Print 79 comment(s) - last by Webgod.. on Jul 15 at 10:50 PM

Bruised but not broken, AMD fires off another volley of price cuts across Core 2 Duo's bow

With only a month until the most anticipated AMD product launch in five years, the company is pulling out all the stops to get competitive before the Back to School buying season.

The AMD-Intel price war, now almost into its second year, was cited as one of the contributing factors to the $611 million dollar loss AMD posted in the fiscal first quarter of 2007.  Following that loss came a 400 employee headcount reduction and a $2.2 billion cash-for-stock deal.

Almost immediately after posting its Q1 loss, Mercury research declared that Intel managed to recapture all of AMD's marketshare gains from 2006 in the first three months of 2007.  JP Morgan directly attributed the Intel traction due to aggressive pricing.

Effective Monday, July 9, 2007, AMD will enforce the following pricing among its channel:

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Pricing

July 9








With these new prices cuts, AMD will also significantly trim its retail CPU portfolio.  All single-core Athlon and Sempron models currently in the channel will officially reach end-of-life status (EOL).  The ultra-low cost Athlon 64 3500+, Athlon 64 3200+, Sempron 3500+ and Sempron 3200+ will continue to exist in high growth markets: Brazil, Russia, India and China.

In addition, the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and 3600+, currently priced at $79 and $69 respectively, will also reach EOL status.

AMD roadmaps confirmed that other low-cost single-core processor families like Lima have already been phased out, just three months after launch. The company is still slated to introduce its 65nm Sparta family, based on the K8 architecture, in September 2007. 

The company's next-generation architecture, occasionally dubbed K10, will officially launch the last week of August for server platforms, and sometime late in the holiday season for desktops.  AMD has not issued pricing notifications on these processors yet.

AMD fired the first volley at the Intel price war when the company dramatically slashed processor prices -- just days before the Intel Core 2 Duo launch.  Since then, both companies reduced pricing of last year's products to less than 33% of last year's street price.

Memos released to DailyTech from AMD distributors confirm that the July 9 AMD price cuts are directly aimed at pre-empting the July 22 Intel price cuts.  These upcoming Intel price cuts will cut current Intel quad-core almost in half.

Comments     Threshold

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

can they?
By poohbear on 7/8/2007 4:07:20 AM , Rating: 3
can they afford to continue doing this? for how long? im a bit worried about these guys, price cut after price cut can't be good for the company, albeit its great for us customers.:p

RE: can they?
By aurareturn on 7/8/2007 4:21:21 AM , Rating: 2
Don't worry about them. AMD won't fall unless a third competitor such as IBM enter the market.

I do want more balance between AMD and Intel though. Intel is just too big and has too much money and will probably out muscle AMD until AMD is bought.

RE: can they?
By Kuroyama on 7/8/2007 9:41:42 AM , Rating: 2
AMD won't fall

And why would you say that? No company can lose money forever, and the little bit of info out so far about Barcelona aren't sounding so great.

RE: can they?
By ksherman on 7/8/2007 9:59:46 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe they are lowering expectations over Barcelona. It is a typical political strategy, to make something sound worse than it is, so when it is actually released, they will exceed the rumors... Just a thought.

RE: can they?
By defter on 7/8/2007 11:41:37 AM , Rating: 3
What are you talking about? They officially announced that Barcelona servers will be available in Septemper at max 2GHz clockspeed.

RE: can they?
By Dactyl on 7/8/2007 3:15:05 PM , Rating: 2
It's not just clockspeed, the question is how good Barcelona is clock-for-clock with K8, Core 2 65nm (Conroe) and Core 2 45nm (Penryn).

Penryn is expected to be a little faster than Conroe at the same clock speeds because of some relatively minor tweaks.

AMD is boasting that Barcelona is 20% faster at integer and 50% faster at floating point than a Quad-Core 65nm Intel processor, but so far AMD has shown no proof for that claim. I hope AMD is telling the truth, but like I said, they haven't shown any proof.

When DT tested Barcelona, they found it was no better than K8, and actually a little slower clock-for-clock than 65nm Intel Quad Cores.

RE: can they?
By TheOtherBubka on 7/9/2007 10:36:34 PM , Rating: 2
What if this was AMD's strategy. Ever notice how all processors produced by AMD above 2.5 GHz are all made on the 90 nm process node? Speculation is/was there is something wrong with 65 nm. But AMD announced all 65 nm products will be less than 65 W max TDP (compare to typical 89 W or more for 90 nm node for most normal binning). Since AMD is expecting Barcelona to go up to 2.6 GHz, what happens if AMD is really focusing on winning the performance per watt ratio not just performance and really focusing 65 nm production on lower powers compared to Q2D/C2D? Problem is, C2D has really good thermals and I doubt if making a 65 W light bulb a 50 W light bulb is a big deal to consumers. As for the corporate sector, it's more important under TCO when you have a few thousand or more to worry about.

