backtop


Print 58 comment(s) - last by afkrotch.. on Feb 20 at 9:54 AM

Intel looks covetously at the cloud computing market for its server processors

The future of large data centers may look very different from the data centers of today. In the future, the data center is expected to be cloud-based and could save companies with large server farms millions of dollars.

Intel is watching the move to cloud computing closely and wants its processors to be at the heart of the cloud computing movement. Intel says that 20 to 25% of its server processors could be dedicated to data centers using cloud computing by 2012.

Intel's Jason Waxman said, "We expect to see, by 2012, a substantial portion of the server market will be running some version of cloud computing. Right now, as much as 14 percent of server purchases are going into some sort of cloud deployment."

Even the largest Fortune 500 companies are expected to begin migrating to cloud computing to grab the massive cost savings that cloud computing can generate. Intel says that cloud computing can save a company 10% in power usage for a large data center equating to a savings of about $6 million in some instances. At the same time software optimization of the same servers could save an additional $20 million.

Intel isn’t alone in coveting the cloud server market though and will have competition from AMD whose server processors are very popular in virtualized applications. Intel is betting on features like its Dynamic Power Node Manager to woo large enterprises to its products for power savings, which equate into big monetary savings for the companies.

Waxman said, "The cloud has promise, but we’re trying to be pragmatic. With small to medium-sized businesses, companies are asking, ‘Do I need lots of infrastructure, or can I do software as service?’ And the enterprise is cautious. They’re thinking that now’s the time to start the evaluation and path to it, as opposed to just jumping in."



Comments     Threshold


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

They will ?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/18/2009 12:22:29 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Intel isn’t alone in coveting the cloud server market though and will have competition from AMD


If AMD continues to bleed cash, they won't even be AROUND in 2012. At least not in the capacity to compete with Intel in cloud server CPU's.




RE: They will ?
By Screwballl on 2/18/2009 12:36:16 PM , Rating: 2
Intel sucks
AMD sucks
Apple sucks
PPC sucks
Verizon sucks
AT&T sucks
Cox sucks
Comcast sucks

There is plenty more but this covers the main bases that all the companies can do sucky things or have problems at one time or another.


RE: They will ?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/18/2009 12:38:43 PM , Rating: 2
?

With all due respect AMD is having a lot more than just "problems".

I seriously doubt they last to 2012 in their current state.


RE: They will ?
By SavagePotato on 2/18/2009 1:45:40 PM , Rating: 1
You should look into the phrase, "be careful what you wish for".

You like $400 mobos and $1200 "enthusiast" processors, I personally don't.

There was a brief golden age there when core2 came out where Intel was the "nice guy" that is over and dead, welcome to I7 or as I like to call it, Mini Skulltrail.


RE: They will ?
By BSMonitor on 2/18/2009 3:40:57 PM , Rating: 4
Phenom II System
$230 - 940
$125 - 790FX MB
$ 80 - 6GB DDR2 1066
=====
$455

Core i7 - 15-20% faster minimum
$280 - 920
$200 - X58 MB
$120 - 6GB DDR3 1333MHz
=====
$600

Hmmm. $150... Didn't I just see the Kool-aide man episode of Family guy?

Next Kool Aide man will tell us a Lamborgini sucks cause it costs more than a Mustang...

Easy Mr. Kool Aide...


RE: They will ?
By mattclary on 2/18/2009 4:59:49 PM , Rating: 1
Not sure what your point is. You responded to SavagePotato, who was making the point that were it not for competition from AMD, Intel would still be raping us anally.


RE: They will ?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/18/2009 5:10:36 PM , Rating: 3
Savage was wrong.

When the C2D's were released it took AMD over two years to even get their answer to it to the market. At no point during that time was Intel "anally" raping us by any objective measure.

And please don't bring up the Extreme Editions. Those will ALWAYS be overpriced regardless of competition.


RE: They will ?
By SavagePotato on 2/18/2009 6:49:45 PM , Rating: 1
You have your blinders on.

Intel only became enthusiast friendly when they lost all the enthusiasts to the athlon64. Until then the status quo was netburst junk at high prices.

Now that they have things back where they like it they are wasting no time moving back to punishing the enthusiast.

Rather than even going with the stupid extreme editions they have gone one farther with i7, there is no, and will be no low end solution for i7.

What does the roadmap have, Q4 a new socket, yes a new socket for the mainstream i5, which also doesn't get triple channel. So what do you have, the i7 segregated as an expensive high end enthusiast platform, (which is why I call it mini skulltrail) and everyone else that isn't keen on spending through the nose for their exclusive platform stuck with i5 and whatever they decide to offer with it.

