Why would 1156 cause a price drop in 1366?

[ercisnow]

I've seen a lot of people saying they think 1366 cpus are going to drop after the release of the 1156 cpu releases. This doesn't make sense to me, as it seems the whole point of releasing this line of cpus was to be a cheaper alternative to the 1366 cpus. If anything, I think Intel would RAISE the price to create a larger gap of consumer vs enthusiast competition.

Thoughts?

 

[Zap]

Welcome to Anandtech Forums, ercisnow.

Until Intel actually does anything (or puts it on their roadmap) everything is just crystal ball gazing.

My crystal ball says that there will either be overlap between top end socket 1156 and low end socket 1366 (and thus you can choose based on platform or mobo costs), or low end socket 1366 will be discontinued.

As you can see, I accounted for every logical eventuality. My crystal ball is reasonably accurate.

If I were to guess (and this is purely a guess and not based on any fact beyond knowing that there will definately be a performance overlap) I'd say that Intel will discontinue the Core i7 920 by February. Alternately keep the cheaper socket 1366 chip to drive demand for X58 mobos.

Whoops, did it again.

 

[Zensal]

Text

High-end Lynnfields will overlap the current low-end Nehalems, so Intel is supposedly going to discontinue their 920 and 940. They do not want to compete with themselves.

And by discontinuing their low end 1366 cpus, they are actually raising the price of the X58 platform as a whole.

In my opinion, Intel will/may have already stopped production of 920s and 940s and will sell them at their current prices until their stock is gone. With a lower supply of low-end 1366 parts, the law of supply/demand kicks in and prices may or may not go up.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Zap
Alternately keep the cheaper socket 1366 chip to drive demand for X58 mobos.

IMO this is what will happen.

Intel may prefer to drop the 920 but at the same time they are relying on mobo makers to have an incentive to continue iterating and improving LGA1366 mobos (for desktop market, not speaking to WS/server markets) and that incentive requires certain minimum volumes of LGA1366 processors in order to generate a viable market size for LGA1366/X58 desktop mobos.

 

[GEOrifle]

Dissontinuing i7 920 will rise prices on them because replacements will be WAY BELLOW
compared to them.
Don't forget SONY's steps with PS3 60 GB with Emotion CHIP ($499), they discontinued it by releasing cheaper console without Emotion Chip for same money($499) and now guys are selling all PS3 60GB consoles on Ebay or another stores for $600-700.

 

[Ben90]

Why exactly would Intel want to pull the 920 when they get more money from a x58 chipset then a p55? I know the whole point of the p55 lineup is to try to increase market share with your average joe/budget concerned consumer... but wouldn't they want a consumer on the wall between 1366/1156 to get a premium part vs the cheaper one? Unless they are trying to force the consumer to go to a 940, which in my opinion will absolutely kill sales of x58

 

[Shmee]

well, its actually the 950 now, but that's what I hear, too bad though.

 

[ectogamit]

I guess there is no point to upgrading now. why they would go to 2 or 3 different sockets at the same time is totally ridiculous. I liked it when AMD and Intel chips could be used in the same motherboards. I generally hate AMD, but I guess I better check out their new stuff. I do not like the games Intel is playing. May have to go AMD just for spite. I would be willing to loose 5 to 10% performance if the price was right. and i was guaranteed a longer lasting platform.

 

[Beanie46]

Originally posted by: ectogamit
I guess there is no point to upgrading now. why they would go to 2 or 3 different sockets at the same time is totally ridiculous. I liked it when AMD and Intel chips could be used in the same motherboards. I generally hate AMD, but I guess I better check out their new stuff. I do not like the games Intel is playing. May have to go AMD just for spite. I would be willing to loose 5 to 10% performance if the price was right. and i was guaranteed a longer lasting platform.

Thanks for coming over from AMD Zone. Enjoy your stay, but please, when you're trying to be critical, get your facts straight.


First, yes, there are two sockets for Intel motherboads, like there always have been. During the 5 years the Socket 775 reigned, there was an alternative socket being used, the Socket 771.

Just like the Socket 1366, the Socket 771 was a server-based socket. Yes indeed, the Socket 1366 platform is in Intel's server platform side of computer hardware. Strange, isn't it?

The Socket 1156, the replacement for Socket 775, is the consumer side of Intel's hardware. Not so hard now, is it?


But, since you brought up AMD and their "one socket fits all cpus" crap, let's examine what has happened since Intel bought out Socket 775.


2004....AMD introduces Socket 939. Great socket. But this introduction killed off Socket 754, which was introduced only a year earlier. 2004 is the year Intel introduced Socket 775.

2006.....AMD introduces AM2 and breaks yet again compatibility with older cpus as no Socket 939 cpu will fit in AM2 motherboards. Sorry, guys! On the other hand, Intel continues Socket 775.

2007.....AMD introduces AM2+, yet again breaking compatibility with previous cpus. While AM2 processors, for the most part, will work on AM2+ motherboards, the AM2 cpus do not benefit from the faster HyperTransport 3.0 and separate power planes on AM2+ motherboards. A BIOS update is required for AM2/AM2+ compatibility and MSI, for one, simply stated that their AM2 motherboards are not compatible with AM2+ processors.

2009......AMD yet again breaks compatibility with the introduction of AM3 socket. Yet again, AMD owners are left in the lurch because while AM3 cpus will work on some AM2+ motherboards, it's completely up to the motherboard manufacturer to release BIOS updates to allow this functional compatibility (and it is true some AM2+ motherboards are labeled AM3 Ready, but they are far fewer in number than the ones that won't work with AM3 cpus.) BUT, AM2+ processors are stuck on AM2+ boards as they WILL NOT FUNCTION on an AM3 socketed board.

Intel continues the Socket 775, five years without interruption, until the release of Socket 775's replacement in September, 2009.......the Socket 1156.

And in the future, 2011 will arrive with another new socket from AMD......codenamed G34 so far, and this will again break all compatibility with previous cpus from AMD.

Guess changing sockets every two years is "AMD cpus fit every AMD motherboard socket out there" in AMD Land. It isn't for rational persons.


Guess spite has no place for wanting the best bang-for-buck in buying components, given that current pricing of the i5 750 is $180 and the AMD 965 is $230. (Motherboard costs and memory costs are equal as there are motherboards on both platforms at $100 or less and memory is exactly the same.)

So, enjoy paying the AMD tax.....higher price for lower performance......while rational persons will judge the two platforms for what they really are and choose accordingly.

Oh, and just how long will that AM3 socket last? A year? Little more? And what's your upgrade path when Socket G34 comes out? I know Socket 1156/1366 iwll long outlast AM3 and probably G34, given AMD's history of changing sockets every two years.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: Beanie46
So, enjoy paying the AMD tax.....higher price for lower performance......while rational persons will judge the two platforms for what they really are and choose accordingly.

You have a point currently. I have always had an AMD system. First system was a Socket A Athalon chip. Upgraded that for a bit, skipped the 754/939/940 stuff but upgraded to AM2 when it was first released. All my AMD systems were great.

I just bought an I7 920, 1366 mobo, and ram to upgrade from my AM2 system. An AMD based system would have cost about the same (with DDR3), but not be as fast as the Intel system. I love AMD, but Intel is dominating CPUs at the moment.

 

[nyker96]

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus

Originally posted by: Beanie46
So, enjoy paying the AMD tax.....higher price for lower performance......while rational persons will judge the two platforms for what they really are and choose accordingly.

You have a point currently. I have always had an AMD system. First system was a Socket A Athalon chip. Upgraded that for a bit, skipped the 754/939/940 stuff but upgraded to AM2 when it was first released. All my AMD systems were great.

I just bought an I7 920, 1366 mobo, and ram to upgrade from my AM2 system. An AMD based system would have cost about the same (with DDR3), but not be as fast as the Intel system. I love AMD, but Intel is dominating CPUs at the moment.

i'm sure amd will respond with a price adjustment soon since they don't currently got anything new to compete at i5 price points yet. however, I do worry by the time they got a new core that could compete with i5s intel would have made 32nm available.

 

[Beanie46]

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus

Originally posted by: Beanie46
So, enjoy paying the AMD tax.....higher price for lower performance......while rational persons will judge the two platforms for what they really are and choose accordingly.

You have a point currently. I have always had an AMD system. First system was a Socket A Athalon chip. Upgraded that for a bit, skipped the 754/939/940 stuff but upgraded to AM2 when it was first released. All my AMD systems were great.

I just bought an I7 920, 1366 mobo, and ram to upgrade from my AM2 system. An AMD based system would have cost about the same (with DDR3), but not be as fast as the Intel system. I love AMD, but Intel is dominating CPUs at the moment.

Don't get me wrong.....I'm not an Intel fangal or anything. I just think hardware deserves to be judged on its merits at the moment, nothing more.

I've been about 50/50 in Intel and AMD over the years.

My first AMD system I built was a 386DX40 back around 1991. Gave a bit faster performance than the Intel 486SX25 that was out at the time. It replaced an Intel 8088-based computer.

I had three Athlon 64/X2 64/Opteron systems running in the house during the early 2000's, on socket 754 and 939.

When it came time to start upgrading off them, it was AM2 vs. C2D. Guess which won out then.

Originally posted by: nyker96

i'm sure amd will respond with a price adjustment soon since they don't currently got anything new to compete at i5 price points yet. however, I do worry by the time they got a new core that could compete with i5s intel would have made 32nm available.

And this is just the problem with AMD. Every time they get close to parity with Intel, at least in the last few years, Intel leaps ahead, again.

AMD needs Magny-Cours ASAP, but by the time it arrives, Intel will have Sandy Bridge out and AMD will again be playing catch up.

Honestly, it's too bad, too. AMD had the performance lead for a few years and let it slip through their fingers. And what did AMD think Intel was going to do, make P4's forever? History shows that didn't happen.....Intel woke up and look where we are now. AMD's top line processor being humbled by an "entry" level cpu by Intel, which is $50 cheaper than the competitive AMD offering.

I hope AMD survives and finally prospers. But, given their history, it looks more and more like AMD will remain the low-end leader.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: nyker96

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus

Originally posted by: Beanie46
So, enjoy paying the AMD tax.....higher price for lower performance......while rational persons will judge the two platforms for what they really are and choose accordingly.

You have a point currently. I have always had an AMD system. First system was a Socket A Athalon chip. Upgraded that for a bit, skipped the 754/939/940 stuff but upgraded to AM2 when it was first released. All my AMD systems were great.

I just bought an I7 920, 1366 mobo, and ram to upgrade from my AM2 system. An AMD based system would have cost about the same (with DDR3), but not be as fast as the Intel system. I love AMD, but Intel is dominating CPUs at the moment.

i'm sure amd will respond with a price adjustment soon since they don't currently got anything new to compete at i5 price points yet. however, I do worry by the time they got a new core that could compete with i5s intel would have made 32nm available.

Considering AMD isn't planning to release a new core (that would be bulldozer or bobcat, take your pick as to which you think will come first) until they debut their 32nm in late 2010/early 2011, the concern there would not be competition with 45nm i5 nor with 32nm westmere but rather 32nm Sandy Bridge.

Unless of course if AMD's plans are to remain in the very low-end sub-$200 ASP marketspace, in which case yeah when Intel releases Sandy Bridge and relegates 32nm westmere SKU's to sub-$200 territory then AMD will be competing with i5 in 2011.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Beanie46

Originally posted by: ectogamit
I guess there is no point to upgrading now. why they would go to 2 or 3 different sockets at the same time is totally ridiculous. I liked it when AMD and Intel chips could be used in the same motherboards. I generally hate AMD, but I guess I better check out their new stuff. I do not like the games Intel is playing. May have to go AMD just for spite. I would be willing to loose 5 to 10% performance if the price was right. and i was guaranteed a longer lasting platform.

Thanks for coming over from AMD Zone. Enjoy your stay, but please, when you're trying to be critical, get your facts straight.


First...

Well said and well done. I wish AT forums had a hand-clap emoticon.

We'll have barely gotten thru the current FUD generating zone-wave with i5 before they will be cranking up the campaign again against whatever westmere and 32nm is going to bring to the marketspace this late fall.

Personally I stand little to zero chance of buying an i5, but I am ecstatic over the prospects of the i5 making a PhII 965 purchase all the cheaper.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Beanie46


Intel continues the Socket 775, five years without interruption, until the release of Socket 775's replacement in September, 2009.......the Socket 1156.

It's funny you conveniently leave out the fact that S775 sockets are typically not electrically compatible with one another and a new motherboard was required for the switch from single core P4, Pentium D, Core 2, and 45nm Core 2. This is essentially a new motherboard for each CPU generation upgrade (with a slight exception for the Core 2 65nm to 45nm transition...some of those were forwards compatible), with the only difference being that S775 could house all the old S775 previously released. However, the backwards compatibility is pretty much a moot point because if the old motherboard works with your current CPU, it makes no sense to buy a new one.

That said, Intel's high end chipsets fare better than their "value" ones. My 975X motherboard survived my upgrades from a P4 660, to PD 920, and then to an E6600. I switched to a P55 motherboard for the Q9550 I used to have though.

 

[DefRef]

Kudos to Beanie46 for that history. I built three AMD-based systems culminating in my current rig (see sig) which had the misfortune of being built a few months before AMD decided to orphan S939. For nearly four years, I've been able to do several video card updates (7800GT>SLI 7900GT>8800 GTS>SLI 8800GT) but for every newer, faster CPU AMD has put out, I've been left with my nose pressed against the glass because they weren't for my mobo.

As Beanie laid out, this has been SOP for AMD forever and even if Intel wasn't absolutely pounding AMD's sorry arse on both price and performance, I would never build another AMD system because they are guaranteed to be forced into obsolescence before I am ready to upgrade. I'm building an X58 rig and should be good to go for the next 3-4 years with occasional CPU/GPU updates. Suck it, AMD!

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: Beanie46

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus

Originally posted by: Beanie46
So, enjoy paying the AMD tax.....higher price for lower performance......while rational persons will judge the two platforms for what they really are and choose accordingly.

You have a point currently. I have always had an AMD system. First system was a Socket A Athalon chip. Upgraded that for a bit, skipped the 754/939/940 stuff but upgraded to AM2 when it was first released. All my AMD systems were great.

I just bought an I7 920, 1366 mobo, and ram to upgrade from my AM2 system. An AMD based system would have cost about the same (with DDR3), but not be as fast as the Intel system. I love AMD, but Intel is dominating CPUs at the moment.

Don't get me wrong.....I'm not an Intel fangal or anything. I just think hardware deserves to be judged on its merits at the moment, nothing more.

I've been about 50/50 in Intel and AMD over the years.

My first AMD system I built was a 386DX40 back around 1991. Gave a bit faster performance than the Intel 486SX25 that was out at the time. It replaced an Intel 8088-based computer.

I had three Athlon 64/X2 64/Opteron systems running in the house during the early 2000's, on socket 754 and 939.

When it came time to start upgrading off them, it was AM2 vs. C2D. Guess which won out then.

I wasn't trying to suggest you're a Intel fangal or anything like that, just agreeing with the market currently there is an "AMD tax" so to speak.

When I upgraded to AM2, the C2D was out but I still wanted to go with AMD (even though they were the slower chips). I liked the platform better than the Intel offerings at the time. Also, I wanted the option for SLI (which I ended up winning two 8800 GT's so SLI came in handy) which Intel didn't have at the time I purchased my system IIRC (March of 2006).

This generation though, the i7 just is too great a chip and the platform is outstanding. AMD's 965 chip is at least in the game with the i5/i7's performance wise, but when price is factored in AMD is losing to any i5/i7 chip. The i5 beats it performance wise, is a cheaper chip, and once the initial release prices of P55 boards come down mobos will be about the same price as the AM3 higher end boards.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Personally I stand little to zero chance of buying an i5, but I am ecstatic over the prospects of the i5 making a PhII 965 purchase all the cheaper.

Under 150$ quads plz, preferably at 100$

 

[betasub]

Originally posted by: Beanie46
{snip}
2004....AMD introduces Socket 939. Great socket. But this introduction killed off Socket 754, which was introduced only a year earlier. 2004 is the year Intel introduced Socket 775.
{snip}

Nice riposte - but why not include AMD's Socket 940 in this section? It was the workstation/server platform for the early Opterons, making the 939/940 line-up a good comparison with today's 1156/1366 (although I admit the 754/939 comparison resonates well because of the memory channels).