Since upper speed grade X2's and FX's are today's equivalents of old P4s, maybe the days of 200 W power supplies will be back after all.

RE: can they?
By TheOtherBubka on 7/9/2007 10:51:10 PM , Rating: 2
The 200 W power supply comment was neglecting the 'enthusiast market' as anyone on these forums is aware of the power requirements of upper level graphics cards. Think of the power supply requirements with AMD/ATI's recent graphics cards. Not as great as performance as expected, but lower power than expected too. Think 45 W BE series too. Keep shrinking the power requirements until computers can be the sleek items they were envisioned years ago.

Computers are becoming more commodity items. And as a commodity, the developed consumer market is expecting them to look less like today's rectangular box and more like the small form factors at a reasonable cost. As for growing markets (India, China, Africa, etc.), power constraints are an issue once you can afford them.

RE: can they?
By TheOtherBubka on 7/9/2007 11:01:01 PM , Rating: 2
Then again...maybe AMD's 65 nm process really isn't up to snuff. I just remembered AMD had a 2.0 GHz 90 nm 35 W Athlon X2. For the 65 nm process equivalents BE-2300 and 2350/1.9 and 2.1 GHz respectively, the TDP is listed as 45 W. More power for equivalent clock speeds on a smaller process? That's not the direction it is supposed to go.

Oh's time to wait and see what happens over the next 8-12 months now...

RE: can they?
By bryanW1995 on 7/8/2007 4:27:16 PM , Rating: 5
yeah, that's a great idea. Scare everybody into buying a c2d or c2q, then saying "gotcha"! Of course, it is entirely possible that they really are planning to do that...

RE: can they?
By spluurfg on 7/10/2007 8:20:13 AM , Rating: 2
If you can name an example of when this has happened for a commercial product...

AMD is a publicly held company... they are required, by law, to report transparently.

RE: can they?
By TomZ on 7/10/2007 8:26:39 AM , Rating: 2
Wrong, they don't have to report the details of their marketing strategy publicly. Financial details: yes. Most of everything else: no. Their marketing strategy would be a trade secret just like their engineering trade secrets.

RE: can they?
By PrinceGaz on 7/8/2007 4:33:29 PM , Rating: 2
IBM wouldn't enter the market as a third competitor. They've already got a nice working relationship with AMD which benefits them both.

If anything, should AMD become no longer viable selling their chips at the prices they are, I think IBM would be the first in the queue to buy them out. They'd be well placed as an IBM/AMD combo would be quite capable of mounting a serious long term challenge to Intel in the PC market. Never ever underestimate the resources IBM have available, both financial and technical.

RE: can they?
By TrogdorJW on 7/8/2007 7:21:40 PM , Rating: 2
My brother speculated the same thing to me about three years back. He said the dramatically increasing costs of building new fabs would likely push AMD out of the market, and IBM would take over. He may be right sooner rather than later....

RE: can they?
By Haltech on 7/9/2007 4:47:38 PM , Rating: 2
not to mention that IBM only has less then 1 percent of the market share in non server processors.

RE: can they?
By masher2 on 7/9/2007 10:37:26 AM , Rating: 2
> "AMD won't fall unless a third competitor such as IBM enter the market."

Exactly. If AMD appears to be in serious danger, Intel will certainly prop them up with a few price increases of their own. It's to Intel's advantage to maintain at least one small, easily outmaneuvered competitor in the market; it lets them avoid a large degree of antitrust heat which would otherwise surface.

RE: can they?
By JWalk on 7/9/2007 11:35:46 PM , Rating: 2

RE: can they?
By MartinT on 7/8/2007 8:07:59 AM , Rating: 3
If you look at their financial results, AMD couln't even afford the prices they were getting in Q2, or Q1, or even Q4 of last year.

They desperately need new, faster products, or else they'll bleed dry in a less than a year. (not considering any additional investments they might be able to acquire)

RE: can they?
By Durrr on 7/8/2007 1:42:21 PM , Rating: 2
Intel won't let them go under. Just like Microsoft wouldn't let Apple go under. I'd imagine there would be a nice lawsuit from the DoJ if AMD stopped making x86 CPUs.

RE: can they?
By retrospooty on 7/8/2007 11:09:25 AM , Rating: 2
"can they afford to continue doing this? for how long? im a bit worried about these guys"

Dont worry, they can survive a long long time, and even if AMD goes under as a company, there is bankruptcy protection, and if that still isn't enough the CPU division (and others as well) will live on, being bought out by a company with deep pockets. No matter what happens to AMD, the CPU division will live on. Remember, the whole "athlon" thing, starting with the K7 started at another company that AMD bought, I think it was called Nexgen, or something like that... It was not even designed at AMD, they just bought it, becasue thier own CPU tech (K6 and lower) sucked rocks.