Oh Intel tried, they had skulltrail, they had absurdly overpriced extreme editions, releasing only the extreme high end versions of processors first and delaying things like yorkfield because they just didn't need to release anything but limited and absurdly priced high end parts in that line. Make no mistake the same money grubbing monopolistic Intel is there they just outsmarted you by playing nice for a little bit.

What did they learn from skulltrail though. It was so absurd no one would buy it. So instead they forced the i7 as a middle of the road enthusiast only platform and THAT is why you are paying $400 for a bloody mobo.


RE: They will ?
By Pryde on 2/18/2009 10:59:38 PM , Rating: 2
Intel calls the i7 Enthusiast. All company's offer a top of the line expensive products. Cars, Sports Gear pretty much anything. So why should Intel be any different, they are a company there to make a profit and i7 offers them that. X48, higher end processor, all them things that enthusiasts like have always been more expensive than the main stream.

Triple channel doesn't offer any increased performance in the desktop area. You make it sound like being stuck on i5 is a bad thing. i5 is going to be a very competitive platform.


RE: They will ?
By afkrotch on 2/19/2009 3:29:51 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Now that they have things back where they like it they are wasting no time moving back to punishing the enthusiast.


Huh? The mainstream enthusiast proc always sits around the $300 mark. It did during the P3, P4, C2D, and now i7 era.

The only hard part to swallow is when Intel makes a big platform change. My jump from Socket 478 to LGA775 was a painful one, since I had to replace the cpu, gpu, and memory all at once, instead of my normal one piece at a time.

quote:
Rather than even going with the stupid extreme editions they have gone one farther with i7, there is no, and will be no low end solution for i7.


This changes how? Here's something for ya. Core 2 Duo has no low end solution either. That's what The Celeron was for.

quote:
What does the roadmap have, Q4 a new socket, yes a new socket for the mainstream i5, which also doesn't get triple channel. So what do you have, the i7 segregated as an expensive high end enthusiast platform, (which is why I call it mini skulltrail) and everyone else that isn't keen on spending through the nose for their exclusive platform stuck with i5 and whatever they decide to offer with it.


It makes perfect sense to make a new processor for the low end. The less crap you cram into a proc, the cooler it can run, the cheaper it can cost.

Also tell me how you have to spend through the nose for an i7. $584 for a i7 920, Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD3R mobo, and 2 x 2GB OCZ Gold DDR3-1600. Hell, my C2D setup cost more than that when I built it and that would be just for a mobo and cpu.

quote:
Oh Intel tried, they had skulltrail, they had absurdly overpriced extreme editions, releasing only the extreme high end versions of processors first and delaying things like yorkfield because they just didn't need to release anything but limited and absurdly priced high end parts in that line. Make no mistake the same money grubbing monopolistic Intel is there they just outsmarted you by playing nice for a little bit.


Ya, like AMD didn't have their expensive dual socket mobo or the overpriced high end cpus.

Intel and AMD only release their high end procs first. Why? Cause of yields. When you're only getting like 1 working proc out of ever 10 made, you want to make as much bank off it as you can. As the yields get better, the lower end offerings start coming to market.

It happens with cpus. It happens with gpus. It happens with memory. High end parts always come first.

quote:
What did they learn from skulltrail though. It was so absurd no one would buy it. So instead they forced the i7 as a middle of the road enthusiast only platform and THAT is why you are paying $400 for a bloody mobo.


No, it's for their later offerings. Intel plans on putting their cpu/gpu in a single package. This of course would need a new socket to funtion. Enthusiasts don't need an integrated gpu, they want triple channel, they may/may not want DDR3, etc.

And the expensive mobos aren't Intel. Intel's x58 mobo is $258. Those other mobos are expensive because they do things like add in tons of goofy features. Like crazy cooling solutions, adding in more Sata ports, adding in external sata ports, raid controllers, external LCD system monitor, etc.

Compare the $258 Intel x58 mobo to the $398 Asus Rampage II Extreme. Is that Intel's fault that the ASUS mobo is about $400.

Thanks for this ignorant post.


RE: They will ?
By SavagePotato on 2/19/2009 10:16:09 AM , Rating: 1
Intel just has you fooled by using baby steps.

With core2 everything was socket 775, whether I wanted one of the low end 2mb cache 1.8gz (yes entry level core2 there was indeed a low end for core2) Or the high end my motherboard supported it. I could even go to wolfdale and possibly a yorkfield quad on my old mobo that I got with my core2 if I want. Wolfdale for sure, I haven't checked the manufacturers page for compatibility with yorkfield.

