Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

"Intel To Suffer More Than AMD In Price War!"

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 31, 2006 7:44:01 PM

Quote:
C Insights has released its 1H06, TOP 15 semiconductor supplier rankings that takes into account the effect the microprocessor price war is having on Intel Corp and Advanced Micro Devices.

Perhaps unexpectedly, the effect of the price war has contrasting results. According to IC Insights;

‘Intel and AMD registered the largest 2Q06 sequential sales declines of any of the top 15 semiconductor suppliers. It should be noted that although Intel and AMD each displayed significant 2Q06 sales declines, IC Insights expects full-year 2006/2005 semiconductor sales at Intel to be down at least 10% while AMD is on pace for a 42% increase.'

This can be put down to a few crucial factors, commented Bill McClean, President of IC Insights. On the one hand, AMD is still building market share in the server space, which is not being impacted by the price war encountered in the PC and notebook space.


http://www.fabtech.org/content/view/1702/2/

8)
July 31, 2006 7:54:54 PM

Right, with Intel on the 65 nm process I hardly see how they are going to suffer more than AMD. Look at the history, who can weather price wars better? It is certainly not AMD. This price war is going to drive them into the red for the rest of the year, a color that their bottom line is very familiar with.
Related resources
July 31, 2006 7:55:37 PM

Haha.

Quote:
Looks like the FX62 is the new Netburst now.
July 31, 2006 8:09:16 PM

Quote:
Right, with Intel on the 65 nm process I hardly see how they are going to suffer more than AMD. Look at the history, who can weather price wars better? It is certainly not AMD. This price war is going to drive them into the red for the rest of the year, a color that their bottom line is very familiar with.



Is there ANYONE who can convince you guys of the different cost sructure for the two companies. AMD can make a lot less and still break even. Intel can't. Yes they have more money but they also have more bills.

Most analysts predict growing AMD market share especially in servers. As the new low cost low power chips become mroe abundant, P4 will lose more sales and Core 2 still has to ramp.

OEMs and retailers have n fear of placing AMD boxes in the "front of the store." They have sold well and will continue. By cancelling 95 chips AMD has saved themselves probably hundreds of millions of dollars.

Also by Q1 07 Ati income will be in AMDs pocket while it's more than likely that nVidia will charge nice fat licensing fees for SLI. Since it iwll e awhile before a lot of SLI/Crossfire boards are even available much less low priced, AMD will have made more sales through SIMPLE PRODUCT DIFFERENTIATION.

I would hate to have to sell Intel right now. How do you market the various chips?
July 31, 2006 8:31:49 PM

Apparently Intel currently would have to do $8 billion dollars less revenue per year to break even... :roll:
How much more money would AMD have to MAKE in order to break even?!? :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
July 31, 2006 8:34:15 PM

MMkay. I guess it's a good thing we don't employ people such as yourself.
July 31, 2006 8:37:14 PM

Quote:
MMkay. I guess it's a good thing we don't employ people such as yourself.


Ya, I guess if this is hurting Intel, you guys would love the pain to continue. You sadomasochist you :wink:

Peace
July 31, 2006 8:44:05 PM

I don't think this article takes into account that when Intel releases Clovertown it will probably fire-sale its existing lines. AMD will have to counter with reductions. Just like in the desktop market.
July 31, 2006 8:46:43 PM

Quote:
Right, with Intel on the 65 nm process I hardly see how they are going to suffer more than AMD. Look at the history, who can weather price wars better? It is certainly not AMD. This price war is going to drive them into the red for the rest of the year, a color that their bottom line is very familiar with.



Is there ANYONE who can convince you guys of the different cost sructure for the two companies. AMD can make a lot less and still break even. Intel can't. Yes they have more money but they also have more bills.

Most analysts predict growing AMD market share especially in servers. As the new low cost low power chips become mroe abundant, P4 will lose more sales and Core 2 still has to ramp.

OEMs and retailers have n fear of placing AMD boxes in the "front of the store." They have sold well and will continue. By cancelling 95 chips AMD has saved themselves probably hundreds of millions of dollars.

Also by Q1 07 Ati income will be in AMDs pocket while it's more than likely that nVidia will charge nice fat licensing fees for SLI. Since it iwll e awhile before a lot of SLI/Crossfire boards are even available much less low priced, AMD will have made more sales through SIMPLE PRODUCT DIFFERENTIATION.

I would hate to have to sell Intel right now. How do you market the various chips?

Is there anyone that can convince you that AMD may see some hard times soon, like they have MANY times in the past? Intel's revenue last quarter probably went down as low as it will go for the foreseeable future. Conroe is inexpensive to make while being priced, on average, quite a bit higher than Pentium Ds, so it will definitely help their bottom line considerably.

Why would AMD continue to gain shares in the server space with an inferior and hotter running chip? 4-way servers are not all that common.

You would hate to have to sell Intel? Why is that exactly? They have the fastest performing chip on the market, while running cooler and using less energy. Pentium Ds will continue to sell on price. Is that a hard concept? Your beloved AMD is doing the same thing with X2s since it is no longer the performance leader.
July 31, 2006 8:50:57 PM

Hard to make money when you're selling a second rate chip, that can't be debated it's a fact that Core2duo out preforms AM2 and 64's. I know I've bought my last AMD, six new conroe's coming next year. Hard not to worry about sales when you've put out and barrowed One Billion more than your net worth. he he he he he, how long will it be before Intel dumps money into AMD like MS did Apple :)  Just to keep a token competitor.
July 31, 2006 8:58:50 PM

Hmmm.. I guess you can say AMD has Intel just where they
want them. :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 

If so, why did they have to buy ATI in order to compete
with Intel? You don't do risky things, when you are in control.
July 31, 2006 9:01:56 PM

Quote:
C Insights has released its 1H06, TOP 15 semiconductor supplier rankings that takes into account the effect the microprocessor price war is having on Intel Corp and Advanced Micro Devices.

Perhaps unexpectedly, the effect of the price war has contrasting results. According to IC Insights;

‘Intel and AMD registered the largest 2Q06 sequential sales declines of any of the top 15 semiconductor suppliers. It should be noted that although Intel and AMD each displayed significant 2Q06 sales declines, IC Insights expects full-year 2006/2005 semiconductor sales at Intel to be down at least 10% while AMD is on pace for a 42% increase.'

This can be put down to a few crucial factors, commented Bill McClean, President of IC Insights. On the one hand, AMD is still building market share in the server space, which is not being impacted by the price war encountered in the PC and notebook space.


http://www.fabtech.org/content/view/1702/2/

8)

More junk I see coming from you. When will you give it up. You know if it wasn't for the fact Intel is still ranked number 1 of the 15 I might have belived you--not! AMD does not want to enter a price war especially now. However, if a price war ever does come, well---you have my sympathies! You know some people get mad at you 9 but I just feel sorry for people like you. You are so funny at times. Enjoy! :lol:  :roll: :lol: 
July 31, 2006 9:07:06 PM

Quote:
Apparently Intel currently would have to do $8 billion dollars less revenue per year to break even... :roll:
How much more money would AMD have to MAKE in order to break even?!? :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 



First off this is NOT MY STORY. I didn't write it, I just agree. Even when a IC firm says AMD is in better shape you still don't believe it. That seems like you are deluded.

I guess it depends on if we're talkign about operatng income or net profits. Net profits I believe is $880,000,000 for AMD.
July 31, 2006 9:10:53 PM

You are a complete and totally worthless bastard. All you do is post random AMD rules bull and never defend your post. I am sorry if your mighty AMD has been beaten, live with it. If not just stop posting, its easy just stop typing this crap.
July 31, 2006 9:15:39 PM

Quote:

Is there ANYONE who can convince you guys of the different cost sructure for the two companies. AMD can make a lot less and still break even. Intel can't. Yes they have more money but they also have more bills.


More bills? You mean to power the fabs and stuff? Okay, I'll give you that intel has more fabs and employees, but AMD just recently added, what, somewhere along 5.4B (ATI merger) + 4 or 5B (NY Fab) to their tab. Not to mention the fab upkeep at Dresden, and the conversion, as well. Looks like AMDs bills are the same as intel's, or even more. Can they still break even?

13 weeks Ending 2006-07-02
Intel: / AMD:
Revenue = 8,009.00. / 1,216.37
Operating costs = 6,937.00. / 1,114.26
Operationg revenue = 1,072.00. / 102.11
Income before taxes = 1,253.00. / 114.33
Income after taxes = 885.00. / 96.03
Net income = 885.0 / 88.85

Yeah, intel's hurting to pay those bills.


Quote:
Most analysts predict growing AMD market share especially in servers. As the new low cost low power chips become mroe abundant, P4 will lose more sales and Core 2 still has to ramp.


Core 2 already is ramping, at a nice pace, too. The only thing that isn't ramping quickly is Kentsfield and Cloverton, since chipsets are being produced at certain fabs to meet demand. But, that's not saying Quads aren't being made and sampled. Also, if Kentsfield can run on existing i975x chipsets, that makes it alot easier to not push a new chipset line. With Core 2 for servers (Woodcrest) that ramped along with Conroe, so I have no idea where you're getting it "needs to ramp" idea.

Quote:
OEMs and retailers have n fear of placing AMD boxes in the "front of the store." They have sold well and will continue. By cancelling 95 chips AMD has saved themselves probably hundreds of millions of dollars.

Uh, okay. Not sure what the whole store front thing was about, but AMD cancelling 95 chips without a newer substitute for 939, other than AM2, was a bit surprising. I figured they'd lose the single core, but push more dual core CPUs, until 65nm transition was complete. I don't know how much they actually saved, but millions of dollars might be a tad much. Maybe 2 million, but not 10 million. Which is gone, either way to pay off loan for merger.

Quote:
Also by Q1 07 Ati income will be in AMDs pocket while it's more than likely that nVidia will charge nice fat licensing fees for SLI. Since it iwll e awhile before a lot of SLI/Crossfire boards are even available much less low priced, AMD will have made more sales through SIMPLE PRODUCT DIFFERENTIATION.


ATIs sales might dwindle without intel support, since it did generate 80% of ATIs sales. Now, if AMD/ATI have a plan in place or in the works before the merger, it might help them (AMD), but with nVidia working with intel for SLI, and if nVidia does raise it's licensing fees to AMD, that leaves AMD with ATI only. I still don't see where simple product differentiation comes from, all I see is a bill from TMSC and UMC for ATIs chips being added to AMDs bill, until a fab is built to create both GPUs and CPUs.

Quote:
I would hate to have to sell Intel right now. How do you market the various chips?


How do you market the various chips? Easy:

Want the fastest CPU around, and price is not an issue? X6800 is for you.
Want something fast, but not too expensive? X6700 is for you.
Want something that has a great price/performance value? X6600 is for you.
Want to create a mid-level budget system without breaking the bank? X6400 is for you.
Want a nice low/mid-budget system? X6300 is for you.

That's not that hard to do.
What is AMD doing to push their products, other than slashing them to the point where profit might not be generated at all. Is slashing the price on the 939s a real deal, when the next upgrade for AM2 means new CPU and memory? Sure, you can keep that 939 a little longer, but when you upgrade, you're buying the same memory type as the C2D, but the system you get might not be as fast/powerful as the C2D. Oh, but you can drop a few grand on 4X4, but we might discontinue that once AM3 arrives, in 2007, sometime.

Please...you've said you're against intel, for whatever reason, but don't try to make them as the ones in the red, or losing wads of cash. They have more than 2 fabs running, they don't rely on foundries for some of their products, they didn't drop almost 10B on mergers/fabs in one year, and I seriously doubt they have problems paying their bills (which by the way, most of the cost of water would be lowered, since they reclaim water in fabs).

Quote:
I guess it depends on if we're talkign about operatng income or net profits. Net profits I believe is $880,000,000 for AMD.

Financials Quarterly (Jul '06) Annual (2005) Income Statement
(in millions of USD)
Total Revenue 1,216.37 5,847.58
Gross Profit 690.31 2,391.76
Operating Income 102.11 231.66
Net Income 88.85 165.48

Source: http://finance.google.com/finance?q=amd&hl=en

When? I think you're thinking about GROSS profits, and not either operation profits or net profits.

Source: http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=ii&cid=327
July 31, 2006 9:18:18 PM

Quote:
Hard to make money when you're selling a second rate chip, that can't be debated it's a fact that Core2duo out preforms AM2 and 64's. I know I've bought my last AMD, six new conroe's coming next year. Hard not to worry about sales when you've put out and barrowed One Billion more than your net worth. he he he he he, how long will it be before Intel dumps money into AMD like MS did Apple :)  Just to keep a token competitor.


Second rate chip? Are you crazy? A second rate chip will not get you 179 fps.

Ask 965EE.

Basically you guys seem to live off of Intel's success. Do you think I care that much about AMD? You're in denial. Every analyst says the same thing and you still don't listen. Does Paul O have to tell you?

If Intel hadn't made a lawsuit necesary AMD would already be at 30% worldwide.

did you really giggle like a little girl in there? Does that imply unbiased replies? NOT!

I hate that Intel backed themselves into this corner with Itanium and HeatBurst, but I can only call em like I see em. If the 965 takes too long it will really dent in Intel's Q3.

I mean no one wants HeatBurst now and AM2 fits right in between them perfectly. So OEMs can order millions of chips nobody wants or millions f chips nobody can get.

Or they can pick up AM2 with $50 mobos.


Sounds like a tough choice. HMMMMMM! Let me see. I think I'd go with AM2 right now as a system builder. Let someone else decide between Core 2 and PD.


I kinda understand how "alone" you feel but it was Intel's fault just like MS' problems with partners and lawsuits was theirs.

Even nVidia made the statement "you have to have friends in this business." Intel has very few. That's why AMD made the statement, "We will not be another Intel."


Partners will absorb some of the price war costs from AMD, but Intel doesn't really have that luxury.

Also, while AMD was canelling chips to streamline their product lines, Intel is adding new chips to further make differentiation difficult for OEMs and consumers.
July 31, 2006 9:20:28 PM

Intel has had a bad last year. Intel's profit dropped some 50% last year. But we know that this has to do with the competitive failure of the NetBurst architecture vs AMD's Athlon64. And in order to maintain their marketshare and introduce Conroe, Intel has dropped prices which has had an immediate negative result on profitability.
buttt
Intel's long term future is, however, not so gloomy. Realizing that their Pentium 4 Netburst architecture was not their salvation, Intel decided to take a step back and work with a design that had more to do with the Pentium III. The Intel Core (aka Yonah) processor was built off the Pentium M design. While it was a bit of step backwards, as they both lack 64bit support, it was enough to convince Apple to choose Intel over AMD when they made their switch to x86 processors.
Intel's future gets rosier when you consider their Intel Core 2 design which combines the advantages of the Yonah core with EMT64T support.
The Intel Core 2 desktop processor (aka Conroe) are shipping now, and the tide is turning... and it is now AMD's turn in the hotseat for the forseeable future.
Believe it or not Baron.
July 31, 2006 9:26:35 PM

Quote:


Is there ANYONE who can convince you guys of the different cost sructure for the two companies. AMD can make a lot less and still break even. Intel can't. Yes they have more money but they also have more bills.


Is there ANYONE that can make you understand what PROFITABILITY means?


Quote:
Most analysts predict growing AMD market share especially in servers. As the new low cost low power chips become mroe abundant, P4 will lose more sales and Core 2 still has to ramp.


And analysts are never wrong are they?


Quote:
OEMs and retailers have n fear of placing AMD boxes in the "front of the store." They have sold well and will continue. By cancelling 95 chips AMD has saved themselves probably hundreds of millions of dollars.


LOL! again you give the average consumer too much credit. All they see is the pricetag and the size of the monitor.

Quote:
Also by Q1 07 Ati income will be in AMDs pocket while it's more than likely that nVidia will charge nice fat licensing fees for SLI. Since it iwll e awhile before a lot of SLI/Crossfire boards are even available much less low priced, AMD will have made more sales through SIMPLE PRODUCT DIFFERENTIATION.


Ati income ain't that much. They are gonna spend 5.4 billion to buy a company that has only made a total of about 200 million profit in the last 4 years. As for the rest of this paragraph, did you actually put a rubber glove on before you reached up your ass to pull that out?

Quote:
I would hate to have to sell Intel right now. How do you market the various chips?


Intel was still profitable last quarter, so somebody is buying them. ALOT of 'em too.
July 31, 2006 9:30:08 PM

Quote:
Apparently Intel currently would have to do $8 billion dollars less revenue per year to break even... :roll:
How much more money would AMD have to MAKE in order to break even?!? :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 



First off this is NOT MY STORY. I didn't write it, I just agree. Even when a IC firm says AMD is in better shape you still don't believe it. That seems like you are deluded.

I guess it depends on if we're talkign about operatng income or net profits. Net profits I believe is $880,000,000 for AMD.

LOL! that was intel's profit last quarter, dumbass! Yer killin' me! Dude please do yourself a favor and stop typing now!
July 31, 2006 9:35:53 PM

Quote:
C Insights has released its 1H06, TOP 15 semiconductor supplier rankings that takes into account the effect the microprocessor price war is having on Intel Corp and Advanced Micro Devices.

Perhaps unexpectedly, the effect of the price war has contrasting results. According to IC Insights;

‘Intel and AMD registered the largest 2Q06 sequential sales declines of any of the top 15 semiconductor suppliers. It should be noted that although Intel and AMD each displayed significant 2Q06 sales declines, IC Insights expects full-year 2006/2005 semiconductor sales at Intel to be down at least 10% while AMD is on pace for a 42% increase.'

