Print 55 comment(s) - last by werepossum.. on Sep 7 at 8:19 PM

AMD prices its quad-core Opteron starting at $206

AMD sent out pricing information for its upcoming quad-core Opteron 2300 and 8300 series processors to its partners and distributors. The company plans to launch nine new quad-core processors later this month with clock speeds ranging from 1.7 GHz to 2.0 GHz.

Only two thermal bins are launching with the long-awaited Barcelona – standard and HE bins. Standard bin processors have 95-Watt TDPs while the HE bin processors have lower 68-Watt TDPs. AMD’s high end SE bin, which typically has a 120-Watt TDP, will not join the launch lineup.

AMD’s two-way capable quad-core Opteron 2300 series launch with five new models – 2350, 2347, 2347 HE, 2346 HE and 2344 HE. Pricing for the two-way capable models start at around $206 and go up as high as $372. Quad-core Opteron 2300 HE models command an approximate $60 premium over standard models, clock for clock.

AMD Opteron 2300 Series


2.0 GHz 95W$372

23471.9 GHz 95W$312
2347 HE
1.9 GHz 68W$372
2346 HE
1.8 GHz 68W$251
2344 HE
1.7 GHz

On the multi-way side of things, AMD has four quad-core Opteron 8300 models ready for launch – the 8350, 8347, 8347 HE and 8346 HE. The multi-way models have a $688 cost-of-entry and top out at around $1,000. Unlike the Opteron 2300 series, the 8300 series HE models command an approximate $110 price premium.

AMD Opteron 8300 Series


2.0 GHz 95W$1,004

83471.9 GHz 95W$774
8347 HE
1.9 GHz 68W$861
8346 HE
1.8 GHz 68W$688

Expect AMD to launch its new Barcelona quad-core Opteron 8300 and 2300 processors later this month for server and workstation markets. Desktop users will have to wait until Q4’07 for AMD’s Phenom to experience quad-core.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Odd Order
By ziggo on 9/4/2007 5:50:02 PM , Rating: 4
Price before performance?

I am really anxious to know the numbers for these processors. I know the inq posted some crazy story, but I won't believe anything till I see facts from a reputable news source.

RE: Odd Order
By davegraham on 9/4/2007 5:52:18 PM , Rating: 2
just a note: these prices are preliminary until product launch confirms otherwise.



RE: Odd Order
By JoKeRr on 9/4/2007 6:00:30 PM , Rating: 2
So for now, nothing >2Ghz. Didn't someone say Barcelona won't be competitive with Clovertown till the frequency is >2.4ghz??

RE: Odd Order
By davegraham on 9/4/2007 6:08:18 PM , Rating: 3
there have been several TERRIBLE insinuations that Barcelona doesn't perform well, all of which have been somewhat quiet as to their configuration. there are some platform issues that reside OUTSIDE of AMD's control that can (and do) affect performance. just be patient.



RE: Odd Order
By TomZ on 9/4/2007 7:27:46 PM , Rating: 5
just be patient

I think that AMD should trademark that and use it for their new marketing slogan. :o)

RE: Odd Order
By Regs on 9/4/2007 10:07:56 PM , Rating: 2
I wish I could rate you a six for that one.

RE: Odd Order
By vignyan on 9/5/07, Rating: 0
RE: Odd Order
By Locutus465 on 9/4/2007 11:20:03 PM , Rating: 2
You have to give AMD this much, they're trying to get their act together (and are making tangible progress) much more quickly than Intel did with the P4... Then again, the relitive size of ego seems to more or less match the relitive size of the company :P

RE: Odd Order
By cassandra on 9/5/2007 3:52:28 PM , Rating: 3
You have to give AMD this much, they're trying to get their act together (and are making tangible progress) much more quickly than Intel did with the P4...

It is really difficult to tell. I am convinced that Intel's big problem was that had, say, 10 year's of experience of putting up the clock speed and managing to market that successfully in the face of industry experts saying that more clock speed wasn't the answer. Then, when the real Cr**burst hit the fan, Intel was still saying 'that's what they always say, just crank the clock speed and cut the prices and they'll come round'. And maybe even, 'How do we convince punters that a 1.5GHz part is faster than a 3GHz part....It'll never sell.'