When I look at i7 I see intel saying to themselves, how can we keep that from happening and force a more expensive upgrade path, because that is exactly how it is.

i5 is a separate socket, if you go mainstream with i5 you aren't going to i7 without a new mobo processor and ram. In fairness most people would upgrade the motherboard anyway just because they were cheap, i7 motherboards on the other hand are not. here in Canada the low end ones start at $350.

What does the roadmap show for i7, a 6 core 32 nano evolution starting in q1 2010 after i5 is out. I wouldn't put it past intel for a second to move i7 to extreme edition only when that happens and i5 is out.

You can call it rosy if you like but I see the segregation of i7 on a separate socket and ram platform as a move toward charging a whole lot more for the enthusiast than ever before. They tried it the optional way with skulltrail by offering an extreme solution for an extreme price, this time around I think they are just going to take the option away and trick you into liking it as well.

Seems like the trick is working based on how many angry intel fanboys are taking offense to my opinion.


RE: They will ?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/19/2009 5:27:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
With core2 everything was socket 775, whether I wanted one of the low end 2mb cache 1.8gz (yes entry level core2 there was indeed a low end for core2) Or the high end my motherboard supported it. I could even go to wolfdale and possibly a yorkfield quad on my old mobo that I got with my core2 if I want. Wolfdale for sure, I haven't checked the manufacturers page for compatibility with yorkfield.


That socket came out THREE YEARS ago, and they have not changed it. Their desktop platform socket is STILL 775 untill i5 launches.

I'm not trying to flame you, but I'm honestly tired of hearing you whine about the socket change. Three years is an ETERNITY in computer technology. Intel should be praised for keeping LGA 775 as long as they have. Not bashed because the i7, a freaking SERVER CPU has a different socket. And they sure as hell shouldn't be bashed because the i5 will have their first new socket in FOUR YEARS for the desktop.

Come on man, I'm sick of your attitude on this topic. Things change in computer technology, and yes, new things are also ALWAYS more expensive. Deal with it for Christ sakes.


RE: They will ?
By afkrotch on 2/20/2009 8:55:10 AM , Rating: 2
How is Intel fooling us with baby steps? Do you think Intel can keep the same socket, if their low end procs will be dual core with a built in intel GPU in a single package?

That's exactly what Intel is planning on doing for the low end. For the most part, this is the perfect solution for probably 90% of the market out there.

It's also not Intel's fault for all these other mobo manufacturers throwing a bunch of features onto enthusiast boards and charging crazy prices for them.

Skulltrail was nothing more than a platform to match AMD's dual socket platform. Both failed miserably, as they were just too costly. I highly doubt we'll see something like that again, with all these quad cores on the market.

I'm simply looking at the socket change with the big change that will happen with the low end procs. I wouldn't be surprised if the lower end procs will get a lot more pins. CPU-GPU hybrids is what both Intel and AMD are pushing for.

If you think Intel is doing it to just ripoff users, think you need to look again. They just need to keep with their plan of selling procs for low prices until AMD is out the picture. Then they can charge whatever the hell they feel like.


RE: They will ?
By SavagePotato on 2/19/2009 10:37:25 AM , Rating: 1
PS: $250 dollars for a motherboard is still crazy expensive.


RE: They will ?
By Belard on 2/19/2009 6:17:03 AM , Rating: 2
Er no... back in the PII days, AMD had little to compete with. A top end PII-400 was a $1000 CPU. A bottom end 266 PII was about $300.

When the PIII 866 first came out, it was a $900 CPU.

Yes, Intel was raping the customers, especially with RD-RAM.

With AMD making the better CPU for all this time, Intel did a smart thing - they sold the C2D for a low price which kicked AMD in the balls twice.

Lets see.. before C2D, the top end Pentium Extreme was $1000 and still be slowe than a typical $250~300 AMD dual core CPU. Intel could have sold the C2D for $1000 and up. But they did a good marketing plan to make C2D for most people by making it CHEAP... starting out at $250 or so, it hurt AMD big time.

But since AthlonXP and Athlon64 - Intel was always behind - yet people STILL paid top dollar for slower CPU (in most cases) because it had "intel" on the name and blue-man group. If more people had BOUGHT AMDs over intel - AMD would have had more $$$$ for R&D.

Its GOOD that Intel replaced the crappy Netburst design. But if AMD was to go-away. The same $250 i7-920 would cost $500~700. Afterall... what other choice would ya have?

The point of what they are doing is to KEEP AMD down. And by all means, AMD doesn't have a top-end CPU... but their CPUs are fine and priced well... but I think only their X2s are the things to get for $50~80 market. Dual-core Pentiums are so much slower (even thou they aren't real Pentiums4 / netburst)

Competition IS GOOD and NEEDED or else we stagnate and/or pay higher.

