Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

Intel U.S. retail share overtakes AMD

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Desktops
  • Intel
  • AMD
Last response: in CPUs
July 11, 2006 3:31:24 PM

http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/10328

"Intel has overtaken AMD in U.S. retail sales for June, according to a Current Analysis report quoted by CNet. The report says Intel's overall share of processor sales in the retail market jumped from 42.2% in May to 51.2% in June, while AMD's share tumbled from 57.4% to 48.5%. Intel's growth can be attributed to the notebook market, where the company went from 57.3% of retail sales in May to 66.2% in June. Current Analysis says these gains are due to an emphasis on cheap Celeron M notebooks, a large portion of which Toshiba-built and retailed for $599 or below.

While Intel made strides in the notebook segment, AMD retained its lead in the desktop arena. The Current Analysis report says AMD had a whopping 73% of desktop retail sales, whereas Intel had just 26.8%. AMD's desktop lead is only in the sub-$750 segment, though—Intel has the upper hand in desktop machines $750 and up. "


I thought this relevant as I recall in recent topic’s some discussion around market share, note the AMD lead in desktop in sub $750, whilst Intel leads it $750 above desktop.

More about : intel retail share overtakes amd

July 11, 2006 4:58:54 PM

I posted this yesterday. Thanks for the info though. :D 
July 11, 2006 5:23:08 PM

DOH .... i did quickly look through.. but must have missed it.


sorry
Related resources
July 11, 2006 5:24:06 PM

Quote:
While Intel made strides in the notebook segment, AMD retained its lead in the desktop arena. The Current Analysis report says AMD had a whopping 73% of desktop retail sales, whereas Intel had just 26.8%. AMD's desktop lead is only in the sub-$750 segment, though—Intel has the upper hand in desktop machines $750 and up. "


Look like Core 2 will turn that around but ya AMD has been leading Intel for years it is time for a change :lol: 
July 11, 2006 5:41:20 PM

Quote:
While Intel made strides in the notebook segment, AMD retained its lead in the desktop arena. The Current Analysis report says AMD had a whopping 73% of desktop retail sales, whereas Intel had just 26.8%. AMD's desktop lead is only in the sub-$750 segment, though—Intel has the upper hand in desktop machines $750 and up. "


Look like Core 2 will turn that around but ya AMD has been leading Intel for years it is time for a change :lol: 

I agree. Competition is great for us.
Im just surprised how long it took Intel to pull it's head outta its butt.
July 11, 2006 5:54:47 PM

Quote:
http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/10328

"Intel has overtaken AMD in U.S. retail sales for June, according to a Current Analysis report quoted by CNet. The report says Intel's overall share of processor sales in the retail market jumped from 42.2% in May to 51.2% in June, while AMD's share tumbled from 57.4% to 48.5%. Intel's growth can be attributed to the notebook market, where the company went from 57.3% of retail sales in May to 66.2% in June. Current Analysis says these gains are due to an emphasis on cheap Celeron M notebooks, a large portion of which Toshiba-built and retailed for $599 or below.

While Intel made strides in the notebook segment, AMD retained its lead in the desktop arena. The Current Analysis report says AMD had a whopping 73% of desktop retail sales, whereas Intel had just 26.8%. AMD's desktop lead is only in the sub-$750 segment, though—Intel has the upper hand in desktop machines $750 and up. "


I thought this relevant as I recall in recent topic’s some discussion around market share, note the AMD lead in desktop in sub $750, whilst Intel leads it $750 above desktop.




You forgot to add, for the first time in awhile. AMDs units didn't go down much. Intel flooded the market with a laptop I would only recommend for Solitiare. It's not cheating but someone is getting ripped off. A Mobile Sempron or Athlon64 would mop up the floor with those in every usage scenario.

I bet Intel basically gave those chips away. but shame on Toshiba for such a crappy PC. A Celeron with 845G?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

8O
July 11, 2006 6:06:20 PM

Quote:
While Intel made strides in the notebook segment, AMD retained its lead in the desktop arena. The Current Analysis report says AMD had a whopping 73% of desktop retail sales, whereas Intel had just 26.8%. AMD's desktop lead is only in the sub-$750 segment, though—Intel has the upper hand in desktop machines $750 and up. "


Look like Core 2 will turn that around but ya AMD has been leading Intel for years it is time for a change :lol: 

I agree. Competition is great for us.
Im just surprised how long it took Intel to pull it's head outta its butt.

Regular quad core may get it back up there. K8L wil NOT DEBUT for the desktop but regular quad core will. AMD has already set the TDP for quad core K8 to 95W @ 65nm.

Clovertown will be a joke to K8 quad because of the FSB. Even with the Core 2 basis, HTX will power alot more bandwidth than even Dual 1333. especially since an AMD system can add the bandwidth from the "northbridge" to the HTX bandwidth.


Again the future looks bright for AMD. Intel releases a good chip finally and everyone is singing a death knell for a company that has 70%+ of the retail desktop. With Turion X2, they will make inroads into mobile also.

I cansee dell adopting Turion X2 especially since AMD just cancelled the single core Turion along with basically every other single core chip.

They have girded their loins for battle and it won't be as easy as it used to be for Intel.

Ask VooDooPC CEO Rahul Sood. he sells plenty of AMD.
July 11, 2006 6:24:35 PM

Quote:
yet another BaronMatrix MISINFORMATION!... Again the future looks bright for AMD. Intel releases a good chip finally and everyone is singing a death knell for a company that has 70%+ of the retail desktop. With Turion X2, they will make inroads into mobile also.


AMD has not cornered 70% of the desktop market... maybe 70% of the el-cheapo under $750 PC's... and profits are razor thin in this segment... as even you can imagine... :p 
While Intel has the more profitable midrange and high end desktop PC's, which is where the money is anyway. :roll:
July 11, 2006 7:05:54 PM

Quote:
yet another BaronMatrix MISINFORMATION!... Again the future looks bright for AMD. Intel releases a good chip finally and everyone is singing a death knell for a company that has 70%+ of the retail desktop. With Turion X2, they will make inroads into mobile also.


AMD has not cornered 70% of the desktop market... maybe 70% of the el-cheapo under $750 PC's... and profits are razor thin in this segment... as even you can imagine... :p 
While Intel has the more profitable midrange and high end desktop PC's, which is where the money is anyway. :roll:


We'll let's see. if AMD owns every market except for the OVER $1250 but has a significant presence as AlienWare, VooDooPC, etc indicates, they do indeed have th elion's share of the RETAIL DESKTOP MARKET.

So what about margins. if they were leading in the above $1250 you would say that Intel's volume at the lower end overrides it. Admit it you're just an Intel "blind follower." All the talk abotu K8L has overridded the fact that AMD has announced TDP for X4. Do you think Core 2 can handle X4?

I don't. EvenClovertown will be hard pressed so AMD will take the crown back as soon as they release quad core, but I guess you'll say "but they need 4 cores."

So what Intel neede dto revam their ENTIRE CPU LINEUP. AMD was plannign X4 with the original Opteron. K8L just differentiates desktop quad from server.


In other words the spanking wil recommence around Q207. I'm glad Intel is selling more but woul dyou really be productive with a Celeron laptop and 854G.

I thinknot. Unless you're playing Solitaire @ 800x600. I'm curious to see GMAX3000. if they want it to run Aero, they better hire some better GPU designers. I'm sure that IGPs and Vista were a major reason for Dell adopting AMD for desktops.

Michael dell just about said they will go full out. With Dell pushing nVidia business desktop, AMD WILL get their 30% share.

maybe one day you'll understand the way the PC business works.
July 11, 2006 7:10:08 PM

Damn, Baron, how often can you flip flop?

You often say that "well, performance doesn't really matter - it's enough to do most of the stuff people need, so buy AMD anyways, because they r0xx0r"... but then in the same breath you mock Intel's budget CPU's saying they can't get anything done.

Two cheers for consistency!
July 11, 2006 7:13:56 PM

Quote:
yet another BaronMatrix MISINFORMATION!... Again the future looks bright for AMD. Intel releases a good chip finally and everyone is singing a death knell for a company that has 70%+ of the retail desktop. With Turion X2, they will make inroads into mobile also.


AMD has not cornered 70% of the desktop market... maybe 70% of the el-cheapo under $750 PC's... and profits are razor thin in this segment... as even you can imagine... :p 
While Intel has the more profitable midrange and high end desktop PC's, which is where the money is anyway. :roll:


We'll let's see. if AMD owns every market except for the OVER $1250 but has a significant presence as AlienWare, VooDooPC, etc indicates, they do indeed have th elion's share of the RETAIL DESKTOP MARKET.

So what about margins. if they were leading in the above $1250 you would say that Intel's volume at the lower end overrides it. Admit it you're just an Intel "blind follower." All the talk abotu K8L has overridded the fact that AMD has announced TDP for X4. Do you think Core 2 can handle X4?

I don't. EvenClovertown will be hard pressed so AMD will take the crown back as soon as they release quad core, but I guess you'll say "but they need 4 cores."

So what Intel neede dto revam their ENTIRE CPU LINEUP. AMD was plannign X4 with the original Opteron. K8L just differentiates desktop quad from server.


In other words the spanking wil recommence around Q207. I'm glad Intel is selling more but woul dyou really be productive with a Celeron laptop and 854G.

I thinknot. Unless you're playing Solitaire @ 800x600. I'm curious to see GMAX3000. if they want it to run Aero, they better hire some better GPU designers. I'm sure that IGPs and Vista were a major reason for Dell adopting AMD for desktops.

Michael dell just about said they will go full out. With Dell pushing nVidia business desktop, AMD WILL get their 30% share.

maybe one day you'll understand the way the PC business works.

Except the fact that Intel has the upper hand in desktop machines $750 and up. Not just the $1250 and above markets...
That sounds like domination to me... :roll:
July 11, 2006 7:29:11 PM

I bet this is due to Intel's very aggressively priced dual-core selections.
July 11, 2006 7:45:19 PM

Nope, AMDs future is darker than the inside of my... well... ya know... the exit we all have :o 
July 11, 2006 8:17:24 PM

Quote:
Nope, AMDs future is darker than the inside of my... well... ya know... the exit we all have :o 
Wow then your Exit Must be pretty Well Lighted. What kind of lighting is it LCD or Halogen or Xeon?
July 11, 2006 8:32:25 PM

Can you try to keep your facts straight. You keep mentioning Toshiba's cheap "solitaire" notebooks and frankly I'm not sure what you're talking about. I haven't been keeping up to date with Toshiba notebooks so I may have missed something, but if you look at the current cheapest thing in the lineup it's:

http://www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/pdet.to?poid=327979...

A 1.7GHz Celeron M with an ATI Xpress 200M. That is no where near this Intel Extreme Graphics 2 level that you are mentioning. I think you are far too taken with the Celeron label. While you may say that the Northwood Celeron Ds were a disaster, the Prescott Celeron Ds still below par, but the Celeron Ms are not comparable to them. Celeron Ms for the last while, for most of this year actually, have been based on Dothan with a 400MHz FSB and a 1MB L2 cache, and their performance is very good for the budget market they target. Even in cases where the Xpress 200M wasn't offered, it was the GMA 900 which while not amazing, is still leaps and bounds above the Extreme Graphics 2 level that you imply. For under $599 you can't really complain, and if you wanted better then you can pay accordingly. It's not like better isn't available if you really wanted it.

Now, you keep mentioning that the Conroe benchmarks were going to crush Intel sales, because why would anyone buy an overpriced under-performing 960D when Conroe is just around the corner? Well, these results say the opposite. If Intel has the upper-hand in the $750+ market, that means what people are buying for high-end systems is the 960D. That doesn't make any sense at all does it, when the X2 is supposed to be better performing and the ultimate for enthousiasts?

The interesting thing is that in order for AMD to have it's drastic lead in the sub $750 segment it's not X2s that are selling, it's single core A64s and Semprons and maybe the X2 3800+. For their price points, they are great, especially because Intel seems slow to drop prices on the 6xx series to compete against the A64 and accomodate dual cores in the premium segment. It also means that Intel's push for dual cores into the mainstream isn't going so well, as indicated by the adoption rates of the 805D. The thing is, this is all going to change soon. If people are willing to buy the 960D over the X2 in June with Conroe around the corner, I would expect the reception would be quite good once Pentium D prices drop further, directly into the sub $750 market. While the 805D sales might be slow now, once it drops below $100 and starts to threaten Semprons rather than A64s, it becomes a lot more competitive.

Essentially, when Conroe launches Intel should continue to hold the plus $750 market, and the currently selling Pentium Ds will certainly give AMD something to think about in it's current sub-$750 haven. I guess this is where the X2 prices drops and the X2 3600+ are suppose to come in. Personally, I'm interested to see it's performance levels. Going from 1MB cache to 512k may be acceptable, but going from 512k to 256k is a lot more significant. The X2 3600+ may be able to lead the 2.8GHz 915D, but I think the 3GHz 925D should be able to hold it's own even in games where the X2 3600+'s cache drop will certainly have an impact. It comes down to price, marketing, and partnership in the end as always.
July 11, 2006 9:45:35 PM

BM owned again, will that dumbass ever give up?
July 11, 2006 10:20:42 PM

BM, your market analsys is pathetic. You are a market analyst right? If that is true then maybe you should go back to school kick all you professors' arse. Seems to me that you are more of an anal-yst than an analyst. :wink:
July 11, 2006 10:22:13 PM

:tongue: You mean Anal-Cyst? :wink:
July 11, 2006 11:20:44 PM

Quote:
BM owned again, will that dumbass ever give up?


I'm relatively new here and I've seen BM owned at least 5 times. There should be a sticky detailing each instance of ownage.

The best ownage was where he said Intel's sales were flat. He got owned with a chart of the actual sales figures. Yet, he keeps posting obnoxious crap. He should be ashamed of himself. :oops: 

Bottom line: facts and BM don't mix.
July 11, 2006 11:32:36 PM

Quote:
http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/10328

"Intel has overtaken AMD in U.S. retail sales for June, according to a Current Analysis report quoted by CNet. The report says Intel's overall share of processor sales in the retail market jumped from 42.2% in May to 51.2% in June, while AMD's share tumbled from 57.4% to 48.5%. Intel's growth can be attributed to the notebook market, where the company went from 57.3% of retail sales in May to 66.2% in June. Current Analysis says these gains are due to an emphasis on cheap Celeron M notebooks, a large portion of which Toshiba-built and retailed for $599 or below.

While Intel made strides in the notebook segment, AMD retained its lead in the desktop arena. The Current Analysis report says AMD had a whopping 73% of desktop retail sales, whereas Intel had just 26.8%. AMD's desktop lead is only in the sub-$750 segment, though—Intel has the upper hand in desktop machines $750 and up. "


I thought this relevant as I recall in recent topic’s some discussion around market share, note the AMD lead in desktop in sub $750, whilst Intel leads it $750 above desktop.




You forgot to add, for the first time in awhile. AMDs units didn't go down much. Intel flooded the market with a laptop I would only recommend for Solitiare. It's not cheating but someone is getting ripped off. A Mobile Sempron or Athlon64 would mop up the floor with those in every usage scenario.

I bet Intel basically gave those chips away. but shame on Toshiba for such a crappy PC. A Celeron with 845G?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

8O

You are aware the OEM's are the ones buying the chips up and selling them in complete systems, Intel is only providing the demand with their supply.

Intel isn't flooding the market the market is flooding itself with cheap machines to Tom Dick and Harry's out there.
July 11, 2006 11:37:51 PM

Quote:
I'm sure that IGPs and Vista were a major reason for Dell adopting AMD for desktops.


You're such a fockwit.

Quote:
maybe one day you'll understand the way the PC business works.


The irony.
July 11, 2006 11:51:15 PM

Quote:
While Intel made strides in the notebook segment, AMD retained its lead in the desktop arena. The Current Analysis report says AMD had a whopping 73% of desktop retail sales, whereas Intel had just 26.8%. AMD's desktop lead is only in the sub-$750 segment, though—Intel has the upper hand in desktop machines $750 and up. "


Look like Core 2 will turn that around but ya AMD has been leading Intel for years it is time for a change :lol: 

I agree. Competition is great for us.
Im just surprised how long it took Intel to pull it's head outta its butt.

Regular quad core may get it back up there. K8L wil NOT DEBUT for the desktop but regular quad core will. AMD has already set the TDP for quad core K8 to 95W @ 65nm.

Clovertown will be a joke to K8 quad because of the FSB. Even with the Core 2 basis, HTX will power alot more bandwidth than even Dual 1333. especially since an AMD system can add the bandwidth from the "northbridge" to the HTX bandwidth.


Again the future looks bright for AMD. Intel releases a good chip finally and everyone is singing a death knell for a company that has 70%+ of the retail desktop. With Turion X2, they will make inroads into mobile also.

I cansee dell adopting Turion X2 especially since AMD just cancelled the single core Turion along with basically every other single core chip.

They have girded their loins for battle and it won't be as easy as it used to be for Intel.

Ask VooDooPC CEO Rahul Sood. he sells plenty of AMD.

How can you say Clovertown will be a joke to quad K8's because of Intel chooses to continue usage of the Northbridge memory controller? You can't even give a reliable AMD projection what makes you think you are able to properly project anything related to Intel.

With considerations the K8 is outdone on every facet of operations by the Core uArch what even makes you think a unchanged K8 in quad configuration will hold a candle to a superior uArch that is essentially running circles around AMD's pride and joy.

It looks bright? When 2010 when they roll out the K10, oh ya you honestly believe Intel isn’t going to be able to move Core 2 Duo's because of Pentium 4 overstock. I keep forgetting what do you do for a living again?

Face it 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 are going to be very much Intel years, no matter how you look at it AMD is right fucked. You can't hold market share if you don't have a product cycle to match your competitor.

Turion X2 making inroads... LOL.

You can see Dell only selling AMD processors but that doesn't mean it will ever happen. Last time I checked Dell was only quoted and confirmed to be using AMD processors in their servers, not the desktop division and certainly not in the mobile division.

You greatly underestimate Intel’s market presence and ability to sell silicon and sadly for you, every time AMD shows red your ego will get that much smaller.
July 12, 2006 12:03:37 AM

Quote:
yet another BaronMatrix MISINFORMATION!... Again the future looks bright for AMD. Intel releases a good chip finally and everyone is singing a death knell for a company that has 70%+ of the retail desktop. With Turion X2, they will make inroads into mobile also.


AMD has not cornered 70% of the desktop market... maybe 70% of the el-cheapo under $750 PC's... and profits are razor thin in this segment... as even you can imagine... :p 
While Intel has the more profitable midrange and high end desktop PC's, which is where the money is anyway. :roll:


We'll let's see. if AMD owns every market except for the OVER $1250 but has a significant presence as AlienWare, VooDooPC, etc indicates, they do indeed have th elion's share of the RETAIL DESKTOP MARKET.

So what about margins. if they were leading in the above $1250 you would say that Intel's volume at the lower end overrides it. Admit it you're just an Intel "blind follower." All the talk abotu K8L has overridded the fact that AMD has announced TDP for X4. Do you think Core 2 can handle X4?

I don't. EvenClovertown will be hard pressed so AMD will take the crown back as soon as they release quad core, but I guess you'll say "but they need 4 cores."

So what Intel neede dto revam their ENTIRE CPU LINEUP. AMD was plannign X4 with the original Opteron. K8L just differentiates desktop quad from server.


In other words the spanking wil recommence around Q207. I'm glad Intel is selling more but woul dyou really be productive with a Celeron laptop and 854G.

I thinknot. Unless you're playing Solitaire @ 800x600. I'm curious to see GMAX3000. if they want it to run Aero, they better hire some better GPU designers. I'm sure that IGPs and Vista were a major reason for Dell adopting AMD for desktops.

Michael dell just about said they will go full out. With Dell pushing nVidia business desktop, AMD WILL get their 30% share.

maybe one day you'll understand the way the PC business works.

They own every market wow I think I will need to see some links there on that tall tall TALL tale.

Oh that’s a good question can the Core 2 handle X4, well based on anything remotely convincing from AMD as of late I will have to say a Core 2 derivative will most absolutely run circles around the X4 and additional will be easily use 20% less power and put out 40% less heat.

They just did revamp their entire CPU lineup maybe you are missing what the rest of us have come to understand and accept, the Core uArch is vastly superior in every facet.

Oh so you can confirm that AMD's intentions with the K8 was always to be in a quad core configuration.

Oh and there will be a spanking come Q207 oh wow cool what if your wrong which I know you are will you shut up and stop posting useless baseless dribble?

You now get a choice in resolutions to play solitaire? I wouldn’t worry about Intel’s IGP's either they are very aware what the design goals are and will have to obviously build a product that can decently run Vistas video API. Oh yes Dell got AMD because of Vista oh wow glad you added that pointless crap.

Mr. Dell said nothing along those lines; he said they would be in a long term partnership with AMD.

And maybe one day you won’t lie about your education or job and maybe you'll do us all a favor and keep your obviously grossly misconceived opinions to yourself, or go and hang out with Dr. S.
July 12, 2006 12:11:38 AM

Only thing I kinda find funny is the title of the article:

"Intel U.S. retail share overtakes AMD"

I mean... AMD is a US manufacturer.

Quote:
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, www.amd.com


So I find it weird to see the title as Intel U.S. :lol: 

Hope that doesn't confuse people here.
July 12, 2006 12:37:34 AM

Quote:
Can you try to keep your facts straight. You keep mentioning Toshiba's cheap "solitaire" notebooks and frankly I'm not sure what you're talking about. I haven't been keeping up to date with Toshiba notebooks so I may have missed something, but if you look at the current cheapest thing in the lineup it's:

http://www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/pdet.to?poid=327979...

A 1.7GHz Celeron M with an ATI Xpress 200M. That is no where near this Intel Extreme Graphics 2 level that you are mentioning. I think you are far too taken with the Celeron label. While you may say that the Northwood Celeron Ds were a disaster, the Prescott Celeron Ds still below par, but the Celeron Ms are not comparable to them. Celeron Ms for the last while, for most of this year actually, have been based on Dothan with a 400MHz FSB and a 1MB L2 cache, and their performance is very good for the budget market they target. Even in cases where the Xpress 200M wasn't offered, it was the GMA 900 which while not amazing, is still leaps and bounds above the Extreme Graphics 2 level that you imply. For under $599 you can't really complain, and if you wanted better then you can pay accordingly. It's not like better isn't available if you really wanted it.