This can be put down to a few crucial factors, commented Bill McClean, President of IC Insights. On the one hand, AMD is still building market share in the server space, which is not being impacted by the price war encountered in the PC and notebook space.


http://www.fabtech.org/content/view/1702/2/

8)

SUBWAY EAT FRESH BITCH. Enough w/ your bs already
July 31, 2006 9:36:11 PM

Quote:
Apparently Intel currently would have to do $8 billion dollars less revenue per year to break even... :roll:
How much more money would AMD have to MAKE in order to break even?!? :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 



First off this is NOT MY STORY. I didn't write it, I just agree. Even when a IC firm says AMD is in better shape you still don't believe it. That seems like you are deluded.

I guess it depends on if we're talkign about operatng income or net profits. Net profits I believe is $880,000,000 for AMD.

LOL! that was intel's profit last quarter, dumbass! Yer killin' me! Dude please do yourself a favor and stop typing now!

Yes, that 880 million is intel's profit last quarter, I just realized.

AMDs was 88.85 million.
July 31, 2006 9:40:21 PM

One thing you fail to not get is that when Intel does poorly, they just fail to make as much profit as projected staying in the black, but AMD does poor and actually looses money going in the red...
Big difference BaronBoy.
July 31, 2006 9:40:40 PM

Quote:
Apparently Intel currently would have to do $8 billion dollars less revenue per year to break even... :roll:
How much more money would AMD have to MAKE in order to break even?!? :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 



First off this is NOT MY STORY. I didn't write it, I just agree. Even when a IC firm says AMD is in better shape you still don't believe it. That seems like you are deluded.

I guess it depends on if we're talkign about operatng income or net profits. Net profits I believe is $880,000,000 for AMD.

LOL! that was intel's profit last quarter, dumbass! Yer killin' me! Dude please do yourself a favor and stop typing now!

Yes, that 880 million is intel's profit last quarter, I just realized.

AMDs was 88.85 million.

Last time I checked having 10X's your competitors profits was some major ownage... and thats on an inferior product !
July 31, 2006 9:43:49 PM

Quote:
Hard to make money when you're selling a second rate chip, that can't be debated it's a fact that Core2duo out preforms AM2 and 64's. I know I've bought my last AMD, six new conroe's coming next year. Hard not to worry about sales when you've put out and barrowed One Billion more than your net worth. he he he he he, how long will it be before Intel dumps money into AMD like MS did Apple :)  Just to keep a token competitor.


Second rate chip? Are you crazy? A second rate chip will not get you 179 fps.

Ask 965EE.

Basically you guys seem to live off of Intel's success. Do you think I care that much about AMD? You're in denial. Every analyst says the same thing and you still don't listen. Does Paul O have to tell you?

If Intel hadn't made a lawsuit necesary AMD would already be at 30% worldwide.

did you really giggle like a little girl in there? Does that imply unbiased replies? NOT!

I hate that Intel backed themselves into this corner with Itanium and HeatBurst, but I can only call em like I see em. If the 965 takes too long it will really dent in Intel's Q3.

I mean no one wants HeatBurst now and AM2 fits right in between them perfectly. So OEMs can order millions of chips nobody wants or millions f chips nobody can get.

Or they can pick up AM2 with $50 mobos.


Sounds like a tough choice. HMMMMMM! Let me see. I think I'd go with AM2 right now as a system builder. Let someone else decide between Core 2 and PD.


I kinda understand how "alone" you feel but it was Intel's fault just like MS' problems with partners and lawsuits was theirs.

Even nVidia made the statement "you have to have friends in this business." Intel has very few. That's why AMD made the statement, "We will not be another Intel."


Partners will absorb some of the price war costs from AMD, but Intel doesn't really have that luxury.

Also, while AMD was canelling chips to streamline their product lines, Intel is adding new chips to further make differentiation difficult for OEMs and consumers.

/Fail
July 31, 2006 9:50:48 PM

Are you kidding me ?... you do know its cheaper for intel to fabricate cpus then it is for amd to fabricate their cpus as their die sizes are bigger. Intel can also last longer and they wont suffer more then amd. You are just dumb as hell.
July 31, 2006 9:52:25 PM

Quote:
How do you market the various chips? Easy:

Want the fastest CPU around, and price is not an issue? X6800 is for you.
Want something fast, but not too expensive? X6700 is for you.
Want something that has a great price/performance value? X6600 is for you.
Want to create a mid-level budget system without breaking the bank? X6400 is for you.
Want a nice low/mid-budget system? X6300 is for you.



But that's bias because you don't mention the fact that Tom's has put at least 6 AM2 dual core at or below the price perf curve. That means that you can substitue any AM2 for ANY Core 2. Especially since you would have a hard time finding a $75 mobo that wil work for Core 2 6800/6700.

There are a whole lot for FX62.

Again I say face it there's a new sheriff in town and he's riding on HyperTransport. AMD made a brilliant move in acquiring ATi. That means Intel has ot decide of they want their competitor making chipsets for them. But where is Intel or AMD going without nVidia and ATi?

Nowhere. At this point Intel will not have branded boards with R600, but ATi will have them with CrossFire for Intel chips. There are no easily found SLI board around so the mighty Core 2 is just sitting there showing slideshows of Q4 at 1600x1200.
July 31, 2006 9:53:09 PM

I love your BS posts.
July 31, 2006 9:54:04 PM

Quote:
One thing you fail to not get is that when Intel does poorly, they just fail to make as much profit as projected staying in the black, but AMD does poor and actually looses money going in the red...


http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-10533-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=23734&messageID=446880&start=-1

Quote:
I reiterate my projection that Intel will post operating loss starting 3Q06, and BK in five to seven quarters.

:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 

Back in reality, however: Intel will probably post a sales decline this year. On top of lower retails, many business customers will be waiting for Clovertown (which probably won't roll out en masse until Q1-07) or even Longhorn (Vista) Server.
AMD will make gains in these last two quarters (as far as the server market goes), since if you need new servers NOW, the opteron line is probably the better route.

Year-to-Year comparisons will probably favor Intel next year. Especially if K8L doesn't make it out until later (Q3) in 2007.
July 31, 2006 9:54:07 PM

AsRock makes an $85 mobo for Core 2 and newegg sells it... it is in stock too.
July 31, 2006 9:54:25 PM

Quote:
How do you market the various chips? Easy:

Want the fastest CPU around, and price is not an issue? X6800 is for you.
Want something fast, but not too expensive? X6700 is for you.
Want something that has a great price/performance value? X6600 is for you.
Want to create a mid-level budget system without breaking the bank? X6400 is for you.
Want a nice low/mid-budget system? X6300 is for you.



But that's bias because you don't mention the fact that Tom's has put at least 6 AM2 dual core at or below the price perf curve. That means that you can substitue any AM2 for ANY Core 2. Especially since you would have a hard time finding a $75 mobo that wil work for Core 2 6800/6700.

There are a whole lot for FX62.

Again I say face it there's a new sheriff in town and he's riding on HyperTransport. AMD made a brilliant move in acquiring ATi. That means Intel has ot decide of they want their competitor making chipsets for them. But where is Intel or AMD going without nVidia and ATi?

Nowhere. At this point Intel will not have branded boards with R600, but ATi will have them with CrossFire for Intel chips. There are no easily found SLI board around so the mighty Core 2 is just sitting there showing slideshows of Q4 at 1600x1200.

/fail again
July 31, 2006 9:55:56 PM

Quote:
I love your BS posts.


I bet he did very well in creative writing.
July 31, 2006 9:56:57 PM

sharikou is a reliable source? :roll: Would not a MMM link be considered more substantial? :wink:
July 31, 2006 9:57:19 PM

Quote:
AMD made a brilliant move in acquiring ATi.


I love how it goes from worst decision ever to brillant move.
July 31, 2006 9:58:37 PM

Quote:
sharikou is a reliable source? :roll: Would not a MMM link be considered more substantial? :wink:

The real test was: Did you figure out who said it, before clicking the link? :p 
July 31, 2006 9:58:47 PM

Quote:
AMD made a brilliant move in acquiring ATi.


I love how it goes from worst decision ever to brillant move.

BaronBS is at it again :roll:

to baronBS: Fail
July 31, 2006 9:59:19 PM

:lol:  :tongue: :mrgreen: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy:
July 31, 2006 10:02:13 PM

Quote:
:lol:  :tongue: :mrgreen: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy: :trophy:


yay cookie me

to baronBS again: You fail
July 31, 2006 10:02:18 PM

How old are you 9nm?
July 31, 2006 10:03:14 PM

Quote:
How do you market the various chips? Easy:

Want the fastest CPU around, and price is not an issue? X6800 is for you.
Want something fast, but not too expensive? X6700 is for you.
Want something that has a great price/performance value? X6600 is for you.
Want to create a mid-level budget system without breaking the bank? X6400 is for you.
Want a nice low/mid-budget system? X6300 is for you.



But that's bias because you don't mention the fact that Tom's has put at least 6 AM2 dual core at or below the price perf curve. That means that you can substitue any AM2 for ANY Core 2. Especially since you would have a hard time finding a $75 mobo that wil work for Core 2 6800/6700.

There are a whole lot for FX62.

Again I say face it there's a new sheriff in town and he's riding on HyperTransport. AMD made a brilliant move in acquiring ATi. That means Intel has ot decide of they want their competitor making chipsets for them. But where is Intel or AMD going without nVidia and ATi?

Nowhere. At this point Intel will not have branded boards with R600, but ATi will have them with CrossFire for Intel chips. There are no easily found SLI board around so the mighty Core 2 is just sitting there showing slideshows of Q4 at 1600x1200.

Biased? How is this biased? You asked how I would sell intel products. If I were to sell them, I would sell them that way.

If I was going to be totally honest, I would say that AMD is a better deal, if you already owned a 939 or AM2 system, and didn't want to overhaul all together.

But, honesty also means, if someone with a 939 is willing to spend money for a CPU, for a line that is pretty much nearing end of life, I would guide them towards the C2D line. Now, if they are adamant about AMD then, I would pull the benchmark/price/performance card on them.
If they still want AMD, then go for it. Hell, I'll even tell them to save up for 4X4 to be able to say that their system is as good/better than C2D.

Biased? No. Just answering your question.
July 31, 2006 10:03:23 PM

Quote:
How old are you 9nm?


i bet hes a 20 year old living in his moms basement lmao :p 
July 31, 2006 10:07:20 PM

There's more BS in this thread than the entire Midwest. I don't pretend to know what is going on at corporate levels of Intel and AMD, but some of you sure do. I don't think I'm going out on limb saying that I doubt any of you are in any position to really know anything about what you are talking about. Sorry, not meant to offend, just calling it as I see it.
July 31, 2006 10:11:25 PM

Quote:
There's more BS in this thread than the entire Midwest. I don't pretend to know what is going on at corporate levels of Intel and AMD, but some of you sure do. I don't think I'm going out on limb saying that I doubt any of you are in any position to really know anything about what you are talking about. Sorry, not meant to offend, just calling it as I see it.


That's cool.

For the record, I do work for intel, but not in management level. I work in the fab, and I see how one little thing in a process line can throw an entire line back to R&D as quickly as the AMD vs. intel posts are generated. So, I know how important a ramp is, and how quickly and time consuming they can be, but once a process has hit it's sweet spot, watch out.
July 31, 2006 10:32:45 PM

No. Theres no SLI/Crossfire boards for Conroe right now. Then again, anyone that invests in TWO highend video cards this close to the release of DX10 is not thinking too well. I can't say I have any inside information, but I'd be willing to bet that a SLI/Crossfire board for Conroe is out BEFORE DX10 drops. Which is really all that matters.

If you want to live in the past and build some AMD system that would have been futureproof two years ago, go ahead. If you have sense you'd know you want a conroe(or even wait for kentsfield or the future AMD chips) and DX10 video cards if you really want something that will last awhile. But trying to compare the AMD chips to conroe right now is just silly unless you're building a value system and want a really cheap CPU or want to go ahead and get a nice AM2 board since they are supposed to be compatible with future AMD chips.

I don't really think either is better, as they go back and forth, but right now Intel is way ahead.
July 31, 2006 10:37:02 PM

Quote:
No. Theres no SLI/Crossfire boards for Conroe right now. Then again, anyone that invests in TWO highend video cards this close to the release of DX10 is not thinking too well. I can't say I have any inside information, but I'd be willing to bet that a SLI/Crossfire board for Conroe is out BEFORE DX10 drops. Which is really all that matters.

If you want to live in the past and build some AMD system that would have been futureproof two years ago, go ahead. If you have sense you'd know you want a conroe(or even wait for kentsfield or the future AMD chips) and DX10 video cards if you really want something that will last awhile. But trying to compare the AMD chips to conroe right now is just silly unless you're building a value system and want a really cheap CPU or want to go ahead and get a nice AM2 board since they are supposed to be compatible with future AMD chips.

I don't really think either is better, as they go back and forth, but right now Intel is way ahead.

Fail

975X mobos support crossfire and SLI, shamino (vrforums) had hack drivers and made it work. official SLI support will be from nvidias 590 chipset.
July 31, 2006 10:39:31 PM

Quote:
Hard to make money when you're selling a second rate chip, that can't be debated it's a fact that Core2duo out preforms AM2 and 64's. I know I've bought my last AMD, six new conroe's coming next year. Hard not to worry about sales when you've put out and barrowed One Billion more than your net worth. he he he he he, how long will it be before Intel dumps money into AMD like MS did Apple :)  Just to keep a token competitor.


Second rate chip? Are you crazy? A second rate chip will not get you 179 fps.

Ask 965EE.

Basically you guys seem to live off of Intel's success. Do you think I care that much about AMD? You're in denial. Every analyst says the same thing and you still don't listen. Does Paul O have to tell you?

If Intel hadn't made a lawsuit necesary AMD would already be at 30% worldwide.

did you really giggle like a little girl in there? Does that imply unbiased replies? NOT!

I hate that Intel backed themselves into this corner with Itanium and HeatBurst, but I can only call em like I see em. If the 965 takes too long it will really dent in Intel's Q3.

I mean no one wants HeatBurst now and AM2 fits right in between them perfectly. So OEMs can order millions of chips nobody wants or millions f chips nobody can get.

Or they can pick up AM2 with $50 mobos.


Sounds like a tough choice. HMMMMMM! Let me see. I think I'd go with AM2 right now as a system builder. Let someone else decide between Core 2 and PD.


I kinda understand how "alone" you feel but it was Intel's fault just like MS' problems with partners and lawsuits was theirs.

Even nVidia made the statement "you have to have friends in this business." Intel has very few. That's why AMD made the statement, "We will not be another Intel."


Partners will absorb some of the price war costs from AMD, but Intel doesn't really have that luxury.

Also, while AMD was canelling chips to streamline their product lines, Intel is adding new chips to further make differentiation difficult for OEMs and consumers.

Crap crap crap crap! You talk nothing but crap! Why don't you shut the heck up and disapppear! Getting tired of your uneducated mindless babling nonsense! You seem to thrive in your own bullcrap. You make no sense and people have reply post after post and it just passes over your stupid head. What are you, 13? Ouch, did I guess your age right!
July 31, 2006 10:39:37 PM

Quote:
Intel has had a bad last year. Intel's profit dropped some 50% last year. But we know that this has to do with the competitive failure of the NetBurst architecture vs AMD's Athlon64. And in order to maintain their marketshare and introduce Conroe, Intel has dropped prices which has had an immediate negative result on profitability.
buttt
Intel's long term future is, however, not so gloomy. Realizing that their Pentium 4 Netburst architecture was not their salvation, Intel decided to take a step back and work with a design that had more to do with the Pentium III. The Intel Core (aka Yonah) processor was built off the Pentium M design. While it was a bit of step backwards, as they both lack 64bit support, it was enough to convince Apple to choose Intel over AMD when they made their switch to x86 processors.
Intel's future gets rosier when you consider their Intel Core 2 design which combines the advantages of the Yonah core with EMT64T support.
The Intel Core 2 desktop processor (aka Conroe) are shipping now, and the tide is turning... and it is now AMD's turn in the hotseat for the forseeable future.
Believe it or not Baron.


The Tide is turning.... As proof - overdrivePC makes custom gaming
PCs - A while back they offered both Intel and AMD machines -
but in the last year or two - they dropped the Intel line - because
AMD was better than P4. But due to the performance of conroe,
they've been getting a lot of feedback - where's conroe -
They made the announcement - Intel is back - but the website needs
to updated.
http://www.overdrivepc.com/
July 31, 2006 10:40:40 PM

AsRock has a $85 Crossfire Conroe board...
And Crossfire is supported on most intel based mobo's
July 31, 2006 10:55:29 PM

Quote:
go ahead and get a nice AM2 board since they are supposed to be compatible with future AMD chips.


I don't really recommend someone buying an AM2 board right now. While the next generation of AMD (AM3) will work on it, AM3 will use DDR3 memory, and AM2 mobos will only be able to use DDR2. I'm saying this like it's a bad thing because - there is only a trivial improvement with DDR2 on an AM2 socket.

I'm saying this because I believe AMD has lost some face right now, but they'll be back. Probably with a vengeance. AM3 platform will probably blow AM2 away, in which case you'll want an AM3 motherboard to make use of all of the new technology. I'm not saying this as an AMD fanboy. If AMD manages to blow away Conroe, Intel will have to respond again. It's a viscious circle with us (the consumers) winning.

If somebody really has their heart set on an AM2, wait for 4x4. Who knows? Maybe AMD has a suprise up their sleeve here. If not, then buy a single socket board.

In any case, if someone has a 939 motherboard - name a better time in history to upgrade your CPU.
July 31, 2006 10:56:55 PM

Quote:
I would hate to have to sell Intel right now. How do you market the various chips?


Run them next to AMD ones.
!