Proof: GF GTX 260/280 (stupid names). Let's see, first 1-2 weeks of their release, these were $400/650 gaming cards. But ATI (AMD) did something (like intel), cometing called ATI 4850 / 4870 cards. Wow, a $200 thats almost as fast as Nvidia'a $400 (sometimes faster) and the $300 that performs almost as good as a $600+ card? Not many people WOULD pay such a high price. So now, how much is a GTX 260, 280?

How much is the 9800GT going for? $100! yet 9 months ago, the 8800GTX was the TOP DX10 card selling for $500. The ATI 3850/3870 were not close enough.

What does Nvidia do? Re-package the same tech into 4-7 different names... ugh? 8800gt/gts-512/9600gt 9800gt/9800gtx and some future GTX 160? Who knows, same chip - different clock.


RE: They will ?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/19/2009 5:35:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
When the PIII 866 first came out, it was a $900 CPU. Yes, Intel was raping the customers, especially with RD-RAM.


Are you really going THAT far back to make your point ?

If I recall when one MEGABYTE hard drives finally came out, they were the better half of a grand too. Was IBM 'raping' it's customers ? Crappy PC133 Ram was a fortune when it came out as well. In fact, EVERYTHING related to computers was at a substantially higher cost compared to today.

quote:
But since AthlonXP and Athlon64 - Intel was always behind - yet people STILL paid top dollar for slower CPU (in most cases) because it had "intel" on the name and blue-man group. If more people had BOUGHT AMDs over intel - AMD would have had more $$$$ for R&D.


AMD's CPU production was already being maxed out by demand at the time. This myth that if everyone magically started buying AMD, everything would be ok, is fallacious. They simply could NOT produce and sell more Athlon's anyway.


RE: They will ?
By 4wardtristan on 2/18/2009 5:10:22 PM , Rating: 2
keep in mind, that apart from ram in your i7 system, thats the *bare minimum* i7 system you can buy

you have essentially listed componenets for a *high end* phenom II system

if you were to quote a *bare minimum* phenom II system, it would be much cheaper then that.


RE: They will ?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/18/2009 5:12:46 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
keep in mind, that apart from ram in your i7 system, thats the *bare minimum* i7 system you can buy you have essentially listed componenets for a *high end* phenom II system if you were to quote a *bare minimum* phenom II system, it would be much cheaper then that.


The *bare minimum* i7 simply blows away a top end Phenom II system though. Not to mention the significant overclocking advantage the i7 has over the PII's.


RE: They will ?
By SavagePotato on 2/18/2009 6:54:17 PM , Rating: 2
I would also ad $200 x58 mobo? what do you get for $200 for x58? Biostar, or that crippled intel board with fewer ram slots.

What does it cost to get a decent asus or gigabyte board, yeah alot more.


RE: They will ?
By Klober on 2/18/2009 7:44:18 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, at NewEgg you can get an MSI or Gigabyte X58 board for that $200. With the MSI board you even get a full 6 RAM slots. :)


RE: They will ?
By SavagePotato on 2/18/2009 8:45:43 PM , Rating: 2
You still have to buy a bottom of the line board to do it, and the MSI is only with a video card bundle.

$200 for a low end board no thanks.

That's also if you are lucky enough to be in the US, and even still over 200 dollars us is still highway robbery especially for a lower end board.

Get a real board and it's more like $400


RE: They will ?
By energy1man on 2/18/2009 9:22:47 PM , Rating: 2
So how much of the responsibility for the higher I7 system price rests with Intel, as opposed to the motherboard and ram manufacturers'?


RE: They will ?
By Dark Legion on 2/19/2009 1:25:45 AM , Rating: 2
Hey, just because you don't like it does not mean that everyone disagreeing with you on this topic is wrong. In fact a lot of what you present as fact is wrong, and the rest screams "AMD fanboy". If this i7 system is not good enough for you, then don't buy it. This one was just used for a comparison, and this so-called low end i7 system still beats the AMD out of the water.


RE: They will ?
By SavagePotato on 2/19/2009 10:25:18 AM , Rating: 1
Yes, I am an amd fanboy that's why I have run an e6600 core2 system for the last two years.

I am a my wallet fanboy, I am the number one fan of saving me money.

Anyone that thinks any company is out to save them money or do the right thing is a fool, that's why as the consumer you need competition otherwise yes you are going to get screwed royally. AMD would do the same if they were on top in the market by themselves, because they did, with the high end a64s, the fx edition.

The fact is people just buy the bs hook line and sinker, they think because intel HAD to release core2 so cheap and give everyone such a high value overclocker that they are good guys and they got your back or something, no the status quo is the same it's still intel.