RE: can they?
By iNGEN on 7/8/2007 11:47:11 AM , Rating: 2
I postulate AMD is trying to return themselves to their roots as "the budget alternative" to Intel while trying to alienate as few of their current customers as possible.

RE: can they?
By MartinT on 7/8/2007 12:01:05 PM , Rating: 2
K7 started at another company that AMD bought, I think it was called Nexgen, or something like that... It was not even designed at AMD, they just bought it, becasue thier own CPU tech (K6 and lower) sucked rocks.

K6 was the Nexgen design AMD bought when they realized that they couldn't muster a decent chip themselves, K7 was designed in-house, under heavy influence from guys that had their heritage in DEC's line of Alpha CPUs.

RE: can they?
By retrospooty on 7/8/2007 12:14:14 PM , Rating: 4
Thanks, I vaguely remembered something like that... I thought the bus design was mainly from the DEC folks and the K7 CPU itself, and later the K8 design (was also in the pipeline at Nexgen when bought by AMD)... but anyhow, my point remains the same. The CPU division will live on, even if AMD dies, and AMD is nowhere near death, in spite of losing alot of money.

RE: can they?
By Smurfer2 on 7/8/2007 12:16:21 PM , Rating: 2
I dunno how long they can keep doing this. They have lost money the last several quarters. The bright side is they have a better price/performance for 2 to 3 weeks. Um, so, hmm...

RE: can they?
By Amiga500 on 7/9/2007 4:54:33 AM , Rating: 2
It is possible that they are seeing better than ever production efficiencies and virtually no wastage, so they can afford to drop the price... a bit.

Its almost certain that they are still hemorrhaging money though.

RE: can they?
By TomZ on 7/10/2007 8:29:50 AM , Rating: 2
No, probably not the reason for the price cut. Prices are a function of "what the market will bear" - they are not a function of production cost.

Therefore, increased production efficiencies would lead to increased profit margin, whereas prices would be lowered in response to market pressures.

Its the Fabs
By Operandi on 7/8/2007 6:07:09 PM , Rating: 2
It seems to me the problem is the fabs.

For as long as I've been following this stuff (7 years or so) Intel has always had the fabrication advantage, allowing them to produce their chips at lower cost vs. AMD.

K8 won out in the end due to superior architecture but the Pentium 4 still remained somewhat competitive due solely to Intel's more advanced fab plants. Now that Intel has more than a competitive architecture along with superior fabs AMD is in a bit of trouble.

K10 should be able to compete with Intel but it needs the fabrication backend to do it.

RE: Its the Fabs
By Ringold on 7/8/2007 8:55:21 PM , Rating: 2
And Jim Cramer says AMD has too many fabs! I think Cramer has taken a step in to something he needs to look in to a bit more there. Consumer processors are commodity parts with a value set by performance, but by brand. Both brands have a small cadre of die-hard loyalists, and in fact I'd say a slim majority of tech geeks always have a soft spot in their heart for AMD as the underdog, but in the end we're all buying C2D right now. If AMD cut production it wouldn't be able to do anything at all with prices, it'd simply give up economies of scale and revenue. :\

RE: Its the Fabs
By Smurfer2 on 7/9/2007 8:04:32 AM , Rating: 2
And Jim Cramer says AMD has too many fabs!

Yea, I agree, he needs to look at this closer. When AMD has agreements with 3rd party fabs to produce chips, I don't think they have too many fabs.

RE: Its the Fabs
By darkpaw on 7/9/2007 9:15:03 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe what he means is that they should be contracting out more instead of having the financial burden of building and upgrading their own fabs.

I don't pretend to know which is the better route, thats what the financial people get paid the big bucks for, but I'm pretty sure this is what that guy meant.

RE: Its the Fabs
By Oregonian2 on 7/9/2007 1:46:23 PM , Rating: 2
For their primary CPU line of products, I thought they themselves really had only one FAB site, the one in Dresden ?

RE: Its the Fabs
By Screwballl on 7/13/2007 12:05:27 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't AMD just sign on with a company or two about adding a few more large fabs???
Would be nice to see them kick things into an increased distribution level that would be a bit more competitive to Intel.

By HotdogIT on 7/8/2007 10:15:26 AM , Rating: 2
With the 4000+ dropping to ~69, what's going to happen to the 3600+ price, which is already near/there?

RE: 3600+?
By KristopherKubicki on 7/8/2007 12:46:01 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry about that. The 3800+ and 3600+ will go discontinued. I added that bit to the article.

RE: 3600+?
By HotdogIT on 7/8/2007 12:49:42 PM , Rating: 2
Jeeze... EOL'd already? I guess they have been "out" since August of 2006, but it feels like they just hit retail not too long ago.


