Intel trying hard to kill the Conroe RD600 chipset

33 answers Last reply
More about intel hard kill conroe rd600 chipset
  1. well, this was expected. Anyway I will look after RD600 mainboard when C2D will have reasonable prices in my country.
  2. Intel wants people to not use motherboards based on chipsets made by their main competitor?

    well, no shit.
    wouldn't you?


    If the article's correct though, depending on the meaning of "...putting pressure on..." there could be more ammo for AMD's antitrust case.
  3. that's pretty shitty Hope R600 is used more/nvidea gets theirs out.
    I'm not going to pay you $300 for a processor intel.
    Not if the board costs me $200 as well.
    especially when I could build an amd budget/midgrade machine for that price.
  4. Quote:
    that's pretty shitty Hope R600 is used more/nvidea gets theirs out.
    I'm not going to pay you $300 for a processor intel.
    Not if the board costs me $200 as well.
    especially when I could build an amd budget/midgrade machine for that price.


    The Core 2 Duo CPUs start at about $191 for the E6300.

    Budget motherboards are less than $100.

    Mainstream motherboards are around $150.

    Enthusiast motherboards are $200 or more.

    ---------------------------------------------

    Yeah, the E6300 costs more than many Athlon 64 CPUs, but they also perform much better.
  5. Disappointed yes, surprised no. Its common sense to prevent your competitor from selling.
  6. Quote:


    9-inch is that you?

    No. 9nm only posts pro-AMD news.
  7. If I was to buy a conroe I would go with the larger cache.
    (E6600 $360/ on newegg currently $350 on ZZF/ 349/369 on TigerDirect)
    I also wouldn't buy the cheapest motherboard.
    I'd want a motherboard that I can OC decently on and not worry too much about.
    So fine lets talk cheapest $200 + $100 at the very lowest.
    I don't buy lowest possible though.
    I'm not going to but the cheapest mobo I can fit a C2D in.
    Not to mention that's before shipping.
    My point was basically I want more competition so that I can get a good motherboard ok really nice motherboard/high end for $150 not $250.
    My last 3 I fried/had trouble with and am sick of cheap mobos.

    I know the prices.
  8. My main point is still that I'd like to see more variety in the higher end mobo's/newer chipsets.

    ALso since I had bought the first AMD64 with one of the only mobos and ran into troubles, I don't want to early adopt/low end bc of price. I'd go midgrade AMD which will be similar in price/performance maybe a little less on both but has been around for awhile. If I was shipped a bad processor for example I know people who I could borrow theirs to test.

    I wouldn't buy a 5000+ or whatever that is a horrible buy.
    I'd get a 3800 for cheap and OC slightly though.
    I wouldn't call a 3800 2gb ram $200 vid card low end.
    Which would be $100 more than 6600+mobo.

    My last post.
    Feel free to get last word =P
  9. You put completely fanatic posts about Intel being good and AMD being bad. But the others can’t do that? Strange ...

    The guy was saying is not going to pay $300 for a processor, Intel or not.

    You compare the E6600 vs FX62. FX62 main competitor is the X6800.

    I could also say that the AMD 3800+ ($112.00) which exceeds or meet the P4 3.0Ghz ($189.00), is a much better choice. Big deal!
  10. Quote:
    You put completely fanatic posts about Intel being good and AMD being bad. But the others can’t do that? Strange ...

    The guy was saying is not going to pay $300 for a processor, Intel or not.

    You compare the E6600 vs FX62. FX62 main competitor is the X6800.

    I could also say that the AMD 3800+ ($112.00) which exceeds or meet the P4 3.0Ghz ($189.00), is a much better choice. Big deal!


    To claim that the X6800's main competitor is the FX-62 is unrealistic. Maybe in price, but not in overall performance. That's what JJ was saying. The X6800 has no competiton in performance right now, in the desktop realm.

    He was simply stating that why complain about a $300-$350 CPU when the it surpasses an FX-62 in most benchmarks?

    Also, where has JJ said that AMD was bad and Intel was good? He even stated that AMD would be the perferred setup for ultralow budget. I'd even give the nod to AMD for mid-range budgets, if upgrading using the 939, and not so much upgrading to AM2, since that would require new mobo and memory.

    *edit*
    dang, JJ beat me. =)
  11. What is amazing is that AMD's mid-range processor is very nice. Not a lot of apps would actually need the high-end AMD or Intel.
  12. Quote:
    AMD is no longer holding the performance lead, this is indisputable.

    No they don’t. But they are not that bad as I initially expected.

    Quote:
    Furthermore, they are not holding the price/performance lead, this too is indisputable.

    That’s not right. That could be slightly true only if all the Intel processor currently in the market selling where Core 2 Duo. But there are still Celeron, Pentium 4 and Pentium D. Even only putting the Core 2 Duo I think its about equal. Intel mobo with similar quality are more expensive. Unless the old P4 skt775 mobo would work with Core 2, which doesn’t.

    OC is good if you really do it. A good capable OC mobo for core 2 duo is even more expensive. I doubt that those ASROCK reviewed by Anandtech would do the trick.

    Quote:
    FX62 can hardly compete against an over clocked E6400 --- FX-62 is not even in the same class as the X6800 .... you are severly misintrepeting the data.

    No I’m doing it right. FX is VS EE. I should compare the FX price with the EE price. If you do price/performance comparisons of E6600 vs FX62 remember that there are also other processor from Intel and AMD.

    The AMD 5000+ is very expensive, but it’s not the only expensive in market offering.
  13. Best not be calling me a amd fanboy lol.
    I plan on buying a conroe in a few months.
    Mostly waiting on motherboards/6600 to decrease in price.
    I say mobo prices are still high with little competition which tilts me to 3800>6300 currently(if I bought today).
    I don't see how it started into an amd v intel ordeal.

    Intel has the edge for high end.
    midgrade is grey line/preferance.
    low end is amd.
  14. Quote:
    You put completely fanatic posts about Intel being good and AMD being bad. But the others can’t do that? Strange ...

    The guy was saying is not going to pay $300 for a processor, Intel or not.

    You compare the E6600 vs FX62. FX62 main competitor is the X6800.

    I could also say that the AMD 3800+ ($112.00) which exceeds or meet the P4 3.0Ghz ($189.00), is a much better choice. Big deal!



    Read the guy's post again; he said he would not spend $300 on an intel processor.

    Your statement about the E6800 being the FX62's main competitor is dishonest at best. Just because both processors are the top processor of each manufacturer, doesn't necessarily mean they are going to be the only processors competing. The fact that the E6600 and E6700 both outperform the FX62 puts them in the same category as competitors. I know, you would like to place the highest priced intel processor as the only competitor to the FX62 because that makes the FX62 not look as bad. The fact remains that performance-wise, the E6600 is the closest to the FX62 in performance (slightly beats FX62 in 8 out of 10 tests), so that when you look at the price difference $350 (E6600), $1,000+(FX62), Intel looks pretty darn good.

    hball
  15. Quote:
    No they don’t. But they are not that bad as I initially expected.


    Is this a sentence? This post very much shows the level of your contributions in this thread.

    Quote:
    That’s not right. That could be slightly true only if all the Intel processor currently in the market selling where Core 2 Duo. But there are still Celeron, Pentium 4 and Pentium D. Even only putting the Core 2 Duo I think its about equal. Intel mobo with similar quality are more expensive. Unless the old P4 skt775 mobo would work with Core 2, which doesn’t.


    Your point?

    Quote:
    OC is good if you really do it. A good capable OC mobo for core 2 duo is even more expensive. I doubt that those ASROCK reviewed by Anandtech would do the trick.


    Link?

    Quote:
    No I’m doing it right. FX is VS EE. I should compare the FX price with the EE price. If you do price/performance comparisons of E6600 vs FX62 remember that there are also other processor from Intel and AMD.


    Here is the link for you!! HERE!!!
    If we were to compare the high end/flagship to the high end/flagship currently there is absolutely NO CONTEST the Conroe is by far the better of the two. During the review of both flagships, the FX series failed miserably (if you wish I can provide the link for this comparo as well right here on THG). The FX anything series at its best competes well with a stock E6600. This is the price per performance that JJ was talking about.

    Quote:
    The AMD 5000+ is very expensive, but it’s not the only expensive in market offering.


    Your point?
  16. Nope said I won't pay $300 for a processor intel.
    As in I was adsressing them, Intel.
    =P
    Not had processor and intel been switched that would mean something completely different =P
  17. Its funny watching the Intel Fanbois hit damage control mode..

    The excuses they use for intel are actually funny.

    So Intel has the Lead right now, great for them, seriously, I mean it did take them, what 5 years, to finally outperform AMD.

    Ehh, no AMD fanboi here nor Intel, just funny that intel fanbois can and do harrass anyone else for using silly excuses for their brand, but yet berate anyone else for people bringing up that they use the same old excuses to.

    Lets really look at this problem. AMD currently owns ATI. Intel and AMD are competitors so Intel doesn't want any ATI chipsets made for their chips.

    Stupid intel move, no fanboi can nor should try to deny this. Intel should be pushing for AMD/ATI to make the chipsets, even offering them money, if they had to, in order to get the chipsets made.

    Why? Simple, intel doesn't like competition, never has.

    I remember in the day when you could get a 486 DX2 66 Processor for $1000, that price lasted for months, if not years. Why? Because intel was the only producer on the block.

    Now Intel has competition in the CPU market, in which they are losing market share, and they now have a competitor in their own Chipset market. Do you really believe Intel wants that competition, especially coming from AMD, who is taking CPU market share from them right now?

    All around, it would be a great thing if ATI still makes Intel Chipsets, it is called competition and where you have competition you have lower prices. THAT IS A GREAT THING.

    Unlike some of the fanbois I ALWAYS see post, I don't want either company to go down in flames, as I love the competition and love the ability to get CPU's and MB's at a decent price, compared to what you used to get back in the day, $700 MB and $1000 CPU that was months/years old.

    If you love intel, fine, love them, if you love AMD fine, love them, but you both need to understand how childish you are when you constantly harrass someone for having a differring opinion than yours.

    Intel doesn't like, nor wants, ANY competition, and with them wanting to stop RD600 products, they are playing into AMDs antitrust lawsuit hands.

    Love Competition, never, EVER, should you want to go back to 1 CPU maker who controls all the market, that spells the end of affordability and innovation.
  18. Scuba,

    Please show me a link where the 486 DX anything was EVER $1000.00..

    I was in retail (second job while in the military) during this time and sold COUNTLESS machines containing 486 chips. Now if you are talking about whole machines then you are correct but just the CPU NEVER!!!!

    Also if you were talking laptops yeah...

    This was the time of computer prices starting to fall... The DX/2 66mhz machines were selling for $1500 and up, not due to the CPU but rather due to the components associated with them. A 420mb Hardrive was selling for nearly $420.00 and not to mention the first round of CD-ROM drives selling at upwards of $500.00 for the kit!

    I wish I had my previous copies of computer shopper... I could easily show you companies like USA FLEX selling DX/2, "killer machines" for the time for less than 2K for the whole thing including a 15" monitor (approx 300- 500 USD by itself with 17" running ~700 - 1100 for the NEC).

    Just did a search for Comp shopper archives and have not found anything YET!
  19. http://www.microprocessor.sscc.ru/comphist/comp1986.htm

    "Intel announces the 25-MHz 486 microprocessor at Spring Comdex in Chicago, Illinois. It integrates the 386, 387 math coprocessor, and adds an 8KB primary cache. It uses 1.2 million transistors, employing 1-micron technology. Initial price is US$900. Speed is 20 MIPS."
    ~April 1989


    http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/reach/435/comphis6.html

    A continued timeline for ya'll
  20. Quote:
    Scuba,

    Please show me a link where the 486 DX anything was EVER $1000.00..

    I was in retail (second job while in the military) during this time and sold COUNTLESS machines containing 486 chips. Now if you are talking about whole machines then you are correct but just the CPU NEVER!!!!

    Also if you were talking laptops yeah...

    This was the time of computer prices starting to fall... The DX/2 66mhz machines were selling for $1500 and up, not due to the CPU but rather due to the components associated with them. A 420mb Hardrive was selling for nearly $420.00 and not to mention the first round of CD-ROM drives selling at upwards of $500.00 for the kit!

    I wish I had my previous copies of computer shopper... I could easily show you companies like USA FLEX selling DX/2, "killer machines" for the time for less than 2K for the whole thing including a 15" monitor (approx 300- 500 USD by itself with 17" running ~700 - 1100 for the NEC).

    Just did a search for Comp shopper archives and have not found anything YET!


    You evidently never searched hard enough...

    I remember those days, especially when the first P5-90 came out and it was $990, and stayed that way for months.

    $700 mb is very actual, at the time I was trying to get a MB for my machine and couldn't touch one for under $700 bucks. Cheaper to buy a complete computer, which I did.

    Yes I remember the $500, 500 meg HD's, once again more competition means the prices are more affordable. Seagate was the main HD seller then, and made lots of money. Since then WD/Cavier and others have made a name for themself in the HD market and drove the prices down.

    Thanks for proving one of my points though, intel fanbois don't like it when you prove them wrong, and try to harrass you when you do.

    Accept it, AMD's competition is making for a GREAT time now, cheap CPU's, better innovation and just all around great time.

    Yet you fanboi's want to go back to 1 CPU seller gouging the market for months before innovating.

    I just don't understand it.
  21. Quote:
    Disappointed yes, surprised no. Its common sense to prevent your competitor from selling.



    I'm not a fanboy, but thats monopolistic not "common sense". Competition is good. Blocking products to further your own profits is bad.
  22. First of all,

    I hope you are not grouping me into any of the fanboy categories... I could care less who wins he price/performance battle. In fact I hope AMD thouroughly trounces the CONROE (as long as the price of that proc is not too steep).

    Second,
    I truly think your memory is failing you... Again I sold what you are talking about MBs, CPUs, and .... Remeber a division of Tandy corp called "Computer CIty"? I was a sales lead for nearly two years. I was the product trainer for the sales force too, even product trained on the MAC releases at the time..

    A 486 DX/2 with MOBO/combo was running about $700. I am not sure what you were looking for (must have been gold plated which would not run very well :)) Anyway I will not continue this pissing match since neither of us has backing info other than our experiences (kinda worthless). I was hoping to add to the convo but see you missed the point. Since you seem to think I am an Intel guy.

    I promise you that If Cyrix puts out a Conroe Killer I will be more than happy to recommend those as well. Also, I have owned many AMD/Cyrix/Intel products over the years and have no love of any of them. Until a Conroe killer is released I will happily recommend the Conroe for new builds (notice the qualified response).

    In fact I am pretty much not a fanboy of ANY company in ANY category of ANY product, with the exception of GM since I get a very good deal from them through my father-in-law which makes for ME/Other family members a very good price/performance buy).

    I do not beleive even the fanboys would be stupid enough to beleive that a single company would be better. I just think that they would like THEIR company to be considered better.
  23. Quote:
    First of all,

    I hope you are not grouping me into any of the fanboy categories... I could care less who wins he price/performance battle. In fact I hope AMD thouroughly trounces the CONROE (as long as the price of that proc is not too steep).

    Second,
    I truly think your memory is failing you... Again I sold what you are talking about MBs, CPUs, and .... Remeber a division of Tandy corp called "Computer CIty"? I was a sales lead for nearly two years. I was the product trainer for the sales force too, even product trained on the MAC releases at the time..

    A 486 DX/2 with MOBO/combo was running about $700. I am not sure what you were looking for (must have been gold plated which would not run very well :)) Anyway I will not continue this pissing match since neither of us has backing info other than our experiences (kinda worthless). I was hoping to add to the convo but see you missed the point. Since you seem to think I am an Intel guy.

    I promise you that If Cyrix puts out a Conroe Killer I will be more than happy to recommend those as well. Also, I have owned many AMD/Cyrix/Intel products over the years and have no love of any of them. Until a Conroe killer is released I will happily recommend the Conroe for new builds (notice the qualified response).

    In fact I am pretty much not a fanboy of ANY company in ANY category of ANY product, with the exception of GM since I get a very good deal from them through my father-in-law which makes for ME/Other family members a very good price/performance buy).

    I do not beleive even the fanboys would be stupid enough to beleive that a single company would be better. I just think that they would like THEIR company to be considered better.


    Hmm.. the excuses of I am not a fanboi, whatever..

    For the failed memory, I believe you are the one with the failed memory.

    PC prices did not start falling till after the P5-100, and really didn't start dropping till the Amd k6 crap came out. At least AMD did try to do better with the AMD K6 II, in which case it was a better attempt, but during this time, they did offer a better/cheaper alternative to Intel.

    That is the time when PC prices started dropping, not back during the 486 era. That was around 1990-1991. Amazing to see intel going from 8088 in 1983 to 486 DX in 1991, but it took AMD in 1999 to present, for us to see REAL innovations in a timely fashion at affordable prices.

    Once again, competition is beautiful :)
  24. Quote:
    So Intel has the Lead right now, great for them, seriously, I mean it did take them, what 5 years, to finally outperform AMD.


    AMD haven't had the lead for 5 years you fool.
  25. Deleted by Moderator

    :lol:

    What a fool. I point out a flaw in your argument and you simply say "YOU FAIL!!!!!"

    It's idiots like you that ruin great forums like this. :roll:

    Cool it with the fanboy references - we've had with these flame wars - so stop or go.
  26. Back On Topic,

    I think the relationship between Intel/AMD/ATI can be best described as a "symbiotic relationship" rather than a "parasitic relationship".

    I guess it is a matter of how you look at it..

    I call it somewhat symbiotic since both would benefit from the relationship. AMD/ATI would benefit from the sales of chipsets while Intel would take a small loss. However, if the RD600 chipset is all it was made out to be it would definetely be cause for folks to purchase Conroes (advantage Intel).

    Would the (possibly smallish) increase in cpu sales be enough to offset the decrease in chipset sales?

    I guess looking at it another way you could see that AMD/ATI are being parasitic on Intel since by definition they are taking away sales.

    All a matter of perspective.
  27. Scuba,

    I must applaud you.

    You have managed to call me a fanboy and to basically tick off the rest on this thread in your first few posts.

    Congrats to you.

    Please do a search using me as the author and I think you will see that I in fact have and WILL recommend AMD where appropriate and the same goes for Intel.

    The search function is a wonderful thing.

    I also when possible provide links to verify my claims. In this case I could not so I backed off as stated in my post above (experience is mostly meaningless) on these forums until such time as you have proven yourself within the forum. ~6 posts (for you) != proven. Also, I am not saying post count is a determination of value.

    Welcome to the forums and so far it is looking like your time will be short lived.
  28. Wusy,

    ME TOO!!!

    The RD600 does look very good and will be a welcome offering.

    The FSB capability should be useful to your OC guide ;)
  29. Ms. D???
  30. Wusy,

    Do you think that the RD600 proposed 1500 is a limit or or just a goal?

    Given the 975X has done so well at its lower rating I am hopeful that the increased rating is not a limit but rather an "I got there" and then went past.
  31. Quote:
    that's pretty shitty Hope R600 is used more/nvidea gets theirs out.
    I'm not going to pay you $300 for a processor intel.
    Not if the board costs me $200 as well.
    especially when I could build an amd budget/midgrade machine for that price.


    The Core 2 Duo CPUs start at about $191 for the E6300.

    Budget motherboards are less than $100.

    Mainstream motherboards are around $150.

    Enthusiast motherboards are $200 or more.

    ---------------------------------------------

    Buying it with American Xpress, Putting it all together & at the last minute opting for the E6600, ASUS P5B Mobo, 2GB OCZ (STINKIN RAM) that doesn't work with an ATI AIW X1900 vid card, 16x DVD burner, waiting 2-4 wks to get all the parts in, spend 3-4 days trying to figure out why it doesn't turn on...
    .
    .
    .
    .
    PRICELESS!!!
  32. I thought the proposed rate for the RD600 was ~375Mhz FSB or (1500 QDR) but it looks like it is spec'd to support (333Mhz quad pumped).

    I have not seen the prelims yet..... Do you have a link? That would be a good read.

    I was basing my initial info on this ARTICLE!!

    From the article :

    Quote:
    The most notable feature of the RD600 is the memory controller. ATI has developed an elaborate memory controller that operates asynchronously from the front-side bus. No more memory dividers means the front-side bus can be overclocked drastically without being limited to memory. There will also be support for DDR2-1066 too. ATI claims the RD600 has been overclocked to 375 MHz (1500 MHz Quad pumped) using the current reference board.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Chipsets Intel