Originally Posted by WhisperPntr
IMO I believe it was a last minute sourcing decision that was a win win for everyone. IMO it meant greater cost savings though this meant that the printed packaging listed incorrect specs.
So iit could very well be that the cost of purchasing cpus that clocked at 800mhz stable was more expensive than purchasing a higher end cpu that functioned at 1.0. If you know about SODIMM ram and so forth, a lower end memory chip costs more to purchase than a higher end.
I have been waiting for someone else to comment on the test that indiciated the RAM was actually 32GB but 16GB was disabled, that is if I remember the numbers right.
This would be taking your comment a step further. If a 32GB part was currently cheaper than a 16GB, they could buy it and disable it. Imagine if we could access 32GB of RAM