RE: 3600+?
By coldpower27 on 7/9/2007 12:50:42 AM , Rating: 2
Not uncommon, it's like how the E6300/E6400 are effectively phased out and don't recieve any more price cuts as newer products at the same price are released.

There is simply no room for 3600+ and 3800+ if the 4000+ is only 70US any lower and your risking going into Intel's Celeron territory.

Its a good time to be a consumer.
By EglsFly on 7/8/2007 4:42:15 PM , Rating: 3
Big picture here for gamers and others...

You can select from a list of more than powerful enough CPU's for little cash that can run any game out there, let alone do basic tasks which most people use PCs for.

Whether you are playing BF2, Half Life or whatever, you are going to get more than enough FPS for what these CPUs can put out with good supporting hardware.

RE: Its a good time to be a consumer.
By nahtanojlui on 7/8/2007 9:42:48 PM , Rating: 2
except that decent graphics cards would cost as much as your CPU

By darkpaw on 7/9/2007 9:15:42 AM , Rating: 2
Or more, decent graphics cards generally are around $200.

Backward compatibility
By Silver2k7 on 7/9/2007 3:01:48 AM , Rating: 2
Hi ive ordered an AMD system last week

Asus M2N32 WS Pro motherboard
AMD 6000+ (AM2)

now for the question can I put in one of the Phenom X4 later will these fit in there ??

RE: Backward compatibility
By fake01 on 7/9/2007 9:19:15 AM , Rating: 2
Yea it will work, just not as goos as the AM2+

I have an AM2 board aswell "M2N32-SLI Deluxe W/E", which is a great board. I'm planning on upgrading to the Phenom X4 when they come out at the end of the year :-)

this is great!!!
By hardwareking on 7/8/2007 9:47:07 AM , Rating: 2
Intel doesn't have anything in the sub $200 region which can compete with the athlon x2 6000+ right now

after the july 22nd price cut,there'll be the E6750

but how can AMD continue to do this?Where did they get money to invest into transmeta?
Are they getting any sort of profit from their 90nm x2s?

But frankly i don't care(so long as AMD doesn't go down)
This is gr8 for the consumer

By Roy2001 on 7/9/2007 12:44:40 AM , Rating: 2
AMD has cut price 3+ times with top clock speed bumped only from 2.8G to 3.0G. Price of their fastest desktop CPU droped dramatically. How long can they afford to do this?

AMD going under
By onereddog on 7/9/2007 6:44:03 PM , Rating: 2
Even if AMD has been loosing money in the last four qurters (or whatever length of time) it does in no way mean that it will go under.
If they are in any cash danger, then I suspect that the most likely next step would be to declare it and issue a new batch of stocks to support the new product.
For any one outside of the forums (read: those who will actually invest money) the lure of AMD awesome past performance should be enticing enough to allow AMD to raise a respectable amount.

By Hearse04 on 7/9/2007 11:21:45 PM , Rating: 2
Well this sucks, I just bought an Athlon 64 X2 5200+ on July 3rd.

This is just sad.
By Domicinator on 7/10/2007 10:47:53 PM , Rating: 2
I was such a big AMD fan for so long. First they were like the budget guys that nobody cared about, then they were kicking Intel's butt and charging less, and now with one product launch (Core 2), Intel just destroyed them. Even I switched over to a Core 2 Quad after my last 4 processors were AMD.

A company cannot continue to lose money like this. They're still making great processors, but the Core 2s are better. The R600 launch was a little bit of a misstep as well. They are bleeding out money like crazy and Barcelona isn't looking like it's going to be their savior. I will always have a soft spot for AMD, but even I can't pass up a Core 2 Quad.

No hope...
By GodLovesPunk on 7/8/07, Rating: -1
RE: No hope...
By Laitainion on 7/8/2007 3:20:49 AM , Rating: 5
Nonsense, I have built a file server (and I'm planning a HTPC) both around AMD processors. The file server has a low end Sempron in it, because it was the cheapest most power efficient processor I could get my hands on. The HTPC will probably have the lowest dual-core Athlon I can find for similar reasons, not everyone needs the power of a Core 2 Duo. In fact most people don't and the only Intel processors AMD can't match for performance are the upper part of the Core 2 line, which are aimed at enthusiasts, a very small part of the market.

RE: No hope...
By tuteja1986 on 7/8/2007 3:56:15 AM , Rating: 3
AMD cheap end processor can compete with intel low end processor in price/performance easily.

RE: No hope...
By Lemonjellow on 7/8/2007 8:13:41 AM , Rating: 4
I just built a general usage PC using a 3600+. I'm almost pissed I didn't wait and put a 4000+ in it, but then again I only paid $330 give or take for mobo w/good
(for being integrated) int. graphics, ram, two hard drives and proc... I would have been out $100 more with a comparable Core 2 setup.

