's not a typical case anymore in the consumer market. They probably have a second gpu. they might have 2x the memory, but they might not have any more components and instead just have 2 higher capacity sticks. a larger psu isn't an extra component, just a different one. They might have more harddrives, or they might just have a sever, which is more likely and a better choice. With that said a raid controller isn't likely in consumer grade as they will either use the motherboard raid controller or have data on a server where the server has the raid cards. So I'd give a conservative estimate of maybe 1 extra hdd/ssd, 1 extra gpu. 2 extra parts as a conservative estimate in a "typical workstation"

10. Of course I'm talking consumer goods, you mentioned a $100 computer. Any business using a $100 PC doesn't deserve to be in business.

11. Again not counting again the labor cost along with the chemicals and the vast amount of time to pull off dozens of motherboard components, the amount of gold in those is so minimal and low in value, I would consider it negligible

12. No it doesn't. It implies a product should cost more than the value of it's components to make a profit for the company producing it. Also the cost of gold per oz is currently very similar to the cost of a mid tier gaming computer, so very near the truth. Also that's the cost of gold per oz, so lets keep that pricing in perspective to how much gold that price affords you

13. I don't know about the typical BOM and couldn't find any sources in a quick search, so without some evidence, I will not argue with you about or believe your numbers, seeing as how your numbers in the past have been refuted by the one article you posted.

As for buying a new desktop for $220, I'd like some examples. And what are you considering a business desktop? I used to work at a brick and mortar shop and to get a "business PC" you were running at least 400-500 depending on sales. I need some sources on what you consider a business pc with examples. what we sold for that price was a celeron with 4 gb ram and a 500 gb hdd.

[KarathKasun]

13 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

1,2, and 3. So you're talking high end servers. First off I mentioned a typical workstation, not a high end server. I am not well enough acquainted with servers to fact check you on how typical those kinds of numbers are, so I won't bother arguing there, but what I will say is all this was in comparison to a hypothetical $100 full fledged computer you still haven't shown me, not a several thousand dollar server setup with 128 gb of ram. if you're going to try and claim I can pull $100 in gold out of a consumer PC don't use a enterprise server as an example, that doesn't match.

6. And $10 is much more than you'd get for the gold on the chip, not taking into account the price of the chemicals used to extract that gold.

8. I clicked on the link and I and others have quoted your own article which refutes your own numbers. So not helpful for your argument.

9. Again using a high end server, not a "typical workstation" as I said. In even a high end "typical workstation" we might have 2 cpus if they went for a server board, but with threadripper, that's not a typical case anymore in the consumer market. They probably have a second gpu. they might have 2x the memory, but they might not have any more components and instead just have 2 higher capacity sticks. a larger psu isn't an extra component, just a different one. They might have more harddrives, or they might just have a sever, which is more likely and a better choice. With that said a raid controller isn't likely in consumer grade as they will either use the motherboard raid controller or have data on a server where the server has the raid cards. So I'd give a conservative estimate of maybe 1 extra hdd/ssd, 1 extra gpu. 2 extra parts as a conservative estimate in a "typical workstation"

10. Of course I'm talking consumer goods, you mentioned a $100 computer. Any business using a $100 PC doesn't deserve to be in business.

11. Again not counting again the labor cost along with the chemicals and the vast amount of time to pull off dozens of motherboard components, the amount of gold in those is so minimal and low in value, I would consider it negligible

12. No it doesn't. It implies a product should cost more than the value of it's components to make a profit for the company producing it. Also the cost of gold per oz is currently very similar to the cost of a mid tier gaming computer, so very near the truth. Also that's the cost of gold per oz, so lets keep that pricing in perspective to how much gold that price affords you

13. I don't know about the typical BOM and couldn't find any sources in a quick search, so without some evidence, I will not argue with you about or believe your numbers, seeing as how your numbers in the past have been refuted by the one article you posted.

As for buying a new desktop for $220, I'd like some examples. And what are you considering a business desktop? I used to work at a brick and mortar shop and to get a "business PC" you were running at least 400-500 depending on sales. I need some sources on what you consider a business pc with examples. what we sold for that price was a celeron with 4 gb ram and a 500 gb hdd.

