Motherboards are Too Expensive with Not Enough Features

[WallacEngineering]

Ya know, I love it when Steve from Gamers Nexus goes on a rant, and I agree with everything he said in this video.

 

I am currently planning out my AM5 build and this is 110% true for all of them. I really wish companies would listen so we could get more actual functional features for less money.

 

You guys should really watch this, he's got a good point.

 

 

[FrostX]

200 bucks for the cheapest z790 is insane

[Catzzye]

Cheapest AM5 motherboard here is 215+ EUR.. It's actually insane, this price really needs to come down to help with the adoption of the new platforms.

Watched the video now, hard agree, 7 segment would help a LOT with troubleshooting for ourselves and especially for the less technically inclined people because they have a very good starting point which even might resolve their issue just by reseating or replacing the part.

[8tg]

As ive gotten older ive just learned that i dont care what the part costs, if the part does what i want ill pay whatever.

 

 

[freeagent]

Lol.. I paid like $400 for a B550 board.. because I didn't want to spend $650 on the X570 Dark Hero that I wanted 

 

I don't regret it though, its like a B550 Dark Hero, it kicks ass 

[OU812]

Motherboards have gotten out of hand like GPUs have. I'm worried in a few years I wont be able to build a PC for myself  because the prices have grown to a point that a machine can only be built by the super rich.

[Lurking]

Maybe adjust or tell your actual needs? Happy with my $150 AM5 MB, best MB i ever had (older ones were 6+ yea rodl $100 MB). Modern MB typically have higher quality and better features. And you have to adjust for inflation. Yes, 50 years a go a beer was only a quarter... but you only earned a dollar an hour as well. 

[WallacEngineering]

2 minutes ago, Lurking said:

Maybe adjust or tell your actual needs? Happy with my $150 AM5 MB, best MB i ever had (older ones were 6+ yea rodl $100 MB). Modern MB typically have higher quality and better features. And you have to adjust for inflation. Yes, 50 years a go a beer was only a quarter... but you only earned a dollar an hour as well. 

Its not that we can't afford it, its that its plain stupidity. Watch the video, Steve knows what he is talking about.

 

@OU812Oh building PCs will ABSOLUTELY get too expensive for the average consumer sooner or later, I discussed this years ago and then discussed why just recently in another thread, but that thread was specifically focused on GPUs, but the reasoning is the same for all the major components.

 

You see years ago when TSMC started the first production of 5nm transistors, an article came out stating their could be massive delays with 5nm products and apparently some TSMC engineers had their doubts that 5nm would even work in a practical scenario such as in the cores of a CPU. Obviously they overcame the engineering challenges as we now have 5nm-based products, but there are hints that they were close to the truth...

 

First of all, there is the heat issue. 5nm is so dense that the engineers originally believed there could be a "nuclear core" thermal run-away scenario where the cores produced heat faster than the IHS could transfer the heat to the cooling solution, and guess what? Now we have Intel 13th Gen and AMD Ryzen 7000 series that both essentially throttle by default because of how hot the cores are. The companies can say they "Target TJMax and boost until it hits" but we enthusiasts know better - each CPU is simply automatically throttled to match the end-users cooling solution because the cores have basically become nuclear cores and they are too hot.

 

Of course the RTX 4090 is massive and doesn't run too hot and that may confuse some people, but the RTX 4090 cooler is the size of an actual brick you use to build houses, its not that hard to figure out lol. I guess if you could make a CPU air cooler that massive then maybe the new CPUs could actually max out and not hit TJMax lol.

 

Also there is another problem increasing pricing - We are getting close to the edge of what traditional silicon transistors can even physically do, many people throughout the community are already predicting that for 3nm and smaller transistors to actually function properly and not have serious issues in a high-power desktop chip, they will have to move away from traditional silicon and towards more exotic materials such as carbon nanotubes.

 

So basically due to a combination of rapid inflation in recent years plus the cost of shrinking transistors becoming exponentially more expensive as silicon engineers struggle to try and go further, the cost of computer hardware will keep growing at an insane rate for quite some time. And when carbon-nanotube based products hit the market, only the rich will be able to afford them at first. The equivalent of a Ryzen 7700X on carbon nanotubes will likely cost over $1000 in TODAY's money. The first generation of Carbon Nanotube CPUs are likely to cost 100-200% MORE than the final generation of Silicon CPUs. Even Upper-Class families and enthusiasts will have a hard time justifying the expense.