While these price cuts are great for us. I too wonder what it does to AMD, but with my (very) limited knowledge and the fact that I have been watching AMD stock religiously due to the stock market game (my buddies little sister's 4.0 Mathlete friend who talked me into playing when drunk is getting stomped by a 2.25gpa History B.S., yes it stands for bull shit, recipient right now. Btw, who'd of thunk his 5000 shares in a Brazilian startup airline would be tanking?:- )
Anyways their stock seems pretty stable for the past couple of weeks, but I have no clue about the trend over the past few months. I am just holding out that the release of Barcelona will catapult me from 600th place to like 200th.
I don't see them as a company going under anytime soon though. Maybe reducing in size, but still staying afloat. I mean this company survived the dark ages of early Intel dominance. I loved my K6-2 500mhz...

Anyhoo to end my rambling, Core 2 Duo is a sexy sports car of a processor, but when you need to get the kids to soccer practice and still be able to afford Happy-meals at the end of the day; AMD's X2 is one sexily priced family car. (god that sounded way to Dr. Phil'ish...)

RE: No hope...
By hardwareking on 7/8/2007 9:50:33 AM , Rating: 2
i wudn't mind getting the x2 6000+ after the price cut,if they had a really good motherboard out

but with the $266 quad just round the corner,i wudn't bother and basically i wud recommend other people to wait too

RE: No hope...
By bob661 on 7/8/2007 11:50:54 AM , Rating: 3
but with the $266 quad just round the corner,i wudn't bother and basically i wud recommend other people to wait too
Why would you do that? Not everyone needs the latest and greatest CPU. What the hell is grandma going to do with a quad core? Forget grandma, how about your parents? Or anyone that doesn't game? AMD is more than competitive on the mid to low end and how well they do does NOT depend on us enthusiasts! You guys need to lower your ego's. We are a whopping 1% of AMD's and Intel's market! Wow! We could crash Intel and AMD today if we wanted to with all that buying power we got! And don't bring up the enterprise market because they are the LAST people to jump on the latest and greatest bandwagon.

RE: No hope...
By EndPCNoise on 7/8/2007 7:43:10 PM , Rating: 1
Not everyone needs the latest and greatest CPU...AMD is more than competitive on the mid to low end

Am I the only one on this forum who is growing tired of hearing these same, worn-out, lame arguments?

Let's come back to reality for a moment and look at some facts and real numbers. I'm talking about market share.

AMD gained market share during the pre-core2 duo years. Why, because their K7-K8 series was superior to Intel's Netburst series.

Now fast forward to today. Intel has regained all the market share they lost to AMD, in less than one year's time, due to the release of the superior core2 duo series.

In a nutshell: Whoever has the superior product will make gains in market share, and market share is what really counts.

You can't argue with the numbers.

RE: No hope...
By fenderkb76 on 7/8/2007 10:38:38 PM , Rating: 3
I'm glad someone is talking sense here. Like someone else said, I'll always have a soft spot for AMD, just like most of the sports teams I follow are underdogs and overachievers.

It's a shame that AMD never had the market share and deep pockets of Intel. I'd say they handily pounded Intel in terms of price/performance for 3 years. However, Intel is the 800 pound gorilla who could have taken that treatment for another 5 years without problems, especially with their brute-force marketing and "incentives". Because of the size of Intel and their "installed user base", they were able to completely turn the clock back to pre-K7 days in a matter of months once they created a superior product.

It really is a shame for AMD although it is good for consumers overall. However, if the trend continues, Intel won't be competitively priced a year from now. I hope AMD can make it to the next generation with enough resources to make something "revolutionary" vs. "evolutionary".

What's funny is that right now, I see much more exposure for AMD now than I ever have. Look at a Best Buy or Circuit City ad in the Sunday paper. I dare say that more than half of the PCs and laptops feature AMD CPUs. For crying out loud, Dell even sells them!

RE: No hope...
By InternetGeek on 7/8/2007 11:32:04 PM , Rating: 1
I've owned AMD only once in my life. It wasn't a bad experience and at the time benchmarking wasn't mainstream. The PC then was a 486DX2 or something like that.

Since then I've simply bought the fastest CPU I could get (best price/performance ratio) every 4 years or so. By pure coincidence Intel has always gotten my money because at the moment I was shopping Intel had the speed crown or was so close to the top the price difference wasn't worth it. The PCs, at their respective time, were Pentium 66mhz, Pentium 600Mhz, 2.8GhzHT and currently, after jumping into laptop realm, a Core Duo 2.8Ghz.

My next buying cycle is in exactly 2years. I will buy a 'gaming' laptop because they can let me play and program without much hassle.

It would be nice to try out an AMD, but historically, Intel will have the speed crown then.

