Athlon x2 Price Cuts Revealed - are they deep enough..?

[the_vorlon]

AMD has announced huge price cuts - here is the new price/performance comparison.

ranked in order of benchmark performance

WHERE DID THIS CHART COME FROM???

This chart is a composite of many composites.

It takes the combined scored for several test suites, specifically:

The Sysmark2004 overall score (Somewhat Intel friendly IMHO)
The PC WorldBench5 score (Somewhat AMD friendly IMHO)
Business Winstone
Multimedia Winstone
3dsmax& Composite score
Quake
Oblivion

All scores were normalized so that an X2 3800 was given a value of 1.000 - ie if a CPU was 20% faster than the X2, it got a score of 1.200

The first 5 benchmarks used should be more or less acceptable to everybody. - the are broadbased, multi-benchmark composites from industry standard tests.

What games to use is hardly a clear matter. Quake and Oblivion are semi- GPU limited, so they likely cast AMD in a slightly favorable light.

On the other hand, running Fear at 640 x 480 would give Intel a crushing advantage, but not really reflect reality.

The raw data is now posted, if you don't like the benchmarks I used, use different ones and "roll your own"

NOTE : Old Netburst "Extreme" XE965 +/- dead even with $183 E6300 performance wise :twisted: :twisted:

Conroe 6800 @ $999.00
Conroe 6700 @ $ 530.00
Conroe 6600 @ $ 316.00 <<Is this the best deal from Intel..?
Athlon FX62 @ $799.00 <<are they smoking crack...?
AM5000+ @ $282.00 <<easily the best AMD value
Conroe 6400 @ $ 224.00 <<or is this the best deal from Intel..?
AM4600+ @ $224
Conroe 6300 @ $183.00
AM4200+ @ $175
AM3800+ @ $149

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3361

 

[Action_Man]

$800 for the FX 62, so much for $350 or whatever you morons were rambling on about.

Very competitive pricing though, I can finally upgrade my A64s to X2s at AMD's expense.

 

[RichPLS]

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=8

Actually, a Conroe E6300 ($187) is closer matched to an X2-4600 ($257) making the price $77 cheaper favoring Intel again...

Not to mention Conroe performs fine using cheaper DDR2 533 memory, and not the elite expensive DDR2 800 memory needed to get respectable benchmarks...

 

[SidVicious]

AM3800 at $149 looks like +/- a draw versus the Conroe 6300 at $183 - mind you the Conroe overclocks and the AM3800 doesn't....

Cough*blatant*Cough*lies*Cough !

The X2 3800+ (be it S939 or AM2) DO overclock, beside, there are a lot of S939 users that will upgrade their single cores for an X2 since it does'nt imply buying a new mobo along with DDR2 and possibly a new GPU.

If you factor in the price of a "Conroe Ready" motherboard, the choice is crystal clear, simply dropping a new CPU in make a lot more sense.

 

[the_vorlon]

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=8

Actually, a Conroe E6300 ($187) is closer matched to an X2-4600 ($257) making the price $77 cheaper favoring Intel again...

Not to mention Conroe performs fine using cheaper DDR2 533 memory, and not the elite expensive DDR2 800 memory needed to get respectable benchmarks...

The $187 E6300 performs basically the same as the old Intel 965 Extreme edition in a lot of benchmarks - utterly amazing

Any yes you are right, I was being too kind to AMD, the E6300s slots performance wise between the AM4600+ and the AM4200+

 

[jaguarskx]

AMD's CPU will probably rule the value segment.

Intel's CPU will rule the performance segment.

Both will be competitive in the mainstream market, but I think Intel will have the upper hand because of the E6300 and E6400.

Anyway, it's a win-win situation for the consumers.

 

[rman3349]

Wow, very steep cuts indeed. Just shows how good Conroe is though. Nice way of showing the clear winner. Although it's already been brought up, I smiled a little when I saw the fx-62 at 700 (not sub 350 as some dolt suggested).

I can't wait to see a large set of data on how well conroe overclocks. Very exciting indeed.

 

[corvetteguy]

Averaging all the benches is the stupidest way of deciding the rank of a cpu. Anyway, i said amd has a slight lead in bang for buck because of the 5000. It will be the best value when the prices drop.

 

[BaronMatrix]

AMD has announced huge price cuts - here is the new price/performance comparison.

Here is the line up... ranked in order of benchmark performance

Conroe 6800 @ $999.00
Conroe 6700 @ $ 530.00
Conroe 6600 @ $ 316.00
Athlon FX62 @ $799.00
Conroe 6400 @ $ 224.00
AM5000+ @ $282.00
Conroe 6300 @ $183.00
AM4600+ @ $224
AM3800+ @ $149

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3361

Objectively speaking, a Conroe 6400 at $224 is +/- 12% faster than a AM5000+ (based on an average of the Toms Hardware benchmarks) and costs $58.00 less... but I suspect this is enough to keep the AMD fanboys buying the product...

AM3800 at $149 looks like +/- a draw versus the Conroe 6300 at $183 - mind you the Conroe overclocks and the AM3800 doesn't....

A 5000+ for


$282

Holy locomotive, Batman.

 

[BaronMatrix]

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=8

Actually, a Conroe E6300 ($187) is closer matched to an X2-4600 ($257) making the price $77 cheaper favoring Intel again...

Not to mention Conroe performs fine using cheaper DDR2 533 memory, and not the elite expensive DDR2 800 memory needed to get respectable benchmarks...

The $187 E6300 performs basically the same as the old Intel 965 Extreme edition in a lot of benchmarks - utterly amazing

Any yes you are right, I was being too kind to AMD, the E6300s best matchup performance wise is indeed the AM4600+

See my other post. OEMs will LOVE that.

 

[BaronMatrix]

AM3800 at $149 looks like +/- a draw versus the Conroe 6300 at $183 - mind you the Conroe overclocks and the AM3800 doesn't....

This will be the new Best Buy special where people will look above their alarm if you say overclock. Core 2 will not be in volume enough to stop that before Dec.

Ask anyone.

 

[ltcommander_data]

I was amazed by the steepness of some of the cuts too. Can't wait to see how AMD's and Intel's bottom line looks by the end of the year though.

For people interested in looking at Intel price lists and price cuts, you can look at the links I posted in my announcements thread:

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/Intel-Announcements-Price-Lists-Merom-July-Launch-ftopict191658.html

 

[the_vorlon]

A 5000+ for


$282

Holy locomotive, Batman.

An Intel E6600 for $316
An AMD AM 5000+ for $282

Insane.. But I like it.. a lot actually 8) 8)

 

[sp6yd6er6]

Damn straight... that pricetag is lookin' REALLY good ;-)

 

[spud]

AMD has announced huge price cuts - here is the new price/performance comparison.

Here is the line up... ranked in order of benchmark performance

NOTE : Old Netburst "Extreme" XE965 +/- dead even with $183 E6300 performance wise :twisted: :twisted:

Conroe 6800 @ $999.00
Conroe 6700 @ $ 530.00
Conroe 6600 @ $ 316.00 <<Is this the best deal from Intel..?
Athlon FX62 @ $799.00 <<are they smoking crack...?
AM5000+ @ $282.00 <<easily the best AMD value
Conroe 6400 @ $ 224.00 <<or is this the best deal from Intel..?
AM4600+ @ $224
Conroe 6300 @ $183.00
AM4200+ @ $175
AM3800+ @ $149

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3361

It's a improvement I will give AMD that.

 

[Spitfire_x86]

Intel = Best bang, but it is fairly close (NOT for high-end though)

 

[guyinyourattic37]

i don't understand the graph. should the # be lower or higher?

 

[TheMaster]

282 Dollars for a 5000+ ?!?

Whatever they're smoking, must be some good shit.

 

[battousai831]

i voted intel still has best but most people don't have 200+ dollars to spend on a cpu alone, i know when the price cuts hit i will prolly pick up a x2 3800+ or 4200+ to replace my 3200+ s939

so this is great for people with a s939 system that want a little more life out of their comps

 

[someguyy]

Assuming price cuts affect 939. (btw i am running a 939)

 

[SidVicious]

The price cuts do affect S939 CPUs, they would be those without the "Socket AM2" comment, the 150$ X2 3800+ is quite a good deal, I payed over double of that when I bought mine in December.

 

[the_vorlon]

i don't understand the graph. should the # be lower or higher?

It's relative performance, based upon average of anandtechs benchmarks, normalized to a X2 3800 being equal to 1.0.

An E6600 for example is, on average, 29.6% faster than a X2 3800+

 

[Mike995]

I really doubt amd will be able to hold out this long, I say intel releases a 3.4 ghz core 2, to completly stomp out amd in one swipe. Its cheaper for intel to produce cpus, they have a bigger user base no matter what anyone thinks on this forum, and they are only going to gain more now that they have the performance crown back. This will be really interesting none the less, but if I was in Intels position, I would crank up the core 2's max clock speed, just to have an extreme lead over the competetion, theres no sence holding back.

 

[the_vorlon]

Can't agree with you.

Clearly, Intel has 2, or 3 speed grades of headroom, but they also have capacity limitations till they get fully ramped.

I expect once they get evrything rampled and the process matured so yileds are good, then they will "hammer" amd and make the 3.00 ghz chip "mainstream"

 

[Heyyou27]

One reason you don't work for Intel. They'll keep the clockspeeds as low as they can until they really need to increase them. If they release an even faster Core 2 Duo, it's only going to compete with the slower Core 2 Duo versions.