[Lurking]

9 minutes ago, WallacEngineering said:

Its not that we can't afford it, its that its plain stupidity. Watch the video, Steve knows what he is talking about.

 

@OU812Oh building PCs will ABSOLUTELY get too expensive for the average consumer sooner or later, I discussed this years ago and then discussed why just recently in another thread, but that thread was specifically focused on GPUs, but the reasoning is the same for all the major components.

 

You see years ago when TSMC started the first production of 5nm transistors, an article came out stating their could be massive delays with 5nm products and apparently some TSMC engineers had their doubts that 5nm would even work in a practical scenario such as in the cores of a CPU. Obviously they overcame the engineering challenges as we now have 5nm-based products, but there are hints that they were close to the truth...

 

First of all, there is the heat issue. 5nm is so dense that the engineers originally believed there could be a "nuclear core" thermal run-away scenario where the cores produced heat faster than the IHS could transfer the heat to the cooling solution, and guess what? Now we have Intel 13th Gen and AMD Ryzen 7000 series that both essentially throttle by default because of how hot the cores are. The companies can say they "Target TJMax and boost until it hits" but we enthusiasts know better - each CPU is simply automatically throttled to match the end-users cooling solution because the cores have basically become nuclear cores and they are too hot.

 

Of course the RTX 4090 is massive and doesn't run too hot and that may confuse some people, but the RTX 4090 cooler is the size of an actual brick you use to build houses, its not that hard to figure out lol. I guess if you could make a CPU air cooler that massive then maybe the new CPUs could actually max out and not hit TJMax lol.

 

Also there is another problem increasing pricing - We are getting close to the edge of what traditional silicon transistors can even physically do, many people throughout the community are already predicting that for 3nm and smaller transistors to actually function properly and not have serious issues in a high-power desktop chip, they will have to move away from traditional silicon and towards more exotic materials such as carbon nanotubes.

 

So basically due to a combination of rapid inflation in recent years plus the cost of shrinking transistors becoming exponentially more expensive as silicon engineers struggle to try and go further, the cost of computer hardware will keep growing at an insane rate for quite some time. And when carbon-nanotube based products hit the market, only the rich will be able to afford them at first. The equivalent of a Ryzen 7700X on carbon nanotubes will likely cost over $1000 in TODAY's money. The first generation of Carbon Nanotube CPUs are likely to cost 100-200% MORE than the final generation of Silicon CPUs. Even Upper-Class families and enthusiasts will have a hard time justifying the expense.

I had seen that video before. He has a point dome cheap features like the error code would be nice. But really, never had a board with that nor needed it.

 

Performance per $ still is increasing. And if you want to save $, you can build a decent AM4 system. Noone needs a $500 MB. It is a want, not a need. 

 

Inflation is just a thing due to printing money. People still buy at those prices. So they seem to value it at that price.

 

No one mentions SSD got ridiculously cheap. Not even accounting for added speed. Not too many years agoI bought a 256GB PCIe 3.0 SSD. I didn't get the NVME version because it was quite a bit more. Today, you get 2TB for the same price and NVME is standard. 

[WallacEngineering]

Just now, Lurking said:

I had seen that video before. He has a point dome cheap features like the error code would be nice. But really, never had a board with that nor needed it.

 

Performance per $ still is increasing. And if you want to save $, you can build a decent AM4 system. Noone needs a $500 MB. It is a want, not a need. 

 

Inflation is just a thing due to printing money. People still buy at those prices. So they seem to value it at that price.

 

No one mentions SSD got ridiculously cheap. Not even accounting for added speed. Not too many years agoI bought a 256GB PCIe 3.0 SSD. I didn't get the NVME version because it was quite a bit more. Today, you get 2TB for the same price and NVME is standard. 

 

Well yes inflation is beyond our control but it doesn't change the fact that hardware is increasing in price much more than other industries. Yes SSDs are super cheap and its very nice I agree, but its also one component, and a component that isn't very expensive compared to a CPU or GPU

[Lurking]

22 minutes ago, WallacEngineering said:

 

Well yes inflation is beyond our control but it doesn't change the fact that hardware is increasing in price much more than other industries. Yes SSDs are super cheap and its very nice I agree, but its also one component, and a component that isn't very expensive compared to a CPU or GPU

6 years ago I bought an i7-7700k for $330. Now I have a 7900 for just $100 more. But triple the cores, more clock and IPC. I call that much bettet value. Or take the 7600 for $230, clearly cheaper but also significantly faster than the i7-7700k. 