The same intel that forced asus to release whitebox unmarked athlon mobos with threats of "equipment shortages", and the same intel that tried to muscle out all competition to keep prices high and keep selling you crap like netburst.

So for anyone that wants to think nah things are gonna be great with just intel, screw amd haw haw haw they can go bankrupt and I shall laugh at their plight cux I are cool... No, you are going to be raped right along with everyone else when intel creeps back to being the stagnant no competition chipzilla it was when they were shoving the p4 down the worlds gullet through oems like dell.

In short, competition is good, very good, don't be a dumbass.


RE: They will ?
By afkrotch on 2/20/2009 9:54:12 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The fact is people just buy the bs hook line and sinker, they think because intel HAD to release core2 so cheap and give everyone such a high value overclocker that they are good guys and they got your back or something, no the status quo is the same it's still intel.


P4s, released at the same price as C2Ds. P4 HTs, same price as the C2Ds on release. Dual Core P4s, same price as the C2Ds on release. All of those...same price at the i7 during their releases.

Anyways, no one has said that competition isn't good. We're just saying the i7 isn't expensive because of Intel.


RE: They will ?
By Klober on 2/19/2009 8:03:28 AM , Rating: 2
Reading comprehension FTW. NewEgg says "Special saving w/ MSI video card combo, limited time offer" - nothing about requiring you to buy a video card to get the $199.99 price, just that you're supposed to be able to get special savings if you also get an MSI video card (which you actually can't from what I can tell, although you can get a "deal" on the mobo and the i7 965 - $40 off - what a joke).

Also, I'd like to know what exactly about the MSI board says "low end" to you. 6 RAM slots with max supported RAM of 24GB, 3 PCI-Express x16, 2 PCI-Express x1, 2 PCI, eSATA on the back panel, power and reset buttons right on the mobo and a good layout. Unless you've read reviews about it or have actual experience with the board, I have to discount your opinion on the quality since there's no factual basis.


RE: They will ?
By SavagePotato on 2/19/2009 10:27:08 AM , Rating: 2
It's msi, msi's name alone says low end.


RE: They will ?
By mattclary on 2/19/2009 11:08:16 AM , Rating: 2
Well said.


RE: They will ?
By mattclary on 2/19/2009 11:09:58 AM , Rating: 2
Clicked the wrong "reply". THIS was well said.


RE: They will ?
By afkrotch on 2/19/2009 4:19:02 AM , Rating: 1
$200 for a Gigabyte board. 4 mem slots and SLI. I don't see a need for more than 4 slots, let alone more than 2 GB of memory for a gamer. If you're making doing like 3D graphics or something along those lines, I can see if. Gamers. Don't see a need, unless you're playing a crappy game with memory leaks.


RE: They will ?
By Klober on 2/18/2009 7:34:42 PM , Rating: 3
Well, considering that Core i7 system you priced is over 30% more expensive than the Phenom II system, the Core i7 systems still aren't on price/performance parity with the Phenom II systems when the i7s are only 15-20% faster.

Yes, I realize there are other advantages such as overclocking ability (in which the Phenom II is no slouch, but I admit can't keep up with i7), but I'm just trying to show that your points are a bit exaggerated, especially considering your analogy of a Lamborghini to a Mustang. So while SavagePotato may have been a little high with his pricing, you were skewed as well. Considering your name you might want to keep an eye on that. ;)


RE: They will ?
By Pryde on 2/18/2009 11:04:57 PM , Rating: 2
i7 is more expensive than Ph2 but Core 2 quad vs Ph2 is a much more even match in price and performance. At the end of the day no one is forcing you to buy this "expensive" i7, there are cheaper alternatives out there.


RE: They will ?
By TSS on 2/18/2009 11:24:42 PM , Rating: 2
that's not the point of the discussion, the point is intel raping us over if AMD wasn't around to compete with them.

the point's proven by 1 simple fact: what was the date that intel lowered it's core 2 duo prices, and what was the release date of Core i7 and Phenom 2?

exactly. they cut prices After Core i7 was released, meaning they don't care if they have better technology available (they'll just make that technology even more expensive) and AFTER the phenom 2 was released. 1/2 days after even.

and they cut prices to that extent that C2D CPU's that where only a smidgen faster then Ph2 CPU's, where exactly at the same price point.

which the anandtech review of Ph2 even predicted a day before it happened.

and in the end it's nothing to get upset about. intel, like AMD, wants to make money, and AMD would do exactly the same if they where in intel's position.

if you want to get rid of this system, there's only 1 way: communism. which would basically make both CPU lines overpriced. the price of "equality".


