yes, which is why the statement i posted was prefaced by "I would think..." which is indicative of inference and/or offering of an opinion on a subject, in the course of friendly discussion. Never claimed to be an authority on the global luminaire market so ill just leave that bait lie.
lighten up man, did you have a bad cup or something? not everything is a competition,a lot of people on message boards are still into friendly discussion.
its nice to have someone knowledgeable about cree's distribution onsite, but not everything needs to be confrontational.
Ok then, lets try this one...
is $/watt even a relevant yardstick when every single one of those fixtures operate at different efficiencies? you can build a cob setup anywhere from $0.50/watt to $4/watt putting out the same PAR at wildly different efficiencies
You can chirp data sheets to potential builders all day. But in the land of reality...end results are what matters. With lights that is system efficiency...Actual light output when in use. Simple as that.
Now how about you go put them in a sphere...and on a gonio...and tell me what the real differences are???
SPOILER ALERT...not even close what is advertised by 95% of them. The variation in output between top brands is not enough to claim anything other than the wattage you pay for.
Nor is it supporting your statement anyways. The suspected lower total system:chip efficiency lights are more/$...actually read and digest what you're responding to please.
When you and others were dragging this thread on and trying to sell products and see who could piss farthest, you must have missed the most honest and truthful answer to the OP's question in this whole thread...it was on page 2.
Get another Amare. If you liked the 350, I'm sure the 450 would be a nice wattage bump. And probably can get a returning customer discount to help.]
After you guys continued to chime in out of egos and opinions rather than real world experience back by fact...I got over listening to all the BS flexing and self ego-validation...
No, they are cheaper because they are SMALLER
A.K.A packaging dude. It is not a higher density package/COB...thus more chips require more packaging. Packaging is the substrate, traces, bonding/wired, LES, phosphor. Like I said...
You pay for the chips and the packaging of them. Being the same product line, makes them all scale the same with little fluctuation.
Thus the TOTAL goes up because of it using more material. But the cost per die and material is near constant throughout the line. But hey...what the hell would I know about cree...