Perhaps Intel simply knows how to time their products according to market trends, putting out their best when most of the people are updating. But that would be a gross generalization.

RE: No hope...
By bob661 on 7/8/2007 11:26:04 PM , Rating: 5
Am I the only one on this forum who is growing tired of hearing these same, worn-out, lame arguments? In a nutshell: Whoever has the superior product will make gains in market share, and market share is what really counts.
Your reading comprehension skills betray you. These "worn-out, lame" arguments will continue until the "worn-out, lame" egotistical belief that enthusiasts drive the market ceases. You NOR I control this market at all. We ARE a very tiny majority. All out performance doesn't mean jack sh!t to the average consumer that pays the bills at AMD and Intel. As long as the web can be surfed, the email can be sent, and the research paper can be written is a REASONABLE time that's all that matters to the bread and butter of Intel and AMD which is NOT us! C2D or Athlon X2. Both work and work well for anything you wish to throw at them. MS Office, Picasa, Google, and even games just don't stop working because you have a slower CPU (which is STILL hella fast!). These are facts that only matter. And tell me once again what AMD's marketshare has to do with how many frames per second I can get in BF2?

RE: No hope...
By EndPCNoise on 7/9/2007 3:05:51 AM , Rating: 2
Hey bob, I find it ironic YOU would bring up reading comprehension skills...

As you read through my post, did you read anything about enthusiasts driving the market?...uh no bob.

In reading my post, did you read anything about you or I controlling the market in any way?...uh that would be no bob.

In reading my post, did I mention anywhere that enthusiasts make up the majority of the market?...again, that would be no bob.

Your comment about what market share has to do with the framerates in BF2 is so ridiculous and off base that I will not even address it here.

bob, I don't know about you, but I wouldn't consider a $266 CPU to be an extreme enthusiast chip. I would consider a $950 QX6700, a $950 X6800, or a $450 Athlon FX-74 to be the extreme enthusiast chips you wrote about. I would call a $266 CPU midrange or maybe upper midrange at the most.

bob, others who responded to my post understood the point I was making regarding market share.

Judging by how badly you misinterpreted my post or maybe you read things into it that I didn't actually say, maybe you should work on your reading comprehension skills.

Lastly bob, maybe you should reconsider your egotistical comment judging by how badly your ego was bruised by my post.

RE: No hope...
By omnicronx on 7/9/2007 10:41:23 AM , Rating: 2
and although you make some very good points, i find it ironic that the original topic you replied to was talking about the enthusiast market not counting for much.

You cannot always look at the numbers either, or if you look at the real numbers of the past 5 years where amd has had a cpu that was faster and cheaper than intel, amd would have a lot more market share and up until c2d intel would have been the one running away with their tails between their legs. But this was the case, why? intel has a hell of a lot more resources, this is the exact reason why these numbers can not always be looked at.
When c2d came out i have no doubt in my mind intel forced the big pc makers to use and market their chips exclusively or much more in their mid to high end systems or they would not offer price reductions, hurting them if another company took the intel deal.

so i guess in the end, all i want to get out there is that as long as intel has at least a comparable product to amd they will have a high market share (not necessarily higher than amd, but never as long as amd is now) , whether or not they hold the performance crown or not.

RE: No hope...
By imaheadcase on 7/8/07, Rating: -1
RE: No hope...
By RjBass on 7/9/2007 12:16:18 AM , Rating: 3
People who constantly point out others spelling mistakes and grammar mistakes on the Internet either need to really get a life, or sell the lame one that they have and move onto something else.

RE: No hope...
By SandmanWN on 7/9/2007 9:46:26 AM , Rating: 1
So pushing people to use better grammar is a bad thing? lol

RE: No hope...
By omnicronx on 7/9/2007 10:44:42 AM , Rating: 2
sure is, i h@ve @ r1ght t0 t@1k 1n l337 5p33k 1f I w@nt.
screw grammar =D

RE: No hope...
By SandmanWN on 7/9/2007 10:33:59 PM , Rating: 2
Then you also deserve to be corrected and get made fun of just the same.

RE: No hope...
By wordsworm on 7/11/2007 11:17:44 AM , Rating: 2
The irony of people's rants against others' use of English is that whilst berating they betray their own inadequate grasp of English.

RE: No hope...
By Webgod on 7/8/2007 9:55:21 AM , Rating: 2
For stocks AMD is probably going to be more or less stable. ATYT which they'd merged with was always a crappy stock. To actually get into it and try to make some money I'd look at NVDA, ERTS, ADBE. AAPL is nuts right now. Some stocks are just going to go nowhere, like Microsoft, Cisco. Intel - INTC - is also mostly stationary. Probably because it split too many times. Even if AMD had "good reasons" to go up, would it? But the stock market is really tricky and I'm no professional. I don't even trade anymore. These days unless I really had some kind of foresight I'd just get a mutual fund and not stress over it.