6. you are using my arguments now.

 

8. Look at the quantities gathered from that recyclers forum, that's where $13 per MB comes from.

 

9. Doesn't matter what it is if I can get it for ~$100.

 

10. 90% of businesses don't deserve to be in business then, most use sub $100 thin clients.

 

11. Part of my initial argument

 

12.  The cost of PCs is so broad you can configure anything to hit a price point between $500 and $10,000.   Invalid point.

 

https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/812948/HP-Slimline-Desktop-PC-AMD-A9/

https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/6810052/HP-290-a0020-Slim-Desktop-Intel/

 

These are available in pretty much every one of their stores, and while the specs change, there is always a system there at this price.

[Jtalk4456]

1 hour ago, KarathKasun said:

6. you are using my arguments now.

 

8. Look at the quantities gathered from that recyclers forum, that's where $13 per MB comes from.

 

9. Doesn't matter what it is if I can get it for ~$100.

 

10. 90% of businesses don't deserve to be in business then, most use sub $100 thin clients.

 

11. Part of my initial argument

 

12.  The cost of PCs is so broad you can configure anything to hit a price point between $500 and $10,000.   Invalid point.

 

https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/812948/HP-Slimline-Desktop-PC-AMD-A9/

https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/6810052/HP-290-a0020-Slim-Desktop-Intel/

 

These are available in pretty much every one of their stores, and while the specs change, there is always a system there at this price.

6. No I'm not. I said it would make more sense to sell as a retro part than pull the gold out, you countered by saying one example selling at 10, i countered that that's far more than the gold inside.

8. but your post said that it was more than that, and that when you add in ram and cpu and stuff it was closer to 100. That link you provided said that was wrong. they said 13/computer not per motherboard

9. It does matter what it is. A tablet will have far less i/o, less components inside, and will therefore have less gold. And you still haven't provided a computer under 100

10. Any source to this? You seem to be pulling stuff out of nowhere. I tried finding examples of thin clients under a hundred, but didn't find any. Also since you've now transitioned to thin client, I have to once again point out you're talking a computer that has less components, less I/O, LESS GOLD. your argument is still invalid as you can't seem to stick to the main point you originally made about being able to buy a $100 PC and pull $100 in gold out of it.

11. Nope, you claimed you could pull 100 out of the $100 PC, you proceeded to add in every other component that would take extra hours and chemicals to process just to pull out some more gold to support your point. So saying that the gold in a CPU is negligible is not your argument when you claimed it would be significant enough to add to the $13 mobo and other parts to make 100 worth of gold

Quote

Then you have nearly all of the pins inside the slots and sockets on the board, which likely adds up to the total amount he showed there and then some.  Plus the CPUs and add in cards.

Quote

 

An "average" PC, going from weight and recorded averages from places that do this work, contains ~$13 of gold just in the PCBs.  Workstations generally have twice as many components compared to "average PC's", pushing the gold value to ~$26 from just the PCB's.  This is also discounting any difference in plating thickness to meet the different quality standards for the hardware, which is a thing that you can observe even in parts aimed at the enthusiast market.  So its likely that an old workstation has ~$35 worth of gold in it.

Then add in the gold you can recover from many of the ICs themselves, which is a considerable amount, probably in the $5 range.

Copper in just the PSU/cables is worth ~$4.  Add in the PCB's and that ends up at ~$8.

Silver from all the solder adds ~$5

 

The fact is you tried to make it out to be significant, I'm arguing it's not significant, therefore this is not your argument. Also your numbers still far short of what you claim.

in the part above you've accounted for $40 worth of gold with no proof that a typical workstation has twice the gold or any proof that the plating thickness is different enough to add value because of, a point that you had literally claimed earlier was not true for the last 40 years

12. Saying you can buy a 500-10000 computer doesn't change my point in the least. I labeled a "typical workstation" which would for most people have an i5-i7 or ryzen equivalent, plus 16 gb ram and a decent video card. If you'd like I can actually provide you with relevant examples. The links you posted are neither <100 or even business computers. those are pentiums, with 4 gb ram, just like i was saying. You continue to disprove your own points and I don't know why