backtop

Print 142 comment(s) - last by db298.. on Jun 28 at 10:13 AM

AMD's July 24 exact price drops
Memos from AMD insiders reveal big plans for July 24, 2006

According to memos recently obtained by DailyTech, AMD will drastically cut prices on its desktop processors after the July 23rd release of Intel’s Core 2 Duo Conroe processors. The memos that DailyTech has secured are between AMD and Japanese system manufacturers and indicate the following price cuts will become effective July 24th, 2006:
  • AMD Athlon 64 price cuts will receive price cut up to 30%
  • AMD Athlon 64 X2 will receive price cuts up to 50%
  • AMD Sempron processors will receive price cuts up to 15%
The memos only mention the AM2 processors; however the AM2 parts are now priced identically with Socket 939 components.  AMD has previously indicated that the aim of the AM2 processors was to be price competitive with its legacy components. Several of the dual-core components do not show a price drop, but it's possible AMD has just not announced the pricing on these processors yet.  The Athlon 64 FX model line will not receive any price reduction.

Perhaps the most interesting price reductions are on the Athlon 64 X2 dual core line.  The memo claims the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ will fall from a processor-in-box (PIB) of $303 to $169. Single core Athlon 64 3800+ processors will fall from $290 all the way to $139 through special promotions.  The AMD Athlon and Sempron Energy Efficient models do not show any price reduction.

Intel already announced that it will also cut prices of its Pentium D and Pentium 4 processors between now and the general availability of Conroe.  Conroe benchmarks have recently surfaced with significant performance advantages over Athlon 64, but the largest advantage of the processor until now has been the price advantage.  With AMD and Intel in a price war over next generation processors, ultimately consumers will benefit the most.

65nm SOI AMD Athlon 64 Revision G processors are expected to ship this December.  The memo also stated that AMD will not publicly announce the price cuts on its processor line until after the Conroe launch to avoid cannibalizing its current sales of AM2 CPUs.

Update from the EIC 12/06/2006: Digitimes is also running a story on this subject, claiming the Athlon 64 3800+ will fall to prices as  low as $152, and that a similar performing Pentium D 945 will run for $163 at the same time. 

We have included the full pricing now as well.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
The consumers win
By phatboye on 6/12/2006 12:16:31 AM , Rating: 3
BRING ON THE PRICE WARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111


Hopefully dual core amd's will now become affordable.




RE: The consumers win
By rushfan2006 on 6/12/2006 8:27:57 AM , Rating: 2
How anyone, even Intel diehards, could view the news of price drops as anything bad is well beyond me.

I think this is great news. I'm still about 6-8 months from having the money to build my next gaming box though...so for me it will come down to price/performance -- I'll *never* have the bleeding edge latest on any system I build, I just don't have deep enough pockets for that. However, I try to at least build in the "middle" -- not the highest end, but definitely not the lowest end either.

And for folks like me -- these price cuts are excellent news.



RE: The consumers win
By TheDoc9 on 6/12/2006 11:08:06 AM , Rating: 5
I'll tell you how you view it as bad, If one of these companies runs the other one out of business. That's bad.

The consumers don't win.


RE: The consumers win
By bob661 on 6/12/06, Rating: -1
RE: The consumers win
By Tsuwamono on 6/12/06, Rating: 0
RE: The consumers win
By masher2 (blog) on 6/12/2006 1:49:34 PM , Rating: 3
Of the ten most intense hurricanes to strike the US, only one (Katrina) has been within the last 35 years. In the much shorter period from 1915-1935, four of those hurricanes struck the US--- one of which hit New Orleans itself, just as did Katrina. We weren't driving many SUVs in 1915, strangely enough.

Currently, the Atlantic basin is at the height of a natural "busy cycle", that has nothing to do with global warming. Cyclone activity in the Pacific, on the other hand, has decreased somewhat.

Hurricane experts are torn on the effects global warming may be having on storm production, if any. Some believe it may slightly strengthen storms, others believe it may actually cause a net weakening. However, they are all united on one point-- that the current high level of storm activity is, almost entirely, due to those natural cycles, and not the actions of mankind.


RE: The consumers win
By mikable on 6/13/2006 9:59:27 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, well that was on topic!

Nice price cuts! I'm getting a new CPU ! :)


RE: The consumers win
By jkostans on 6/12/2006 1:51:16 PM , Rating: 2
These price cuts aren't enough in my opinion. If intel holds true to their prices, the 2.4Ghz 4mb conroe part is a better deal than anything AMD can offer. I also think these parts will be good overclockers... the E6600 could be the next Opteron 165 if it has decent headroom.


RE: The consumers win
By bards on 6/13/2006 6:43:04 AM , Rating: 2
Couldn't agree more.

I'm a fan of the fastest/coolest CPU for the least amount of cash ! Given that a middle of the line conroe will be close to an FX62 for about 1/3 the price, I know what I'll be aiming it... the conroe. I love AMD, I have all my servers with AMD64 but I cant wait for conroe.

AMD would need to cut prices now to get me to buy an X2, IMHO, they have always been way too expensive and waiting until after conroe would seem like madness. I would buy a x2 4600 now if it were $250 (USD), but it aint.

Good luck AMD you're going to need it.



RE: The consumers win
By animedude on 6/15/2006 3:48:15 PM , Rating: 2
Good luck getting one. Ratio of Netbursts to Core 2 Duo is 4:1. Newegg will only have the highend Core2Duo chips because all midrange chips will be eat up by OEM. By the time I get one on my hand is next year spring.


RE: The consumers win
By Steve Guilliot on 6/12/06, Rating: 0
RE: The consumers win
By TomZ on 6/12/2006 1:12:13 PM , Rating: 4
I would suggest you think about where you are getting your information from on these issues, and whether they are as much as "fact" as you think.

Fears of global warming mostly comes from politicians and environmental groups.

Fears of oil shortages mostly comes from politicians and the oil industry itself.

Do you think these groups are in a position, or have any desire, to supply "just the facts"?

