Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD Suck

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 9, 2006 2:38:26 PM

Can someone explain to me why the FX62 still costs around $700 when it gets beaten on all performance metrics by the C2D 6600 that costs half as much?

Also why are there so many people posting here about setting up new systems with all new components and still buying AMD's? Are they just stupid or something?

More about : amd suck

October 9, 2006 2:50:52 PM

Quote:
Can someone explain to me why the FX62 still costs around $700 when it gets beaten on all performance metrics by the C2D 6600 that costs half as much?

Also why are there so many people posting here about setting up new systems with all new components and still buying AMD's? Are they just stupid or something?


well correct as you said they are stupid or <insert-something>
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 119 À AMD
October 9, 2006 2:52:35 PM

Quote:
Can someone explain to me why the FX62 still costs around $700 when it gets beaten on all performance metrics by the C2D 6600 that costs half as much?


Could be for the sake of appearance and reducing the price could also mean reducing the price on their other CPUs. It is still a premium chip though who's clock multiplier is unlocked and probably has low yields.

Quote:

Also why are there so many people posting here about setting up new systems with all new components and still buying AMD's? Are they just stupid or something?


AMD fanatics, or they want to upgrade to AMD's next generation CPU assuming that it can beat the C2D.
Related resources
October 9, 2006 2:53:38 PM

Somehow I would prefer to think that they are simply misguided and follow/favor the advice from the likes of fellow horde members... or simply ignorant of the technology...
October 9, 2006 2:56:19 PM

October 9, 2006 3:00:03 PM

Quote:
Can someone explain to me why the FX62 still costs around $700 when it gets beaten on all performance metrics by the C2D 6600 that costs half as much?

Also why are there so many people posting here about setting up new systems with all new components and still buying AMD's? Are they just stupid or something?



I assume you were posting this before Core 2 in regards to Intel. Actually you could ask the same question about 965EE. It still cost $999 at Newegg.
October 9, 2006 3:00:34 PM

Well, this thread is going to annoy the horde, naturally.

I don't think AMD sucks... more like caught with their pants down. Sure, AM2 looks like a budget solution for the moment, and if people still want to buy AMD products, why can't they? Its their money, they can do what they like. Sure, C2D is mighty tasty, but if it were a bit cheaper and if I hadn't upgraded my PC about 6 months ago, then I would go Intel.

However, if you were someone like BM... :lol: 
October 9, 2006 3:02:03 PM

Quote:
Well, this thread is going to annoy the horde, naturally.

I don't think AMD sucks... more like caught with their pants down. Sure, AM2 looks like a budget solution for the moment, and if people still want to buy AMD products, why can't they? Its their money, they can do what they like. Sure, C2D is mighty tasty, but if it were a bit cheaper and if I hadn't upgraded my PC about 6 months ago, then I would go Intel.

However, if you were someone like BM... :lol: 



You would have to try very hard to not hunt Intel ho s down and ....
October 9, 2006 3:02:47 PM

i can see a huge flam war starting, biggest in the history of THG forumz... and then this thread will be locked many people will lose etc etc... and at the end this thread is going to get locked!
October 9, 2006 3:03:33 PM

Quote:
Can someone explain to me why the FX62 still costs around $700 when it gets beaten on all performance metrics by the C2D 6600 that costs half as much?

Also why are there so many people posting here about setting up new systems with all new components and still buying AMD's? Are they just stupid or something?



I assume you were posting this before Core 2 in regards to Intel. Actually you could ask the same question about 965EE. It still cost $999 at Newegg.
October 9, 2006 3:09:24 PM

Quote:
Can someone explain to me why the FX62 still costs around $700 when it gets beaten on all performance metrics by the C2D 6600 that costs half as much?

Also why are there so many people posting here about setting up new systems with all new components and still buying AMD's? Are they just stupid or something?



I assume you were posting this before Core 2 in regards to Intel. Actually you could ask the same question about 965EE. It still cost $999 at Newegg.



Just whine and get it locked. That's your specialty. Interesting though how it's only AMD posts.
October 9, 2006 3:17:16 PM

top of the line CPUs are never worth the cash; you have 'sweet points', or models which cost little compared with their native or overclocked performance.
An AMD X2 3800+, which is a respectable overclocker, and which draws less than 65W at full load (see latest Tom's benchies) costs less than $150.