RE: They will ?
By Pryde on 2/19/2009 12:50:57 AM , Rating: 2
Have all you forgotten about AMD and their price gouging during the A64 days?

This was AMDs price cut as of July 16 2006 for AM2
FX-62 $999 - $799
X2 5000+ $649 - $282
X2 3800+ $277 - $149

Now these weren't all the processors cut but it gives you the idea of how overpriced they were.

All these people are saying Core i7 costs a arm and a leg.

Core i7 920 - $290
MSI X58 Pro or Gigabyte X58 UD3R - $200
6GB 1333 RAM - $100

Not cheap but not over the top for what you get. Very few people buy the $1000 CPU or the $400 Motherboards.

The reason that Intel didn't change the pricing on Core 2 after the i7 launch was that Ph2 was being released very soon. They waiting until they knew the performance / price of Ph2 before they reacted otherwise they would have had to make 2 price cuts in a very short amount of time which customers would no like.

Intels very high end parts have always been expensive but they have also always offered a very good mainstream line up. People get to fixed on the Extreme Edition Processors that make up very little of the market. Core i7 is high end, i5 is mainstream.

Entry Level products have not changed, E6600 - E8400 - i7 920 have all been around 266 - 284 at launch with the Extreme models around 999 and couple of models in between.


RE: They will ?
By afkrotch on 2/19/2009 4:26:25 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
AMD would do exactly the same if they where in intel's position.


Athlon 64 and X2s during their height. They didn't do the same as Intel. They kept their price higher than Intel and didn't have any major drops in them until Intel put out their C2Ds. The cheapest X2 hovered around the $400 mark for how many months? Like 8?

That's why I stuck with Intel for so long and continued staying with them til the C2Ds release. All their single core 64s couldn't hold a candle to Intel's single core HT offerings in multitasking. I don't care if it could get higher fps on a game, as I don't even spend 50% of my time gaming.


RE: They will ?
By Dark Legion on 2/19/2009 1:33:53 AM , Rating: 2
Add in the other components and see what you get. Say maybe $400 more for everything else to build your rig (which considering this is a high end system, is conservative), and you get $1000 for the i7 system and $855 for the PII. That alone already makes the price/performance advantage go to Intel. Also keep in mind that it is 15-20% minimum.


RE: They will ?
By Pryde on 2/19/2009 3:27:12 AM , Rating: 2
If you already have a AM2+ Mobo & Ram the Ph2 940 is the better deal. Now i7 is not that much more expensive than a new Ph2 build. A i5 build when released is looking very cheap with solid performance. Ph2 or i7, they both offer solid performance for a reasonable amount.

All these accusations about Intel being a bad monopoly seem to stem from the troubles they had with P4. Intels top of the line Processors have always been expensive but they have always offered a solid inexpensive processor.

If AMD was to go under Intel would have a monopoly but then governments would jump in applying all sorts of regulations that could seriously hurt Intels profit. At worst new designs would come out slower but its not like were are fully using all the CPU power we have today. What I care more about is Larrabee and other GPU advancements. 3 players in the high end graphics market could lead to some serious great products at bargain prices.


RE: They will ?
By afkrotch on 2/19/2009 2:36:27 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
There was a brief golden age there when core2 came out where Intel was the "nice guy" that is over and dead, welcome to I7 or as I like to call it, Mini Skulltrail.


Explain. i7 cost just as much as C2D when it came out. An Intel x58 mobo costs $258. The only expensive part is the DDR3, but it's not Intel's fault that it's expensive. Even then, DDR3 is cheaper than DDR2, when it came out. Intel always pushes the new tech, as AMD isn't gonna do it.

Hell of a lot better than AMD. Look at the short amount of time when they were on top. It was like what? 5 months of no dual core from them for under $400 or $500, while Intel's dual core was around $200. Sure, it wasn't as fast of course. Quite a lot different from Intel's approach of being the fastest and cheapest, cept the low end market. Not like I care about that market anyways.

Everyone of course says, if there's no competition, they'd increase the prices. I doubt Intel would start increase their prices if they were the only ones making cpus. If the prices go up, it's less likely ppl would buy a new comp every year. If that happens, profits go down. Then attempt to sell their cpu in emerging markets to try and make money. They won't buy the cpus at high prices, cause they can't.


RE: They will ?
By Pryde on 2/19/2009 3:33:43 AM , Rating: 2
DDR3 is no longer expensive. Its cheaper to buy 6GB 1066 than it was to buy 2GB 1333 when C2D was released. Intel has always had Extreme Products at Extreme Prices but they have always offered a great mid range product at a very reasonable price.

People like savage that only focus on the very top of the line product are kidding themselves. Intel most likely sell 10x more 920s than 940s & 965s combined.


RE: They will ?
By afkrotch on 2/19/2009 4:41:56 AM , Rating: 2
I always buy my proc at the $300 range. Cause a little overclocking puts it at the same performance as the $1000 procs, which they usually don't have that much performance anyways.

I'm running a 3 ghz C2D at 3.33 ghz. I'm overclocking it, just to make push the proc a little for no reason. Cept maybe make use of my watercooling. I setup my watercooling setup for my old 3.4E P4, which ran hot as hell. It's been kind of worthless since the C2Ds have come out. But it's cooling everything while being making no noise, so I guess it's all good.


RE: They will ?
By SavagePotato on 2/19/2009 10:35:28 AM , Rating: 2
Mobo's were nowhere near the cost of i7 equipment.

When core2 released I built an e6600 system for about 1000 dollars Canadian.

When i7 came out and I was excited for i7 like everyone else, I quickly found that it would cost me far more by a longshot than it did when I built my e6600. You could not get an i7 motherboard for under 400 dollars canadian at the time, and I considered spending $250 canadian for my core2 board very expensive.

So no it did not cost exactly the same as core2 when it came out, not even close.

If you doubt that intel would increase the price if they had no competition you are a fool period. end of conversation.


RE: They will ?
By Wieland on 2/18/2009 1:53:02 PM , Rating: 3
AMD shouldn't have too much trouble staying around until 2012. Honestly, they haven't lost that much ground because they had only a small share of the market to begin with. The profit margins on their processors are probably paper thin right now, but the phenom II is almost competitive. ATI's products are also doing exceptionally well, and their advantage over nVidia may widen in the next generation.

AMD's real problem has always been marketing. Back when they first introduced the Athlon64 and Opteron their performance and functionality advantage over Intel's products was at least as big as the one Intel has now with Nehalem. That performance advantage didn't translate into significantly increased sales because knowledge of the development was limited to the enthusiast sector. With any luck AMD will be able to stay around long enough to shake things up again, at least for those of us that follow the processor market closely.


RE: They will ?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/18/2009 4:45:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
AMD shouldn't have too much trouble staying around until 2012


But in what capacity ? They won't be a CPU competitor if things don't drastically change. And despite what the blogs say, the PII is NOT enough to save them in their current economic situation.

quote:
AMD's real problem has always been marketing. Back when they first introduced the Athlon64 and Opteron their performance and functionality advantage over Intel's products was at least as big as the one Intel has now with Nehalem. That performance advantage didn't translate into significantly increased sales because knowledge of the development was limited to the enthusiast sector.


Right, and wrong. At that time their production lines were already maxed out. They simply could not produce more product than they were regardless of demand.


RE: They will ?
By FaceMaster on 2/18/09, Rating: -1
RE: They will ?
By mattclary on 2/18/2009 5:04:44 PM , Rating: 2
FaceMaster, his post was NEUTERAL. He was not bashing AMD.

AMD is in trouble. I build systems for a living, 99% of those systems use AMD chips because they are the value market. When AMD provided best performance, that is what i had in my machine. I go where the performance is for my hardware, plain and simple. I wish AMD the best of luck, without them, as stated a few posts above, Intel would still be raping us anally for mediocre speed bumps.


RE: They will ?
By FaceMaster on 2/18/2009 7:43:26 PM , Rating: 2
Just for the note I was being a bit... extreme. Perhaps even sarcastic?

I just saw that his posts were voted down and decided to give the people who voted him down a bad name by saying stuff people who would vote him down would probably say.


RE: They will ?
By PrinceGaz on 2/18/2009 9:19:32 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know for sure, but I would expect the effect of voting down people does not influence the ratings of posts already made. As such, voting down someone for any reason only damages that person's rating, along with the people who choose to reply to what they know is an already downrated post and are willing to have their reply immediately downrated somewhat.

The fact of the matter is we need AMD for the CPU market to remain competitive, and Intel's tick-tock strategy (a nice friendly sounding name for what in reality is a relentless effort to crush the competition) has already got AMD floundering and making increasing losses. As things stand, I fear for the future of AMD. My last three computers have had AMD CPUs in them, because they were the best option at the time, but I now fear that when I build my next computer in a year or two, there won't be an AMD to choose from, and that it will have to be Intel. And that would take me back to the days before AMD became competitive, and how expensive the orignial Pentium was. Now that Apple are using Intel chips, Intel dominates the market, and as things stand, are likely to drive AMD to bankruptcy.

AMDs only hope is IBM. AMD on their own (split into a seperate company or not) cannot keep pace with Intel's fab technology, and being behind Intel means they are always playing catch-up selling cheap processors, instead of the big profit-margin server chips Intel are doing now.

With careful navigation of x86 patents and copyright usage, a combined AMD/IBM would be capable of seriously taking on Intel, both in the chip-design and fab-process areas. That is the only way I can see AMD surviving as a competitor to Intel. On their own, AMD will soon become another VIA/Transmeta competing in a particular lower market area, and quite possibly being very successful in it, but meaning that Intel has no true competitor and can charge as much as it likes for its new chips (and reduce the R&D budget, to increase shareholders profits).


RE: They will ?
By phaxmohdem on 2/18/2009 1:19:13 PM , Rating: 5
If the Mayans have their way, nothing will be around past 2012 :)


RE: They will ?
By majorpain on 2/18/2009 1:25:14 PM , Rating: 5
finally a smart post :P


RE: They will ?
By HaB1971 on 2/18/2009 2:51:48 PM , Rating: 1
Well you have to check out the Mayan 2012 Swimsuit Edition calendar... wow that Popol Vuh in a bikini... that is world ending right there for you...


RE: They will ?
By Tacoloft on 2/18/2009 4:55:32 PM , Rating: 2
Miss July looking all hot with her nose/chin/cheeks/ears pierced with jade jewelry eating the thighbone from another tribesman is just breathtaking... not to mention the dead babys littering the ground. Ah paradise...


RE: They will ?
By stimudent on 2/18/2009 5:04:45 PM , Rating: 3
I always find that keeping track of Intel's ethics violations in the market place are more interesting than the technlogy. :)


RE: They will ?
By Tacoloft on 2/18/2009 5:28:21 PM , Rating: 2
Like Intel is the only one at fault for ethics violations. The so called "ethics" put in place have been instituted by the very same government that has no ethics in the first place! They don’t pay their taxes but they require their citizens to pay (got to give themselves their next pay raise), they spend like crazy on their own government placed programs and call it stimulus, they don’t allow failure in the marketplace thus making sure that no-one else can succeed. They call it change but in reality it is the Socialist Nanny-state that has been implemented under our noses while the main concern of Americas citizens are what is happening in the next episode of Grey’s Anatomy and how to pass the next level in GTAIV. Their only thought towards what these mobster.. I mean politicians are doing is “how will you pay off my mortgage and send me a paycheck…so I can watch Grey’s and play GTAIV and be equal like all Americans? Because it’s now my right as an American to enjoy equality in all things! I don’t have to earn a dime but I better have equality or I cry financial inequality!”
Saying Intel has ethics violations while overlooking the people who made the ethics rules in the first place is plain stupid. Let’s get back to capitalism- you suck at running a company –your company will fail. And others will step in to succeed. No bailouts- let the marketplace thrive baby!


RE: They will ?
By pugster on 2/18/09, Rating: -1
RE: They will ?
By JackQW on 2/18/2009 7:47:25 PM , Rating: 3
Use Google's I'm Feeling Lucky button with search term QPI.

It's Intel's HyperTransport. They got the idea from AMD.

"The Intel QuickPath Interconnect ... is a point-to-point processor interconnect developed by Intel to compete with HyperTransport. ... In more complex instances of the architecture, separate QPI links connect one or more processors and one or more IO hubs or routing hubs in a network on the motherboard, allowing all of the components to access other components via the network. As with AMD's Hypertransport, the QuickPath Architecture assumes that the processors will have integrated memory controllers, so a multiprocessor system implements a NUMA architecture."

/nudge AMD fanboy/

I really want to see some GPU-style CPUs from AMD/ATI, but even Intel might get that out of the door first... at least Intel's GPU technology sucks, so come on AMD -- kick out the hybrid GP-GPU/CPUs!


RE: They will ?
By Klober on 2/18/2009 7:51:13 PM , Rating: 2
You beat me to it. :)


RE: They will ?
By afkrotch on 2/19/2009 5:33:29 AM , Rating: 2
I think any hybrid gpu/cpu will suck in the gpu department. That or have a very good gpu slapped in there and hope you can keep the heat under control.

I personally don't want it. More crap on a single die package, more crap that can go wrong. In turn, more crap you lose when it does go wrong.

I'm much rather a newer processor connection. Maybe shorter pins or no pins. At least Intel moves the pins off the chip to the mobo. It was a good thing when a proc cost more than a mobo, but now half the time my mobo costs more than my proc now.


RE: They will ?
By Klober on 2/18/2009 7:49:53 PM , Rating: 3
Hint - read up on Core i7 and QPI.


"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki