What if AMD priced their lowest quad-core at $60. Would it kill the dual market?

[P4man]

I dont really game anymore, why would I want a quad core? To speed up openoffice? To be able to decode 6 HD streams?

~$ uptime
15:56:27 up 3 days, 3:18, 4 users, load average: 0.02, 0.08, 0.08

Thats actually on a quad, but if it where to break, Id just as gladly rebuild around a single core sempron or whatever is cheapest (and faster than an atom). Id probably end up with a dual, "just in case" and since the price difference just isnt there, but Id just as likely deliberately avoid a quad since I got no use for it 99.99% of the time. Ill take the lower price, heat or higher clock instead.

 

[phillyTIM]

Didn't Intel say that even the entry level point will be quad-core with IVY BRIDGE next year? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Bridge_(microarchitecture)#Ivy_Bridge

I just can't imagine buying anything under quad today!

 

[Patrick Wolf]

Didn't Intel say that even the entry level point will be quad-core with IVY BRIDGE next year? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Bridge_(microarchitecture)#Ivy_Bridge

I just can't imagine buying anything under quad today!

Perhaps, but that info was taken from an old "rumor" article.
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/new...uses-on-22nm-ivy-bridgehaswell--larrabee.aspx

 

[Battoe]

I believe the E8400 will stand as the last enthusiast dual core option (and the E6750 as the greatest of all time).

 

[weez82]

i dont know whether that would make much difference in amds sales other than to bring down the prices of all their other chips. many people buy intel just for stability/compatibility

this isnt 1999. stability/compatibility is the same for both amd and intel. People are buying intel cause right now they offer the highest performance chips. amd is still the budget brand