Most environmental scientists feel that there is too little information to draw any conclusions on global warming. Things people blame for global warming, e.g., more active hurricane season in North America, have also been attributed to other causes, like the 25-30 year hurricane cycle in this case.

Many economists and unbiased industry obervers believe that oil's currently high cost will lead to significant investments in exploration and drilling, which will thus cause a strong increase in supply in the near future. This should last long enough to transition to other forms of energy for the longer term. We will probably not "run out" of oil; instead, we will replace oil with more cost-effective energy sources.

For most of these arguments, there are folks constructing arguments on the other side, and these are very complex issues. In other words, these issues are far from "hard fact," and thus is it wrong to simply dismiss that someone who does not believe in these things is "drinking the koolaid." It is not as clear as that.


RE: The consumers win
By Googer on 6/13/06, Rating: 0
RE: The consumers win
By Bonesdad on 6/12/2006 12:42:50 PM , Rating: 2
Here we go again..."AMD will go out of business, then Intel will team up with the Bush White House and use the Ring of Power to destroy us all.." egad.


RE: The consumers win
By Ringold on 6/14/2006 5:16:25 PM , Rating: 2
There is merit to the idea the price wars could devastate AMD..

But..

Look at GM (or most airlines). Companies can survive and continue to invest in R&D for years in spite of massive losses, even with "junk" credit ratings. AMD will have its day again.. but I'd feel better if there was a 3rd option out there too.. but cant have it all. Since we can't have it all, I'll comfort myself with having a Core Duo 2 instead. :)


RE: The consumers win
By tuteja1986 on 6/12/2006 11:29:37 AM , Rating: 2
I knew AMD would do this , the moment i saw thoes benchmark. But will i be able to buy a AMD X2 4800 for $300 :


RE: The consumers win
By ZeeStorm on 6/12/06, Rating: 0
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 6/12/2006 12:43:05 PM , Rating: 2
Typically I'd agree with you - but I'm pretty sure AMD does not want these numbers publicized.


Osborne Effect.
By Googer on 6/12/2006 12:10:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
AMD Plans Major CPU Price Drops Day After "Conroe"


I am thinking that AMD's preemptive announcement of major price cuts may cause another instance of the good 'ol Osborne effect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect


RE: Osborne Effect.
By TomZ on 6/12/2006 12:44:57 PM , Rating: 2
Good point, many folks currently considering a new AMD system will probably decide to wait another month. That could even backfire more, since that same person might also at the same time decide to get Conroe instead.


RE: Osborne Effect.
By animedude on 6/15/2006 3:50:17 PM , Rating: 2
Please, where are you going to get a Conroe chip? Your best bet is eBay, but expect the price to be outrages.


RE: Osborne Effect.
By masher2 (blog) on 6/12/2006 2:51:28 PM , Rating: 2
> "may cause another instance of the good 'ol Osborne effect."

I find that unlikely, given the "effect" itself is pretty much a myth. Osborne didn't go out of business due to a new product announcement, a fact that even your own link demonstrates.


RE: Osborne Effect.
By Googer on 6/13/2006 1:51:37 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I find that unlikely, given the "effect" itself is pretty much a myth. Osborne didn't go out of business due to a new product announcement, a fact that even your own link demonstrates.


There are certain excetions to almost every rule.

As a side note, that page had change since I last read it a year or so ago on wikipedia. Thanks for the observation.


RE: The consumers win
By One43637 on 6/12/2006 2:39:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
BRING ON THE PRICE WARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111



hell yes! lol 3800 going for less then 150 USD... crazy. i paid 400 for my 175 back in the day.


RE: The consumers win
By otispunkmeyer on 6/12/2006 2:57:56 PM , Rating: 2
excellent mate! now i dont have to settle for a X2 3800 OEM, i can shoot much higher!

hopefully they will be jus as kind to UK as they are to the US

i mean $169 to me is £91....... 91 QUID! for a dual core AMD cpu!!!


The consequence of price wars..
By crystal clear on 6/12/06, Rating: 0
Not quite
By Griswold on 6/12/2006 4:00:48 AM , Rating: 3
Humbug. Intel is way too late to crush anyone anymore. They should have done that a few years ago. Now they have no chance to get rid of AMD again.

AMD has been through this before, Athlon XP was cheaper than anything Intel had to offer, also because it was weaker in the end, just before A64 launch.

Check out whos looking into the possibility to lay off subsidiaries (and maybe even labour) like the cell phone and network chip branch - thats Intel. And they have a good reason to do so. The next couple of quarter figures will look worse than AMDs because they drop prices to get rid of their netburst junk stockpile.

For the coming 6+ months, AMD will compete with P4 and P-D on the mass market, not with core2.


RE: Not quite
By MrKaz on 6/12/2006 5:33:47 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, very interesting. P4 will hurt Intel a lot in the next quarter’s maybe next year too.

They have to get rig of the huge stock of P4 at bargain prices <- First hit

People that go for the bargain P4 will obviously not buy conroe <- another hit to them


RE: Not quite
By Furen on 6/12/2006 10:32:14 AM , Rating: 2
Not only do they have to get rid of old stock, but they'll continue producing Pentium Ds and Pentium 4s for a while yet. Remember that Conroe will only be 25% of Intel's production by Q4 so Pentium production will still be huge.


RE: Not quite
By TomZ on 6/12/2006 9:05:49 PM , Rating: 2
Remember also that demand for Conroe will not go from 0->100% on the first day it is launched. Customers will still be ordering Netburst for a while as they transition to the newer chips.


RE: Not quite
By bob661 on 6/13/2006 11:36:33 AM , Rating: 2
Not to mention Conroe will come at a price premium until Dell and others have enough CPU's to sell.


RE: Not quite
By animedude on 6/15/2006 3:55:34 PM , Rating: 2
Core2 is eating up AMD's high end gaming. But AMD reacted by dropping price and crank up production level by going all 2X512KB cache. AMD is wise! Now AMD is going to chase after P4.


