Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel Kentsfield - Price speculation

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 25, 2006 8:14:28 AM

Not sure if Intel has stated how much this quad-core chip will cost when it comes to market, but does anyone care to guess what it may be?

- Op
a b à CPUs
March 25, 2006 10:36:57 AM

Lest Intel act as though they are giving away 2 free additional cores for the price of a dual, I'd be surprised to see any variants appear initially uder $600-$700....; there will probably be an EE variant surely worthy of $1300+ of someone's hard earned dollars, but..not mine! :-)
March 25, 2006 10:58:22 AM

Damnit, we are talking Kentsfield aren't we ?
Below comments were for Woodcrest, but still apply to topic anyway. :p 

It should be cheap, especially if they use 2 x Allendale chips, which may have just been the 'Celeron' of the next gen 'Core' line anyway, so pairing 2 of them on a multi-chip module should be fairly cheap.

I'd lean towards a (possible) selling price of around US$600 or so, quite possibly as low as US$450, but they won't release the product from the get go, so consider looking at Woodcrest. Chances are the possible selling price is well under what they'll be asking for such a MCM though. :cry: 

================================================

US$700 - US$1100 per chip, depending on model.
(Lower end ones will be cheaper).

It may not be clocked as high as the Conroe XE/EE though, as Intel are aiming for performance per watt (per square inch). Offering them at 3.0 GHz or less would be far more viable for Intel as their target for them is the server market.

However, They could also do a 'heavy workstation' varient of it for 2-way systems and clock it higher than the initial server offering, but it would cost.

Based on the CPU being twice the surface area (of Conroe at same die size) it could cost up to four times (although more likely three times) as much as upper Conroe models to make (excluding R&D costs). As such the wouldn't be able to go lower than US$700 initially at my guess.

AMD lit a fire up Intel's ass, and Intel give back 3x fold what they take in a market perspective.

AMD better have an ace up their sleeve.

How much are the Core Duo based Xeon LV's selling for ?, They only came out in recently (Mid March 2006), and are already kicking ass compared to Xeons based on NetBurst. While fitting in the same systems and using a fraction of the power.

Most analysts are leaning towards my above comments, and from a technical / manufacturing perspective it adds up in Intels favour.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Next_Generation_Micr...
================================================

Although if AMD make 65w (or less, say < 40w) Opteron 200 series CPUs for Socket 940 still, clocked at higher speeds (3.0 GHz is the magic number AMD need I think) with more cache, it will make Socket 940 look very attractive and existing customers could just install a drop-in upgrade.

It would be a fine upgrade, and lead to my PC becoming silent, while having good power..... Even though it is technically possible to do they'll likely mass produce Socket F(1207) and Socket AM2(still 940) CPUs and force mainboard (and RAM :cry:  ) upgrades / replacements.
Related resources
March 25, 2006 3:05:03 PM

Kentsfield will be priced the exact same as all other Extreme Editions namely $999 since it is a direct line replacement for the Conroe Extreme Edition. Kentsfield is targeted for a Q1 2007 launch alongside Windows Vista.

Quote:
Kentsfield will be Intel's replacement for the Conroe Extreme Edition, now expected to be released in the third quarter of this year.


http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30504
March 25, 2006 3:06:24 PM

Quote:
Kentsfield will be priced the exact same as all other Extreme Editions namely $999 since it is a direct line replacement for the Conroe Extreme Edition. Kentsfield is targeted for a Q1 2007 launch alongside Windows Vista.

Kentsfield will be Intel's replacement for the Conroe Extreme Edition, now expected to be released in the third quarter of this year.


http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30504


Too expensive, Im poor!
March 25, 2006 3:32:55 PM

Quote:
Kentsfield will be priced the exact same as all other Extreme Editions namely $999 since it is a direct line replacement for the Conroe Extreme Edition. Kentsfield is targeted for a Q1 2007 launch alongside Windows Vista.


According to this link, the Extreme Edition costs $1063.

Keep spreading your FUD. :wink:
March 25, 2006 3:44:53 PM

I was talking suggested pricing. I have no control over market conditions, availability, or retailer profit margins.

If you're really trying to insult me you should at least get your facts right.

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductList.jsp?ThirdCate...

The 955EE is available for $969.00 open box with shipping included and for $1020 including shipping for a mint condition one. Now don't tell me you're going to nitpick for it being $21 above suggested pricing.

As well, FUD is supposed to be negative marketing toward a competitors product. I really don't see how providing an indication for pricing of an Intel product in any way puts AMD in a negative light.
March 25, 2006 3:56:35 PM

Once again, this is what you said:
Quote:
Kentsfield will be priced the exact same as all other Extreme Editions namely $999


Even your link says the d@mn thing costs $1020.
March 25, 2006 4:12:01 PM

Em, I think we're beginning to talk in circles so I guess I should have been more specific in my original message.

Quote:
Kentsfield will be priced (MSRP by Intel) the exact same as all other Extreme Editions namely $999

Like I said before, if you are going to spend around $1000 on a processor, picking on $21 isn't going to make or break your decision.
March 26, 2006 5:02:48 AM

I think what he was trying to say is that it may cost US$999 in 1 thousand unit quantities initially.

Bearing in mind Kentsville may just be a quad-core MCM (2 dual-core Allendales on a module) and not clocked at high as Conroe XE/EE it may cost less, but not be targeted at gamers.

Since Allendales are just 'failed' Conroes with half their L2 cache disabled, and possibly depending on demand, a new die with just half the cache of Conroe. They should be cheaper to produce than Conroe. (Bear in mind however that 2 such chips are required on a MCM to make Kentsville.).

Everything credible points at a 2 x Allendale MCM = Kentsville.

The Inquirer just makes stories up - Because no one really likes talking to them... No-one credible anyway :p 


The image / site above is more credible than 'The Inquirer'

Having 4 cores at 2.67 to 2.80 GHz is not going to help in gaming. Gamers would be far better off with just a dual-core at 3.00 - 3.33 GHz. That becomes especially true considering the Conroe XE/EE has more cache available 'per core' than Kentsville.

My money is on Kentsville being targetted at cost effective servers (like the Pentium 4 servers with ECC RAM), and also for video encoding. Bear in mind video encoding (HD, MPEG4, etc) is going to be a booming market in the next 5 years (2007 - 2012). Video encoding also requires very little cache per core, however it does benefit from HyperThreading.

eg: A Celeron D and Pentium 4 (PreScott) both clocked the same, with HyperThreading disabled on the PreScott will both encode video at the same speed. (+/-3%, which video encoders doing 2+ hour jobs don't care about).

Thats my 2c, but I like to think my thoughts are worth more than 2c, so pay up. 8)
March 27, 2006 5:31:42 AM

Yeah like the Pentium 4 is only for desktops / workstations. :p 

http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Networking/Products...

http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Networking/Products...

http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Networking/Products...

http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/Networking/Products...

Not to mention IBM, Dell, etc "Pentium 4 servers" in the newspaper.
And that's just the Gigabyte ones. :p 

The 'affordable' Opteron 100 series servers (for Socket 939) are just like them btw. Requires Unbuffered (as key'd that way), but still supports, and strongly recommends the use of, ECC memory with such 'affordable server' style systems.

I reckon Kentsville could fill that roll, just aswell (if not better at that price range) than Woodcrest.
March 27, 2006 10:56:08 AM

I dont think they will be much more expensive than Conroe - if at all.
March 27, 2006 12:31:18 PM

Intel will do the same thing that they and AMD have done:

Have an super-duper model that is 1,000+ and other variants with lower stock frequencies and less cache ranging from 200-600.

I could see the first quad cores being a little more than $1,000, but once demand goes down the price would go down as well.
!