RE: No hope...
By EndPCNoise on 7/8/2007 5:13:26 PM , Rating: 3

I have always thought you were supposed to BUY LOW and SELL HIGH.

NVDA, AAPL, and ADBE seem to be very near their highs, and yet you recommend buying them?

You already missed the boat on MSFT and INTC my friend. You should have bought MSFT at around $24-25 and Intel at around $17-18. Those ships have already sailed.

I may not necessarily know how to make money, but I sure know how not to gamble it away. But hey, maybe you know some new market strategy the rest of us don't, or maybe this is why you don't trade anymore?

RE: No hope...
By Ringold on 7/8/2007 9:00:27 PM , Rating: 2
Buy high and sell higher!

Mutual funds for you, bud. Nothing wrong with mutual funds, either.

RE: No hope...
By EndPCNoise on 7/9/2007 3:13:26 AM , Rating: 2
By all means then, be my guest, and show us all how smart you really are.

RE: No hope...
By Webgod on 7/11/2007 12:28:11 PM , Rating: 2
I was saying he should've been into those stocks instead of AMD you ass.

RE: No hope...
By EndPCNoise on 7/11/2007 5:49:05 PM , Rating: 2
Well it seems you forgot what you said in your own post. Therefore I will pull a quote from it to refresh your memory.

To actually get into it and try to make some money I'd look at NVDA, ERTS, ADBE.

Webgod's comments speak for themselves...who's really the ass here.

RE: No hope...
By Webgod on 7/11/2007 9:12:06 PM , Rating: 2
Alright man, you go out of your way to make me look bad when my point was that AMD has often been one of those stocks that go nowhere. I used to trade it, as NVDA, ERTS, ADBE, ATYT. It's really hard to make money in the stock market from just buying a stock and letting it ride, really you have to trade it, and you have to speculate on when to trade it. NVDA and ERTS have some good swing. AVID used to be great. Most of the action happens before the bell. The rest happens most usually within 20 minutes of the open. I spent some time at it, but ultimately I needed to use the money I'd accumulated elsewhere. Actually I traded since 2000 and I've learned that, y'know, the regular individual trader has got to have some serious bank to really be in the game. Here I was trying to make a helpful post and you have to mess with me. How about I mess with your Reseller Ratings bub?

"Buy low and sell high" yes, that's the first thing anybody learns, it's so elemental I figured I wouldn't even bring it up. Besides, my post shouldn't have been construed as a "Strong Buy on These Stocks Right Now". Sheesh.

Anyway, I hope this clears up my stance and my reputation, I can't let it be challenged. Show some tact next time.

RE: No hope...
By EndPCNoise on 7/12/2007 2:56:57 PM , Rating: 2
Oh man, where do I start...

This "strategy" (and I use the term loosely here) of yours which you have described here is purely market speculation a.k.a. GAMBLING! This should be the first thing anybody learns. The market loves guys like you who use this same, old, get-rich-quick "strategy".
Just calling a spade a spade.

my post shouldn't have been construed as a "Strong Buy on These Stocks Right Now"

How else would someone interpret, "To actually get into it and try to make some money I'd look at NVDA, ERTS, ADBE"?

Show some tact next time.
You call me names on an open, public forum, and yet you tell me to show some tact? Please...

I hope this clears up my stance and my reputation, I can't let it be challenged.
you go out of your way to make me look bad

Step up and take responsibility for what you wrote in an open, public forum. Don't try to pass your blame off on me for comments YOU WROTE! You wrote these comments here. You destroyed your own reputation here!

Your comments are like so many I've seen here before where people either "spin" or just throw out "facts" and "statistics" without listing, nor linking, any sources to support them.

There's an old saying, which seems to be appropriate here...
You want to get out of the hole you dug for yourself? STOP DIGGING!

One more thing...
You may want to consider changing your user name from Webgod to WebgodOfSpeculationAndDenial.

RE: No hope...
By Webgod on 7/15/2007 10:50:16 PM , Rating: 2
Jonny boy, pipe down brotha man. You're hillarious here. FWIW, this along with AnandTech are the only places where I'm known as Webgod. Everyplace else I'm known as EndDTTrolls. Here I am passing on my insight into trading of tech stocks, and you really seem to like to attack me, and by response I defend myself.

You seem to want to slur me as if I don't know what I discuss, or as if I'm providing a disservice, and so I expound. You're up on the stock market. Let's be intellectually honest here, you just want to piss a guy off. ;)

Really for an individual, buying a stock and letting it sit won't necessarily be a good use of one's money unless it goes up at a rate that is "worth your while", splits, or if it pays dividends, unless you trade it at speculated opportune times which requires a deal of research - and guesswork.

my post shouldn't have been construed as a "Strong Buy on These Stocks Right Now"

How else would someone interpret, "To actually get into it and try to make some money I'd look at NVDA, ERTS, ADBE"?

Well to look at, I guess would mean research? As in look at its trends, determine if it's at a seasonal low which will go up at a future time? Get into it, I guess might refer to elevating stock trading into relation to other hobbies? Although I already implied that getting a mutual fund would be a more of a set it and forget it approach.

Your comments are like so many I've seen here before where people either "spin" or just throw out "facts" and "statistics" without listing, nor linking, any sources to support them.

I admit I did a quick reply earlier that didn't exactly properly characterize my initial (outstanding) post, which more reacted to your rhetoric. But, calling your own quote back upon you, am I to take this to mean you expect people to source any statements they make? :) It's a DailyTech comment system, I'm going to make generalized statements for brevity.

By tact, perhaps in the future you should address the opinions/statements that you disagree with, with alternatives instead of attacking somebody's character. If you've got to attempt to bring somebody down to lift yourself up in your own self perception, you have issues to work out. I think you could get alot out of self-psychoanalysis. Or decaf.

I'll give you this though, at one point in the last two years AMD was at what, $40 or so? (But, then the C2D launched.)

RE: No hope...
By George Powell on 7/8/2007 3:55:17 AM , Rating: 2
At these prices AMD can compete quite effectively.

While they are not leading in the performance stakes these are excellent prices which will be very tempting to system builders and budget conscious consumers alike.

RE: No hope...
By soydios on 7/8/2007 4:14:09 AM , Rating: 4
I'm worried about AMD competing in the high-end. I'm not worried about AMD suriving as a company. Their price-performance is as good as or better than Intel's at the midrange and low-end, and their fabs are working at capacity plus additional outsourced production. As a company, they'll survive.

RE: No hope...
By Mathijs Moonen on 7/8/2007 2:45:42 PM , Rating: 2
Nowadays, a company with the financial possibilities AMD has can never die, like most of the people here already said, simply because there are enough crazy powerfull investors to support the company or even take it over. I think it would not be bad for the AMD we know today to go down, if after that a company with the ressources of ASUS or APPLE takes it over: has Intel ever NOT been financially superior to any other CPU manufacturer? There is no reason to worry about the efficient products we know from AMD and the price wars we appreciate so much.

RE: No hope...
By werepossum on 7/9/2007 6:16:13 PM , Rating: 2
has Intel ever NOT been financially superior to any other CPU manufacturer?

They were not financially superior to Motorola not so long ago, weren't they? Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but seems to me that in the CP/M days everything was Motorola and National Semiconductor, with Intel being the odd man out, mostly used for embedded applications and do-it-yourself kits until DOS. But maybe my mind is slipping.

RE: No hope...
By blaxor on 7/11/2007 3:43:09 AM , Rating: 2
motorola 68000 all the way baby :D

god do i miss my sega !!!16-BIT!!! megadrive - things were SOOOOO much simpler back then....

RE: No hope...
By Aries1470 on 7/15/2007 5:17:44 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but seems to me that in the CP/M days everything was Motorola and National Semiconductor, with Intel being the odd man out, mostly used for embedded applications and do-it-yourself kits until DOS. But maybe my mind is slipping.

Well, don't forget IBM too... They had the PowerPC for the Mac's after Apple changed from Motorola... IBM is in a VERY strong position to get in the 'game', but they don't. They were ALSO in it in the 386/486 days, and I think even until the early days of the Pentium's. So, guess where you can find them today... in your PS3 & XBOX 360 both PPC based.

Then on another note, to some other posts above. There is still VIA, that is the extremely low power and umm slow ;-) So for those that say 'no need for all the speed...' etc, why aren't they selling like hot cakes? If anyone needs a link, just google for VIA... You can use them in very small boxes, have a modest hdd etc for a pc for 'Mum & Dad/ Grandma' etc. Easy, Intel has 'control' of the main channels and have 'incentives'. Go to your average 'target', 'Kmart', 'D!ck Smith & Powerhouse', 'Harvey Norman' etc (these brands in Australia and elsewere?) if you go to ask for a 'cheap' pc for surfing the internet and viewing a moving editing your DV movies etc, they would PUSH the Intel rather than the AMD. Of what I rememebr, there was a lawsuit for this by AMD vs Inter for this very reason, just haven't followed that up recently.

So, there are also other brands out there and other companies that might walk in, but still, AMD / Intel are the most known.

"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine." -- Bill Gates

Most Popular ArticlesTop 5 Smart Watches
July 21, 2016, 11:48 PM
Free Windows 10 offer ends July 29th, 2016: 10 Reasons to Upgrade Immediately
July 22, 2016, 9:19 PM

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