Now, you keep mentioning that the Conroe benchmarks were going to crush Intel sales, because why would anyone buy an overpriced under-performing 960D when Conroe is just around the corner? Well, these results say the opposite. If Intel has the upper-hand in the $750+ market, that means what people are buying for high-end systems is the 960D. That doesn't make any sense at all does it, when the X2 is supposed to be better performing and the ultimate for enthousiasts?

The interesting thing is that in order for AMD to have it's drastic lead in the sub $750 segment it's not X2s that are selling, it's single core A64s and Semprons and maybe the X2 3800+. For their price points, they are great, especially because Intel seems slow to drop prices on the 6xx series to compete against the A64 and accomodate dual cores in the premium segment. It also means that Intel's push for dual cores into the mainstream isn't going so well, as indicated by the adoption rates of the 805D. The thing is, this is all going to change soon. If people are willing to buy the 960D over the X2 in June with Conroe around the corner, I would expect the reception would be quite good once Pentium D prices drop further, directly into the sub $750 market. While the 805D sales might be slow now, once it drops below $100 and starts to threaten Semprons rather than A64s, it becomes a lot more competitive.

Essentially, when Conroe launches Intel should continue to hold the plus $750 market, and the currently selling Pentium Ds will certainly give AMD something to think about in it's current sub-$750 haven. I guess this is where the X2 prices drops and the X2 3600+ are suppose to come in. Personally, I'm interested to see it's performance levels. Going from 1MB cache to 512k may be acceptable, but going from 512k to 256k is a lot more significant. The X2 3600+ may be able to lead the 2.8GHz 915D, but I think the 3GHz 925D should be able to hold it's own even in games where the X2 3600+'s cache drop will certainly have an impact. It comes down to price, marketing, and partnership in the end as always.



ANd here i though tyou would up to your namesake. I said Intel has to compete with themselves and this "internal competition" will cost them a lot of money until NetBust is gone. Look it up. I DID say that AMD would continue to gain share, but part of that will be industry growth.

The TDP for quad cor HAS BEEN released and dumping cheap parts is the easy way to get a quick boost. They did the same thing with P4s for HD-DVD.

Intel knows they will be bleeding this year. PERIOD! They won't go out of business either but they will bleed more money with this price war and the competition between COre 2, Core, and the 100 flavors of NetBust will cause stock buildup unless they really gouge prices. And I mean an average of 60%.


I am glad they at least put ATi in them. IS it wrong for me to think they are shipping out the whole mobo CPU combo for pennies? Celrons are even lower than P4.

OMG he shrieks, waiting for that 9th window.
July 12, 2006 12:46:45 AM

Speaking of bleeding, one would think you should know a bit more about that than this drivel you post, especially coming from you since it occurs monthly... :roll:
July 12, 2006 1:05:39 AM

Quote:
Speaking of bleeding, one would think you should know a bit more about that than this drivel you post, especially coming from you since it occurs monthly... :roll:


I think I explained this in the first of 3 posts about this.
July 12, 2006 2:19:00 AM

Quote:
Speaking of bleeding, one would think you should know a bit more about that than this drivel you post, especially coming from you since it occurs monthly... :roll:



You know I just realized that was some kind of period joke. Check the time.
:roll:
July 12, 2006 2:19:51 AM

Quote:
Can you try to keep your facts straight. You keep mentioning Toshiba's cheap "solitaire" notebooks and frankly I'm not sure what you're talking about. I haven't been keeping up to date with Toshiba notebooks so I may have missed something, but if you look at the current cheapest thing in the lineup it's:

http://www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/pdet.to?poid=327979...

A 1.7GHz Celeron M with an ATI Xpress 200M. That is no where near this Intel Extreme Graphics 2 level that you are mentioning. I think you are far too taken with the Celeron label. While you may say that the Northwood Celeron Ds were a disaster, the Prescott Celeron Ds still below par, but the Celeron Ms are not comparable to them. Celeron Ms for the last while, for most of this year actually, have been based on Dothan with a 400MHz FSB and a 1MB L2 cache, and their performance is very good for the budget market they target. Even in cases where the Xpress 200M wasn't offered, it was the GMA 900 which while not amazing, is still leaps and bounds above the Extreme Graphics 2 level that you imply. For under $599 you can't really complain, and if you wanted better then you can pay accordingly. It's not like better isn't available if you really wanted it.

Now, you keep mentioning that the Conroe benchmarks were going to crush Intel sales, because why would anyone buy an overpriced under-performing 960D when Conroe is just around the corner? Well, these results say the opposite. If Intel has the upper-hand in the $750+ market, that means what people are buying for high-end systems is the 960D. That doesn't make any sense at all does it, when the X2 is supposed to be better performing and the ultimate for enthousiasts?

The interesting thing is that in order for AMD to have it's drastic lead in the sub $750 segment it's not X2s that are selling, it's single core A64s and Semprons and maybe the X2 3800+. For their price points, they are great, especially because Intel seems slow to drop prices on the 6xx series to compete against the A64 and accomodate dual cores in the premium segment. It also means that Intel's push for dual cores into the mainstream isn't going so well, as indicated by the adoption rates of the 805D. The thing is, this is all going to change soon. If people are willing to buy the 960D over the X2 in June with Conroe around the corner, I would expect the reception would be quite good once Pentium D prices drop further, directly into the sub $750 market. While the 805D sales might be slow now, once it drops below $100 and starts to threaten Semprons rather than A64s, it becomes a lot more competitive.

Essentially, when Conroe launches Intel should continue to hold the plus $750 market, and the currently selling Pentium Ds will certainly give AMD something to think about in it's current sub-$750 haven. I guess this is where the X2 prices drops and the X2 3600+ are suppose to come in. Personally, I'm interested to see it's performance levels. Going from 1MB cache to 512k may be acceptable, but going from 512k to 256k is a lot more significant. The X2 3600+ may be able to lead the 2.8GHz 915D, but I think the 3GHz 925D should be able to hold it's own even in games where the X2 3600+'s cache drop will certainly have an impact. It comes down to price, marketing, and partnership in the end as always.



ANd here i though tyou would up to your namesake. I said Intel has to compete with themselves and this "internal competition" will cost them a lot of money until NetBust is gone. Look it up. I DID say that AMD would continue to gain share, but part of that will be industry growth.

The TDP for quad cor HAS BEEN released and dumping cheap parts is the easy way to get a quick boost. They did the same thing with P4s for HD-DVD.

Intel knows they will be bleeding this year. PERIOD! They won't go out of business either but they will bleed more money with this price war and the competition between COre 2, Core, and the 100 flavors of NetBust will cause stock buildup unless they really gouge prices. And I mean an average of 60%.


I am glad they at least put ATi in them. IS it wrong for me to think they are shipping out the whole mobo CPU combo for pennies? Celrons are even lower than P4.

OMG he shrieks, waiting for that 9th window.

I attempted to give you friendly advice a few days ago; here is one more --- don't say to much more you are simply digging your self in deeper.


You're not the boss of me. If I want to go down in flames that's my choice.
July 12, 2006 2:21:03 AM

Obviously... :p 
July 12, 2006 2:22:36 AM

Quote:
You're not the boss of me. If I want to go down in flames that's my choice.


Well you're doing one fine job of it.
July 12, 2006 2:37:24 AM

Quote:
You forgot to add, for the first time in awhile. AMDs units didn't go down much. Intel flooded the market with a laptop I would only recommend for Solitiare. It's not cheating but someone is getting ripped off. A Mobile Sempron or Athlon64 would mop up the floor with those in every usage scenario.

This is a not true. I have both Turion64(Lancaster) and Pentium M(Dothan). PentiumM is faster than Turion64 clock for clock.
July 12, 2006 2:53:55 AM

Quote:
You forgot to add, for the first time in awhile. AMDs units didn't go down much. Intel flooded the market with a laptop I would only recommend for Solitiare. It's not cheating but someone is getting ripped off. A Mobile Sempron or Athlon64 would mop up the floor with those in every usage scenario.

This is a not true. I have both Turion64(Lancaster) and Pentium M(Dothan). PentiumM is faster than Turion64 clock for clock.

He has been pretty obsessed with mopping the floor... some people can not leave thier work after clocking out... :lol: 
July 12, 2006 3:24:50 AM

Quote:

You're not the boss of me. If I want to go down in flames that's my choice.


You're right, I guess that's why you removed the SmartSoft or whatever company from your signature. Seriously, if they see the kind of nonsense crap you post, I'm sure they would not be amused and defintely would not want to be a part of it in any way, shape, or form.
July 12, 2006 4:19:39 AM

Quote:
You forgot to add, for the first time in awhile. AMDs units didn't go down much. Intel flooded the market with a laptop I would only recommend for Solitiare. It's not cheating but someone is getting ripped off. A Mobile Sempron or Athlon64 would mop up the floor with those in every usage scenario.

This is a not true. I have both Turion64(Lancaster) and Pentium M(Dothan). PentiumM is faster than Turion64 clock for clock.

I won't quote on your interpretation of "clock or clock," but I will say that I didn't want a Turion anyway, though I thought of it as a laptop PC that is worth more than the Celeron in the Toshiba CPU that seemed to change the "MONTHLY" -

"Oooo I'm bleeeding"

- CPU share ratings.
I would continue but.....
July 12, 2006 6:32:34 AM

Quote:

You're not the boss of me. If I want to go down in flames that's my choice.


You're right, I guess that's why you removed the SmartSoft or whatever company from your signature. Seriously, if they see the kind of nonsense crap you post, I'm sure they would not be amused and defintely would not want to be a part of it in any way, shape, or form.

QFT

I was wondering about that myself.
July 12, 2006 7:25:22 AM

Quote:
They own every market wow I think I will need to see some links there on that tall tall TALL tale.

Oh that’s a good question can the Core 2 handle X4, well based on anything remotely convincing from AMD as of late I will have to say a Core 2 derivative will most absolutely run circles around the X4 and additional will be easily use 20% less power and put out 40% less heat.

They just did revamp their entire CPU lineup maybe you are missing what the rest of us have come to understand and accept, the Core uArch is vastly superior in every facet.

Oh so you can confirm that AMD's intentions with the K8 was always to be in a quad core configuration.

Oh and there will be a spanking come Q207 oh wow cool what if your wrong which I know you are will you shut up and stop posting useless baseless dribble?

You now get a choice in resolutions to play solitaire? I wouldn’t worry about Intel’s IGP's either they are very aware what the design goals are and will have to obviously build a product that can decently run Vistas video API. Oh yes Dell got AMD because of Vista oh wow glad you added that pointless crap.

Mr. Dell said nothing along those lines; he said they would be in a long term partnership with AMD.

And maybe one day you won’t lie about your education or job and maybe you'll do us all a favor and keep your obviously grossly misconceived opinions to yourself, or go and hang out with Dr. S.


Yeah, X4 will be sweet, 250W of pure heat pumping into your case, purely from the CPU, not to mention ridiculously expensive for under-performing CPUs. The FsuX line-up is screwed, they're pushing 90nm clocked to 3.6 GHz all throughout next year. Seriously, what a waste. Quad-core Kentsfield will be out by then, and if you hadn't gotten the update about dual-core being better than dual-cpu, I'll let you in on a secret: Kentsfield (or whatever else is on the market by then) will kick a FX-WHATEVER at 3.6 GHz in an X4 combo to the curb, open its mouth onto it, and kick it in the back of the head, knocking its teeth out. AMD is no longer performance king, and they won't be for a while.

Like you said, Dell hasn't announced anything about AMD besides >4 core servers . . . oh right, because Intel DOMINATES everything else.

Why do these AMD fanboys even try anymore? You lose, guys, GIVE IT UP.
July 12, 2006 2:48:20 PM

Something you guys are forgetting is that that we're in a GLOBAL market and AMD are still the smart arse; they're working hard on the HUNGRY Chinese and Indian markets :wink:
July 12, 2006 3:13:23 PM

Quote:
You forgot to add, for the first time in awhile. AMDs units didn't go down much. Intel flooded the market with a laptop I would only recommend for Solitiare. It's not cheating but someone is getting ripped off. A Mobile Sempron or Athlon64 would mop up the floor with those in every usage scenario.

This is a not true. I have both Turion64(Lancaster) and Pentium M(Dothan). PentiumM is faster than Turion64 clock for clock.

I won't quote on your interpretation of "clock or clock," but I will say that I didn't want a Turion anyway, though I thought of it as a laptop PC that is worth more than the Celeron in the Toshiba CPU that seemed to change the "MONTHLY"

It must be mightily convenient to just ignore the facts because you don't want one. Come to think about it, that explains a lot...
July 12, 2006 3:22:51 PM

i believe the price difference for june is because of the conroe release. i believe a lot of people are in the same boat as me and were waiting for the conroe to be released so that amd chips will drop in price.
July 13, 2006 12:26:43 AM

Quote:
Speaking of bleeding, one would think you should know a bit more about that than this drivel you post, especially coming from you since it occurs monthly... :roll:


Word.
It's Funny Because It's True!