backtop

Hardware Last Call for 2x1MB Athlon 64 X2s
Anh Tuan Huynh (Blog) - August 2, 2006 10:21 PM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 41 comment(s) - last by AncientPC.. on Aug 8 at 9:40 PM
The last price cut for the Athlon 64 X2 4800+, 4400+ and 4000+

DailyTech previously reported AMD price cuts that occurred on July 24th, 2006. The announced price cuts affected most of AMD’s product lineup except soon-to-be discontinued products such as the Athlon 64 X2 4800+, 4400+ and 4000+ for Socket AM2 and Socket 939. Although Athlon 64 X2 4800+, 4400+ and 4000+ are end-of-life products distributors still have them in stock. Since AMD never announced price cuts for Athlon 64 X2 4800+, 4400+ and 4000+ products, retailers were stuck with the original pricing.

Nevertheless a new distributor price sheet reveals new distributor pricing for the remaining 2x1MB Athlon 64 X2 processors. Between July 24th, 2006 and August 27th, 2006 distributors are expected to drop prices on Athlon 64 X2 4800+ and 4400+ Socket AM2 and 939 products to $266 and $224 respectively. Athlon 64 X2 models 4000+ will drop to $173 in the same time frame.

The price cuts will be the last for the respective models as AMD has already sent out an end-of-life regarding Athlon 64 X2 models 4800+, 4400+ and 4000+.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
price cuts?
By poohbear on 8/2/2006 10:36:59 PM , Rating: 2
so the 4000+ x2 has a 1mbx2 cache for only $173? sweet! it'll be the new super cheap opty 165 then?




RE: price cuts?
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 8/2/2006 10:42:52 PM , Rating: 2
Opty 1xx and the DDR2 Opty 1xxx for AM2 are getting price cuts too


RE: price cuts?
By peternelson on 8/3/2006 1:56:27 AM , Rating: 3

IF there exists DDR2 Opteron for AM2 right now, where is it? Maybe I missed the anandtech coverage/review? ? ?

What price has it been? What price will it be after reductions?

Can this be bought already?

Will it be compatible with 4x4 motherboards?


RE: price cuts?
By elegault on 8/3/2006 8:29:13 AM , Rating: 2
Most if not all Opty's will be Socket F and is not compatible with AM2. I'm not sure if the 1xx's will be AM2 though, but the 2xx's and 8xx's will be.


RE: price cuts?
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 8/3/2006 9:19:27 AM , Rating: 2
The 12xx opterons are AM2 compatible. The rest of the DDR2 opterons are Socket F


RE: price cuts?
By Kiijibari on 8/3/2006 11:48:02 AM , Rating: 2
Euro prices are here:

http://www.geizhals.at/eu/?fs=opteron+am2&x=0&y=0&...

But none are available so far.

regards

Kiijibari


RE: price cuts?
By poohbear on 8/2/2006 10:43:00 PM , Rating: 2
huh? the 4000+ appears as having 2x512kb cache, why does anandtech say "last chance to buy 2x1mb" if it's not? also, AMD's pricing schemes are all messed up, a 4000+ san diego w/ 1x1mb cache costs double what a 4200+ X2 w/ 2x512kb cache costs.:0


RE: price cuts?
By The Cheeba on 8/2/2006 10:46:27 PM , Rating: 2
First of all, this place hasn't been annadtech for a year, and second, the 4000+ is 2x1mb
http://www.amdcompare.com/us-en/desktop/details.as...


RE: price cuts?
By Topweasel on 8/3/2006 9:18:48 AM , Rating: 3
You really think there is no Connection to Anandtech. His old editor runs the site, it is the sole source of news for Anand, and its DailyTech with the same Anand dash over it.


RE: price cuts?
By caboosemoose on 8/3/2006 6:50:19 PM , Rating: 2
Dailytech prefers to keep the pretence of not being connected to Anandtech so that they can break NDAs left right and centre without it causing a problem. It doesnt work of course, because everyone knows Dailytech is a subsidiary of Anandtech.


