Sitting here, reading the forum in order to avoid working, I came upon yet another "E6600 here..." thread. <<<Not bashing, I have nothing againts those threads, especially if they help people get what they want.>>> The question occured to me, as it has so many times over the past 2 weeks, 'where is the supply of these things?'
Core 2 was not a paper launch. Every day more people accross the globe are getting their hands on them. I dont believe X2 5000 was a paper launch either, but the process of getting these things into the hands of the consumers has been 'jerky' and painful. Several of the posters here at THG (myself included) have batted around the supply vs demand issue, concentrating on the supply side, as that is what the horde has been attacking with the paper launch BS
But is it really the supply?
Personally, I had been waiting since xmas for prices on the x2 3800 to drop below $200. They didnt. They didnt even go down until July 24. As I waited, news for Core 2 broke and I decided to wait some more. Then both AMDs and Intels July price cuts made the news, and I couldnt not wait even more.
We all saw Intels and AMDs sales for DT over the first 2Q of 06. Surely the pricing had something to do with that, but what about all the news of new CPUs and lower prices. In my case, the new CPUs and promise of lower prices made me hold off my purchase, but surely I was not alone in deciding to delay my purchase.
So, is it possible, that the lack of supply is not the key factor right now? Is it possible that so many people decided to hold off purchases, that what we are seeing now is not normal demand, but excessive demand depleting supplies the instant they come available?
So, is it possible, that the lack of supply is not the key factor right now? Is it possible that so many people decided to hold off purchases, that what we are seeing now is not normal demand, but excessive demand depleting supplies the instant they come available?
What do you think?
Peace
I believe you are correct. I too was going to build an Athlon 64 X2 system, but then Intel released thier preliminary benchmarch for Conroe back in March (has it really been that long?). I was intrigued enough to hold off on my build despite the fact that the benchmarks could have been doctored, or at least very selective. I figured since my system is more than 4 years old I could wait a little longer.
Weeks and months passed as the Conroe hype built up. Simply by reading the post on this thread during that time you can easily see that many people were either waiting on Conroe benchmarks or the price cuts that they were expecting from AMD. Then the NDA expired an the benchmarks flooded the internet. To my surprise (and others too I'm sure) the reviews more or less confirmed the benchmarks that Intel initially released. Even MadModMike tossed in the towel and admitted that Conroe wasn't just all hype.
So that brings us today. The demand is definitely high for Conroe. The lower end CPUs are more or less readily available by now, but for people like me who wants the E6600 we gotta wait a little while longer. It's no surprise really 'cause lower end CPU are usually released first. Look at AMD's AM2 Athlons, only the slower models appeared initially, then the rest of the family started to appear. But if I remember correctly, I think Intel only has about 20% of it's capacity devoted to producing Core 2 Duo CPUs right now. Doesn't really help with the demand.
I only hope that I can get my hands on the Core 2 Duo E6600 before the end of the month since I did promise my cousin that I would give him my current PC an Athlon XP-M 2600+ with a Radeon 9800Pro.
So, is it possible, that the lack of supply is not the key factor right now? Is it possible that so many people decided to hold off purchases, that what we are seeing now is not normal demand, but excessive demand depleting supplies the instant they come available?
What do you think?
Peace
I believe you are correct. I too was going to build an Athlon 64 X2 system, but then Intel released thier preliminary benchmarch for Conroe back in March (has it really been that long?). I was intrigued enough to hold off on my build despite the fact that the benchmarks could have been doctored, or at least very selective. I figured since my system is more than 4 years old I could wait a little longer.
Weeks and months passed as the Conroe hype built up. Simply by reading the post on this thread during that time you can easily see that many people were either waiting on Conroe benchmarks or the price cuts that they were expecting from AMD. Then the NDA expired an the benchmarks flooded the internet. To my surprise (and others too I'm sure) the reviews more or less confirmed the benchmarks that Intel initially released. Even MadModMike tossed in the towel and admitted that Conroe wasn't just all hype.
So that brings us today. The demand is definitely high for Conroe. The lower end CPUs are more or less readily available by now, but for people like me who wants the E6600 we gotta wait a little while longer. It's no surprise really 'cause lower end CPU are usually released first. Look at AMD's AM2 Athlons, only the slower models appeared initially, then the rest of the family started to appear. But if I remember correctly, I think Intel only has about 20% of it's capacity devoted to producing Core 2 Duo CPUs right now. Doesn't really help with the demand.
I only hope that I can get my hands on the Core 2 Duo E6600 before the end of the month since I did promise my cousin that I would give him my current PC an Athlon XP-M 2600+ with a Radeon 9800Pro.
Yeah, only, allow me to clarify: Im not saying that the fabs are in all up production (we know they are not yet there) and supply is ample for normal demand.
Nice post -- and very well presented concept of the landscape. I tend to agree. When the IDF benches came, then leaked benches, and buzz in the industry around Conroe, I believe it froze a number of purchasing decisions and contracted the precurement by whitebox and teir 1 OEMs.
This presented an industry imbalance, Intel suffered more from this as they stockpiled the inferior product at the time. C2D, while coming out as quickly as they can get it out, certainly shifted the market and, my opinion, is that there is a huge imbalance. On one side is the supply of the best product against it's demand, then there are the factors of current stock and the prices dropping by 50% or more. In one situation there is no demand, in others demand far outstrips supply.
I also agree with you on the 5000+, it was not a paper launch, but the natural distribution of a high speed bin coupled with a next day precipitous drop drove a dry up in supply over night (essentially).
What we see here, I believe, is a desire for high performance, and the demand is simply allowing the flux of new product introductions to drive the pricing points. I did not follow the DRAM market, and I am not sure if this was a similar situation... I doubt it because RAM is the lesser visable product within the PC. One thing is for sure, the CPU market is changing and we are standing near the fault line, feeling the initial tremors --- the earthquake (the big one) is still yet to come.
Jack
Yes, and it also presents Intel with an interesting descision to make.
If the OEMs hold out, as well as the retail consumers, for the newer CPUs, does Intel:
abandon their plan to clear the stock of P4/Netburst and try to write the losses off on taxes
or
continue to pursue that plan and lower prices further
or
Option 3???
This is very true as I was going to buy a s939 system back around February and just before i was going to buy it the conroe stuff started, and the AM2 stuff had already made me think about waiting. Now i'm getting an AM2 system after waiting longer for the price drops. I'm also waiting again for the x1950xt possibly, although by now my P2 has been making me angry for years, and enough is enough.
I would also like to add that the excessive demand combined with normal demand PLUS the back to school rush have made probably the highest demand in a long time if not history for processors.
This is very true as I was going to buy a s939 system back around February and just before i was going to buy it the conroe stuff started, and the AM2 stuff had already made me think about waiting. Now i'm getting an AM2 system after waiting longer for the price drops. I'm also waiting again for the x1950xt possibly, although by now my P2 has been making me angry for years, and enough is enough.
I would also like to add that the excessive demand combined with normal demand PLUS the back to school rush have made probably the highest demand in a long time if not history for processors.
BS. You're just getting AM2 because you think C2d is overkill for gaming.
This is very true as I was going to buy a s939 system back around February and just before i was going to buy it the conroe stuff started, and the AM2 stuff had already made me think about waiting. Now i'm getting an AM2 system after waiting longer for the price drops. I'm also waiting again for the x1950xt possibly, although by now my P2 has been making me angry for years, and enough is enough.
I would also like to add that the excessive demand combined with normal demand PLUS the back to school rush have made probably the highest demand in a long time if not history for processors.
BS. You're just getting AM2 because you think C2d is overkill for gaming.
I'm getting it because the midrange AM2' perform about the same the low range conroes, but i believe AM2 will have a much longer lifespan than current intel boards allowing me to upgrade later to an AM3 cpu, which i explained OOHHH so many times in my other thread. 8)
PS. and yess any high end (e6600, 6700, 6800, FX-62) is overkill for gaming if you care about money, and value. Now i know you'll say "e6600 is best price/performance, but its also out of many people's price ranges.
This is very true as I was going to buy a s939 system back around February and just before i was going to buy it the conroe stuff started, and the AM2 stuff had already made me think about waiting. Now i'm getting an AM2 system after waiting longer for the price drops. I'm also waiting again for the x1950xt possibly, although by now my P2 has been making me angry for years, and enough is enough.
I would also like to add that the excessive demand combined with normal demand PLUS the back to school rush have made probably the highest demand in a long time if not history for processors.
BS. You're just getting AM2 because you think C2d is overkill for gaming.
I'm getting it because the midrange AM2' perform about the same the low range conroes, but i believe AM2 will have a much longer lifespan than current intel boards allowing me to upgrade later to an AM3 cpu, which i explained OOHHH so many times in my other thread. 8)
PS. and yess any high end (e6600, 6700, 6800, FX-62) is overkill for gaming if you care about money, and value. Now i know you'll say "e6600 is best price/performance, but its also out of many people's price ranges.No i won't. I don't want this to turn into another 13 page joke.
Not really. Even with some features turned off and the RAm problem, AM3 processors will probably still be better than any AM2 processors at the time. I'm mainly looking at just prolonging the lifespan of the rig. Now conroe may turn out to be very upgradeable but based on the track records of both companies i'm more inclined to go the AMD route.
This is a good question. C2D froze more sales of Intel than it did AMD, but the pricing and the anticipation dented AMD as well as AMD's inventory swelled in Q2 as well (Osbourne effect).
Intel has already taken charges on the inventory and now it is simply sitting on the books as dead weight, I can see them doing option 2 --- it continues to kill two birds with one stone, i.e. flushes inventory, gets it off the books, and puts more pressure on AMD in the area where AMD has always held supreme --- the low end.
I also believe Intel will stock pile a certain number to maintain their SIPP program. The other alternative is to start shoving them into the emerging set top box market (HD-DVD is currently using a low clocked P4). There is something to do with the stock, it is just doing it effectively.
AMD is in a different boat, with operating margins and net margins in the teens and sub 10 %, the bulk of their product line is now dragging ASPs low by the day. They are going to have a tough time maintaining those margins if they don't find a way to get pricing structure up. Right now, Opteron will help --- but in a quarter or two, enterprise contracts renewing to Woodcrest will start to show up in the market share. I think AMD is in for a few rough quarters.
Jack
Interesting, I didn’t know they were using P4s in set top HD-DVDs. That certainly seems a market to begin feeding excess inventory to, assuming the market grows to create a significant demand.
Pursuing the low end market is also very interesting. I have seen an increasing number of posts here recently cataloging low end P4 systems with 775 mobos. By the cheap P4 now, upgrade to Core 2 later strategy. Looks to be people who are tired of waiting for Core 2 or just enticed by the low cost P4's
I don’t know if AMD will be able to maintain their margins. I can’t see a way for them to drive pricing up in the near future, even though they desperately need to do so. But looking at the PDF Verndude linked to the other day (over in the notorious "gamers-Conroe" thread), AMD seems to have a very aggressive plan for the next few years. If they can pull of the R&D on the time table they have established for themselves, and they don’t loose too much of the gains they have recently made, they look to be a very strong competitor in 2008. That’s a lot of "ifs". It will also be interesting to see where the OEM market goes with AMD. With the sudden increase in demand for AMD by the OEMs, and the limited number of Fabs AMD has, I can’t help but wonder if the OEMs will experience significant AMD shortages. I don’t think it will take the OEMs that long to become disenchanted with AMD if AMD cannot meet the OEMs product demands.
On another note, I wonder if Intel realized what they were going to do to the sales of P4/Netburst when they started hyping Core 2. I would not want to be the Intel executive who misread that one.
Not really. Even with some features turned off and the RAm problem, AM3 processors will probably still be better than any AM2 processors at the time. I'm mainly looking at just prolonging the lifespan of the rig. Now conroe may turn out to be very upgradeable but based on the track records of both companies i'm more inclined to go the AMD route.
Good point, I am not really arguing with you on this item--- socket compatibility is a huge selling point and AMD is certainly better than Intel is in this regard no question.
However, some people like the latest and greatest, my point --- I use the CPU refresh to also refresh my MB and RAM --- it is an expense I plan on and accept as part of being an enthusiast. As such, socket compatibility is important to some and inconsequential to others.
I personally have other reasons than just performance for staying Intel. I will not go into detail.
Jack
Very true. I won't mention anything else about intel vs. amd because i'm tired of argueing and have accepted taht it doesn't matter what is logical or what you or i think, because people will still by what they want.
BTW how do we get that other thread locked without me getting banned?
This is very true as I was going to buy a s939 system back around February and just before i was going to buy it the conroe stuff started, and the AM2 stuff had already made me think about waiting. Now i'm getting an AM2 system after waiting longer for the price drops. I'm also waiting again for the x1950xt possibly, although by now my P2 has been making me angry for years, and enough is enough.
I would also like to add that the excessive demand combined with normal demand PLUS the back to school rush have made probably the highest demand in a long time if not history for processors.
BS. You're just getting AM2 because you think C2d is overkill for gaming.
I'm getting it because the midrange AM2' perform about the same the low range conroes, but i believe AM2 will have a much longer lifespan than current intel boards allowing me to upgrade later to an AM3 cpu, which i explained OOHHH so many times in my other thread. 8)
PS. and yess any high end (e6600, 6700, 6800, FX-62) is overkill for gaming if you care about money, and value. Now i know you'll say "e6600 is best price/performance, but its also out of many people's price ranges.