RE: Not quite
By crystal clear on 6/12/06, Rating: 0
RE: Not quite
By Spoonbender on 6/12/2006 6:41:52 AM , Rating: 2
"AS your last sentence says "AMD will compete with P4 and...
not with Core 2".That implies Core 2 has all the market for itelf with no competition whatsover"
I thought he was just assuming low availability of Core 2, meaning people will only be able to get A64 or P4.


RE: Not quite
By crystal clear on 6/12/2006 6:57:03 AM , Rating: 2
My sources tell me INTEL intends to ensure a high rate of
availabity,keeping in focus the 2 major buying seasons to
come in 2006.


RE: Not quite
By Viditor on 6/12/2006 9:47:53 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
My sources tell me INTEL intends to ensure a high rate of availabity, keeping in focus the 2 major buying seasons to come in 2006

So you think Intel is lying to OEMs in their shipping estimates? I think that given the choice I'll believe Intel's official notifications over your sources...

Of course this doesn't mean that Conroe won't be highly available...if you buy a Dell or HP box.


RE: Not quite
By crystal clear on 6/12/06, Rating: 0
RE: Not quite
By Viditor on 6/13/2006 2:41:19 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Nobody here knows Intels actual production figures(Conroe)

I'm sure that not even Intel knows these exactly...but the estimates that we read were given to OEMs and distributors so that they can plan their business around expected supply. For Intel to knowingly (as you suggest) sandbag these numbers would be a very grevious error on their part.


RE: Not quite
By crystal clear on 6/13/2006 9:20:31 AM , Rating: 2
Indeed very interesting talking (bloging) with u.
The demand is such that manufacuterers in Taiwan want to bring out conroe based notebooks(Intel does not object to that).
I am sure you agree that the production capacity of Intel is huge.
Production/distrubution figures are classified & that very
rarely get published,unless ofcourse leaked.
Anyway lets wait & see.


RE: Not quite
By Viditor on 6/12/2006 10:03:46 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
This price cut war is certainly not a short one ,rather that wil extend into 2007/08

Into the beginning of 2007 most certainly...but beyond that I doubt it. Intel is a public company and I can't imagine shareholders allowing Intel management to devalue their shares so much for very long...
quote:
Ask any upgrader, his choice is Core 2

I don't think an upgrader can answer the question if he doesn't yet know the price. If this weren't true, then everyone would own FX chips today.
When chips are in short supply in the retail market, prices can increase as much as 40-50%...so the question could be, an X2 5000+ for $350 or an E6700 for $800? How much is that 15-20% performance bump worth to you...?


RE: Not quite
By clnee55 on 6/12/2006 4:43:02 PM , Rating: 2
WHy do you think only Intel has this shareholder problem. Price war is always good for customers and bad for companies. AMD stock already drops from 35 to 26 in less than a month. And the price war doesn't even start yet.


"Into the beginning of 2007 most certainly...but beyond that I doubt it. Intel is a public company and I can't imagine shareholders allowing Intel management to devalue their shares so much for very long... "


RE: Not quite
By Viditor on 6/12/2006 9:34:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
WHy do you think only Intel has this shareholder problem

I don't...and for the first time ever, I agree with your post!
However, my whole point was that the "price war" won't last through 2007/2008...


RE: Not quite
By crystal clear on 6/13/2006 10:07:41 AM , Rating: 2

REVIEWS
WEEK TO DATE
EARLIER
SOFTWARE
MEMORY
MICROPROCESSORS
MOBILE/PDA
GRAPHICS
SERVERS
CHANNEL
SET TOP BOXES
CONSOLES
GUTTER WATCH
EMISSION GOALS
ABOUT US
MESSAGE BOARD
LOGIN
TRAINING




Edited by Mike Magee Phone +44 208 248 2800

Published by VNU Business Publications

Terms and Conditions of use.

To advertise in Europe e-mail here

To advertise in Asia email here.

To advertise in North America email here.

Join the INQbot Mail List for a weekly guide to our news stories: Subscribe/unsubscribe here.




"Intel price cuts conceal money making scheme "

"Sneaky pricing hides the problems"

Pls read the above article in the INQUIRER -worth reading.





RE: Not quite
By crystal clear on 6/13/2006 10:10:47 AM , Rating: 2
Something not ok here- ignore the upper portion of the
comment-sorry again


RE: Not quite
By crystal clear on 6/13/2006 9:32:04 AM , Rating: 2
Intel is using the low prices of its shares,to its (Intel)
advantage-they are buying back their shares on the quiet.
Intel does take the shareholders into consideration & protect their interest.
Shareholders themselves are well aware of the fierce competition that exist & ofcourse the price cut wars in the
market.
Intel CEO does have their support in this respect.


RE: Not quite
By Viditor on 6/13/2006 12:49:04 PM , Rating: 2
Intel announced the buyback program at the beginning of the year, they have been buying back shares for a few years now...it's the best way to keep the share price up when going through weak financial times.

As for shareholders, it's been my experience that most shareholders want as much as they can get in as short a time as possible...and they really don't care much about the companies they invest in.


"significant performance advantages" ??
By Saist on 6/12/06, Rating: 0
RE: "significant performance advantages" ??
By Garreye on 6/12/2006 9:30:25 AM , Rating: 2
Ya, and when has AT/DT been favorable to a brand in the past. Especially Intel, they've almost exclusively been recommending AMD systems for the last year, so I find it hard to believe they would suddenly start giving favorable benchmarks for no reason.


RE: "significant performance advantages" ??
By bob661 on 6/12/2006 12:03:58 PM , Rating: 2
Can you please remove tomshardware from that list? That's a bad word around here. :)


RE: "significant performance advantages" ??
By Tsuwamono on 6/12/2006 12:30:46 PM , Rating: 3
Toms is a very bad word around here indeed. lol. I dont think he has many reviews on that site that arent skewed.


By dilz on 6/14/2006 12:07:54 PM , Rating: 2
I've been reading Anand and Tom's for about 8 years now, and it seems like there is tremendous animosity between each site's readers. Particularly in this forum, but certainly noted on others as well, is the assertion made that "XXX is t3h XXX-ƒ@/\/8()ii!!1!"