RE: price cuts?
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 8/4/2006 12:49:50 AM , Rating: 2
It sounds like you're in the industry and upset about something. AnandTech and DailyTech are separate companies, separate publications and have no editorial crossover whatsoever. We've stated this over and over, and unfortunately a few people (particularly my competitors) continue to perpetuate this rumor.


RE: price cuts?
By AaronAxvig on 8/6/2006 5:28:28 PM , Rating: 3
But still using the same database of users?


RE: price cuts?
By Crusader on 8/6/2006 6:34:07 PM , Rating: 2
Ouch.. good point. :/


RE: price cuts?
By Targon on 8/2/2006 10:47:41 PM , Rating: 2
There were different versions, so you need to look for which version of the X2 you are seeing.

The big issue is that it's cheaper to manufacture a processor with only 2x512KB cache than it is to manufacture a 2x1MB cache version, which is one of the reasons the Opteron 100 series cost more in the first place.

AMD signed the deal with Chartered to manufacture processors, and I would guess that is another reason for the price cuts on the 2x512KB versions.



RE: price cuts?
By Torched on 8/2/2006 11:21:20 PM , Rating: 2
You forgot to add Conroe to your list. And also the fact that Intel has chopped the legs off its own processor's pricing. Hasn't there been a barrage of articles last month talking about the up coming price wars.

I know AMD pissed off a few channel partners because the most recent price cuts were unexpected. This left a few manufacturers with overpriced processors in the inventory... but thats what "price wars" are all about.



RE: price cuts?
By bob661 on 8/3/2006 1:11:13 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
You forgot to add Conroe to your list
WTF does Conroe got to do with a thread about getting some 1MB cache A64's? And why should that be listed when the article is ONLY about A64's?


RE: price cuts?
By Visual on 8/3/2006 1:53:45 AM , Rating: 2
Torched wasn't commenting on the main article, but replying to the comment above. The 'list' here means just the list of reasons why AMD dropped prices. Why can't you think for ten seconds before you go WTF at people?


RE: price cuts?
By Targon on 8/3/2006 6:51:23 AM , Rating: 2
My own comment was about the reasons for dropping the 2x1MB cache versions of the X2, and had nothing to do with Conroe. Since Chartered isn't being used to manufacture the Opteron from the sound of it, all 2x1MB processors are being reserved for Opteron and FX-62.

When AMD further ramps up production to the point where they arn't capacity limited, THEN we may see 2x1MB versions make it back into the regular X2 line, or perhaps once AMD transitions to quad core(X4) for the desktop in late 2007/2008.

We may also see a 2x1MB version showing up if/when AMD starts to really push their 4x4 platform since we shouldn't need an FX class processor for it(even if it's "required").


RE: price cuts?
By Phynaz on 8/3/2006 9:42:38 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why can't you think for ten seconds before you go WTF at people?


That's bob for you. Know it all 14 year olds don't think.


RE: price cuts?
By bob661 on 8/3/2006 12:33:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's bob for you. Know it all 14 year olds don't think.
I guess your all seeing eye didn't read Targon's comment. Here I'll post it for you.
quote:
My own comment was about the reasons for dropping the 2x1MB cache versions of the X2, and had nothing to do with Conroe.

Like I said, which part of an AMD X2 thread has to with Conroe?





RE: price cuts?
By duploxxx on 8/3/2006 2:43:11 AM , Rating: 3
wrong wrong... its intel that dumped the channels full of stock and dropping prices now... the price cut was long known in amd distribution channels and no stock at all in distribution.


RE: price cuts?
By Torched on 8/3/2006 9:04:53 AM , Rating: 3
I never said AMD dumped the channel full of stock in fact the opposite is true. They have a well managed channel with little excess inventory in the hands of VARs.

I was simply mentioning the fact that the price wars are here and there is strong evidence coming from AMD that they are waging battle. Look at this article: http://enews.ttnet.net/cgi-bin/enews.cgi?date=2006...
This price cut was not well known by many familiar with AMD's channel.

Oh and Bob661, Conroe is one of the reasons for the loss of the 2 x 1MB cache X2's. It increases AMD's production capacity by reducing the amount of space taken on the 200mm wafers that AMD produces. Increase in demand, however is a natural progression for a company, not a war over the price of goods produced. If you think AMD was blind enough to ignore the onslaught of Conroe/Merom/Woodcrest, then you are gravely mistaken. This is a calculated measure to ensure the price is low enough to compete with a better processor.


RE: price cuts?
By Tsuwamono on 8/6/2006 7:17:01 PM , Rating: 1
Last time i checked AMD doesnt produce Core 2 Duo CPUs... you should read man.


RE: price cuts?
By Madellga on 8/3/2006 12:55:55 AM , Rating: 2
You mean Opt 170, right? The 4000 has 2.0GHz.


no upgrade option
By dgingeri on 8/3/2006 9:59:26 AM , Rating: 2
I pretty much, after a year of having a 4200+, have nothing that would be an appreciable upgrade option without spending $1k. I remember the days when I'd be tempted into a processor upgrade after 6-8 months because the speed increase would be 50% or more. Now it's just stalled. I had considered the 4800+, but with them now on clearance, I'll probably not be able to get one before they're gone.

I've overclocked my 4200+ to 2572 with 466Mhz memory. I hope AMD makes some decent progress in the near future. Even the $1k processors aren't much of an upgrade from that. I was hoping a 4800+ at around 2800-3000 would boost my speed good enough.

I guess I'll have to wait for AM2 dual cores at 3200 or higher at $300 or lower before I upgrade again. I'm NOT buying a Conroe.




RE: no upgrade option
By Knish on 8/3/2006 10:25:57 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
I'm NOT buying a Conroe.

Too bad, the rest of us are.


RE: no upgrade option
By drebo on 8/3/2006 10:46:29 AM , Rating: 2
Is there anything your processor cannot run?

Are you having problems with games/applications being too CPU limited?

I seriously doubt it. So why bother upgrading? Hell, with my moderately overclocked Athlon64 3800+ single core, I can play Oblivion on Ultra High quality with no stuttering even in the Imperial City.

We're at a performance plateau right now. Intel has caught up with AMD in the last move. The ball is in AMD's court, now. My guess is that we'll see a small boost when AMD switches to 65nm, another boost to certain areas of computing when K8L comes out, but we won't see anything major until K10 in ~18(?) months.

Intel's next big performance leap won't happen until they ditch the FSB, and we all know that's not going to happen any time soon.


RE: no upgrade option
By dgingeri on 8/3/2006 2:13:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Is there anything your processor cannot run?

Are you having problems with games/applications being too CPU limited?

I seriously doubt it. So why bother upgrading?


but... but... but...

I wanna upgrade :( I feel less of a man without suping up something. (that's just to laugh at myself)

I've been upgrading my system continuously for the last 12 years. I don't think I've gone more than a year between processor upgrades until the last couple years. Back in the AthlonXP days, I actually bought 4 significant upgrades in a year: Athlon 1000 to AthlonXP 1500+ to AthlonXP 2100+ to AthlonXP 3200+ all in 2003 to 2004. I upgraded my 3200+ to a Athlon64 3500+ after a little over a year and then a little over a year after that I upgraded to this 4200+.

I'm feeling slow now since I have nowhere to go now. I keep upgrading my video cards, but even that has stalled a bit after my 7800GT's (SLi) came out. the current video cards aren't that much of an upgrade either. My system is as good as it's going to get without significant outlay.

I guess I'll save up for that 24" LCD monitor I've been drooling over. Shouldn't take more than a few months.