In this interpretation, it is only Pentium M that made Intel come to their senses, so Intel only started to react from 1 yr - 18 months into ther life of the P-M as that was the time from which Intel saw P-M was a success and thus that it was right to change approach.

If this is right, they actually made a very major architecture change (not just processing, not just a bigger cache, not just a few extra instructions and very much more of a change than just adding, say, HT) pretty rapidly.

I believe (and this is guesswork) that up until relatively recently, AMD didn't believe that Intel wouldn't have a substantially improved underlying architecture (the same issue again!) and they thought their four cores would be at a similar IpC or better compared to Intel and would therefore be at an advantage and from this they could dictate pricing. For some time now, I have not expected AMD, at introduction, to have better IpC on four cores compared to four-core competition and therefore be facing an uphill struggle. OTOH that means that they will keep down prices to compete.

I'm expecting bulldozer and derivatives to improve the IpC ratings substantially, but that ain't close. Certainly, it hard to say (curently) that with bulldozer AMD reacted much faster than Intel did Conroe and friends.

(Note that I'd like to be wrong and barca be a pleasant surprise in IpC and bulldozer be out ahead of schedule, but time will tell.)

RE: Odd Order
By CyberHawk on 9/5/2007 1:38:09 AM , Rating: 2
:D this was a good one.

I just hope that these chips will perform quite well.

It was a long time, since I hardly waited for the new hardware... now, i can't wait for monday next week :)

RE: Odd Order
By Proteusza on 9/5/2007 4:21:41 AM , Rating: 3
Why has AMD been so quiet with its own configurations and tests?

Surely, if those insinuations were based on configurations not favourable to AMD, then AMD would want to show tests using platforms favourable to AMD?

Yet we have seen nothing.

AMD = Great chips, nonexistent customer relations.

RE: Odd Order
By sdsdv10 on 9/4/2007 6:42:43 PM , Rating: 5
That was editor Gary Key in this thread based on his experience with pre-production and now production based Barcelona samples.

RE: Odd Order
By OddTSi on 9/4/2007 6:29:08 PM , Rating: 2
The prices should give you a hint at their performance. ;)

RE: Odd Order
By Amiga500 on 9/5/2007 4:11:57 AM , Rating: 2
Yeap, my thinking too.

Compare with Xeon prices here:

So from that, they expect the 2.0GHz K10 to go up against the 2.50 GHz Penryn (or thereabouts).

Meanwhile the 1.7GHz K10 vs. the 2 GHz Penryn.

Assumming price equals broadly equivalent performance, work that out and your talking a clock-for-clock difference of around 20%.

RE: Odd Order
By Amiga500 on 9/5/2007 4:12:52 AM , Rating: 2
i usse an speelchekor!


RE: Odd Order
By Mitch101 on 9/5/2007 10:38:07 AM , Rating: 2
I believed so when I created this article a while back.

If the performance of the Barcelona is so bad and AMD cant compete with current Intel chips then one has to wonder why Intel is rushing Wolfdale into the 4th quarter now. I think you will be happy with Barcelona's performance especially later this year when the 3.0ghz parts start to arrive.

RE: Odd Order
By Continuation on 9/5/2007 12:11:13 PM , Rating: 2
There's nothing "rushing" about Wolfdale. In fact Intel has been very clear all along about their tick-tock product plan: new architecture (Conroe) followed by die shrink (Penryn) 1 year later followed by new architecture (Nehalem) 1 year later.

If anything, Intel has delayed the release of Penryn (to Q4 instead of 1 year after Conroe launch which should've been Q3), possibly in response to the delay and underwhelming launching clockspeed (2GHz max) of Barcelona.

The prices are actually pretty good though...
By coldpower27 on 9/4/2007 9:34:04 PM , Rating: 3
At these prices AMD has a decent chance actually.

The Opteron 8350 2.0GHZ is only competing against the E7320 2.13GHZ and the 8347 1.9GHZ is competing only against the 1.6 GHZ E7310, not to mention the AMD parts have at least a 10% cost advantage give or take.

