Apple Silicon switch could lead to lower-cost Mac lineups, analyst says

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 44
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,627member
    maestro64 said:
    Do you think the cost to apple would drop considering all the licensing fees they will not have to pay Intel to use their overly expensive processors. The chip costs to Apple will be a fraction of the cost of having Intel inside.

    The real question, how much of this cost reduction will Apple pass forward.
    The question to you is why should they. Is Apple somehow obligated to pass cost savings on to its customers, just to be “fair”? That “fair” word is tossed around in too many situations, including politics, social issues, and the like. Who determines “fairness”. Seems like it’s an arbitrary term. As another poster postulates I would prefer those cost savings be reinvested right back into the hardware in the form of increased performance, battery life, reliability, stability, etc.
    Fidonet127
  • Reply 42 of 44
    "Apple Silicon switch could lead to lower-cost Mac lineups, analyst says" 

    Why would a company charging $200 for 8GB of RAM or $200 for an additional 256GB of SSD storage pass any savings onto their customers? I could go to Amazon and buy 32GB of RAM for $200 and a professional grade 1TB NVME drive from Samsung for $200.  The whole point in Apple going away from intel didn't have anything to do with the customers and everything to do with increasing profits.  There is no Mac between the Mac Mini or the Mac Pro because people would buy that instead of an iMac.  Speaking of the Mac Pro what company could get away with selling a "professional" computer with only an 8 core CPU, 32GB of RAM, 256GB SSD, a two generation old GPU that costs $200 for $6000? No one but Apple.  
    edited November 2020
  • Reply 43 of 44
    lkrupp said:
    maestro64 said:
    Do you think the cost to apple would drop considering all the licensing fees they will not have to pay Intel to use their overly expensive processors. The chip costs to Apple will be a fraction of the cost of having Intel inside.

    The real question, how much of this cost reduction will Apple pass forward.
    The question to you is why should they. Is Apple somehow obligated to pass cost savings on to its customers, just to be “fair”? That “fair” word is tossed around in too many situations, including politics, social issues, and the like. Who determines “fairness”. Seems like it’s an arbitrary term. As another poster postulates I would prefer those cost savings be reinvested right back into the hardware in the form of increased performance, battery life, reliability, stability, etc.
    A long time ago companies took pride is making the best product they could and selling them at a fair price.  The people who determine "fairness" are consumers. If Apple didn't sell many of their overpriced Mac's they would lower their prices, but unfortunately people still pay their outrageous prices. 
  • Reply 44 of 44
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,612moderator
    Bobbypdue said:
    "Apple Silicon switch could lead to lower-cost Mac lineups, analyst says" 

    Why would a company charging $200 for 8GB of RAM or $200 for an additional 256GB of SSD storage pass any savings onto their customers?
    For the entry-level, it's hard to make a machine lower cost than what they already do:

    $50 CPU, $50 RAM, $100 SSD, $50 battery, $50 motherboard, $100 keyboard/trackpad, $100 display, $50 chassis, $50 PSU = $600 costs. Add 30% margin and you get $857 plus packaging, delivery, marketing, OS, returns, waranty. The entry is $999 and $899 for education.

    PC manufacturers survive on 5% margins so would sell the same parts for $631.

    For Apple's higher-end models, they are currently paying Intel and AMD separately for both parts so the retail price is Intel/AMD costs plus Intel/AMD profit plus Apple profit.

    Apple's costs are significantly below Intel/AMD because of the scale of their mobile operation, they won't have to pay their costs/profit any more and they don't need to use separate CPU/GPU parts and I assume they don't have to use a separate chip for the touchbar.

    The higher-end models like the 16" MBP could reduce in price by about $300 retail. There are reasons against doing this because it drops the resale value of all machines in the market and this affects their resellers but Apple's not going to sell a CPU at $5000 like in the Mac Pro just because that's what Intel charges or $500 for a GPU just because that's what AMD charges. They can now make independent choices about pricing, supply, manufacturing.

    If they make a 16" MBP that has a 10TFLOP GPU in a 40W package (given that the Air is 2.6TFLOP in 10W), they'd have no reason to price it lower.

    Razer sells a laptop like this around $3300:

    https://www.amazon.com/Razer-Blade-Advanced-Gaming-Laptop/dp/B086M84ZC9

    They have the option to do that though whereas before, it was up to Intel and AMD. Even if Apple sells at the usual $2800 price point, it's still really competitively priced for the performance, more competitive than when they used Intel/AMD.
Sign In or Register to comment.