RE: no upgrade option
By Mojo the Monkey on 8/3/2006 4:22:21 PM , Rating: 2
ha, i'm in the very same position. The new x2's and conroes are going to be impressive, but i really see no reason not to wait a liiiiittle bit longer and snag a quad core (either company, whichever is the better performer) and a DX10 card. (G80 or R600).

so i've been sitting on my rig, waiting for something to blow me away. oh, and yes... my 24" was worth the $. :)


RE: no upgrade option
By Xavian on 8/3/2006 6:47:04 PM , Rating: 2
then again.... what on earth will you use 4 cores for? i doubt consumer level applications for 4 cores will be out any time soon.

I see the immense benefits of dual core over single cores, however quad core is well into diminishing returns for now until some consumer-level software takes advantage of it... which could be quite some time.


RE: no upgrade option
By kontorotsui on 8/4/2006 6:01:18 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I've been upgrading my system continuously for the last 12 years. I don't think I've gone more than a year between processor upgrades until the last couple years. Back in the AthlonXP days, I actually bought 4 significant upgrades in a year: Athlon 1000 to AthlonXP 1500+ to AthlonXP 2100+ to AthlonXP 3200+ all in 2003 to 2004. I upgraded my 3200+ to a Athlon64 3500+ after a little over a year and then a little over a year after that I upgraded to this 4200+.


What do you do with the "old" hardware you continuosly remove?


RE: no upgrade option
By mlittl3 on 8/3/2006 10:56:08 AM , Rating: 3
Any modern day processor is good enough for all the apps that endusers have. I would say that any Athlon XP Barton and lower and any Pentium 4 Williamette and lower are two slow for todays needs. Anything better than those (Athlon 64s, Northwood/Prescott/Prescott-2M, Core) will run everything just fine.


RE: no upgrade option
By AntiTomZandmasher2 on 8/5/2006 1:55:45 AM , Rating: 2
The machines running at my home are:

500 Mhz Pentium III
1 Ghz Pentium III
1 Ghz Duron
Athlon XP 1800+

They run everything I want perfectly fine. As soon as we passed the 1 Ghz barrier, I knew that upgrading for office and dev tasks (no games) was pointless.

The article on "512 MB is fine if you only run one app at a time" drew a chuckle from me.


RE: no upgrade option
By coldpower27 on 8/7/2006 8:25:30 PM , Rating: 2
Well I guess they are assuming your running Windows XP, which likes a fair amount of RAM.


RE: no upgrade option
By AncientPC on 8/8/2006 9:40:17 PM , Rating: 2
Even then, WinXP came out like 2001? 256MB - 512MB were on the high side then for PCs and everything ran fine.


huh? everything's EOL, what's left?
By fanbanlo on 8/2/2006 10:35:39 PM , Rating: 2
huh? everything's EOL, what's left?




RE: huh? everything's EOL, what's left?
By Torched on 8/2/2006 11:13:25 PM , Rating: 2
Only the 1MB cache ones... Did you read the article?


By Torched on 8/2/2006 11:14:42 PM , Rating: 2
excuse me... only the 1MB cache ones are EOL... need. edit. soon?


..
By Xavian on 8/3/2006 1:46:02 AM , Rating: 3
Since the Athlon X2's and Athlon 64 barely make use of the extra 512kb cache, i'll stick with my X2 3800+ thanks :)

Thats probably why AMD is scrapping all its 1MB cache variants.




RE: ..
By kitchme on 8/3/2006 3:39:18 AM , Rating: 2
I'd assume they're also cheaper to produce, meaning you can make more chips if they're all 512kb cache. With these prices, having 1Mb cache for AMD is a waste of resources. Except for FX series of course...


Bah.
By stephenbrooks on 8/3/2006 3:07:12 PM , Rating: 2
I bought a X2 4400+ at full price because I thought they were going EOL without a price cut after the last roadmap was published :(




"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer











botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki