Hammer delayed til 2003! From AMD Conference Call

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Soccerman
holy crap, since when could you buy a Xeon for so damn cheap?? they used to be near $900!

I'm acutally typing right now on a 1.7 GHz dual Xeon - purchased right after its release. Sure Dell charged $900 for the Xeon but it cost a lot less to buy it elsewhere and just plop it into the empty slot... Dell always overcharges for the second CPU.

The Intel Xeon (based on the P4) has always been cheap. It started with about a $50 premium over the same speed P4 - but now it is closer to $30 premium. The P3 based Xeons were the only ones in the $900 price range. Intel learned from their P3 Xeon mistakes. It cost so much money that people developed a way to make dual P3s without needing to buy the expensive Xeon processors. This time around, the Intel left no reason for motherboard manufacturers to develop dual P4 motherboards.

The drawback with the Intel Xeon is the expensive motherboards or expensive powersupply. However it is still quite possible to build a minimally equipped dual 2.2 GHz Xeon for just about $1000.

Note: there are many more sellers on pricewatch that sell the Athlon MP than sell the Intel Xeon. This added competition causes the Athlon MP to be cheaper than the Intel Xeon even though their 1000 lot prices are the same. (Also I think AMD gives a good discount for lot purchases in excess of 1000 when Intel doesn't give much of a discount).

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Rectalfier
Okay, maybe it's not the end of the world, but it really will only get worse for AMD. Right now they are two speed grades behind Intel, this will only get worse, as the T-bred does not look like it will offer a higher speed grade anytime soon. AMD has a lot of debt, so I hope they can last through this tough period.

You're missing the point. Intel having the fastest chip means nothing to most people except some of us on this board. If you want the fastest PC no matter what the cost, that's the only time being the "fastest" is going to matter. As far as OEMs are concerned, being a speed grade or two behind doesn't matter as long as the chip is still cost effective.

 

[majewski9]

To talk of an AMD fold is rediculous! Geez they have been in business since 1969 and have faced a lot stiffer competition than the p4. I would like to see a better Athlon core with more cache, fsb bump, and clock speed bump, but AMD doesn't seem to care about the 32 bit Athlon and forget about the Duron its all about the hammer. Yeah and all these perfromance probs they have been having were "Sledgehammer" aka Opteron and not the Clawhammer core aka Athlon something. The sledgehammer was always slated for q1 of 2003. So this post is rediculous! Although I wouldnt be suprised if AMD does push the hammer release date back!

That information might be in the conference call, but a lot of misleading info has been said in those calls. The call before this one mentioned SSE2 support in thouroughbred! So even if this was said I wouldnt rely on it fully. The processor roadmap on AMD's website remains unchanged!

 

[ChrisIsBored]

AMD's stock is down 13% @ under $9 now... getting close to post 9/11 prices... Might be a good time to invest.

 

[Rectalfier]

Okay, so they are likely not going to go under. But, I still believe it matters to keep up with Intel. Let me demonstrate with a chart, it's hypothetical.


These are model's Intel and AMD price against each other. Right now they are based on Mhz/PR rating.


Hypothetical Pricing Chart A

Price Points(in Dollars).........................700..................500................300...........200.........150.........100
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel CPU.................................................2.53...................2.4................2.2............2.0.........1.8............1.6
AMD CPU...............................................X.......................X.................2200..........2100.......1800........1600

Hypothetical Pricing Chart B

Price Points(in Dollars).........................700.................500................300............250..........200.......150..........100
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel CPU................................................2.0...................1.9................1.8.............1.7...........1.6........1.5...........1.4
AMD CPU................................................X......................X..................X................X .............X............X.............1.4

Intel and AMD are locked in a pricing paradigm. As Intel pumps up the megahurtz, they can push AMD down the price points at will. Intel is now in full control of the pricing scheme. Chart A represents todays price scheme, and Chart B represents last years. With AMD stuck around the 2200 mark, they will have no choice but to stay competitive with Intel's prices, and will be pushed further down the pricing scheme as Intel pumps out faster models at a greater rate.

With low ASP's and a weak market(less processors sold), AMD is going to be losing a lot of money.

 

[christoph83]

That information might be in the conference call, but a lot of misleading info has been said in those calls. The call before this one mentioned SSE2 support in thouroughbred! So even if this was said I wouldnt rely on it fully. The processor roadmap on AMD's website remains unchanged!

I'm really suprised anyone listens to you majewski. You have spewed so much crap on these forums based off I dont know what. But basically your saying this post is rediculous even when its coming straight from AMD's mouth? You seem to be a little too emotionally attached to AMD.