Here comes the dreaded price cuts..

[v8envy]

Originally posted by: n19htmare
I wouldn't even consider AMD.
Imagine, I get a Compatibale Mobo now, get a Pentium D at a fair price... DDR2 alreayd supported and later on all i have to do is pop in a conroe.. and voila.

Exactly my point. Except for e-peen size comparisons, an 805 overclocked to 3.2 ghz or so is all you need today. For the price of a 3000+ you're on a platform that's upgradeable to a much faster CPU when you need it in a year or two. You can sell your DDR ram while it's still worth something (now) to boot.

Any AMD choice is not only more expensive, but is guaranteed to be a dead end. Socket 754, 939, AM2. All already declared dead by either AMD or board partners.

The only choice for a mainstream build today is Intel. AMD still remains king for the extreme performance crowd, for the moment.

 

[Looney]

I don't see what the big deal is here. Intel has to compete with AMD. They can't do it on performance, and for years, they were relying on their brand name. Now that AMD is so well known amongst even the average consumers, Intel's name alone isn't enough to guarantee sales. So they need to compete on price.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: CrimsonKnight
So AMD has the performance lead but are too expensive.

and Intel has less impressive chips but they give the most bang for your buck.


What's happening with the world these days?

So what Intel chip has best bang/buck ? AMD still holds that IMO. And their chips are not too exspensive, just SOME of them APPEAR tp be more exspensive than the Intel counterpart. See posts on 8xx and 9xx Intel chips, I don;t want to repost what others have said.

Pentium D 950 @ $330


newegg

Who is thayt so good ? at stock the 3800 beats it most of the time and is cheaper. To OC to a decent speed you need a $200 mobo. Advantage AMD.

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: CrimsonKnight
So AMD has the performance lead but are too expensive.

and Intel has less impressive chips but they give the most bang for your buck.


What's happening with the world these days?

So what Intel chip has best bang/buck ? AMD still holds that IMO. And their chips are not too exspensive, just SOME of them APPEAR tp be more exspensive than the Intel counterpart. See posts on 8xx and 9xx Intel chips, I don;t want to repost what others have said.

Pentium D 950 @ $330


newegg

Who is thayt so good ? at stock the 3800 beats it most of the time and is cheaper. To OC to a decent speed you need a $200 mobo. Advantage AMD.

you dont need to oc anything on a 950 for it to beat a 3800+


http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=pd900&page=11

 

[Markfw]

One benchmark ? give me a break..... The next page shows the 3800 beating it, and the X2's OC on air and stock cooling much easier than the 950.

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
One benchmark ? give me a break..... The next page shows the 3800 beating it, and the X2's OC on air and stock cooling much easier than the 950.

Sure and that is a nice win, if your running Apache Web Server software...

 

[Markfw]

It also wins windows meadia encoder... Thats not my main point. It still doesn;t get the same performance/$ after OCing, and still puts out more heat and takes more power to run.

 

[dmens]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
One benchmark ? give me a break..... The next page shows the 3800 beating it, and the X2's OC on air and stock cooling much easier than the 950.

LOL, one benchmark... learn how to read, at stock 950 beat the 3800 in most of the benchmraks in that review.

 

[anandtechrocks]

Wow those are amazing prices. I can't believe how low that dual core 3.2 GHz processor is... it's very tempting, even just to try it out. I haven't got a dual core system yet...

 

[bongsteen]

irrisistible eh! i am thinking about building a system with 930.

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: Markfw900
One benchmark ? give me a break..... The next page shows the 3800 beating it, and the X2's OC on air and stock cooling much easier than the 950.

Sure and that is a nice win, if your running Apache Web Server software...

apache ftw! lol

 

[Keysplayr]

Actually, according to that review anyways, the 950 is closer to an X24200/4400 for the most part. With some really radical wins from both sides on some of the benches.
So it's seems more accurate to say a 950 is faster than a 3800 X2 and more closely matched to a 4200/4400.

 

[blackangst1]

Man you all are AMD fan boi's and havent read about the 65nm Intel cores. The D series is kicking ass...yes AMD's. And Conroe...well...gonna be nearly impossible for AMD to offer anything close to it. The lowest speed Conroe will be around $350, and smokes the FX60 by 20-30%. You AMD folks need to do some reading. These aint no P4's anymore...

And yes. I have an Opty at the moment and hate reading about the new Intel's coz I now have an inferior CPU...

 

[Markfw]

I am not talking about Conroe now, and I am not a fanboy. The 950 is way better than the 8xx series, but it still runs too hot, and requires a $200 mobo to OC, and my 3800 can kick its arse without watercooling OC'ed, and its cheaper, but nobody wants to hear facts.

Now when Conroe comes out, it very well be another story, talk to me then.

 

[sindows]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
I am not talking about Conroe now, and I am not a fanboy. The 950 is way better than the 8xx series, but it still runs too hot, and requires a $200 mobo to OC, and my 3800 can kick its arse without watercooling OC'ed, and its cheaper, but nobody wants to hear facts.

Now when Conroe comes out, it very well be another story, talk to me then.

If I remember correctly, when the Presler first came out and members of Ananadtech started overclocking, most mobos(of various manufactureres) were limited by their fsbs at ~270(somwhere around there, couldn't remember exactly) but couldn't go higher unless they invested in that $200 Asus mobo.

However since the 940 has a 16x multiplier, 270x16=4320mhz whereas if you only had the 920, it would net 3780. For what I've seen so far, Presler at 4.1=2.6ghz x2.

So they perform pretty much the same but Intel costs $60 cheaper.

Sounds like a good deal to me

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
I am not talking about Conroe now, and I am not a fanboy. The 950 is way better than the 8xx series, but it still runs too hot, and requires a $200 mobo to OC, and my 3800 can kick its arse without watercooling OC'ed, and its cheaper, but nobody wants to hear facts.

Now when Conroe comes out, it very well be another story, talk to me then.

*shrug* whatever you say

 

[Markfw]

Its 224 max, and after that its $200. See other post my stevty, he even works for intel and agrees with me on most of these issues.

 

[pkme2]

Lets hope the X2 4800+ is affected too, I'll just wait until I see some serious downward movement........
Price cuts really can help here.

 

[blackangst1]

edit: scratch that nevermind

 

[lopri]

The point here is not the results of individual benchmarks. The point is that Intel basically halved the prices across the line of their dual-core chips, to the point their top model is comparable to AMD's bottom line, price-wise Think about the past, say, a year ago. For example, P4 3.0GHz more or less matched A64 3000+ when it comes to price. Whether it's AMD's doing or Intel's doing, the model # - price parity has been kept without their acknowledgement, and we all knew what it's all about. How about Extreme Edition? Regardless of its performance, its price has been always around FX series. Coincidence? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight..

The situation is changing drastically. Not many people will consider individual benchmark wins (and with this price cut, the performance/price of P-D is more realistic, compared to X2), heat/power, cost of mobo, etc. The importance here is that stuff that used to cost $500 untill yesterday now cost $200, and there is nothing offered from competition in that price range. Will all AT members switch to P-D? Hardly. (But someone who needs to build a new rig right now will be likely to consider) Will retail market/system builders be excited? Possibly. Will Dell be more than thrilled to offer 3.0GHz dual-core rig for $500, completed with flat-panel monitors from their inventory? Definitely.

You can't look at this from our point of view. Even then, I'm sure many of us are now more willing than before to consider Intel build. This is the power of price cuts, and that's why AMD's stock has been slowly going down, even though they're having a golden age and analyst predict near record breaking profit for the next few quarters. AMD stock holders are scared of Intel's price cut because they know it can kill AMD. AMD has one big relief though - the litigation. Looking back the whole story how CPU market has been going since last year, it's like watching such drama. Maybe AMD predicted a worse case like this earlier? Thanks to the litigation alone (of course they have excellent products to support themselves. I'm not overlooking it) Intel won't be able to push AMD down to where it was like 5 years ago, but it will certainly be able to not lose any more market share: by price cuts.

What's interesting is AMD's counter in near future. I can't even begin to guess how it's going to span out. Counter price-cut seems suicidal to AMD. (You know, AMD has been having supply problem and their dual-cores are HUGE, which means they can't afford to lose profit on every single die) If AMD don't do anything, they will have a hard time gaining further market share from now on.

The CPU market is becoming just as interesting as the GPU market.

 

[Auric]

Originally posted by: the Chase

Originally posted by: Shukla
What socket type is Conroe supposed to mount to? LGA775? If someone were to buy a mobo today-- would they be able to upgrade to Conroe in current socket w/o bios upgrade?

I hope to buy a S939 Opty-- so I hope AMD does reduce prices... but I can *see* that it may not have to.

This will be my biggest hurdle to going to a Conroe. Confusing(to me) motherboard chipset choices and changes. I imagine it won't be too hard to figure it out after reading enough threads and motherboard reviews. But still- socket 939/Nf4 was so simple....

If waiting for the release, the mainstream/performance desktop chipset to get will be i965, making it simple unless you feel like venturing into the land of dodgy third-party suppliers as you generally must with AMD -which only compounds the usual dodgy-ness, or at least quirks of various mainboards even from first tier manufacturers, let alone others.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
I am not talking about Conroe now, and I am not a fanboy. The 950 is way better than the 8xx series, but it still runs too hot, and requires a $200 mobo to OC, and my 3800 can kick its arse without watercooling OC'ed, and its cheaper, but nobody wants to hear facts.

Now when Conroe comes out, it very well be another story, talk to me then.

http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q1/pentium-xe-965/index.x?pg=14

C1 revision Pentium-D's do not run hot at all.

Power consumption for the 965XE is about the same as most X2's while idle (lower if you don't have C&Q enabled). Load power consumption is within the spread of error against the FX-60, and only a few watts higher than a single core FX-57.

 

[fatty4ksu]

"Hi. My name is Intel. I've come to destroy"

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: fatty4ksu
"Hi. My name is Intel. I've come to destroy"

:Q

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: lopri
The point here is not the results of individual benchmarks. The point is that Intel basically halved the prices across the line of their dual-core chips, to the point their top model is comparable to AMD's bottom line, price-wise Think about the past, say, a year ago. For example, P4 3.0GHz more or less matched A64 3000+ when it comes to price. Whether it's AMD's doing or Intel's doing, the model # - price parity has been kept without their acknowledgement, and we all knew what it's all about. How about Extreme Edition? Regardless of its performance, its price has been always around FX series. Coincidence? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight..

The situation is changing drastically. Not many people will consider individual benchmark wins (and with this price cut, the performance/price of P-D is more realistic, compared to X2), heat/power, cost of mobo, etc. The importance here is that stuff that used to cost $500 untill yesterday now cost $200, and there is nothing offered from competition in that price range. Will all AT members switch to P-D? Hardly. (But someone who needs to build a new rig right now will be likely to consider) Will retail market/system builders be excited? Possibly. Will Dell be more than thrilled to offer 3.0GHz dual-core rig for $500, completed with flat-panel monitors from their inventory? Definitely.

You can't look at this from our point of view. Even then, I'm sure many of us are now more willing than before to consider Intel build. This is the power of price cuts, and that's why AMD's stock has been slowly going down, even though they're having a golden age and analyst predict near record breaking profit for the next few quarters. AMD stock holders are scared of Intel's price cut because they know it can kill AMD. AMD has one big relief though - the litigation. Looking back the whole story how CPU market has been going since last year, it's like watching such drama. Maybe AMD predicted a worse case like this earlier? Thanks to the litigation alone (of course they have excellent products to support themselves. I'm not overlooking it) Intel won't be able to push AMD down to where it was like 5 years ago, but it will certainly be able to not lose any more market share: by price cuts.

What's interesting is AMD's counter in near future. I can't even begin to guess how it's going to span out. Counter price-cut seems suicidal to AMD. (You know, AMD has been having supply problem and their dual-cores are HUGE, which means they can't afford to lose profit on every single die) If AMD don't do anything, they will have a hard time gaining further market share from now on.

The CPU market is becoming just as interesting as the GPU market.

Bing Bing Bing! The man has found the prize behind Door #3! Everybody stand and applaud! Well said!

Everybody should stand up and give a big salute to AMD for forcing Intel to actually compete with better products. I mean really. When the P4s came out it was ******' embarassing. NetBurst was worse. Intel was staggering around punch-drunk with their own market power until AMD finally got its crap together and sucker-punched 'em.

AMD forced Intel to get its act together again. Now that Intel is flushing out its inventory, preparatory to its flooding the market with a high-performance chip line based on the PIII series architecture (heh heh) some of us can get nice 3.4 GHz dualies for a song. Cool.

But Conroe is looking like the one to get. And no, I wouldn't count on compatibility with current motherboards. Anyone who does is assuming too much without guarantees. Intel wants to maximize their margins just like AMD is trying to do. 975-based mobos will be optimized for Conroe.

I would love to see AMD cut their prices too. Sure, I'd love to slap in a 4800+ for awhile. But for the next year or so, what I have is fine and blasts the crap out of my desktops at work.