• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How can AMD make money come Apr 22?

N

nyker96

Diamond Member
Just was reading this 2-12 post on upcoming intel price cuts

* Q6600: $851 to $530
* E6700: $530 to $316
* E6600: $316 to $224
* E6420: -------- $183
* E6320: -------- $163
* E4400: -------- $133
* E4300: $163 to $113

pentium d 935 = 84
pentium d 925 = 74
celeron D 440/430 = 59/49 (that's dual core!)

Dual core celeron at 60 bucks a piece? E4300 at 113? I mean the AMD X2s will have to be squeezed to below 100s to even compete with these dual core bad boys. I really think AMD will do better to break even by not making any chips at all. $75 X2 anyone? This is going to be crazy.

Edit: my bad celeron Ds are single core! but still this price drop is going to be nasty!
 
Dual core Celerons for sixty bucks? :Q

It might be a Celeron, but I don't recall my BP6/Dual550 system being "slow" for its time. 😀

Edit - Googling says that the Celeron D 4xx is going to be single-core. 😛

- M4H
 
Intel is trying to strong arm AMD into failure. AMD is still small fish to them, but they are not appreciating their market share.

The E4x00 chips are going to be the best bang for buck out there.

 
"Very Agrreassive"

AMD what are you doing? First, you have nothing on your roadmap that can compete with C2D any time soon. Second, you delay R600, so you're letting nVidia and Intel grab up new video card and hence motherboard sales.

Honestly, I think AMD has rested on the success of the K7 and the failure of the Pentium D for far too long. They should've had to the foresight to start looking for a next-generation solution before K8 even came out. Now, just when you're starting to gain some acceptance into the wider market, you're about to lose it to Intel again.

AMD better pray that Intel fudges the move to 45nm, and Barcelona better kick some serious Intel ass.

As for now, anyone building a computer would be insane not to go with an E4300 at $113!
 
It's already been pointed out; the Celerons are single core, but Core 2 based. Tempting.

The E4300/4400 will be the chips to beat; dual core, cheap, and easy to overclock.

AMD will likely cut prices as well. X2 3400/3600+ prices are already below $100, and will probably go somewhere south of $80.
I really think AMD will do better to break even by not making any chips at all.
Click to expand...
What an asinine comment. I guess they'll start making donuts instead?
 
Originally posted by: Farmer
As for now, anyone building a computer would be insane not to go with an E4300 at $113!
Click to expand...
Agreed, but Intel and AMD care relatively little about people who build their own PCs. Their priorities are 1) Server OEMs and 2) PC OEMs, in that order. The enthusiast BYOPC market is a drop in the pond.
 
jpeyton:

True, but when has AMD ever had that much market share there? PC OEMs use mostly Intel. They've been doing it since they started existing, and continued to do so for almost six years, when AMD obviously had a better architecture (K7, K8).
 
Originally posted by: Farmer
jpeyton:

True, but when has AMD ever had that much market share there? PC OEMs use mostly Intel. They've been doing it since they started existing, and continued to do sol even when Intel's flagship processors were the craptacular NetBurst P4s and Pentium Ds.
Click to expand...
Intel is the 800lb gorilla, no denying that.

But AMD has increased its share of the server market dramatically since the Opteron was introduced. And December 2006 was their biggest quarter for OEM PC sales so far.

Intel will cut its prices and AMD will follow. Their margins suffer while consumers win.
 
Originally posted by: jpeyton
It's already been pointed out; the Celerons are single core, but Core 2 based. Tempting.

The E4300/4400 will be the chips to beat; dual core, cheap, and easy to overclock.

AMD will likely cut prices as well. X2 3400/3600+ prices are already below $100, and will probably go somewhere south of $80.
I really think AMD will do better to break even by not making any chips at all.
Click to expand...
What an asinine comment. I guess they'll start making donuts instead?
Click to expand...

there's a new X2 3400 coming?
 
Might have to start quietly accumulating parts for my next build soon... have my eyes on a 6600 for ~$200... Frankly, I'm not really into OCing that much anyway. Man, what a good time for anyone to buy or build a PC. Love my X2 but Man, this is getting ridiculous
 
This is great.Intel is trying really hard to reduce AMD's profits.
I can't wait for the core 2 quad price to come down.It'll be the same price as the E6700 today.
 
Newbie question: Is the pricing on the Q6600 a good investment for an early quad core machine, or you think the new pricing on the E6420 a much better deal for a total system overhaul in the long run?
 
Originally posted by: hardwareking
This is great.Intel is trying really hard to reduce AMD's profits.
I can't wait for the core 2 quad price to come down.It'll be the same price as the E6700 today.
Click to expand...

That is silly, so to spite AMD Intel will cut its own profits ?? That is not the way business runs especially when you are number 1, and number 2 is well behind you in sales and there is no number 3

Intel would have a nightmare on its hands if AMD did not exist
 
In the UK at the moment, the X2 3800+ is about 2/3rds the price of the E4300 (£67 vs £100), and I haven't even seen an X2 3600+ for sale (but it would in theory be even cheaper.

Some places aren't even stocking P4's/PD's anymore....
 