Though I have been an AMD “fan” since I got into computers, it would appear that the performance pendulum (“unfortunately” if you accord me fanboy status) is swinging toward Intel - at least based on the current hype. This is natural and healthy for the marketplace. I, personally, refuse to buy DDR2 just yet, so I'll be sticking with my 754 a little longer than expected. Watching marketing departments work to churn out appealing literature is as entertaining as any soap opera or drama, but after the suspense has passed, you aren't left with a whole lot.

The video arena tells a similar story: After years of “dominance” by nVidia, ATI has improved to the point where a video card purchase is more of a toss-up than it has been in awhile, with the scales increasingly tipping toward ATI. It's kinda creepy, but nVidia is looking like 3dfx during it's last days... external power supplies... dubious marketing practices... our modern-day variants are "Multi-Card SLI" and "1000w PSUs." The diminishing returns experienced using something like a pair of pair of 7900GX2's liken it to the most Sisyphean of hair-splitting contests – especially given the current software available to supposedly harness the awesome power of these products (Oblivion... and...?). As an nVidia “fan,” I must say that I don't hear ATI owners complaining about their drivers as much anymore... the bars on the graphs are looking good too. It may be time (for me) to check out the competition.

I really like the topics we discuss here on DT, though I am more of a lurker I'd say. Please help me to understand why there is such a rift between two ostensibly similar groups of computer hardware enthusiasts. I understand that sites are put under pressure or at least given incentives to "promote" the products of a particular maker over those of another. Just supply me with a few stark examples of shameless promotion by hardware site operators. Do this by finding me links to articles/reviews that show obvious bias to an absurd degree, because that it was I feel like you're saying when you state that “XXX i2 t3h byus!” Its not like Tom's is plugging the original Celeron or something!

I'd like to know what you know, so I can participate in the bashing with you, rather than sit on the sidelines, observing with ignorance.


RE: "significant performance advantages" ??
By gchanjam on 6/12/2006 2:06:27 AM , Rating: 2
Wait so you think a Core 2 Duo wont surpass a single core S754 Athlon64? Im a bit confused by that statement.

I personally think AMD is a tad bit too late with their price drops because Intel has already started their fire sale and its going to go even farther after the launch of Core 2 Duo.


By mindless1 on 6/12/2006 4:35:44 AM , Rating: 2
Too late? I think not, the link to Hexus above had a poll on what CPU "you'd" buy in the next 3 months. AMD was leading Intel by over 12%


RE: "significant performance advantages" ??
By cciesquare on 6/12/2006 2:25:35 AM , Rating: 2
hahahaahah you are funny. You dont think people here read other websites besides anandtech?

So far the overall consensus is that Conroe performance is ahead of AMD, of course ahead does not mean have them beaten to a pulp, we will find out for ourselves once things are released officialy.

Also your breakdown of Anandtech testing procedure are a bit miss qouted and not to mention miss read.

Like someone already has said and posted links to other sites. This is not something that is hard to believe, especially when you have other well known websites stating the same thing about conroe.

I would like to see your link to the example you had. It looks to me like the example could well be the result of the video card setups not the CPUs. People are talking about CPU(intel) vs. CPU(AMD). I want to see the same experiment done on a AMD processor.


RE: "significant performance advantages" ??
By mindless1 on 6/12/2006 4:38:25 AM , Rating: 2
Actually it would be more accurate to write that many newer softwares which are not as commonly used, suggest Intel has some advantage.

It's always amusing when someone says "it's faster" but leaves out that part about "if you pay a few thousand $$$$ for all new software".


By Plasmoid on 6/12/2006 6:01:05 AM , Rating: 2
Yes your right... its faster for Quake 4, FarCry and FEAR as well as iTunes encoding. All those programs cost thousands and the advantage is a mere 25%+

Oh noes!

/sarcasm

The tessts so far show conroe being faster or as fast as a comparable A64 and that it will cost about the same or less (pre price cuts). It's Faster... across the board... for almost every app possible.


By KenGoding on 6/12/2006 2:06:26 PM , Rating: 2
It makes me think back to when the A64 finally came out. I think it was Zedersw who said something like "So the new processor is faster than the old one, how surprising."


By wilki24 on 6/12/2006 5:55:01 AM , Rating: 2
[quote]
Um, sorry, but I'm having a hard time accepting the scores from Tapai. [/quote]

Yep, they're just fabricated benchmarks to generate hype. That way, when the chip is actually released and performance isn't what they said it was, no one will notice.

Seriously, do you people think before you post?

I'm going to predict (going out on a big limb here - NOT) that the release versions will be in the ballpark of the scores being reported now.

We'll talk in 6 weeks.


By theprodigalrebel on 6/12/2006 8:42:21 AM , Rating: 2
Your paranoia baffles me.


By zsdersw on 6/12/2006 9:31:25 AM , Rating: 2
Particularly because he wouldn't be so skeptical if it were a new AMD chip coming out.


By bob661 on 6/12/2006 12:14:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Particularly because he wouldn't be so skeptical if it were a new AMD chip coming out.
Yep. The message is clear, Conroe is faster.


Suckers
By smokenjoe on 6/12/06, Rating: 0
RE: Suckers
By Lord Evermore on 6/12/2006 4:04:06 AM , Rating: 3
Can't comment on the general value of methodology, but it's pretty common to test on lower quality and resolutions in order to make the CPU performance the focus, rather than having any possibility that graphics performance limitations come into play.


RE: Suckers
By MrKaz on 6/12/2006 5:44:22 AM , Rating: 2
I agree with you, but the funny thinking is when AMD kicked the but on Intel, they never done the test at low quality because they said no one was going to play at that settings now is the other way around they do. How convenient…


RE: Suckers
By epsilonparadox on 6/13/2006 11:55:10 AM , Rating: 2
When Anandtech did its review of the AMD X2 3800, the games test was done on Doom3, HL2 and UT2004 w/ a resolution of 1024x768. I don't see how its different from the conroe tests.


RE: Suckers
RE: Suckers
By MrKaz on 6/13/2006 1:22:21 PM , Rating: 2
Right. But if you look at the others sites, they are almost all at 640x480 (when reviewing Conroe).

