Noticed an oddity with pricing of the Core 2 processors when picking up components for a new system and wanted to know if anyone knew why it was this way. I purchased the E6550 Core 2 - 1333 MHz FSB, 2.33 GHz, 4 MB L2 cache. It goes for $175 on NewEgg. Question is: why are the E6400 and E6420 more expensive even though the specs aren't as good? Both of them go for $200 even though they are only 2.13 GHz and 1066 MHz FSB. Is there a quality difference or feature I'm missing, or is it just a pricing oddity based on when the chips were released?

Just FYI, it will be going in an nVidia nForce 680i SLI board with a 512 MB Radeon X1900XT and 2 GB of OCZ 800 MHz DDR2 RAM.

*yes, it may look a bit odd to be using a Radeon in an nVidia board, but both of those components were given to me...

[Edited on October 21, 2007 at 6:56 PM. Reason : d]

10/21/2007 6:55:18 PM

I'm guessing that the production amounts of the 1066 MHz FSB processors are lower. Thus, economics of scale suggests that the price per unit volume is more than the 1333 MHz processors despite being an inferior product. It's either that or a pricing oddity produced by someone in Intel's marketing decision.

10/21/2007 7:55:12 PM

^ agree

10/21/2007 8:00:09 PM

i agree with the supply/demand economics aspect of that one post

10/21/2007 8:07:34 PM

NewEgg fluctuates prices around, sometimes things sell for cheaper b/c they want to get rid of stock/push inventory, etc. It's a good deal, jump on it.

10/21/2007 9:35:14 PM

darkone is right, both the E6400 & E6420 are older gen cpu's lower production, still odd that they aren't lower.

good luck w/ the ATI on an nvidia board.

curious why you went with the E6550 over the E6750?

10/21/2007 10:30:46 PM

even the e6600 is more expensive than the e6750's. I would build a system from an e6750 if I didn't have my e6600 now, although I built it last year so not much of an upgrade.

10/22/2007 9:59:14 AM