Originally posted by: tallman45
Originally posted by: hardwareking
This is great.Intel is trying really hard to reduce AMD's profits.
I can't wait for the core 2 quad price to come down.It'll be the same price as the E6700 today.
Click to expand...

That is silly, so to spite AMD Intel will cut its own profits ?? That is not the way business runs especially when you are number 1, and number 2 is well behind you in sales and there is no number 3

Intel would have a nightmare on its hands if AMD did not exist
Click to expand...

No, this is a brute force way to take back some of the market share Intel has lost to AMD over the past few years.
 
Originally posted by: tallman45
Originally posted by: hardwareking
This is great.Intel is trying really hard to reduce AMD's profits.
I can't wait for the core 2 quad price to come down.It'll be the same price as the E6700 today.
Click to expand...

That is silly, so to spite AMD Intel will cut its own profits ?? That is not the way business runs especially when you are number 1, and number 2 is well behind you in sales and there is no number 3

Intel would have a nightmare on its hands if AMD did not exist
Click to expand...



I'm not even sure if that's meant to be sarcastic. Intel obviously would not be decreasing prices if AMD didn't exist. Ever since C2D came out, it became the performance king, and the AMD X2 chips were relegated to being essentially budget chips for people who wanted good performance for ~$100-$200, or a fast flagship chip for $50 or so bucks below Intel's price (ie., X2 6000+, whose primary selling point is clock speed, much like Intel during their NetBurst period). By decreasing prices, Intel is trying to edge AMD out of that niche, like keysplayr said.

Hell, if AMD didn't exist we'd still be buying 400 MHz Pentium IIs for $1000 each.

 
How long would it take Intel to kill off AMD using price war? Fab costs and salaries come from investors, not from Otellini's and/or Gelsinger's pockets of Intel. Investors these days want returns of their investments fast.
I don't know how much it costs Intel or AMD to make CPU's but it's suicidal not to satisfy investors for long periods of time. I love fast CPU's, whether it's Intel or AMD, not expensive ones due to monopoly.
 
Does AMD have nothing on the roadmap to compare with the new intels? Athlon 64 is way old now (4-5 years?)
 
Barcelona is still a few months away but that would be what I'd see them having to compete with Intel, either late this summer or early Fall. Barcelona is supposed to debut in the middle of the year but one could guess there may be some time between then and when you'd see the parts to support them.
 
Originally posted by: Farmer


Hell, if AMD didn't exist we'd still be buying 400 MHz Pentium IIs for $1000 each.
Click to expand...

actually they would probably be something like 4 Ghz dual core, sloppy itanium chips with massive amounts of cache and giving off some 300 watts of heat. :/

there would be no conroe / core 2 if AMD did not exist, and our computers would not be as fast or as efficient as they are, that much is a simple fact. Hell if it wasnt for AMD going dual core 9 months before intel, who knows if we would even have dual core at all.


Originally posted by: foges
Does AMD have nothing on the roadmap to compare with the new intels? Athlon 64 is way old now (4-5 years?)
Click to expand...


yup, barcelona, im looking forward to buying its dual core variant. 🙂
 
Originally posted by: Farmer
Originally posted by: tallman45
Originally posted by: hardwareking
This is great.Intel is trying really hard to reduce AMD's profits.
I can't wait for the core 2 quad price to come down.It'll be the same price as the E6700 today.
Click to expand...

That is silly, so to spite AMD Intel will cut its own profits ?? That is not the way business runs especially when you are number 1, and number 2 is well behind you in sales and there is no number 3

Intel would have a nightmare on its hands if AMD did not exist
Click to expand...



I'm not even sure if that's meant to be sarcastic. Intel obviously would not be decreasing prices if AMD didn't exist. Ever since C2D came out, it became the performance king, and the AMD X2 chips were relegated to being essentially budget chips for people who wanted good performance for ~$100-$200, or a fast flagship chip for $50 or so bucks below Intel's price (ie., X2 6000+, whose primary selling point is clock speed, much like Intel during their NetBurst period). By decreasing prices, Intel is trying to edge AMD out of that niche, like keysplayr said.

Hell, if AMD didn't exist we'd still be buying 400 MHz Pentium IIs for $1000 each.
Click to expand...


Microsoft and its Monopoly lawsuits is the reason Intel is happy there is an AMD and the small market share it looses to AMD is a drop in the bucket compared to the legal fees it saves


 
tallman45:

AMD has existed for about as long as Intel has: they've only been a major competitor since K7. I don't recall Intel encountering any antitrust issues in the pre-K7 days.
 
Originally posted by: jpeyton
It's already been pointed out; the Celerons are single core, but Core 2 based. Tempting.

The E4300/4400 will be the chips to beat; dual core, cheap, and easy to overclock.

AMD will likely cut prices as well. X2 3400/3600+ prices are already below $100, and will probably go somewhere south of $80.
I really think AMD will do better to break even by not making any chips at all.
Click to expand...
What an asinine comment. I guess they'll start making donuts instead?
Click to expand...

Hmmm, Advanced Micro Donuts. I like that idea!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top