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/06/04/intel_...

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/914/11/page_11_b...


RE: Suckers
By mindless1 on 6/12/2006 4:53:17 AM , Rating: 2
I happen to think Intel's marketing dept is deceitful slime that needs to be kept on tighter reins, but I can see the problem with reviewers both:

A) Not being able to objectives test every possible parameter and still get the job done.

B) Trying to bench what seems popular hardware and yet not just the exact same bench as all the other reviews else it's just senseless repetition after the first few confirmations of statistically similar results.


RE: Suckers
By Lord Evermore on 6/12/2006 5:37:47 AM , Rating: 2
NOOP processing rate sounds like a great item to be stuck onto a benchmark graph!


RE: Suckers
By Lord Evermore on 6/12/2006 5:38:47 AM , Rating: 2
Damn comment system keeps making me reply to the wrong posts.


RE: Suckers
By wien on 6/12/2006 5:28:05 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Suckers Why do you guys think all the games and benches are on low quality and they use synthetic benchmarks? Because it looks impressive.
This is getting annoying. How exactly would a CPU benchmark in which the CPU is spending most of it's time waiting for the GPU be relevant? I don't want to know how fast Conroe can do NO-OPs, I want to know how fast it can get actual work done.

If you want to know how many framez you'll get inn CS:S, lolz, a pure CPU benchmark is not the place to look.


RE: Suckers
By Lord Evermore on 6/12/2006 5:39:41 AM , Rating: 2
NOOP processing rate sounds like a great item to be stuck onto a benchmark graph!


RE: Suckers
By Spoonbender on 6/12/2006 6:45:31 AM , Rating: 2
The problem with these conspiracy theories is that Conroe just has a lot of architectural advantages over the A64. It *is* a more powerful chip, the only question is in how much more powerful. No matter how much we accuse Intel of fiddling with benchmarks, it doesn't change the fact that Conroe just is capable of a few tricks the A64 can't do.


RE: Suckers
By Targon on 6/12/2006 8:05:15 AM , Rating: 2
More cache doesn't mean that Conroe has a better design, it just means it has certain advantages. I'd love to see an Athlon 64 with 4 megs of cache so I could see which chip really is the fastest.

The 65nm process also gives Conroe an advantage for the moment, but again, isn't a function of the architecture/design .

An Athlon 64 with 4 megs of cache and made with a 65nm process has the potential of beating Conroe by as much as Conroe is beating the Athlon 64 at this point.

How far will Conroe scale is the next question for those of you looking forward. If Conroe can't get beyond the 3.4GHz mark due to design limitations for example, then Intel will still need to come up with a new architecture once AMD gets the Athlon 64 to the 3.6GHz mark. That's just an example, but the Pentium Pro design is ANCIENT, and even though it has been tweaked a LOT to come up with Conroe, it's still ancient.


RE: Suckers
By Chillin1248 on 6/12/2006 9:32:08 AM , Rating: 3
And the K8 can also be called an evoltionary, not revolutionary, cousin of the K7.

The K8 don't seem to scale so well with increased cache so I don't think in most cases it will trully affect performance by large numbers.

The 65nm is nice, but Intel hopes to push it to 45nm soon (insanely small).

Conroe engineering samples (ES6600) have hit from 2.4GHz to 3.5GHz on air and stock voltage, Intel however does not need to release a 3.33GHz Conroe just yet since the 2.93 is still faster than anything else out there by a comfortable margin. World class overclockers on exotic cooling can't even get the A64 over 4.2GHz, the X6800 Conroe has already broken 5GHz. The P6 design is still a tried and true model with great performance, why spend billions on R&D creating a totally new architecture from the ground up when you have a excellent one at your fingertips?



RE: Suckers
By zsdersw on 6/12/2006 10:18:11 AM , Rating: 2
More cache isn't the only thing Conroe brings to the table, and it isn't now.. and won't be in the future.. the only thing responsible for its performance advantages.


RE: Suckers
By clnee55 on 6/12/2006 4:19:08 PM , Rating: 2
Interesting to see an ANCIENT CPU beating the MODERN CPU and forcing AMD to drop price.


amd should be dropping X2 prices NOW
By JaredExtreme on 6/12/2006 2:41:58 AM , Rating: 2
If AMD wants to persuade the thousands of people like myself who are planning on building Conroe systems, they should drop the X2 prices NOW while the X2's still have a performance advantage over Intel's dual cores.

When Conroe comes out, I personally am not going to be dissuaded to buy an X2 and take a performance hit just in order to save a bit of dough. I'm not rich or anything, I plan on buying the 2.4 ghz model Conroe, but when I build a new system every 3 years or so I have performance in mind.

Of course this is assuming that the Conroe performance resembles what we have seen in preliminary testing, which I think it will.




RE: amd should be dropping X2 prices NOW
By Lord Evermore on 6/12/2006 3:07:58 AM , Rating: 2
You seem to be contradicting yourself. You're saying that if they did drop prices now, people would flock to buy an X2 even though they know Conroe is coming? But then you say even with a lower price, you won't buy an X2. The way I read that is that you'd accept the performance hit with the lower price if it meant you could get an X2 now instead of waiting for a Conroe in 2 weeks.


RE: amd should be dropping X2 prices NOW
By toyota on 6/12/2006 3:41:35 AM , Rating: 2
i thought it was more like 6 weeks.


By Lord Evermore on 6/12/2006 4:00:22 AM , Rating: 2
I keep seeing June instead of July. Wishful thinking.


amd should have dropped prices MONTHS AGO
By GoatMonkey on 6/12/2006 11:53:00 AM , Rating: 3
AMD should have droped the prices months ago, like maybe back in January. They have just been sitting on their performance crown and not doing their traditional price drops for at least 9 months now.

I used to be a fan of AMD for their bang for the buck advantage and underdog status. Then they reached the performance crown and did the same thing that Intel did, rake in cash. Now I realize they're just another company with no benevolent agenda.

AMD will now have to be better in some way to get my money. I'm not saying I won't buy from them, but they have to give me a better reason to do it now.