We talked about watching the way you word things. Dont confuse overkill, i.e. excessive power, with overly expensive.
The E6600 hardly falls into the FX 62/E6700/6800EE in terms of price. Yes, its more expensive than a X2 3800, but no nearly so much as the FX 62 or 6800EE.
Not really. Even with some features turned off and the RAm problem, AM3 processors will probably still be better than any AM2 processors at the time. I'm mainly looking at just prolonging the lifespan of the rig. Now conroe may turn out to be very upgradeable but based on the track records of both companies i'm more inclined to go the AMD route.
Good point, I am not really arguing with you on this item--- socket compatibility is a huge selling point and AMD is certainly better than Intel is in this regard no question.
However, some people like the latest and greatest, my point --- I use the CPU refresh to also refresh my MB and RAM --- it is an expense I plan on and accept as part of being an enthusiast. As such, socket compatibility is important to some and inconsequential to others.
I personally have other reasons than just performance for staying Intel. I will not go into detail.
Jack
Me too. Well, I get free CPUs, so I guess it's incentive to stay on one platform, no matter how bad my systems were compared to others. But my systems usually costed me a motherboard, memory, and a video card.
For the C2D system, I am actually upgrading my RAM speed to DDR2 800 and maybe a 7900 or x1900 card, along with a 975x motherboard. So, I have a built price around $400-500 bucks. Depending how much longer I wait to order parts.
To stay on topic:
I think turpit stated the situation quite well. Very nicely done.
Not really. Even with some features turned off and the RAm problem, AM3 processors will probably still be better than any AM2 processors at the time. I'm mainly looking at just prolonging the lifespan of the rig. Now conroe may turn out to be very upgradeable but based on the track records of both companies i'm more inclined to go the AMD route.
Good point, I am not really arguing with you on this item--- socket compatibility is a huge selling point and AMD is certainly better than Intel is in this regard no question.
However, some people like the latest and greatest, my point --- I use the CPU refresh to also refresh my MB and RAM --- it is an expense I plan on and accept as part of being an enthusiast. As such, socket compatibility is important to some and inconsequential to others.
I personally have other reasons than just performance for staying Intel. I will not go into detail.
Jack
Very true. I won't mention anything else about intel vs. amd because i'm tired of argueing and have accepted taht it doesn't matter what is logical or what you or i think, because people will still by what they want.
BTW how do we get that other thread locked without me getting banned?
Wrong. When it came time to buy, I wanted the X2 5000. I bought the 6600. Why? Availability and price.
Actually, I think they should also retire the Celeron name, let P4s take the very low end and eventually phase those out with the E4000s. My advice anyway.
I agree Jack, Celeron has always been associated with cheap/slow. Just as AMD retired the Duron name to be replaced by Sempron, so should Intel...and have a fresh lineup (name-wise) from top to bottom.
Does it seem strange that Intel so strongly embraces HD DVD --- this is actually a VIIV platform, 'hidden' as a set top DVD player.
Nope, not strange at all. I've just had my head so far up my arse on the Core 2 issue, I havent been paying attention to any other tech for the past 6 months.
Actually, I think they should also retire the Celeron name, let P4s take the very low end and eventually phase those out with the E4000s. My advice anyway.
Noted. Sounds like the intelligent way for them to go.
Quote :
They knew --- it was a calculated gamble, Intel if it is anything is full of bean counters. Essentially, they were willing to bite the inventory, undercut their own product to put hurt on AMD---Intel does not want AMD to expand, if this happens then one of two things must happen, Intel must allow AMD 30% or better market share, or drive AMD into oblivion as 15% MSS is not enough to sustain 2 fabs let alone 3. AMD is shooting for the stars, Intel is trying to tie a rope around the rocket to stop it from taking off.
Intel needs AMD to survive, otherwise FTC, ATC, and EUTC will bust them up for sure, but they do not want to share too much of the pie. Intel is in between a rock and a hard place in my opinion.
Funny, I was dicussing this in another thread with corvetteguy. "Intel could price AMD out of business" Wouldnt it be an amusing twist of fate if Intel was ordered to subsidize AMD? Time will tell. Of course, if old Billy Gates has his way, there should be enough market for both companies with the specialized system crap MS is pushing.
I've seen a lot of people enthused over Vista and the prospects of GPU on CPU die. I dont think they realize that this has the potential to lead to having to buy multiple PCs (or PC based products) to accomplish what one PC can do now. If this does come to pass, it will certainly be a boon for both AMD and Intel. Not so much for we consumers though.