 

My MB cost $150 vs $100 6 years ago. But now with better BIOS, VRM, fan headers, PCIe 4, 3x4K ports, USB-C and so on. An equivalent board would have cost a LOT 6 years ago.

 

I just don't see how I get less value compared to some years ago. Food and other essentials got much more expensive, but essentially didn't improve like hardware.  A PC used fore more than browsing is just a nice to have hobby unless you need the latest hardware for work. But then it also pays for itself.

[XNOR]

22 minutes ago, Lurking said:

6 years ago I bought an i7-7700k for $330. Now I have a 7900 for just $100 more. But triple the cores, more clock and IPC. I call that much bettet value. Or take the 7600 for $230, clearly cheaper but also significantly faster than the i7-7700k. 

 

My MB cost $150 vs $100 6 years ago. But now with better BIOS, VRM, fan headers, PCIe 4, 3x4K ports, USB-C and so on. An equivalent board would have cost a LOT 6 years ago.

 

I just don't see how I get less value compared to some years ago. Food and other essentials got much more expensive, but essentially didn't improve like hardware.  A PC used fore more than browsing is just a nice to have hobby unless you need the latest hardware for work. But then it also pays for itself.

Technology moves on. Comparing 5 or 10 year old technology with today's is futile. The conclusion will always be that you get more. What matters is that you get less for the same money when you keep the state of the art in mind. The new USB standard is now USB C/Thunderbolt/whatever, and was USB 3.0 or 2.1 back then. SATA 3 back then, PCIe 5.0 M.2 now. PCIe 5.0 graphics slot now, PCIe 3.0 slot then.

 

If you compare those historic apples to today's apples, the feature set has become much more sparse. A $125 motherboard was a luxury board not too long ago, now it's bottom of the barrel, even if you take inflation into account. That is supposed to cost $165 today, not $250, $350 or even more. And that $125 board had a debug display too, something you'll only find on stupidly expensive boards now.

[Lurking]

20 minutes ago, XNOR said:

Technology moves on. Comparing 5 or 10 year old technology with today's is futile. The conclusion will always be that you get more. What matters is that you get less for the same money when you keep the state of the art in mind. The new USB standard is now USB C/Thunderbolt/whatever, and was USB 3.0 or 2.1 back then. SATA 3 back then, PCIe 5.0 M.2 now. PCIe 5.0 graphics slot now, PCIe 3.0 slot then.

 

If you compare those historic apples to today's apples, the feature set has become much more sparse. A $125 motherboard was a luxury board not too long ago, now it's bottom of the barrel, even if you take inflation into account. That is supposed to cost $165 today, not $250, $350 or even more. And that $125 board had a debug display too, something you'll only find on stupidly expensive boards now.

What exactly is wrong with a $150 MB that you need that $350 MB? It runs all available CPU. Maybe some benchmark shows 1% less performance and it doesn't have blinking lights. Nothing wrong with buying the fancier thing. But those are luxury items. 

 

Years ago you needed the top hardware for decent performance. Nowadays the top is  so high that medium performance hardware is adequate. Yesterday I saw  derBauer review of a €2,200 case. It exists and someone may see value in it. But it doesn't mean this is the new normal. It Is jewelry, not necessary hardware.If you have to worry about money, this just isn't for you.

 

Sounds like a lot of Porsche drivers complaining about increased Porsche prices while a Corolla would master the commute in the same time. But no, it has to be a Porsche 

[XNOR]

7 minutes ago, Lurking said:

What exactly is wrong with a $150 MB that you need that $350 MB? It runs all available CPU. Maybe some benchmark shows 1% less performance and it doesn't have blinking lights. Nothing wrong with buying the fancier thing. But those are luxury items. 

 

Years ago you needed the top hardware for decent performance. Nowadays the top is  so high that medium performance hardware is adequate. Yesterday I saw  derBauer review of a €2,200 case. It exists and someone may see value in it. But it doesn't mean this is the new normal. It Is jewelry, not necessary hardware.If you have to worry about money, this just isn't for you.

 

Sounds like a lot of Porsche drivers complaining about increased Porsche prices while a Corolla would master the commute in the same time. But no, it has to be a Porsche 

That's the point, isn't it? A debug LED never was a luxury item, perhaps slightly upmarket, but now it is. Anything but the barest board and there was a fair chance you'd debug LED, a proper one, with numbers. It's more like a Corolla driver complaining their car now costing Porsche money. That basic motherboard that will run any available CPU used to be an $80 item, not $150. A $150 board then is now $350. You can go back and forth all day long and bicker about needs versus wants, but the fact of the matter remains that a comparable class motherboard doesn't cost comparable money, even after talking inflation into account, but significantly more.

 

It's not like people are inventing complaints either. We know PC components have had a huge boom during the pandemic, and we know manufacturers have taken advantage of the massive demand. Now that the demand has collapsed we're left with excessively expensive parts that don't have much to show for. It'll take a while for things to correct themselves, if they do at all.

[Lurking]

4 minutes ago, XNOR said:

That's the point, isn't it? A debug LED never was a luxury item, perhaps slightly upmarket, but now it is. Anything but the barest board and there was a fair chance you'd debug LED, a proper one, with numbers. It's more like a Corolla driver complaining their car now costing Porsche money. That basic motherboard that will run any available CPU used to be an $80 item, not $150. A $150 board then is now $350. You can go back and forth all day long and bicker about needs versus wants, but the fact of the matter remains that a comparable class motherboard doesn't cost comparable money, even after talking inflation into account, but significantly more.

 

It's not like people are inventing complaints either. We know PC components have had a huge boom during the pandemic, and we know manufacturers have taken advantage of the massive demand. Now that the demand has collapsed we're left with excessively expensive parts that don't have much to show for. It'll take a while for things to correct themselves, if they do at all.

I'm sure you can use a PC without debug LED. And who pays $200 extra just for that feature? I'm pretty sure there are other features the buyer wanted in that more expensive board and that LED is just part of the added value. 

 

They do the same in cars or many other products where they package things so that a simple but really great feature requires buying the highest trim level. This isn't new or MB specific. A car also doesn't give you error codes, even if that was useful. You have to buy an OBD reader to read the legally required codes. And you have to buy extremely expensive proprietary readers to read the other error codes. If they even sell them to non-licensed shops or individuals. And a car already has a display. It wouldn't even require added hardware to show error codes and the clear English explanation. 

 

I'm not disputing adding that $1 LED would be nice, even if the consumer price would increase by $5. But I also think most buyers don't want to pay $5 more (unless it is RGB!) for a feature only 1% ever need. So they disappeared from lower cost boards. Just look in this forum where people make a decision based on $1. 

 

Ultimately the buyer decided that MB is worth $350 since they volunteered to pay that price. At the time of purchase they valued having that MB more than having the $350. 

[XNOR]

24 minutes ago, Lurking said:

I'm sure you can use a PC without debug LED. And who pays $200 extra just for that feature? I'm pretty sure there are other features the buyer wanted in that more expensive board and that LED is just part of the added value. 

 

They do the same in cars or many other products where they package things so that a simple but really great feature requires buying the highest trim level. This isn't new or MB specific. A car also doesn't give you error codes, even if that was useful. You have to buy an OBD reader to read the legally required codes. And you have to buy extremely expensive proprietary readers to read the other error codes. If they even sell them to non-licensed shops or individuals. And a car already has a display. It wouldn't even require added hardware to show error codes and the clear English explanation. 

 

I'm not disputing adding that $1 LED would be nice, even if the consumer price would increase by $5. But I also think most buyers don't want to pay $5 more (unless it is RGB!) for a feature only 1% ever need. So they disappeared from lower cost boards. Just look in this forum where people make a decision based on $1. 

 

Ultimately the buyer decided that MB is worth $350 since they volunteered to pay that price. At the time of purchase they valued having that MB more than having the $350. 

You're focusing on the debug LED, but the point remains: whatever class of board you buy, they've become a lot more expensive. You can buy a basic board for the same money you used to buy a luxury board, and you can buy no board at all for what used to be a basic board.

[Blue4130]

28 minutes ago, XNOR said:

You're focusing on the debug LED, but the point remains: whatever class of board you buy, they've become a lot more expensive. You can buy a basic board for the same money you used to buy a luxury board, and you can buy no board at all for what used to be a basic board.

But the cpu, ram and ssd have all come down, haven't they? So the end results are that the pc as a whole costs roughly the same. I've always had a $2000 limit on building towers and I've always been able to get a solid machine at that level, be it my 1999 build or my 2019 build.

[XNOR]

39 minutes ago, Blue4130 said:

But the cpu, ram and ssd have all come down, haven't they? So the end results are that the pc as a whole costs roughly the same. I've always had a $2000 limit on building towers and I've always been able to get a solid machine at that level, be it my 1999 build or my 2019 build.

No? A $2000 machine was very high end in 2013, now it's very definitely mid-range.

 

If you go back far enough things start evening out, but I don't think going back 25 years is a sound comparison.

[IkeaGnome]

10 hours ago, WallacEngineering said:

AMD Ryzen 7000 series that both essentially throttle by default because of how hot the cores are

No, their cores are surprisingly cool. AM4 backwards compatibility is what has AM5 so hot. Have you seen how thick their IHS is and how well they respond to lapping? 

 

10 hours ago, WallacEngineering said:

each CPU is simply automatically throttled to match the end-users cooling solution because the cores have basically become nuclear cores and they are too hot.

Yes and no. CPU heat is our fault at this point. We’ve proven generation after generation we’ll buy the cpu that has 1fps more than the other. It’s gotten to where Intel or AMD have to push more and more power to get that 1 fps. 
Look at how cool Zen 3 and Zen 4 can run with an under volt and often get more performance. 
Alder Lake and Raptor Lake both also respond well to under volts. 

[freeagent]

If you want lower prices, we the consumer have to quit buying new products. By giving them your money you are saying these high prices are ok. They are not ok though.

 

Quit buying their stuff, prices will go down. Remember, they have to earn our money, they work for us, quit working for them.

[WallacEngineering]

24 minutes ago, IkeaGnome said:

No, their cores are surprisingly cool. AM4 backwards compatibility is what has AM5 so hot. Have you seen how thick their IHS is and how well they respond to lapping? 

 

Yes and no. CPU heat is our fault at this point. We’ve proven generation after generation we’ll buy the cpu that has 1fps more than the other. It’s gotten to where Intel or AMD have to push more and more power to get that 1 fps. 
Look at how cool Zen 3 and Zen 4 can run with an under volt and often get more performance. 
Alder Lake and Raptor Lake both also respond well to under volts. 

Keeping cool should be possible under default settings, not having to undervolt and such. These are just ways AROUND the problem, but they do not excuse the problem.

 

Yes I have seen how lapping the Ryzen 7000 CPUs can help immensely and I do agree the problem with overheating cores is more on Intel's side than AMD but still, even after shaving down the IHS, JaysTwoCents barely got down to under 90C using a 360mm AIO on an open air bench with his 7950X CPU. I wonder how would a Noctua D-15 would do after lapping though...

 

I actually plan on shaving down/lapping my 7800X3D just to see if I can push any sort of stable overclock on air cooling. The one negative of 3D V-Cache CPUs is the fact that the Cache is so sensitive to the combination of voltage and heat, that the 7800X3D comes with much lower boost clocks than the 7700X.

[IkeaGnome]

1 hour ago, WallacEngineering said:

Yes I have seen how lapping the Ryzen 7000 CPUs can help immensely and I do agree the problem with overheating cores is more on Intel's side than AMD but still, even after shaving down the IHS, JaysTwoCents barely got down to under 90C using a 360mm AIO on an open air bench with his 7950X CPU. I wonder how would a Noctua D-15 would do after lapping though...

I haven't done an AM5 build, so I haven't been able to play around with it myself yet. I wonder if Zen 4 responds as well to a negative PBO offset as Zen 3 did. Combination of lapping and PBO, maybe "good" temperatures?

I do agree that the "average" user shouldn't have to lap an IHS and void their warranty as well as mess around in BIOS that much to tame heat, but I wonder how "easily" it's possible. 

[Lurking]

8 hours ago, XNOR said:

No? A $2000 machine was very high end in 2013, now it's very definitely mid-range.

 

If you go back far enough things start evening out, but I don't think going back 25 years is a sound comparison.

Every equipment related hobby has the extreme top of the line equipment. Like the rich dentist who rides a bike once a year but thinks he needs the $15,000 bike used in the Tour de France. But you can't use that as a price indicator for most people.

 

If you take your $2,000 PC from years ago and add inflation for the last few years, you are at $2,500. I'm pretty sure you can build a playable PC with that 

 

I remember the time before RGB and glass panels. Only few very hardcore people had glass panels and cold cathodes etc. Now this is part of very many pedestrian PCs. Do you expect all those new (not really needed) features to be free?

 

If you can't afford kaviar, buy bread. Don't go to the jewelry store if you need to worry about money.

 

[XNOR]

3 hours ago, Lurking said:

Every equipment related hobby has the extreme top of the line equipment. Like the rich dentist who rides a bike once a year but thinks he needs the $15,000 bike used in the Tour de France. But you can't use that as a price indicator for most people.

 

If you take your $2,000 PC from years ago and add inflation for the last few years, you are at $2,500. I'm pretty sure you can build a playable PC with that 

 

I remember the time before RGB and glass panels. Only few very hardcore people had glass panels and cold cathodes etc. Now this is part of very many pedestrian PCs. Do you expect all those new (not really needed) features to be free?

 

If you can't afford kaviar, buy bread. Don't go to the jewelry store if you need to worry about money.

 

That's the same thing you said in your previous post, only now it's racing bicycles and caviar instead of Porsches. The point remains the same. It's not about expensive things being expensive. It's about the whole industry having shifted significantly from affordable towards expensive. Cheap options have become more expensive. Expensive options have become more expensive. Not only the carbon bikes are more expensive, cheap Chinese bicycles have also significantly risen in price. Things simply are much more expensive.

 

The glass panel remark doesn't really hold water. We already discussed how things like debug LEDs and onboard power buttons used to be a fairly mundane feature and now definitely are not. Features are being stripped or pushed upmarket. Features are removed, not just added. It also ignores the economy of scale. The market was much smaller back then and (then) outlier products were produced in even smaller volumes, so they were woefully expensive. Now there's a massive market and things like RGB or glass panels are commodity items. These things are not responsible for computer hardware far outpacing inflation. If that were true, cases without glass or motherboards without RGB wouldn't  significantly outpace inflation, yet they do.

 

The point is not caviar is expensive, the point is bread is now sold at caviar prices.

[Lurking]

1 hour ago, XNOR said:

That's the same thing you said in your previous post, only now it's racing bicycles and caviar instead of Porsches. The point remains the same. It's not about expensive things being expensive. It's about the whole industry having shifted significantly from affordable towards expensive. Cheap options have become more expensive. Expensive options have become more expensive. Not only the carbon bikes are more expensive, cheap Chinese bicycles have also significantly risen in price. Things simply are much more expensive.

 

The glass panel remark doesn't really hold water. We already discussed how things like debug LEDs and onboard power buttons used to be a fairly mundane feature and now definitely are not. Features are being stripped or pushed upmarket. Features are removed, not just added. It also ignores the economy of scale. The market was much smaller back then and (then) outlier products were produced in even smaller volumes, so they were woefully expensive. Now there's a massive market and things like RGB or glass panels are commodity items. These things are not responsible for computer hardware far outpacing inflation. If that were true, cases without glass or motherboards without RGB wouldn't  significantly outpace inflation, yet they do.

 

The point is not caviar is expensive, the point is bread is now sold at caviar prices.

My $150 MB has an onboard reset button. So this isn't a feature you need a $350 MB for  Not sure if this also starts the PC. I find it a questionable value since it is unlikely to be needed. If you build on a bench without case, you could just use a screwdriver to connect power pins. Removing that actually would be good value engineering. I also have an RGB port I don't need. That sure wasn't standard 6 years ago. It all cost real estate, labor and parts. 

 

Unlike that button, the error LED is an actual benefit. Just not a $200 benefit, IMHO. But every customer makes a choice.

 

Ultimately they build boards they think many people will buy. They don't build a board for just me, or just you. And people buying the boards at the price reenforces their strategy. If you buy the MB at that price, you declare it is worth that much to you. 

 

There are cheaper options... but people want fancy. It apparently is impossible to game on a PC if the hatdware doesn't have "gaming" in the name and has RGB all over.

 

There also are 25% tariffs and other cost out of control of manufacturers  You can thank past and current administration for those cost. That $100 MB now cost $125 just because of tariff.