RE: amd should have dropped prices MONTHS AGO
By KenGoding on 6/12/2006 2:13:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Now I realize they're just another company with no benevolent agenda.


You mean, you thought that they might actually be here just "for the people" rather than to make money? 'Twould be nice, but...no.


By GoatMonkey on 6/12/2006 2:29:01 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, it's easy to fall into that trap when you see an smaller company with low prices going up against a company that has been a virtual monopoly for years. However, given the opportunity AMD is no better. There is not a "don't be evil" policy over there.


RE: amd should have dropped prices MONTHS AGO
By TomZ on 6/12/2006 2:51:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Now I realize they're [AMD] just another company with no benevolent agenda.

QFT.

It is my personal pet peeve that people get this idea in their head that AMD is "good" because they are "nice" to their customers. That is their marketing propaganda, nothing more.

AMD are a for-profit corporation. Just like Intel. Just like Microsoft. Just like Apple. Just like many others. These companies are only looking out for their bottom line, and they only care about you and I insofar as we can help their bottom line. AMD is no different.


By Viditor on 6/13/2006 2:37:26 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It is my personal pet peeve that people get this idea in their head that AMD is "good" because they are "nice" to their customers

I don't think it's that so much as that Intel's marketing practices are "evil". I can certainly understand strongly competing for cash, what's unacceptable is when you break the law to do it (as I believe Intel has).
There's a line that you just don't cross...


lowest conroe
By Alaa on 6/12/2006 10:06:57 AM , Rating: 2
basically the lowest conroe @1.8(i think) will outperform 3800X2 and up when over clocked so why would amd wait?
conroe @ 183$ or 3800X2 @150 i dont get it!! they should do it now!




RE: lowest conroe
By poohbear on 6/12/2006 12:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
erm, unless the 3800+x2 is also overclocked, in which case it wont outperform it by much.:)


RE: lowest conroe
By poohbear on 6/12/2006 12:01:43 PM , Rating: 2
if they drop the prices now, it wont matter cause on release u'll be hard pressed to find a conroe cpu (seperately) to begin w/.


RE: lowest conroe
By TomZ on 6/12/2006 12:40:44 PM , Rating: 2
Getting the newest Intel CPUs in the retail channel hasn't been a problem in the past. On several occasions, I've found it pretty easy to get their latest-and-greatest.

Also, Intel has huge manufacturing capacity, so I doubt this will be an issue at all.


RE: lowest conroe
By Griswold on 6/12/2006 1:11:21 PM , Rating: 2
You might learn something new. Especially since Intel themselves said that they will keep riding the netburst horse for a good while - ever wondered why that is? Certainly not because they can swamp us with core2 parts after feeding Dell and HP.

You can always find any product (assuming is not a perfect paper launch) on the retail market, the question is, how much will the retailers charge you if demand is higher than supply. And are you willing to pay much more than you would pay 6 months later.

Their "huge" manufacturing capacity maneuvered them into a position where they have to get rid of their stockpile before it is totally worthless (when core2 production overtakes P4/P-D production).

And last but not least, Yonah was not widely available to notebook manufacturers for a good while, other than apple (and even they couldnt quench the demand from day 1). Think about it.


RE: lowest conroe
By TomZ on 6/12/2006 1:37:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Their "huge" manufacturing capacity maneuvered them into a position where they have to get rid of their stockpile before it is totally worthless

I've heard this assertion before from other posters. Do you "really" think this is the case, that Intel (or AMD for that matter) would build so far ahead of demand so as to have huge inventories that end up losing value? I don't think so.

The reason for the "relatively slow" transition from Netburst to Conroe et al. is due to demand, not supply. It's not like all customers can instantly switch in 1 day from buying Netburst to buying Conroe - this transition takes time. Same is true for AMD during product transitions - I doubt that either company "stockpiles" any inventory whatsoever.


RE: lowest conroe
By maevinj on 6/12/2006 1:45:57 PM , Rating: 2
well in Amd's case, I don't think they've had the capacity to stockpile the past couple of years.


RE: lowest conroe
By mindless1 on 6/13/2006 9:33:03 AM , Rating: 2
Remember that Intel can anticipate selling these chips for several more years after having left the mainstream, it might even make as much sense to do large runs now rather than continuing on to maintain production at a lower rate later. That wouldd tend to go against the argument of having to be rid of them all at lowest prices possible, though.

I think more than anything they don't want to let any more customers see the grass on the other side of the fence. Intel had always counted on their name and the perception by the average joe that AMD was the budget choice. When joe finds his AMD box runs good he may buy another, and another.


The consumers win and I am quite happy.
By coldpower27 on 6/12/2006 8:40:49 PM , Rating: 2

This means I won't be considering AMD products as I don't want an AMD Dual Core unless I can get the full Windsor core at an appropriate price and since AMD doesn't wish to sell those to me at good prices, in relation to the Intel offerins they are out of the running for me.






RE: The consumers win and I am quite happy.
By Viditor on 6/13/2006 2:46:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
This means I won't be considering AMD products as I don't want an AMD Dual Core unless I can get the full Windsor core at an appropriate price


Huh? You don't feel that $240 for a Windsor core 4200+ is a good enough deal? What do you plan to purchase for that price instead?


RE: The consumers win and I am quite happy.
By coldpower27 on 6/14/2006 2:02:46 PM , Rating: 4
You will be able to get the E6400 2.13GHZ/2MB/1066FSB for the same pricing level.



By Viditor on 6/15/2006 10:59:09 AM , Rating: 2
It'll be interesting to see if the E6400 runs as fast...


By animedude on 6/16/2006 2:52:56 PM , Rating: 2
It will be interesting to see if you can find one of those when demand is so high. You want one, but 10 other people want it, too. If I can get my hand on E6400 at the price point, sure why not, else AMD is a decent choice considering at that price point.


RE: The consumers win and I am quite happy.
By mindless1 on 6/13/2006 9:21:43 AM , Rating: 2
I really don't think they plan on lowering their prices SO MUCH that they compel every man, woman, child and dog to dash to the nearest store. SOMEBODY has to have the best deal for your particular use at any given point in time. If history is any indication, the architecture is usually the deciding factor except that intel has tended to charge a slight namesake premium over AMD except in the highest speed, lowest yield parts which can vary too wildly to average out.