The HE Opteron 8300 are especially attractive because Intel is only release 1 50W unit in the 4P+ Space at $2300.

The Opteron 2350 is priced between the Xeon DP E5335 and E5345 so we will have to see how that fairs. With the 1.9GHZ 2347 pretty much going head to head with the 2.0GHZ E5335

The HE vs LV is effectively about the same LV L5335 is going against HE 2347, and the 2346 1.8GHZ going against the LV L5310 1.6GHZ, it will be interesting to see how AMD does.

RE: The prices are actually pretty good though...
By zpdixon on 9/5/2007 3:58:42 AM , Rating: 1
One of the few wise post in this thread, thanks.

I wish to remind people that, next week, when the Opteron 8300 series comes out, AMD will be first to market with a quad-core processor for the 4-socket market. Intel will only release their Tigerton (quad-core Xeon MP ) a couple of weeks after AMD.

People usually don't realize the long-term consequences of the different design decisions Intel and AMD are making. People think AMD is in a very bad position now, when actually I am much more worried about Intel today. Their reaction/innovation speed is not as good as AMD.

- It took Intel 3.5 years to counter-attack K8 (March 2003 to June 2006), versus 1.25 years for AMD to counter-attack Core2 (June 2006 to Sep 2007).
- Intel still have no IMC.
- Intel still have no CSI (or "Quickpath" as it is known today -- how many more name changes before an introduction to the market ?).
- Intel have 10x more employees than AMD but only ship 3x more CPUs
- AMD is going to ship 8-core CPUs before Intel (gluing 2 quad-core dies is easier/better than gluing 4 dual-core dies)

RE: The prices are actually pretty good though...
By Accord99 on 9/5/2007 5:06:37 AM , Rating: 3
I wish to remind people that, next week, when the Opteron 8300 series comes out, AMD will be first to market with a quad-core processor for the 4-socket market. Intel will only release their Tigerton (quad-core Xeon MP ) a couple of weeks after AMD.

Tigerton is scheduled for launch on September 6, where it should have no problems obliterating the existing x86 enterprise benchmarks.

It took Intel 3.5 years to counter-attack K8 (March 2003 to June 2006), versus 1.25 years for AMD to counter-attack Core2 (June 2006 to Sep 2007).

Intel had different products in-between, Prescott and its variants was inadequate on the desktop and servers, while Dothan was unmatched in mobile. It looks like Barcelona will be like Prescott, an inadequate response.

Intel have 10x more employees than AMD but only ship 3x more CPUs

It's less than 6X now, plus Intel has 6X the revenue and has net profits greater in one quarter than AMD in the whole of its existence.

AMD is going to ship 8-core CPUs before Intel (gluing 2 quad-core dies is easier/better than gluing 4 dual-core dies)

Barcelona is big to fit two dies on a Socket F package, while Shanghai with its upgraded L3 will probably be too big as well.

RE: The prices are actually pretty good though...
By zpdixon on 9/5/07, Rating: 0
RE: The prices are actually pretty good though...
By Accord99 on 9/5/2007 4:40:34 PM , Rating: 2
As I explained elsewhere in this thread, the Opteron 8300 series will be more performant and cheaper than Tigerton.

That remains to be seen. And unlike AMD, Intel has no problems with clockspeed with Tigerton.

Doesn't matter. The fact is that Intel is less innovative than AMD. This Intel executive disagree with you

This Intel executive wants more creative research, doesn't mean he thinks AMD is more innovative.

Again, you are someone who seems to live in the past and is unable to think about the future. As they say, previous performance is not a guarantee for a future success. The "old" K8 has been directly responsible for Intel's net income drop of more than 40% in 2006.

While Merom-Conroe-Woodcrest in a space of a few quarters has all but reversed the K8 damage, while retaking half of AMD's server market share and 1/3rd of AMD's revenue, now placing AMD to the point of collapse.


The scale of the damages caused by K10 will be higher. No matter how much money Intel is making today, tomorrow it will be much, much worse.

At this point, it looks like K10's will damage AMD far more due to its high manufacturing cost and poor performance.

With all due respect, you don't know what you are talking about. This is precisely what AMD is going to do with Shanghai:

And now they say they will wait to Bulldozer and Sandtiger.

RE: The prices are actually pretty good though...
By erikejw on 9/6/07, Rating: 0
By Accord99 on 9/6/2007 11:46:17 PM , Rating: 4
Learn to read. I said obliterate existing x86 server scores in major enterprise benchmarks, which it does.

And the same article says Clovertown is 30% in other instructions.

By werepossum on 9/7/2007 8:19:26 PM , Rating: 2
And now they say they will wait to Bulldozer and Sandtiger.

Didn't they change those names to "Bullsh*tter" and "Papertiger"?


By Willie on 9/5/2007 5:32:25 AM , Rating: 5
You seem to forget that, while Intel's 10X employees are only shipping 3X cpus than AMD, they're also producing 100X more chipsets than AMD, are the world's largest shipper of video chipsets (and yes, I realize their integrated solutions of video are nowhere near AMD/nVidia's quality or playability, but still ship more gpu's than either entity), ship 100X more flash memory, and on and on.

And while it seemed that Intel was slow to respond to K8, did you ever think that Intel was in the process of developing what is now being unveiled every 6-8 months now during those long, dark Netburst years? Intel is rolling out so much new product these days it seems ludicrous that they "just" decided to start developing the products beyond C2D last year....

The wait will soon be over
By INTC on 9/4/2007 9:29:47 PM , Rating: 2
All of the Barcelona marketing and hype will be over within less than a week and then the benchmarks will have to be released. Rumors are also floating that we could see Intel Tigerton and Caneland platforms this week which will make things very interesting. X-bit labs thinks Tigerton quads will start at 1.86 GHz and go up to 2.93 GHz priced from $856 to $2301. AMD has left some room for pricing between their top end $1004 and Intel's top end. What will hurt AMD is going to be getting good yields on their huge 283 mm2 Barcelona monolithic die whereas Intel can use 2 x 143 mm2 C2D die (and soon 2 x 107 mm2 Penryn die) to make Tigerton with their MCM process. No doubt we're going to see a lot of benchmarks from high end quads from Intel and a lot of FP and perf/watt benchmarks from AMD. This next week should be a lot of fun!

RE: The wait will soon be over
By zpdixon on 9/5/2007 3:26:45 AM , Rating: 2
If Intel really price the entry-level Tigerton X7310 at $856, they are doomed. AMD's Opteron 8346 HE ($688, 1.8 GHz) will be more performant and cheaper.

mobo advice?
By Visual on 9/5/2007 4:49:58 AM , Rating: 2
can anyone tell me of a good mobo for two 2xxx opterons, that would allow for enough room around the sockets for a decent heatsink and has overclocking options?

also, are there any plans (or existing products) for a dual-socket board supporting non-registered memory any time soon?
maybe something from the 4x4 line? do those boards use the same socket-f as normal opteron boards?

RE: mobo advice?
By Visual on 9/5/2007 5:35:15 AM , Rating: 2
yay, did some googling, and
wow this looks promising :)
quick, someone try that with the 2344 HE chips and tell me it still works! please!

i am sooo buying that as soon as it's available.

btw, with less than a month till launch now, aren't there any legitimate performance reviews out yet?

Uneducated guess
By wordsworm on 9/5/2007 3:39:31 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not an engineer, so my guess isn't even educated. However, I'll iterate it anyways. It seems to me that punching out the highest performance chips is harder than the slower performance chips. I'm willing to bet that more chips at higher frequency have a higher chance of failure at the manufacturing level. It seems to me that if they get some practice at producing these slower chips, they will gain the expertise they need to produce higher performance chips without the high costs associated with faulty parts. Further, this means they produce more chips that work and are therefore able to fulfill more orders. It seems to be a very logical move, considering their current financial problems.

By the way, I've noticed that their stocks have creeped up to $13/share this week. I wouldn't be surprised to see it trading at $15-17 in 1-2 weeks. Hopefully the investment at $11.75 a share will double by the end of this year, as I fully expect it to.
"Silver lining!"

By cassandra on 9/5/2007 3:26:08 PM , Rating: 2
I was surprised that the prices on the low-way parts wasn't a bit higher.

My interpretation is this is because AMD anticipates adding higher clocked parts in the near future - say a quarter, or so - and these parts will drop into the around $1000 position or maybe even a bit higher.

Of course, on the one hand this implies that they are having difficulty getting the clock speed up. On the other, it implies that they anticipate fixing it pretty soon. On the other, other hand, they might be wrong and it might be more difficult to fix than they think.

Of course, these are Barcelona prices and Barcelona parts aren't intended for desktop use. But you could use them to provide desktop computing, if you wanted...

K10 is a looser.
By gOJDO on 9/4/07, Rating: -1
RE: K10 is a looser.
By TomZ on 9/4/2007 7:32:48 PM , Rating: 3
I think it's too soon to label it as a "looser," but IMO, launching at 2GHz max is not exactly going to set the world on fire. Even if they are able to beat Xeon in performance-per-clock, at 2GHz that gives Intel a lot of performance margin to work with.

But at the end of the day, the success of Barcelona will be about how they price them relative to Intel and whether they can keep up with demand. Even if the performance turns out to be inferior, AMD can still price them to sell.

I will say that it looks like AMD is going to have to eat some humble pie. To listen to them a year ago with their confident statements about wiping the floor with Intel, it all seems like a distant memory now.

RE: K10 is a looser.
By Master Kenobi on 9/4/2007 8:34:42 PM , Rating: 5
Nobody around here knows how to spell "Loser"?

RE: K10 is a looser.
By GlassHouse69 on 9/4/2007 9:40:27 PM , Rating: 5
whenever I eat a lot of shredded wheat and prunes, I too feel looser.

RE: K10 is a looser.
By JumpingJack on 9/4/2007 10:19:25 PM , Rating: 2

RE: K10 is a looser.
By TomZ on 9/4/2007 9:59:41 PM , Rating: 2
Hence why I put it in "quotes" :o)

RE: K10 is a looser.
By JumpingJack on 9/4/2007 11:59:28 PM , Rating: 2
There is a silver lining to this launch. AMD is not launching the 120 Watt performance 'power bin'.... this is odd, and one can only speculate -- as such, a power wall is not their limiter, but most likely just some interconnect communication glitches ... which are easier to fix.

So while the launch may produce a lackluster 'non-performance-crown-changing' event, the likelihood that it will scale quikcly in clock (as AMD has promised) seems reasonable.

PS: Where have you been?

crazy prices
By tacoburrito on 9/4/07, Rating: -1
RE: crazy prices
By JTKTR on 9/4/2007 6:32:27 PM , Rating: 2
Clock speed isn't everything (as intel's 3.73 GHz processor should have told you). Plus I'm sure these prices will drop in a matter of weeks as they usually do after a launch.

RE: crazy prices
By coldpower27 on 9/4/2007 9:16:31 PM , Rating: 2
I doubt it these are the distributor pricing, so anything bought in retail will be higher most likely due to initial low volume and high demand.

If these are indeed distributor pricing then the prices that will be listed on AMD's pricing page will actually be higher.

RE: crazy prices
By TomZ on 9/4/2007 10:02:05 PM , Rating: 2
Most of the pricing we see here at DT is pricing at quantity 1000. So as long as you compare these prices to other prices here, you're comparing apples to apples.

RE: crazy prices
By kkwst2 on 9/4/2007 6:43:04 PM , Rating: 5
Well, if you have to ask the question, you're probably not their target market.

I might. Anyone performing complex computations that scale well with increased cores might. This potentially gives you 32 cores with extremely low latency (as compared to having to span nodes with a high speed switch to get 32 cores).

Understand than in many computational circles, including high performance cluster computing, the Opteron is still king and scales much better than the Xeon. The Quad core Xeon scales like crap in a lot of code (including Fluent, the CFD code I use). So an 8-core Xeon box doesn't hold a candle to an 8-core box of dual-core Opterons. Of course, the Xeon box is also significantly cheaper, so price/performance ends up being prety close.

Of course, the jury is still out on how well Barcelona will scale in these applications. But if it does a lot better job than the Xeon and I can get 32 cores in a 2U blade, then I'd certainly consider it. However, I'll still probably be better off with a dual processor configuration and a high speed switch for node-spanning. I'm certainly interested in finding out.

RE: crazy prices
By Amiga500 on 9/4/2007 7:19:54 PM , Rating: 2
Yeap - I can back that up with CFX as well.

Over 2 nodes, the "double dual core" Intels perform great. Once you start passing information between the two dual cores (which make the quad), performance drops off a lot.

RE: crazy prices
By Makaveli on 9/4/2007 6:53:05 PM , Rating: 3
You need to start thinking of out of your little box my friend. Businesses have a far bigger budget than your yearly income. These Processors are aimed at the server market not the desktop. If the market will bare it they will keep selling them at the price accordingly. When Q4 comes around and the Phenom is released then you can bitch at prices!

RE: crazy prices
By JumpingJack on 9/4/2007 11:12:57 PM , Rating: 2
4-way, quad core chips are niche products and typically MP destined processors fetch much higher prices... this is actually quite quite in-line for the application in 4P and greater configurations.

RE: crazy prices
By vignyan on 9/5/2007 2:58:19 AM , Rating: 2
Just adding to your statement - Its a multi-way chip... up to 8 way!:)

RE: crazy prices
By Visual on 9/5/2007 11:04:50 AM , Rating: 2
if you need the 8xxx series, you're looking at buying at least 4 chips, and usually it is more. the infrastructure that would house that much computing power then, costs tens of thousands at least - that's racks and rackmount cases, tons of expencive scsi/sas storage, fbdimm ram, redundant psus, even backup power generators and such.
where this kind of hardware finds application there are potentially millions of dollars at stake, both profits and expenses are a whole different order of magnitude from your expectations.

Prices make K10 a "looser"
By LTG on 9/4/07, Rating: -1
RE: Prices make K10 a "looser"
By coldpower27 on 9/4/2007 9:41:13 PM , Rating: 3
I will just say this, these are extremely low introductory prices for a new processor line, AMD once charged $2649 for the top Opteron 8xxx Series and $1299 for the top Opteron 2xxx Series.

Even today the highest Opteron 8xxx price is $2149 and Opteron 2xxx price is $873

Not to mention these new Opteron are being offered at prices far lower then even the top range Dual Core Opteron available today.

Well at least they are doing the right thing as with the HD 2900 XT and pricing accordingly for good value, I just hope they can survive long enough, to get the higher clocked versions out.

RE: Prices make K10 a "looser"
By RjBass on 9/4/2007 11:18:35 PM , Rating: 2
Is it possible that AMD is trying to regain some lost ground from the last year or so?

Let's just imagine for a minute that the new Opterons are the cream of the crop. They introduce them at such low prices that before long, all the talk in the circles is AMD again.

Granted, this is probably just a pipe dream, but it could bizzaro world.

By coldpower27 on 9/5/2007 1:30:40 AM , Rating: 2
Given AMD capacity and their financial situations, I would believe for the most lucrative of sectors as the Opteron 8xxx series they would price them as high as possible.

If AMD had a winner on their hands they would likely try to charge $2500 and force Intel to drop their prices instead, as continue a scorched Earth policy now when they are on financial life support is effective suicide.

RE: Prices make K10 a "looser"
By defter on 9/5/2007 2:56:10 AM , Rating: 3
Why this was modded down? He was exactly right: if Barcelona would take a performance crown, then fastest 2-way Barcelona CPUs would be priced at >=$1000.

$372 price tag means that the CPU will perform as well as similarly priced CPUs from Intel.

RE: Prices make K10 a "looser"
By vignyan on 9/5/2007 3:02:05 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed.. I dont have any votes left else i would have done it! :) anyways... the pricing makes me speculate that Barcelona is not a performance crown snatcher.. As most of them are speculating! ;)

Anyways, waiting till Monday! :)

"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki