Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD speaks about price cuts to match intel.

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 26, 2006 12:43:44 PM

"Unlike before, when AMD used to implement low-cost strategies, developing profitable growth is now our priority concern, and we avoid blindly following price-cut fluctuations in the industry."

Can they keep their prices competitive as well as make a profit?

http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20060524A6028.html

Discuss:
May 26, 2006 12:50:31 PM

They will only be able to be price competitive and still turn a profit with 65nm production.

Hope they get it on-line ASAP.
May 26, 2006 5:19:38 PM

it's a different situation now though. intel is going to be making faster processors for less money, not just processors for less money.

AMD will have to cut at least some imo.
Related resources
May 26, 2006 5:26:33 PM

i dont care why?


Cheaper prices = me using less money. and thats what matters to me, when i go tto newegg and i see a lower price i buy.
May 26, 2006 5:27:55 PM

Let me translate:
"We intended to build processors that offer good performance for the money in the past, but now we decided to go the greedy way and we just want to rip off our customers instead of trying to offer the customer better prices just like the competition does."

Thats what they would say, if they werent using marketing-language.
May 26, 2006 5:55:37 PM

Guys, get real.
If Intel sells faster processors for less money, nobody will buy AMD.
Not even the most idiotic of the fanboys.
This statement AMD has made is IMHO more of a signal to the markets to indicate that they won't rush into dumping their prices or engage in a price war.
But of course, they'll have to position their offering based on its real value.. and given the prospected performance/price of Conroe, this won't be an easy task.
May 26, 2006 7:02:38 PM

I think they will have to lower prices at least for a while... I have to wonder what this will do to AMD's profits. Didnt they just become profitable ? Ahhh well lower prices are always a good thing maybe I can finaly get a couple of X2's for my 2 A64 rigs. As it stands right now it was just tooooo expensive 300$ a pop for the cheapest X2. They should cost about 150$ :) 
May 26, 2006 8:13:49 PM

Quote:
Guys, get real.
If Intel sells faster processors for less money, nobody will buy AMD.
Not even the most idiotic of the fanboys.
This statement AMD has made is IMHO more of a signal to the markets to indicate that they won't rush into dumping their prices or engage in a price war.
But of course, they'll have to position their offering based on its real value.. and given the prospected performance/price of Conroe, this won't be an easy task.


Exactly, I think that AMD is at a crossroads here between choosing whether they will pick the investors, or try to please their fan base of millions of loyal who have spread AMD's performance over Intel practically by word of mouth. Of course they will aim for both, but that would be very difficult for them in the near future since investors always look at the bottom line and margins. If AMD would try to compete with Intel in a price war that would seriously hurt both profits and margins, and investors would dump the stock. Intel on the other hand is at a position where its stock is at a 3 year low and its profit loss and low margins are already reflected in their stock. So I believe that based on their comments, they probably feel that they have achieved a level where they don't necessarily need to please their fan base anymore, and that their products can speak for their selves. We will see how this pans out in the 2H of 06.
May 26, 2006 8:41:13 PM

Quote:
Let me translate:
"We intended to build processors that offer good performance for the money in the past, but now we decided to go the greedy way and we just want to rip off our customers instead of trying to offer the customer better prices just like the competition does."

Thats what they would say, if they werent using marketing-language.



That's unfair. AMD has survived when Transmeta, Cyrix, NatSemi, and others have been bulldozed by Intel. WHy should they lower prices? Core 2 has to compete with P4. Unless Intel shorted the last few runs they will be knee-deep in crappy space heaters until October.
May 26, 2006 8:55:01 PM

Quote:
Guys, get real.
If Intel sells faster processors for less money, nobody will buy AMD.
Not even the most idiotic of the fanboys.
This statement AMD has made is IMHO more of a signal to the markets to indicate that they won't rush into dumping their prices or engage in a price war.
But of course, they'll have to position their offering based on its real value.. and given the prospected performance/price of Conroe, this won't be an easy task.


Exactly, I think that AMD is at a crossroads here between choosing whether they will pick the investors, or try to please their fan base of millions of loyal who have spread AMD's performance over Intel practically by word of mouth. Of course they will aim for both, but that would be very difficult for them in the near future since investors always look at the bottom line and margins. If AMD would try to compete with Intel in a price war that would seriously hurt both profits and margins, and investors would dump the stock. Intel on the other hand is at a position where its stock is at a 3 year low and its profit loss and low margins are already reflected in their stock. So I believe that based on their comments, they probably feel that they have achieved a level where they don't necessarily need to please their fan base anymore, and that their products can speak for their selves. We will see how this pans out in the 2H of 06.


WHat none of you see to rememer tis that AMD is still worth what they charge. They are not competing against Core 2 at the time. IF that were true Intel would have went out of business, since for the last 3 years they have been selling chips that can't compete with Athlon but cost more.

So accordign to you, NO ONE bought a Pentium D. AT ANY SPEED.
May 26, 2006 8:58:35 PM

I don't think AMD could match the price cuts done with that of Intel. I mean judging from AMD's sales and market share it's a corporate suicide to do so. It's not like AM2 could expect high sales when it comes out.
May 26, 2006 9:14:53 PM

Quote:
They will only be able to be price competitive and still turn a profit with 65nm production.

Hope they get it on-line ASAP.



Whats taking them so long to get it online? are they just waiting to release it, or are they having serious issues??

---------------------------------------------
Fighting online is like competing in the special olympics...even if you do win, you're still retarded
May 26, 2006 9:38:40 PM

Baron makes a point. For years the Pentium was getting thrashed by AMD but they are fine. AMD will take a few hits, but if they concentrate on producing a new architecture then they will be fine in the future.
May 26, 2006 10:09:13 PM

Wow, theres a striking post title.
Isnt that how it works? Competition?
May 26, 2006 10:18:49 PM

Quote:
They will only be able to be price competitive and still turn a profit with 65nm production.

Hope they get it on-line ASAP.



Whats taking them so long to get it online? are they just waiting to release it, or are they having serious issues??

---------------------------------------------
Fighting online is like competing in the special olympics...even if you do win, you're still retarded

First of all... AMD has to refine the 65nm process for commercial production, and then refine the new processors that will be manufactured. This, of course, takes time. Plus, AMD has to build up a reserve of CPUs to act as a buffer in case demand exceeds production, which would give AMD time enough to react to the demand and increase production, but this again, takes time. All in all, its best not to rush things, but then again, its good not to delay, so I can understand why AMD is sticking to its set deadlines
May 26, 2006 10:35:12 PM

Quote:
Let me translate:
"We intended to build processors that offer good performance for the money in the past, but now we decided to go the greedy way and we just want to rip off our customers instead of trying to offer the customer better prices just like the competition does."

Thats what they would say, if they werent using marketing-language.



That's unfair. AMD has survived when Transmeta, Cyrix, NatSemi, and others have been bulldozed by Intel. WHy should they lower prices? Core 2 has to compete with P4. Unless Intel shorted the last few runs they will be knee-deep in crappy space heaters until October.

If I remeber correctly, at that time all these companies inlcuding AMD were actually only competing in the low end of the cpu market and they (AMD) had a better product then the rest of the companies that went under. AMD back then had minimal market share in the cpu industry and profits were unheard of so they were able to fly under Intel's radar. Now it looks like Intel has their sights set on AMD in both performance and price. Although it could only be for a couple of quarters, that just might be enough to scare investors away from this company. Investors realize that in a theoritical scenerio were AMD and Intel are equal at performance and price that Intel would have the advantage because of capacity, manufacturing, marketing, money etc.. To answer your question about the p4 competing against the Core2, well actually it looks like Intel will be moving cutting prices on the P4 down to low end market, low enough to compete against the semprons. This I believe is to get some of the retail market share back. I can see it now.... at best buy, a $399 3.0ghz P4 up against a $399 sempron.
a c 131 à CPUs
a b À AMD
a b å Intel
May 26, 2006 10:38:23 PM

As said above. For a long time the p4 was getting crushed my the K8's
and yet there was not "intels going down threads" all over the place

It is just stupid to see all the Conroe Hype.... Yes its a good cpu....but it is going after a 3+ year old amd cpu... Duhhh?

EDIT

also before the AM2 topic comes up..... its just 939 with ddr2
May 26, 2006 10:43:23 PM

I think what many people are forgetting is that AMD has SAID they are willing to lose desktop competetivness to Intel for a while. They are focusing on server processors where they will hold a technological advantage because of the I/O with hypertransport vs. the FSB Intel will still be using.

The short of it is AMD will be beat in the desktop and they already know it. And they can't do anything about it right now so they aren't going to. They are going to club Intel's head in with high end 8 way quad core server processors because their processors scale better.

Period


Teldar
May 26, 2006 10:47:19 PM

AMD still has the best processors currently available in the desktop market. As soon as Conroe is unleashed they will lower their prices, but until then they are going to make as much money off of their current lineup (including AM2) for as long as they can. They've made a name for themselves and need to make as much money off of it as they can before Intel starts gaining ground again. Most people won't even know what a Conroe, AM2, Core 2 Duo, etc, is until the holiday season. AMD knows they can still make money because of that. This is why competition is a good thing.

Quote:
Let me translate:
"We intended to build processors that offer good performance for the money in the past, but now we decided to go the greedy way and we just want to rip off our customers instead of trying to offer the customer better prices just like the competition does."

Thats what they would say, if they werent using marketing-language.


Intel uses the same marketing language & has just as much greed. Intel not only can, but needs to market Conroe at a better price point than AMD. They have much to lose if they don't start getting aggressive. They've learned that AMD can compete with them and that they (Intel) are no longer the top dog across the board. They have no choice but to get competitive now, something they haven't been doing lately even though they were more than willing to use that same marketing language to make people think they were with their current product line-up.

It's just business. It's about making money. Plain and simple. Neither Intel nor AMD care about what's best for YOU. They only care about your money and their bottom line.

Investors won't run away from either one right now because they'll want to invest in both companies. I would think more along the lines of more investors coming onboard with both of them because they see the competition is going to heat up. Both companies have proven that they can do very well when challenged. Investors won't jump ship until one or the other starts drowning. Neither company is even close to that at this point.
May 26, 2006 11:40:17 PM

Reality time....

Based on what we have seen, an Athlon FX62 will perform somewhere between the 2.13 ghz Conroe and the 2.40 ghz Conroe. (Prices at $244 and $316 respectively)

So even taking into account rampant AMD Fanboyism, this make the FX62 a $279 part.. (or more likely a $2,000 8xx Opteron) but in reality.... it's not a retail part anymore...

AMD will likley push out a few speed bumps (3.0, 3.2, maybe 3.4 ghz), maybe Zram....K8L ahead of schedule.... who knows, but the Universe has changed, and the faster AMD reacts the better chance they have to live.
May 27, 2006 12:04:56 AM

Quote:
I think what many people are forgetting is that AMD has SAID they are willing to lose desktop competetivness to Intel for a while. They are focusing on server processors where they will hold a technological advantage because of the I/O with hypertransport vs. the FSB Intel will still be using.

The short of it is AMD will be beat in the desktop and they already know it. And they can't do anything about it right now so they aren't going to. They are going to club Intel's head in with high end 8 way quad core server processors because their processors scale better.

Period


Teldar


I agree, only problem with is that 8 way servers are in the 1K, 4 way are in the 100K, while 2 way and single servers each are in the millions of sales per quarter. While amd will continue to have the advantage in the 4 way and 8 way servers they will lose market share in the 1-2 way servers to the woodcrest. Question is will the high end server sales be enough to keep them out of the red.
May 27, 2006 12:19:58 AM

Quote:
As said above. For a long time the p4 was getting crushed my the K8's
and yet there was not "intels going down threads" all over the place

It is just stupid to see all the Conroe Hype.... Yes its a good cpu....but it is going after a 3+ year old amd cpu... Duhhh?

EDIT

also before the AM2 topic comes up..... its just 939 with ddr2


Well actually there were, only difference is that intel continued to sell alot of them for high margins even with the atholon64 beating them performance wise. I'm just not sure that AMD will be able to do the same when the core2 comes out.
May 27, 2006 1:18:56 AM

Quote:
Let me translate:
"We intended to build processors that offer good performance for the money in the past, but now we decided to go the greedy way and we just want to rip off our customers instead of trying to offer the customer better prices just like the competition does."

That's what they would say, if they werent using marketing-language.



That's unfair. AMD has survived when Transmeta, Cyrix, NatSemi, and others have been bulldozed by Intel. WHy should they lower prices? Core 2 has to compete with P4. Unless Intel shorted the last few runs they will be knee-deep in crappy space heaters until October.

P4 will not be competeing with core 2 exept on benchmark sites and on forums.

Most of the desktops are going to the business world. In that world modern process don't work very hard, mostly thin client based apps. For example we are about to buy 1000 desktops P4 3.0 to be exact if a 3.2 cost $10 more that's an additional $10k which for nearly zero ROI. Also we don't like to make changes with configuration regardless of how low the risk. If I authorize the purchase of $600,000 worth of PCs that cause some kind of glitch with our code and we lost 1 days worth of work About 2 million in review I would have a lot of explaining to do. Risk extremely remote do I care no.

There will be no competition within Intel. This is a battle for the much lower consumer market who doesn't for the most part doesn't refresh there system every 3 years.

If Core 2 is as good as reported so far AMD will have to cut cost to sell CPU's. Core 2 will is not expected to be in volume until Q4 so don't expect the price to fall much sooner.
May 27, 2006 2:13:38 AM

Quote:
AMD still has the best processors currently available in the desktop market. As soon as Conroe is unleashed they will lower their prices, but until then they are going to make as much money off of their current lineup (including AM2) for as long as they can. They've made a name for themselves and need to make as much money off of it as they can before Intel starts gaining ground again. Most people won't even know what a Conroe, AM2, Core 2 Duo, etc, is until the holiday season. AMD knows they can still make money because of that. This is why competition is a good thing.


Absolutely. Intel still hasn't fixed a release date for the core 2 duo and by the time it hits as being mainstream, AMD could well have plans on shipping their 65nm parts.
It doesn't change the fact that AMD knows they aren't going to be winning the speed crown for a while.

Doesn't mean their processor lineup is a load of crap either though.

Teldar
May 27, 2006 2:26:16 AM

Quote:
AMD still has the best processors currently available in the desktop market. As soon as Conroe is unleashed they will lower their prices, but until then they are going to make as much money off of their current lineup (including AM2) for as long as they can. They've made a name for themselves and need to make as much money off of it as they can before Intel starts gaining ground again. Most people won't even know what a Conroe, AM2, Core 2 Duo, etc, is until the holiday season. AMD knows they can still make money because of that. This is why competition is a good thing.


Absolutely. Intel still hasn't fixed a release date for the core 2 duo and by the time it hits as being mainstream, AMD could well have plans on shipping their 65nm parts.
It doesn't change the fact that AMD knows they aren't going to be winning the speed crown for a while.

Doesn't mean their processor lineup is a load of crap either though.

Teldar

Woodcrest in June, Conroe in July, and Merom in August. Oh and they also expect to have 60% of the chips out by the end of they year to be based on Cor2 arc.
May 27, 2006 8:39:46 PM

Quote:
Let me translate:
"We intended to build processors that offer good performance for the money in the past, but now we decided to go the greedy way and we just want to rip off our customers instead of trying to offer the customer better prices just like the competition does."

Thats what they would say, if they werent using marketing-language.


Remember when Intel Willamette and first northwood were more expensive and slower than AMD?? And what about Prescott before the Pentium D were released?
May 27, 2006 9:18:35 PM

Quote:
They will only be able to be price competitive and still turn a profit with 65nm production.

Hope they get it on-line ASAP.



Whats taking them so long to get it online? are they just waiting to release it, or are they having serious issues??



---------------------------------------------
Fighting online is like competing in the special olympics...even if you do win, you're still retarded
They don't have to. Conroe is still unreleased, and 99.9% of the people that has to buy a computer until Conroe don't even have a clue about it, so waiting is not an option and they'll buy anyway. Current process is now mature and rentable. So, the most cpu AMD can get out of that process to the market, the more money they will make. Intel game, being behind is to get as much attention that they can, in order to divert customer from AMD.

There is no advantage when you lead with a product to always rush something better too fast. That make you loose money. And no one want to loose money. Not AMD, not Intel, not me. When you design something, it cost money and that's what define the current price. Over the time, you get your money back, and can afford to lower the price because the production cost is recovering. And once all the cost has beed recovered, then here come the profit. AMD is making profit with K8. They won't let it go like that, no matter what the 0.01% of whiners here want or say.

Intel lost market share. People talk more about AMD than before, and that's hurt. More than sales lost. They announce low price, but get them when they last, because Intel, just like any company is run by greedy investor and they won't let the price low if the product sells good. No matter how big is Intel, it will have to recover and you need money to do it. And they'll want to do it fast.. They will first make the product out cheap to get peoples to start talking about them, then soon, start to either increase price or take a newer revision out to justify price increase. Loyal customers and fans will get it anyway..they'll make money, investor will be happy but will want more, price will keep going up, ...

But remember, when Conroe will be available, 99.99% of the world wot have a clue about it's performance and it will be yet another CPU on the market. Big company will be scared about lower priced product, they'll be affraid about eventually lack support. Intel don't want that too.

Opteron wouldnt have get the same attention if they were named Athlon and priced at the same level. They needed separateproduct for different market. Just like software. Why Linux is slow to get attention? It is free. You don't want something free that don't have support if you run something that your business depend of.

The 0.01% here and on other forum (it may even be less than that actually, but that make a nice number) think that Intel or AMD make CPU for them, that they are reading forum and actually listen to them. Intel or AMD don't give a shit about them.. They are quite happy to have some of their money, but that is not them that will make them richer.

Oh.. Intel and AMD have they luxurious CPU, the FX and the EE. Why do Intel still sell EE or AMD FX? Because of the 99.99% don't know or care about Conroe, and they'll get it anyway.

If Intel was to be honest, they would stop selling their CPU to anyone, because they know that they are ripping them if Conroe live up to expectation. Will they do that? No. The 99.99% still need computer. They'll buy them right now.

Will AMD go out of business? No. AMD don't make only CPU. And they've been able to get something that's worth much more than their CPU. It is called "credibility". More and more customers now know and use AMD and are happy with them. No, it is not the 0.01% whining here I'm talking about. They are big customers, like ILM that use AMD and has builded a business association. This bring much more money to AMD that the whiners here. Even if Intel has a better product, the partnership they have worth much more than performance. And there is the always growing 99.99% market that just get a computer, not a CPU. They will still buy AMD or Intel.

So now, whiners, 0.01%, fanboy, trolls that happen to be here, keep dreaming about your favorite brand.. But remember something.. they don't really care about you. It is like the girl you are dreaming about, masturbating only to discover that she flirt with a richest boy than you poor moron..
May 28, 2006 12:41:29 AM

Quote:

What else does AMD make? Last I heard they dumped their flash group....



www.amd.com... and products!!

memory, embedded devices...
May 28, 2006 1:35:07 AM

Quote:

What else does AMD make? Last I heard they dumped their flash group....



www.amd.com... and products!!

memory, embedded devices...

Ahhhh the make networking stuff, coooolll. Thanks

they did stop making memory though. You know, they use to make all sorts of stuff -- DSPs, op amps, small integrated devices, all this stuff is gone tooo. I wonder if they start losing money again if they will spin off the network prodcuts next?

If they start making less money, they'll release something new. Don't worry, they have product much more advanced that even the announced k8l. Once they created AM2, they did not sit back doing nothing.. A company doing that won't survive very long. Instead, they keep advancing, releasing feature slowly, when needed. Intel do it too.

The CPU is way too advanced compared to other technology, mainly storage. Motherboard are not that efficient, and chipset is having difficulties to follow. Even RAM is slow... You can have the fastest CPU in the world, but coupled with still slow HDD, network devices (no..Gb ethernet is not fast.. simply faster than 100..), it is still waiting for data and wasting time..

In perfect world, RAM should be 10 time faster than it is now to keep the CPU really busy and HDD should be 10 time faster than now to have a balanced computer..
May 28, 2006 1:37:38 AM

Quote:


BTW did you google that? :wink:


Google?? what's that? never mind, I'll yahoo it to find out ..
May 28, 2006 1:54:30 AM

Quote:

I know, I am sorry --- I was just giving you a hard time.

As I have pointed out several times, people who may say this is AMD doom are not understanding how the development cycle works. K8L has been planned, researched, and in the process of testing for the last couple of years I would suspect. It is not something you draw up over night, then announce at the Spring Processor Forum.

What I did find interesting was the Fred Weber interview where he echo's what we have also heard other AMD brass say -- K8 is good enough, everything we do will be evolutionary and not revolutionary.

This was the Intel approach and it landed them with Netburst -- I don't believe in the longer term (4-8 years) -- this approach may not be the wisest.

Jack


Problem with netburst is that it was supposed to scale up in frequency, which it didnt.

The k8 is good. It still perform very good with currentspec and could be improved. That don't mean that AMD have nothing else, it just mean that they will try to make the most of it, while developping something better.

It take less ressources to make improvement to a already good product. This way, more can be sent to RnD. If the base was not good, then more should be necessary to make a good product and less would be available to RnD for newer one.. That's what you want to avoid.

Let say you just invest 500000$ in a new restaurant.. the first meal will cost you that, +time to make it, serve it and clean everything less the current price for it. Every time you sell a meal, it cost less, until you actually start making money from it because the initial cost is gone..

It is simple as that. from burger to CPU. You have a good product, you use it as long as it allow you to make a money without needing too much to remain competitive. Netburst found its end this year. Intel has something ready. AMD will just do the same. And the 99.99% will still buy computer and the 0.01% will still complain..
May 28, 2006 2:07:09 AM

Yeah this is good news, we are seeing the effects of the new competitive pressure from Intel. Cheaper AMD and Intel chips for everyone!
May 28, 2006 7:28:12 PM

Quote:
Reality time....

Based on what we have seen, an Athlon FX62 will perform somewhere between the 2.13 ghz Conroe and the 2.40 ghz Conroe. (Prices at $244 and $316 respectively)


Sounds about right since FX62 is 2.8ghz. Do you really think AMD will still charge $1000 for FX62 if it can only compete with a $250 Intel processor??
I think you need a reality check.
May 28, 2006 8:04:49 PM

Quote:

WHat none of you see to rememer tis that AMD is still worth what they charge. They are not competing against Core 2 at the time. IF that were true Intel would have went out of business, since for the last 3 years they have been selling chips that can't compete with Athlon but cost more.

So accordign to you, NO ONE bought a Pentium D. AT ANY SPEED.

Sure they are.
And i'm expecting them to change their prices accordingly to their real value, as soon as Intel lauches its new processors.
Concerning your argument that Intel still sold chips in the last 3 years, there are 2 flaws:
1) the P4 was and *is* competitive with K8. It's generally a bit slower yes, but not by such a huge margin, and definitely not accross the board, i.e. there have always been specific tasks and applications which ran extremely well on the Netburst architecture
2) Intel was the market leader. The company with branding and recognition. The company known to make reliable CPU. The company which could produce enough chips to fulfill the market needs. Now AMD has proper brand recognition.. but i still dont see them have any advantage in this field compared to Intel.
For what we can see until now, the only AMD CPUs which could keep a fat price premium, are all the Opterons for the 4 and 8 way server market, and for the 2 way, the 3GHz Opteron as well should be competitive with Woodcrest.
May 28, 2006 8:51:52 PM

Quote:
Reality time....

Based on what we have seen, an Athlon FX62 will perform somewhere between the 2.13 ghz Conroe and the 2.40 ghz Conroe. (Prices at $244 and $316 respectively)


Sounds about right since FX62 is 2.8ghz. Do you really think AMD will still charge $1000 for FX62 if it can only compete with a $250 Intel processor??
I think you need a reality check.

Did I write what you quoted??? Nope

Quote:
Reality time....

Based on what we have seen, an Athlon FX62 will perform somewhere between the 2.13 ghz Conroe and the 2.40 ghz Conroe. (Prices at $244 and $316 respectively)

So even taking into account rampant AMD Fanboyism, this make the FX62 a $279 part.. (or more likely a $2,000 8xx Opteron) but in reality.... it's not a retail part anymore...

AMD will likley push out a few speed bumps (3.0, 3.2, maybe 3.4 ghz), maybe Zram....K8L ahead of schedule.... who knows, but the Universe has changed, and the faster AMD reacts the better chance they have to live.


But he happens to be right. Also, do you think AMD can make a profit charing a $250 for an FX-62 chip? If they drop to that price, then all the other X2 must shuffle down respectively.... Enthuiast parts come at such a premium because typically the bins are low at that speed grade, so not only there goes your margin but there goes your volume to boot.


A too fast reaction from AMD and announcement of a superior product would only hurt current AMD CPU sale. Intel had nothing to loose because they were already loosing market share. So the best option for them was to make an announcement fast, to tell peoples that they are still there.

AMD, OTOH, won't gain anything by announcing something better to answer Conroe. They better wait and keep current product sale strong and when they start to get some problem, just make what Intel did.... announce something better soon, and hope to deliver it.

It is all about money, not performance...
May 28, 2006 9:05:46 PM

With Conroe being available at the end of july, I don't expect anything from AMD before winter...That will be Crhistmas time...so the timing should be better that right in the summer when nobody really care..
May 28, 2006 9:35:53 PM

Quote:
With Conroe being available at the end of july, I don't expect anything from AMD before winter...That will be Crhistmas time...so the timing should be better that right in the summer when nobody really care..


Probably true, but they have gotta throw the analyst a bone, at least a projection of performance gains anticipated with K8L. They will need to appear to have a plan.

Yeah I think that would be realy important to the shareholders... If I had money invested in AMD I would realy want them to keep up the good work and keep taking market from Intel. Anouncements go a long way keeping people from thinking "I need to sell my AMD stock before Intel gets that Conroe out the door..." even if its little more then a rumor or projection it can change things :)  might even make some one think "hmm stock may take a dip but for the long term invester this is a good time to pick up some more stock" Just my thoery on stock investers (I dont realy understand them im more of a hardware junky) Anyway I was reading up on K8L it looks good as long as they can scale it up to speed (it looks like it will need to run at least 1.8Ghz from my understanding...wich isnt much)
May 28, 2006 10:25:13 PM

People who don't have boards that support conroe? Idiots?
May 28, 2006 10:39:14 PM

Quote:
With Conroe being available at the end of july, I don't expect anything from AMD before winter...That will be Crhistmas time...so the timing should be better that right in the summer when nobody really care..


Probably true, but they have gotta throw the analyst a bone, at least a projection of performance gains anticipated with K8L. They will need to appear to have a plan.

The plan should be announced after Conroe. Right now, it is not necessary to create speculation.
May 28, 2006 10:41:15 PM

Quote:
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2547

Has anybody noticed that the 960 (3.6 GHz P4) is priced the same as the E6700? Who in their right mind would buy that? This doesn't seem very intelligent to me :) 


That's what AMD has to avoid. Intel has nothing to lose as sales are already lower than usually expected.
May 28, 2006 10:43:29 PM

Quote:
People who don't have boards that support conroe? Idiots?


99.99% of peoples having board that don't support Conroe don't even care about it.. the 0.01% that does is not really weighty enough to make a difference.. So Intel are happy selling them and that's good for them and those who need it
May 28, 2006 10:53:14 PM

One thing I do know is Most people dont know anything about the conroe chip. Unless they go on sites like Tomshardware or any other forum that talk about computers and next generation chips.

They would be looking in Pricewatch or ebay and any site like dell or gateway for a new computer. For they want a computer Now not next Month or next year.
May 28, 2006 11:04:43 PM

Quote:
One thing I do know is Most people dont know anything about the conroe chip. Unless they go on sites like Tomshardware or any other forum that talk about computers and next generation chips.

They would be looking in Pricewatch or ebay and any site like dell or gateway for a new computer. For they want a computer Now not next Month or next year.


That's the 99.99% I'm talking about. CPU are made mainly for them. And that's why you won't see anything done by Intel now for CPU price. The same thing can be said for AMD.

The 0.01% whining that there is nothing right with CPU performance/price ratio will always be whining anyway. AM2 will be outdated with Conroe. Conroe will be outdated 6 month later. The one that outdated Conroe will too be outdated soon after its launch. Only the 0.01% whiner really care about that fact and will be always waiting. The 99.99% that just get a computer when needed will always be happy with either AMD or Intel. And AMD and Intel will happily make CPU for them..
May 28, 2006 11:57:04 PM

Let's all keep it very real. AMD fanboys (and I'm neither an Intel or AMD fan...a processor is ubiquitous to me)...AMD fanboys will purchase AMD processors just because they ARE fanboys. ...Intel fanboys will do the same. With that said, AMD makes an unquestionably excellent product...and doesn't need to dump it price-wise just to compete with Intel.

We're lucky as h*** that Intel isn't the only player out there or they'd gauge us just like they used to in the past. I'm delighted that they're FORCED to compete with AMD. Conroe will be all that for a little while...and then the pendelum will swing...it always does.
May 29, 2006 12:01:53 AM

Am2 is just a update so it can use dd2 It was not for speed increase. It like the Intel update when it change over to ddr2 It took Intel a while to work everything to there liking. The real update is am2 fx 64 and higher also when they make a smaller die.
May 29, 2006 12:26:32 AM

Yeah I was thinking about this and I seriously doubt that when Conroe hits the stores in July, AMD will drop there prices to align with price/performance for Conroe. First off, I seriously doubt they could afford to do it based on their profit margins in their SEC filings. But also it would be tantamount to straight up admitting Conroe is a better offering than their K8, 65nm or not and that is certainly NOT good marketing tactics, heh.

If they reduced the price of the FX-62 to be $300 (between Conroe E6400 and E6500), what would they have to price their other parts at, since that is their flagship consumer part?

I think they will lower prices a bit, and work their asses off to come out with new products in Q1 2007 that puts them back in the game (I'm sure they already are). They should be able to keep up the perception that Athlons are "better" among some of the uninformed/uninterested for the remainder of the year.
May 29, 2006 12:35:03 AM

Quote:
Am2 is just a update so it can use dd2 It was not for speed increase. It like the Intel update when it change over to ddr2 It took Intel a while to work everything to there liking. The real update is am2 fx 64 and higher also when they make a smaller die.


Launching DDR2 controller on an excellent existing product was the best choice. First, they had a fully functionnal CPU, so they didn't have to care about that part of the design. Then, all they had to do was to make the controller so that the core remain competitive at least with existing product. This gives them time to have the controller to mature enough. If they had to launch an entirely new product, it wouldn't be as easy to have a clear idea about where the problem is. is it the new core or the controller??

In my POV, AMD, since the Athlon 64 introduction, did almost everything right.

They first release the new core with 64 bits to get some attention. They separated the server and desktop CPU to have a name exclusively for server environnement. they updated the ir product slowly, and remain compatible enough for the whole line. Adjusted their performance to only be ahead of intel. make themself a name that allowed them to sell dual core at higher price than Intel, and still gaining market share (not so long ago, AMD would never had sold a CPU at higher price than Intel..). They keep improving it so they always appears to be moving and took their time to release product when needed, without rushing the market.
May 29, 2006 12:47:06 AM

Quote:
Yeah I was thinking about this and I seriously doubt that when Conroe hits the stores in July, AMD will drop there prices to align with price/performance for Conroe. First off, I seriously doubt they could afford to do it based on their profit margins in their SEC filings. But also it would be tantamount to straight up admitting Conroe is a better offering than their K8, 65nm or not and that is certainly NOT good marketing tactics, heh.

If they reduced the price of the FX-62 to be $300 (between Conroe E6400 and E6500), what would they have to price their other parts at, since that is their flagship consumer part?

I think they will lower prices a bit, and work their asses off to come out with new products in Q1 2007 that puts them back in the game (I'm sure they already are). They should be able to keep up the perception that Athlons are "better" among some of the uninformed/uninterested for the remainder of the year.


People are still paying higher price to get a Sony, even if it don't really matter now. There will always be people wanting to buy an AMD because thay had good success with them, and the same for Intel. So don't worry about AMD... They won't die from Conroe. AMD and Intel already have post conroe product. Intel was due for a new product. AMD is not yet. Neither AMD or Intel want to rush the market. This would stress the chipset supplier, motherboard maker and product may be released full of bug or unnecessary feature. Even software may not be ready. just have a look at dual core or 64 bits...

AMD did not create 64 bits only to create it. The game was bigger than that. It has to prove that they can be a technology leader, not only a follower.
May 29, 2006 1:07:27 AM

Quote:
They should be able to keep up the perception that Athlons are "better" among some of the uninformed/uninterested for the remainder of the year.


I think that some of the same "uninformed/uninterested" ppl, still recognise Intel as better, alot of such ppl never got on the AMD bandwagon, so the Intel marketing blitz that awaits us will only remind them of what they believed all along.

Alot of ppl even those like my dad who is relatively tech literate that have heard AMD is better, are simply more comfortable with the idea that Intel leads the way.

to the ppl that buy on a techie's advice......it all depends on what kind of fanboy your personal nerd is.
May 29, 2006 1:22:24 AM

Quote:
They should be able to keep up the perception that Athlons are "better" among some of the uninformed/uninterested for the remainder of the year.


By the way, Intel is playing a dangerous game by pricing their CPU too low.

By doing that, it may only reinforce that Athlons are better since they cost more... It must have a catch because they are selling these supposely fast CPU at such lower price..

I'm sure that if Linux start to sell for 100$ and Windows just get given away, Linux would see its share going higher and Windows will see its to decrease.. Peoples will be affraid of the catch...
!