By Merglet on 6/14/2006 12:52:19 PM , Rating: 2
Hehe.. you should *sell* computers! You share my philosophy on "appropriate cpu for appropriate use".

Sure, I'd love to sell an FX-62 (were I a salesman), but since it's grandma and she just wants to gather recipes and just talk to her grandkids, I'd sell her a nice $400 system with a celeron or sempron, built in graphics and sound, and some cheapo $10 speakers.


By mlittl3 on 6/12/2006 12:52:15 PM , Rating: 2
So let me get this straight. They are reducing the price on their 2x512K L2 cache versions (non-energy efficient) but leaving everything else the same. That makes absolutely no sense. The only processors that have a chance in hell of competing with Intel are the 2x1M L2 cache versions at 65W. AMD is going to get whacked hard if they don't wise up soon.




Well
By Griswold on 6/12/2006 1:19:18 PM , Rating: 2
Did you ever try to figure out what 1MB over 512KB L2 cache does for you and the apps you run? Thing is, with the current K8 design, L2 cache size is not that important in most situations. Its also why the 3800+ X2 is so popular...

I agree with the EE parts though. They could use a price cut. Then again, we'll see a few 65nm parts by december and they might very well give core2 a run for its money in the power consumption department (note: I didnt say performance per watt) - considering how successful AMDs previous shrinks were in terms of TDP decrease.


RE: Well
By mlittl3 on 6/12/2006 2:16:18 PM , Rating: 2
You are of course right, but you only know that you are right because you browse the hardware review sites. I'm worried about spec bragging rights. Even though the average user will not know what L2 cache actually is, they usually know that when it comes to size of memory, more is better.

Therefore, Intel will advertise 2M and 4M L2 caches at low prices while AMD will only have 2x512K (1M total) at low prices. It might hurt them. Besides, if L2 cache doesn't matter on Athlon 64 processors (which is really doesn't except for a few percent performance in some games) then AMD should stop making two sizes and charging a premium for the higher.


RE: Well
By noxipoo on 6/19/2006 1:50:33 PM , Rating: 2
worried about bragging rights? that's a stupid reason to want them to change the prices of something.


By Viditor on 6/13/2006 1:42:24 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The only processors that have a chance in hell of competing with Intel are the 2x1M L2 cache versions at 65W. AMD is going to get whacked hard if they don't wise up soon

You are comparing them to Conroe, which is a mistake.
Conroe will not ship in large enough numbers this year to effect AMD at all. AMD's competition (and the reason for the price drop) is the firesale on Pentium D and P4...

Of all the processors Intel ships, more than half are Celerons, another quarter are mobile parts, and most of the rest are the mid-high level desktop parts (server chips are small in numbers but high in revenue).
Only a small percentage of those mid/high desktop parts will be Conroe...which means that the retail price of the Conroe will most likely be quite a bit higher than the released price list indicates (if you can even get one).

As to the rest (P4,PD), AMD is already MORE than competitive on every level...and if they are priced even slightly higher than Intel, AMD should easily outsell them with the normal powered version.


ut oh
By Scabies on 6/12/2006 2:32:39 PM , Rating: 2
I am seeing some asterisks... Whether this image was taken from an internal presentation or externally assembled from notes or something..

Athlon 64 X2 (4800+) (Energy Efficient*)

Athlon 64 X2 (3800+) (Energy Efficient Small Form Factor **)

Funny, Friday I had a wishlist all set out for my long-awaited step into 64bit processing, with an ATI RD600 board socket 939, the best nForce4 Asus 939 board, and the new nForce 590/AM2 Asus board. I was ready and willing to buy one of the setups within a week or so, but with this news, saving $xxx would be worth the wait.

Whatever it will be, my (32bit)XP 3000+ is gonna get obliterated.
(And when are we getting AM2 Opterons?!)




RE: ut oh
By Scabies on 6/12/2006 2:33:54 PM , Rating: 2
(I should say 3 wishlists)


RE: ut oh
By mlittl3 on 6/12/2006 3:42:11 PM , Rating: 2
* indicates 65W parts
** indicates 35 W parts

These footnotes are on AMD processor pricing page which can be found here.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInforma...


RE: ut oh
By dilz on 6/14/2006 12:31:43 PM , Rating: 2
I admire your patience with hardware purchases. I had a XP2500+ until this past January. I took a risk that DDR would remain the standard a bit longer and got a 754 for very cheap. I would definitely wait if I were you!


RE: ut oh
By TwiztidFoo on 6/15/2006 8:46:16 AM , Rating: 2
I'd done the same pretty much, mulitple wishlists made out then I read of the price drops and feel the need to hold out for a bit longer so I can get a bit more for my money. Rather than an OCed single core, I can go dual now. :D

And I do believe that the AM2 socket is the same as Socket 940, so the "AM2" Opterons are out, just called Socket 940 rather. Or maybe I totally misconceived something.


gg
By rqle on 6/12/2006 12:30:51 AM , Rating: 2
good to see conroe threat already have an effect on amd. we win




RE: gg
By ZeeStorm on 6/12/06, Rating: -1
RE: gg
By Tsuwamono on 6/12/06, Rating: 0
RE: gg
By gramboh on 6/12/2006 12:44:20 PM , Rating: 2
What are you talking about? Conroe is faster clock for clock and uses LESS power than S939/AM2 as it is 65nm vs 90nm. A 4GHz Conroe would be insane performance though. Even a factory clocked 2.6 is impressive coming around performance of the $1000 FX-62 except for less than half the price.


RE: gg
By zsdersw on 6/12/2006 1:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's not a threat, it's not an effect. It's a reaction, to make AMD's procs more enticing for "speed-demons", who like at the speed of a crappy processor rather than the quality. Conroe's got nothing on AMD as far as I'm concerned. Oh wow, 4ghz, "w00t" for overheating? haha! AMD's processors are, have been, and always will be better than Intel's. Never will I ever pay for an "Intel Inside".


You're the winner of Idiot of the Year.


RE: gg
By KenGoding on 6/12/2006 2:03:05 PM , Rating: 2
Well, idiot of the day, anyway. :)


64-bit OS...?
By fxyefx on 6/12/2006 11:03:47 AM , Rating: 3
I really wish someone could release some benchmarks of Conroe running under a 64-bit OS. People buying Conroe will certainly have the future in mind, as Vista will soon come out. We already have a good idea of how AMD64 scales into 64-bit programs, and since that's the future (about 6-7 months away), then that's where much of the comparison should take place.




RE: 64-bit OS...?
By Khenglish on 6/12/2006 6:44:07 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php...

He ran it in 64bit and 32bit at 3.7gHz. Overall 64bit is slightly slower. I don't get why, even the p4 would have a performance improvement when runing 64bit. His last benchmark shows the tremendous integer performance increase you'd expect, but floating point performance drops a lot.

Some benchmarks he ran were only 32bit, but I'm 90% sure sandra is 64bit and its performance dropped.


RE: 64-bit OS...?
By coldpower27 on 6/12/2006 8:44:48 PM , Rating: 2
Looks at all the benchmarks, it really varies depending on what your looking at Cinbench 64 vs Cinebench 2003 registered an improvement.


Whatever
By exdeath on 6/12/2006 1:53:09 AM , Rating: 2
Nice to know they have the room to drop prices all this time and they wont do it until then. Just as bad as Intel milking.

And no price cuts on the FX huh? Guess thats like no 0% financing on Corvettes, Vipers, and Cobras.




RE: Whatever
By Lord Evermore on 6/12/2006 3:04:47 AM , Rating: 2
Just because they have "room" to drop prices doesn't mean they should. Nearly every product of any kind ever made has "room" to drop the price and still make a profit, but the nature of the free market is that they are priced at what people are willing to pay, not the lowest possible price to allow the maker to just barely profit. It's not like they're gouging prices and making them artificially high while they roll around in piles of money (not compared to the way some other products are priced).


RE: Whatever
By Dfere on 6/12/2006 10:14:22 AM , Rating: 2
People who buy those cars typically do not NEED financing.....


What's with the 'we win'?
By samuraiBX on 6/12/2006 11:07:07 AM , Rating: 2
I'm seeing alot of 'we win' posts here. Do you guys work for intel, does that make it a 'we'? Because unless you work for them or own stock, I'd say, umm, the 'we' your talking about is actually some other guys taking your money, whether it's AMD or Intel.




RE: What's with the 'we win'?
By fishbits on 6/12/2006 11:18:23 AM , Rating: 3
"We win" refers to PC enthusiasts. We have more powerful processors and price drops coming our way. If you back a particular brand or neither, you're getting good news.


Awesome!
By l Thomas l on 6/12/2006 1:51:03 AM , Rating: 2
Looks great! 3800+ X2 for $150! Hopefully Opterons drop too.

But it's UP TO 50%. They probably won't give 50% price drops on the best ones (the best selling ones).

They'll probably give the highest drops to the higher models, lower drops to the lower models, since everyone buys the lower models and overclocks them.

But AMD might be nice, and just do it equally. =D That'd be great.




RE: Awesome!
By Furen on 6/12/2006 10:26:40 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but a $200 X2 3800+ may be a pretty decent competitor to the 1.86GHz Conroe, especially considering that the impact of the 2MB L2 cache reduction is a big unknown at this time.


Next stop...
By Cunthor01 on 6/12/2006 12:36:54 AM , Rating: 2
ATI and NVidia!!


One can hope anyway...




RE: Next stop...
By ZeeStorm on 6/12/2006 12:27:57 PM , Rating: 1
If it were that easy. It's moreover the manufacturer's for the GFX cards that drop the price bomb. It would be nice to see what ATI has to offer next year, though I'm a hardcore nVidia fan due to their tools and continue support for Linux. ATI becomes more and more enticing.


Yet more to come!
By Proprioceptive on 6/12/2006 12:43:52 AM , Rating: 2
As if the existing AMD price drops weren't welcome enough... this just gets better and better!!




we win
By xenon74 on 6/12/2006 4:40:25 AM , Rating: 2
This is great yet anticipated news.
(I guess that oil prices will be low this year also :D)
AMD success until Dec06 depends on Conroe/Merom availability in Q3-Q4.




soo.....
By poohbear on 6/12/2006 6:25:19 AM , Rating: 2
so basicly, u're a gimp if u buy an amd x2 cpu b4 the price drops. or am i missing something?




Hell yeah!
By bigboxes on 6/12/2006 7:17:44 AM , Rating: 2
X2 here I come! It has been worth the wait. :)




Fanboys
By Chillin1248 on 6/12/2006 8:07:02 AM , Rating: 2
Seems like the AMD fanboys are out in force today.

Anyways does anyone know what exactly SSE4 instruction set is supposed to add?




Takes one to know one
By Griswold on 6/12/06, Rating: 0
nice..
By teng029 on 6/12/2006 9:20:14 AM , Rating: 2
maybe i can finally build a dual core machine without breaking the bank.




And the winner is .... US!
By Dfere on 6/12/2006 10:11:28 AM , Rating: 2
Sweet.. good to know if they can't win on performance, they will try to compete on price/performance.

Too bad intel won't do the same...............

(That last sentence was just a defensive yin yang mechanism kicking in as I do not like to be called a fanboi...)




whoa!
By RallyMaster on 6/21/2006 11:28:26 PM , Rating: 2
X2 3800+ 939 for $169? I'm liking the sound of that!




No price cuts yet???
By razorsplat on 6/27/2006 1:04:25 PM , Rating: 2
Its June 27th now and still no price cuts???? I building a new AM2 computer and all I need is a CPU come on AMD and slash those prices!




Razorsplat
By db298 on 6/28/2006 10:13:30 AM , Rating: 2
RTF thread... 27 JULY, not June. You're gonna have to hang in there bud.




“We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone.” -- Steve Jobs

Related Articles










botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki