Wait for 939 and you're waiting for sticker shock

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.overclockers.com/tips00588/">"The AMD roadmap for the next nine months will effectively work as follows:

Socket 939 will exist for at least the next three months as a placeholder to scare people into thinking that socket 754 systems aren't too badly priced, so they'll buy them instead.

Sometime very early in 2005, AMD will wave a magic wand, and all of a sudden, socket 754 will become AMD's Celeron line, and suddenly, everyone is supposed to suddenly stop buying socket 754 and start buying socket 939 systems, leaving those suckered into socket 754 high and dry.

."</a>
 

vYktYm

Member
Dec 21, 2003
76
0
0
Good read. Gotta love articles that make the upgrading decision even harder...what to do what to do :p Hopefully the launch on the first will clear up some questions...
 

Com807877

Senior member
Jun 26, 2001
230
0
0
Hmmm.... Not really leaving high and dry.

If all one needs to take advantage of 939 is a new mobo then cost of upgrade - CPU + mobo. Not too bad as I assume many mobos will be in the 70-100 price range.
 

Ackmed

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2003
8,476
523
126
Originally posted by: eagle101
i have a brand new 3400+ will it work in a 939?
thanks

No it wont.

I just got a NF3 250 mobo, and a 3400+. I dont regret anything.

The 939 CPU and dual channel mobo isnt much faster than the current setup, but it is a lot more expensive.
 

SickBeast

Lifer
Jul 21, 2000
14,377
19
81
I'm sure the prices will level off over time. The technology is so new, and I hear they are having production problems. It's going to be the same scenario as the ATi X800 fiasco; inflated prices for the time being.

BTW, won't there be slower/cheaper CPUs than the 3500+ released for the 939-platform? Anything higher than a 3400+ is going to be overpriced until intel can pull answers to it from their collective rectums IMO.
 

Jeff7181

Lifer
Aug 21, 2002
18,368
11
81
It's no secret that socket 754 is for their "value line." That's the way it's always been since it was released.

I just don't see why this guy who wrote the article has a bug in his ass. Socket 939 brings new technology to the market... new technology is NEVER cheap.
 

imported_Aelius

Golden Member
Apr 25, 2004
1,988
0
0
New technology? BS

The tech is already in the current A64 CPUs, all they are doing is connecting circuits and reducing the size of HT from 1024K to 512K.

They are saving tons of money doing this, so they cannot justify skyrocketing the price of 939 CPUs.

It sounds like AMD is about to pull an Intel.

If so AMD is just shooting themselves in the foot for absolutely no gain what so ever. Its monumentally retarded.

They could steal a massive chunk of Intel's CPU market share practically overnight. If AMD can ramp up CPU production by 20% (which is what they apperantly can do but choose not to) it would be enough to lower the cost of 939 CPUs to undercut Intel by a massive margin yet again and steal tons of Intel's market share.

WTF are they thinking?

I think a couple of CEOs need to get the boot.
 

Algere

Platinum Member
Feb 29, 2004
2,157
0
0
Originally posted by: Aelius
New technology? BS

The tech is already in the current A64 CPUs, all they are doing is connecting circuits and reducing the size of HT from 1024K to 512K.

Cache, not HT.
 

AnnoyedGrunt

Senior member
Jan 31, 2004
596
24
81
Ummm, they are not skyrocketing the price of 939 CPU's relative to 754. The article itself shows a 939 3800+ @ $830 and a 754 3700+ @ $820.

Therefore, on a comparison WRT speed, the two sockets should be fairly similar in price.

The only issue is that you won't be able to get the slower processors in the 939 socket initially (according to this article). If they do not release lower speed 939 processors, then I agree that the adoption of that architecture will be relatively slow, but maybe they will be coming out with 939 CPU's in the $400 range as well.

I know that when I build my computer in December (when this PCI-Express and 939 has settled a bit) I will be buying whichever socket has a processor for around $300-400 and a decent upgrade path. I'd like to buy a relatively "low-end" processor so that a couple years down the road I can upgrade to a faster one without building a new computer. I kinda screwed myself with my current PC since my MoBo can't handle an faster processor (currently have XP 1800+ palomino core). Hopefully the 939 will have something available @ that price point, but if not it looks like the 754 will at least have some life in it, given the glimpse @ a 3700+ proc.

I wouldn lose hope yet.

-D'oh!
 

DarkMadMax

Member
Oct 27, 2001
39
0
0
Ummm, they are not skyrocketing the price of 939 CPU's relative to 754. The article itself shows a 939 3800+ @ $830 and a 754 3700+ @ $820.

Therefore, on a comparison WRT speed, the two sockets should be fairly similar in price

And considering some unknowns source of those prices I would call this article pure BS. - I will not make any decisions or conclusions till I see pricetags on pricewatch.
 

Com807877

Senior member
Jun 26, 2001
230
0
0
Originally posted by: Gusty987
If all one needs to take advantage of 939 is a new mobo then cost of upgrade - CPU + mobo.

Don't you have to buy Windows XP again?

Why would you? When I change hardware and activation fails I call the number, talk to the MS rep (they ask you questions), and they give me a confirmation code. Then I'm activated and ready to go.

You only have to buy another license if you are using it on more than one system at the same time.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,429
20,416
146
He makes a very good argument about AMD not ceasing the initiative when Intel is bumbling, fumbling, stumbling! Once again AMD's marketing morons cost them sales :( Just as well, looks like this skt754 setup I've been running for a number of months now will enjoy a longer life than I presumed it would. I'll buy a nF3 250GB board for the chip, and buy a Paris based CPU for the present nF3 150 board :light:
 

Ackmed

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2003
8,476
523
126
The fact remains that the 939 is only marginaly faster than 754, from the reviews Ive read anyways. I saw no point in waiting, so I got a 754 setup.
 

BlvdKing

Golden Member
Jun 7, 2000
1,173
0
0
Originally posted by: Ackmed
The fact remains that the 939 is only marginaly faster than 754, from the reviews Ive read anyways. I saw no point in waiting, so I got a 754 setup.

I figured the same. Socket 754 still has alot of life left in it.
 

Shimmishim

Elite Member
Feb 19, 2001
7,504
0
76
hehehe this has been a fun read...

i still have my an50r.. was thinking about selling it...

might as well keep it and pick up a cheap processor... :)

though i am very satisfied with my AXP-M @ 2.9 ghz
 

Muadib

Lifer
May 30, 2000
17,916
838
126
Well, I'm waiting. The way I see it, that article proves nothing other than the fact that his one source charges too much. Am I missing something?
 

spaceghost21

Senior member
May 22, 2004
900
0
0
What about the FX-55? Anyone have any news about that? I mean I read it's coming in late Q3 but anyone know what the price will be like? From what I've read it will cost same as FX-53 when it was first released.
 

clarkey01

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2004
3,419
1
0
I am a little worried 939?s will have less chance but duel memory SHOULD make up for it and go a little further ahead in performance.

But the prices ? WTF

Intel is wounded, a shot to right arm of the company with tejas gone/ Prescott issues, the emphasis on Mhz/ghz gone, but its still dangerous. AMD aren?t shifting too many Clawhammer, it?s a fact and I wish it were otherwise, one of the reason they won?t increase or run Dresden at full capacity is that they are keeping the market small, Xp?s are still the main attribute of their income and they reckon it will be until Q4. Hector has the thing with high prices so ppl think ? wow, its expensive it must be tons better then the Intel equivalent ?

Prescott won?t get any better, for the fan boys that were hailing that come 3.6 GHz or there about it would take off sorry it wont and never will, Toms showed this, maybe DDR 2 might give it a boost but 04/05 belongs to AMD, but you can just sense that AMD are going to shot themselves in the foot. I want to see AMD trample Intel and embarrass them with the huge price/performance ratio they used to have but allow it to shine through on the Hammers/Newcastle?s, this makes Intel work harder and prices come down so we all win. But if AMD decide to keep prices high Intel will just leave their prices as they are and get the money simply because there cheaper also the marketed brand.

Perhaps I sound a little biased but even the most die hard Intel fan can appreciate what hard competition does, makes Intel work harder and knocks down prices, thing is Intel will work harder and not bother to knock prices because AMD are making their chips look cheap. Some might say ? Yeah, give it a month and they?ll drop prices or even 6 months down the line?, I doubt it , Hector had the same approach with high prices @ Motorola. They?ll only shift more 64?s when they realise their prices are just too much. Perhaps there is a reason for asking so much for one, does anyone know if the production costs are higher for the K8 then for the K7?, hell there saving money on the 939?s by cutting the cache in half, so what?s up?

Id like to know how much headroom they?ve got with clock speed at 0.13 micron process, I?m not expecting huge performances gain to be seen in 939?s, in some cache hungry apps they clawhammer will pull ahead and in some memory bandwidth intense apps, the 939?s will pull ahead, so it be nice if AMD could of added an extra 100 Mhz to the chip, instead of added 100 points to the performance rating for a chip running at the same speed as a clawhammer, it would of put more pressure on Intel and perhaps justify the cost a little more.

Sorry for the long post ;-)
 

clarkey01

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2004
3,419
1
0
Muadib ,FX-55 should be 2.6Ghz, err kinda unsure but I think its safe to say its on 0.13 micron process, strange tho, I didnt think they could go that high on 130 nm, perhpas SOI is to thank ( hail IBM)

late july I think for it coming out, and it be the same price as a current fx-53

and only on 939's I think, but there wont be any performance boost I dont think , correct me if I'm wrong.
 

Com807877

Senior member
Jun 26, 2001
230
0
0
I think you are correct Clarkey.

Though I think the various product lines will be how they go about shooting themselves in the foot.

Although for an individual it is not such a big deal to move (for example) from 754 to 939 or Athlon XP to Athlon 64 or Athlon 64 to Athlon FX, for the business sector this really destroys confidence.

If I were a corporate executive right now I would be VERY hesitant to move my firms architecture to something newer AMD until AT LEAST Q2 2005. Moving my entire firm to a newer product line may cost millions of dollars/euros. How can I be sure with all of this architecture changing that AMD will not shift to something else right after we invest the money, leaving us with something that will soon be considered archaic or not supported or not mainstream? I wouldn't be confident in making such an investment at the moment, and I would either delay or go with something Intel is offering.

This might cut in to AMDs sales for the next several months.