Ideal for a living room computer (silent, runs barely hot under high load, dual core), or a budget gaming rig (dual core, fast enough for most games, keeps overclockers happy - mine reached 4400+ scores under Sandra, while barely pushing it).

The C2D 6600 is another one: a bit more expensive, more powerful, very good overclocker but running hotter would be not as good for aliving room PC but better for a budget gaming rig.

The 805D is an overclocker's dream: VERY cheap dual core with crappy default performance, it reaches unprecedented performances when pushed. It is however a power hog, making it unsuitable for anything else than an enthusiast's rig.
October 9, 2006 3:19:07 PM

Well, replying to the original question.

1. It costs as much as AMD needs to charge for it to recoup their investment. AMD unfortunately got blindsided by Intel this time round (It has gone the other way on several occasions too)

2. Why do some people buy Macs? Why do some people prefer Linux over Windows? The reasons are many and varied. In the end it is good for all of us as it fosters competition as each vendor vies to lure market share.
October 9, 2006 3:21:16 PM

Yes, that sox.

You just...
October 9, 2006 3:22:26 PM

If you already have an AMD set-up and want to upgrade the system, you can either buy a faster AMD proc, or a C2D, mobo, maybe new RAM too if you're not already on DDR2, etc, etc...

Also, you might think that Intel suck, and that you'd rather pay more for less. It's a free country!!!
October 9, 2006 3:25:45 PM

To the person that started this thread, have you ever actually used an AMD processor or are you reying on benchmarks to prove all of your claims? Don't forget that certain benchmarks can be tweaked to give certain hardware an advantage. That's why a lot of benchmarks have to be taken with a grain of salt. Go and actually compare those 2 procesors in real world tests ie games or what have you and see if you can sense any real difference. I gaurentee there will be no discernable performance difference that you'll be able to detect.

Just my opinions,

overclockingrocks
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 9, 2006 3:26:46 PM

Quote:
Also why are there so many people posting here about setting up new systems with all new components and still buying AMD's? Are they just stupid or something?


For the same reason that some people drive Nissans and some drive Fords some people like Harleys some like Kawasaki's, different strokes for different folks my friend get used to it, it's what makes the world go round. :lol: 
October 9, 2006 3:31:00 PM

Quote:
Just whine and get it locked. That's your specialty. Interesting though how it's only AMD posts.

October 9, 2006 3:32:42 PM

Quote:
Just whine and get it locked. That's your specialty. Interesting though how it's only AMD posts.



Haha I find that very funny.
October 9, 2006 3:33:57 PM

As many people have said many times, its not just the cost of the CPU, its the cost of the motherboard, the memory, the video card, etc.

If you already have a K8 system with a Socket 939 motherboard (even if you bought it 2 years ago), you can upgrade to the fastest processor AMD makes without replacing any other piece of hardware, and WITHOUT having to re-install Windoze. Its a simple drop-in replacement.

Can you do the same with an Intel?

8)
October 9, 2006 3:36:56 PM

Clearly Intel fanboy you have no idea what you're talking about. The FX-62 is a 90nm chipset while the Intel Core 2 Duo is a 65nm chipset. The Core 2 clearly has the advantage here because of its architecture. Also if you didn't notice Intel's 90nm technology was a joke. Their chips produced so much heat. As you can see now, AMD is showing signs of some brilliant work with their new EE 54W chipsets. If AMD can produce chips on a 90nm architecture with 54-125W, imagine what they can produce on a 65nm architecture, once they make their transition. Also some of these people are right, some of Intel's old chips are still $1000. So explain that.
October 9, 2006 3:38:55 PM

Quote:
Can someone explain to me why the FX62 still costs around $700 when it gets beaten on all performance metrics by the C2D 6600 that costs half as much?

Also why are there so many people posting here about setting up new systems with all new components and still buying AMD's? Are they just stupid or something?
Actually, the pricing structure for both companies leaves a lot to be desired(though the merchants are likely to blame)....for instance...In Canada:


Pentium 4 660: $523.19 CAD
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=14039&vpn=BX...


Pentium 4 661: $199.14 CAD(After $30 Rebate)
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=17445&vpn=BX...


Now, i realize that the 661 is a Cedar Mill(65nm) and therefore cheaper to manufacture vs the 660(Prescott@90nm), but who in there right mind would buy the 660 over the 661 and at 2.5 times the price to boot? :?
October 9, 2006 3:40:28 PM

You know, once cpus get into that range (fx-62, c2d6800) they are all so powerful that whatever you are doing is going to happen fast. That in mind, theres nothing wrong with supporting a particular company because you like them. I shop at Wal-Mart instead of Target but that doesnt mean Im a slavering Wal-Mart fanboy. It means I like Wal-Mart.

If the difference between an fx-62 and a c2d6800e is 1000 3dmark06 points, then Id go buy the AMD chip, not because Im an AMD fanboy, but because AMD stuff makes me happy.

People are allowed to support products merely because they like the parent company, not based on perfomance. Im just sayin...
-cm

Oh, yeah: Mousemonkey is my hero.
October 9, 2006 3:48:08 PM

Quote:
Can someone explain to me why the FX62 still costs around $700 when it gets beaten on all performance metrics by the C2D 6600 that costs half as much?

Also why are there so many people posting here about setting up new systems with all new components and still buying AMD's? Are they just stupid or something?


well sure i will do that if you would explain to me why the 965EE is selling for $999...
October 9, 2006 3:50:02 PM

Quote:
You know, once cpus get into that range (fx-62, c2d6800) they are all so powerful that whatever you are doing is going to happen fast. That in mind, theres nothing wrong with supporting a particular company because you like them. I shop at Wal-Mart instead of Target but that doesnt mean Im a slavering Wal-Mart fanboy. It means I like Wal-Mart.

If the difference between an fx-62 and a c2d6800e is 1000 3dmark06 points, then Id go buy the AMD chip, not because Im an AMD fanboy, but because AMD stuff makes me happy.

People are allowed to support products merely because they like the parent company, not based on perfomance. Im just sayin...
-cm

Oh, yeah: Mousemonkey is my hero.



That's exactly the point I always try to make. This is a capitalist society so people can choose to buy the brands they want. The BMW got faster than the Audi and people didn't burn ther Audis.

Value, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
October 9, 2006 3:51:27 PM

Quote:
Also if you didn't notice Intel's 90nm technology was a joke. Their chips produced so much heat.
Oh.....My Pentium M 760(2GHz) is faster than same clocked K8 singlecore and it has only a TDP of 28W.

Quote:
As you can see now, AMD is showing signs of some brilliant work with their now EE 54W chipsets.
The EE are underclocked K8 with reduced voltage. Every chip will spend less energy with reduced votlage and freqfency.
Quote:
If AMD can produce chips on a 90nm architecture with 54-125W, imagine what they can produce on a 65nm architecture, once they make their transition.
Just look at the AMD roadmap. Their 65nm SOI3 chips have almost same TDP as 90nm SOI2, but are clocked lower. How efficient will be their new process depends on many uncertain factors.
Quote:
Also some of these people are right,
You mean some of these trolls, like BaronBS?
Quote:
some of Intel's old chips are still $1000. So explain that.
Yes, the Pentium 965 EE is $1000 becouse it was expencive to produce. Unknowledgable people might buy it as well as Athlon FX. Both are very bad bang for the buck.
October 9, 2006 3:53:57 PM

Okay. To use your examples:

If something is $50 cheaper at Target, would you still go to Wal-mart to buy the same thing?

Also, to compare the FX-62 to the X6800 is not fair, since the X6800 pretty much destroys everything right now. I would use the E6600/6700 as a good comparasion for performance. If you're talking just price, then yes, the FX62 and X6800 are close, but the price/performance difference is unbalanced, since again, the X6800 has no peers, right now.

So, it comes down to this...Pay $700 for the FX-62, or $524 (E6700)/$317(E6600) for the same performance?

Also, I think this topic title is just asking for a flame war. I don't think AMD suck(s). They make good CPUs, and the OP is forgetting the leadership that AMD had just a mere 6 months or so ago.
October 9, 2006 3:55:45 PM

Quote:
You know, once cpus get into that range (fx-62, c2d6800) they are all so powerful that whatever you are doing is going to happen fast. That in mind, theres nothing wrong with supporting a particular company because you like them. I shop at Wal-Mart instead of Target but that doesnt mean Im a slavering Wal-Mart fanboy. It means I like Wal-Mart.

If the difference between an fx-62 and a c2d6800e is 1000 3dmark06 points, then Id go buy the AMD chip, not because Im an AMD fanboy, but because AMD stuff makes me happy.

People are allowed to support products merely because they like the parent company, not based on perfomance. Im just sayin...
-cm

Oh, yeah: Mousemonkey is my hero.

October 9, 2006 3:56:33 PM

Quote:
You know, once cpus get into that range (fx-62, c2d6800) they are all so powerful that whatever you are doing is going to happen fast. That in mind, theres nothing wrong with supporting a particular company because you like them. I shop at Wal-Mart instead of Target but that doesnt mean Im a slavering Wal-Mart fanboy. It means I like Wal-Mart.

If the difference between an fx-62 and a c2d6800e is 1000 3dmark06 points, then Id go buy the AMD chip, not because Im an AMD fanboy, but because AMD stuff makes me happy.

People are allowed to support products merely because they like the parent company, not based on perfomance. Im just sayin...
-cm

Oh, yeah: Mousemonkey is my hero.



That's exactly the point I always try to make. This is a capitalist society so people can choose to buy the brands they want. The BMW got faster than the Audi and people didn't burn ther Audis.

Value, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Brand loyalty is fine, as long as it isn't blined loyalty based on falsehoods, and that one doesn't try and convince everyone else of the same to prop themlseves up with an emotional crutch.

The car analogy is not a good one though even though we're partially in agreement for once. A car, especially to some nationalities, is not just functional and is very visible and can be aesthetically pleasing. They brand the way they look and style as well as the corporate image around the car.

A chip sits out of sight inside a case. Ok, you might want to put a silly badge on the outside if you feel you need to, but that's neither here nor there. You also don't drive your CPU out in public every day. Sure, you 'take your CPU online' everyday, but of course nobody knows what you use unless you shout about it. And so we go back to my first point....
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 9, 2006 3:56:56 PM

And I love you too my friend :mrgreen:
October 9, 2006 3:57:18 PM

Quote:
Also if you didn't notice Intel's 90nm technology was a joke. Their chips produced so much heat.
Oh.....My Pentium M 760(2GHz) is faster than same clocked K8 singlecore and it has only a TDP of 28W.

Quote:
As you can see now, AMD is showing signs of some brilliant work with their now EE 54W chipsets.
The EE are underclocked K8 with reduced voltage. Every chip will spend less energy with reduced votlage and freqfency.
Quote:
If AMD can produce chips on a 90nm architecture with 54-125W, imagine what they can produce on a 65nm architecture, once they make their transition.
Just look at the AMD roadmap. Their 65nm SOI3 chips have almost same TDP as 90nm SOI2, but are clocked lower. How efficient will be their new process depends on many uncertain factors.
Quote:
Also some of these people are right,
You mean some of these trolls, like BaronBS?
Quote:
some of Intel's old chips are still $1000. So explain that.
Yes, the Pentium 965 EE is $1000 becouse it was expencive to produce. Unknowledgable people might buy it as well as Athlon FX. Both are very bad bang for the buck.


EE Chips are NOT underclocked. They run at the rated speed. At least the FX62 is in the running with Core 2. 965EE brings up the rear in nearly every test.

Linkage! STFU
October 9, 2006 4:01:28 PM

Quote:
You know, once cpus get into that range (fx-62, c2d6800) they are all so powerful that whatever you are doing is going to happen fast. That in mind, theres nothing wrong with supporting a particular company because you like them. I shop at Wal-Mart instead of Target but that doesnt mean Im a slavering Wal-Mart fanboy. It means I like Wal-Mart.

If the difference between an fx-62 and a c2d6800e is 1000 3dmark06 points, then Id go buy the AMD chip, not because Im an AMD fanboy, but because AMD stuff makes me happy.

People are allowed to support products merely because they like the parent company, not based on perfomance. Im just sayin...
-cm

Oh, yeah: Mousemonkey is my hero.



That's exactly the point I always try to make. This is a capitalist society so people can choose to buy the brands they want. The BMW got faster than the Audi and people didn't burn ther Audis.

Value, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Brand loyalty is fine, as long as it isn't blined loyalty based on falsehoods, and that one doesn't try and convince everyone else of the same to prop themlseves up with an emotional crutch.

The car analogy is not a good one though even though we're partially in agreement for once. A car, especially to some nationalities, is not just functional and is very visible and can be aesthetically pleasing. They brand the way they look and style as well as the corporate image around the car.

A chip sits out of sight inside a case. Ok, you might want to put a silly badge on the outside if you feel you need to, but that's neither here nor there. You also don't drive your CPU out in public every day. Sure, you 'take your CPU online' everyday, but of course nobody knows what you use unless you shout about it. And so we go back to my first point....

Please, it's the same thing. People can buy what they want. PERIOD! If you start with a 3800+, you get good gameplay on most games, so 70fps vs 80fps is a joke. The eye can't tell the difference.

The car analogy is perfect cause it's just another product people can choose from.
October 9, 2006 4:06:25 PM

Not exactly true: a EE SFF 3800+ is clocked exactly the same as a 'standard' 3800+ - but it keeps a low (1.1V) voltage at all frequencies instead of switching from 1.1 to 1.4V on load; all X2 processors use the same 90 nm engraving. It's just that those CPUs that have a 'EE' equivalent are rated as 89W, while they actually do 60-70W due to:
- less L2 cache than other models
- lower frequency than the max rating for the initial batch of 90 nm X2
Meaning that very little work is necessary to make them run under 65W; here, the biggest achievement is the 3800+ EE SFF running undervolted (but not underclocked) at 2 GHz.
October 9, 2006 4:07:58 PM

Quote:
That's exactly the point I always try to make.


Quote:
This is a capitalist society so people can choose to buy the brands they want. The BMW got faster than the Audi and people didn't burn ther Audis.

Deleted
Quote:
Value, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

October 9, 2006 4:09:30 PM

The issue you pose has many factors that need to be considered and many of which you probably don't have too much knowledge about.

It is well known that the Intel Core 2s are the best performing chips in the high end segment and that in a direct price/performance comparison, the C2D dominates this part of the market. However you do have to consider some things.

Yes, if you follow THG's price/performance curve the FX60/FX62 should be around $500. But they simply cannot lower the price that much. Here is why...

First off, AMD is a business and needs to make a profit to survive. The price set for a product has to take into account the current yield rate, break-even point, and the projected demand for the product.

AMD could cave and lower the price of the FX60/FX62s to coincide with THG's guide... but here's the thing about that.

The FX60/FX62 chips, like the C2D Extremes, or even the P4 EEs, are not meant to sell like proverbial "hotcakes". Having a chip like this is more of a status thing, like say, owning a Ferrari or an Astin Martin. Most people do not buy a ferrari because it is the fastest car on the road... it is because of the prestige and ego satisfaction you get from buying one. Same with the high end CPUs. These chips are targetted for a very specific market, and one that 99.5% of us do not - nor will we ever - belong to. These people tend to always want the "best of the best" and will pay whatever it takes to get it. It is not about performance as much as it is prestige. Also, regardless of performance people in this market segment tend to remain very loyal to their brand and upgrade frequently. Some people prefer Intel, others AMD... just like some people prefer Lexus and some BMW, even if my Mustang GT that costs hal;f the price can blow either one of them off the road from a stoplight.... because it is not just about performance. And regardless of how many price/performance debates you want to have this will not change. Kind of like the Coke/Pepsi debate... only on a more expensive scale. It is called "eletism", and that is what these chips cater to.

So say AMD does lower the FX60/62 prices down to ~$500. What heppens then? Sure AMD now rules the price/performance curve. But there is a huge fallout from such an act. Consider this.... what status would having a ferrari have if everyone could afford one? The answer is none. At that point the "ferrari" brand name carries none of the recognition it used to and you essentially destroy your brand name. Once you destroy a brand's exclusiveness you alienate your target market. People who already own one get pissed off and decide never to buy AMD again. People who were planning to buy one no longer want one because everybody has one. The exclusivity of the FX60/62 brand is gone and AMD truly has nothing to compete against the C2D Extreme brand.

The second thing is, these chips are not meant to sell in great quantities. If AMD lowers their price and they begin to sell like hotcakes, and AMD loses money on these parts in the process... where exactly is it in their best interests to do so?

Bottom line is that the only company that benefits from a FX60/62 price drop to the level at which you are talking is Intel. Vote whichever way you like... my preferred method is with my pocketbook, which always proves to be the most effective.
October 9, 2006 4:10:09 PM

Quote:
You know, once cpus get into that range (fx-62, c2d6800) they are all so powerful that whatever you are doing is going to happen fast. That in mind, theres nothing wrong with supporting a particular company because you like them. I shop at Wal-Mart instead of Target but that doesnt mean Im a slavering Wal-Mart fanboy. It means I like Wal-Mart.

If the difference between an fx-62 and a c2d6800e is 1000 3dmark06 points, then Id go buy the AMD chip, not because Im an AMD fanboy, but because AMD stuff makes me happy.

People are allowed to support products merely because they like the parent company, not based on perfomance. Im just sayin...
-cm

Oh, yeah: Mousemonkey is my hero.



That's exactly the point I always try to make. This is a capitalist society so people can choose to buy the brands they want. The BMW got faster than the Audi and people didn't burn ther Audis.

Value, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Brand loyalty is fine, as long as it isn't blined loyalty based on falsehoods, and that one doesn't try and convince everyone else of the same to prop themlseves up with an emotional crutch.

The car analogy is not a good one though even though we're partially in agreement for once. A car, especially to some nationalities, is not just functional and is very visible and can be aesthetically pleasing. They brand the way they look and style as well as the corporate image around the car.

A chip sits out of sight inside a case. Ok, you might want to put a silly badge on the outside if you feel you need to, but that's neither here nor there. You also don't drive your CPU out in public every day. Sure, you 'take your CPU online' everyday, but of course nobody knows what you use unless you shout about it. And so we go back to my first point....

Please, it's the same thing. People can buy what they want. PERIOD! If you start with a 3800+, you get good gameplay on most games, so 70fps vs 80fps is a joke. The eye can't tell the difference.

The car analogy is perfect cause it's just another product people can choose from.

No, you're missing the point which is not surprising as you've been missing this and others wilfully or otherwise since you arrived here.

Yes, people can buy what they want. Does that make it better? No. And people shouldn't make stuff up to try and claim that it is, often just to make themselves feel better.

The car analogy is poor for the reasons I already outlined before which you chose to ignore or maybe couldn't understand. A car is visible. It can have unique shapes and forms. It can be pleasing to the eye. You can form a judgement on it just by seeing it.

For all relevant purposes, a CPU chip is invisible. It's stuck in your PC case. Nobody else sees it. Nobody knows what you're using, unless you feel the need to stand up and tell everyone about it.

It is a very poor comparison. A better one might be your choice of ISP. Nobody can tell who you use by looking at the phoneline. You can't see how fast or slow it is. There are of course different features in terms of speed, price, contention etc but these only become apparent if you tell someone else about them. Otherwise it's just a wire outside your house.
October 9, 2006 4:16:52 PM

Quote:
Please, it's the same thing. People can buy what they want. PERIOD! If you start with a 3800+, you get good gameplay on most games, so 70fps vs 80fps is a joke. The eye can't tell the difference.

The car analogy is perfect cause it's just another product people can choose from.

Oh........I thought that one of your 1000 job is being a "dev" :roll:
Are "dev"s playing games?

My friendly advice for you:
October 9, 2006 4:19:03 PM

CUZ AMD is better, watch its only a matter of time till the AMD will rise again and crush INtel, But I have to admit the new core 2 duo's are a real kick in the ass :D 
October 9, 2006 4:25:03 PM

Quote:
Clearly Intel fanboy you have no idea what you're talking about. The FX-62 is a 90nm chipset while the Intel Core 2 Duo is a 65nm chipset. The Core 2 clearly has the advantage here because of its architecture. Also if you didn't notice Intel's 90nm technology was a joke. Their chips produced so much heat. As you can see now, AMD is showing signs of some brilliant work with their new EE 54W chipsets. If AMD can produce chips on a 90nm architecture with 54-125W, imagine what they can produce on a 65nm architecture, once they make their transition. Also some of these people are right, some of Intel's old chips are still $1000. So explain that.


Pentium M?
October 9, 2006 4:30:06 PM

Quote:
You know, once cpus get into that range (fx-62, c2d6800) they are all so powerful that whatever you are doing is going to happen fast. That in mind, theres nothing wrong with supporting a particular company because you like them. I shop at Wal-Mart instead of Target but that doesnt mean Im a slavering Wal-Mart fanboy. It means I like Wal-Mart.

If the difference between an fx-62 and a c2d6800e is 1000 3dmark06 points, then Id go buy the AMD chip, not because Im an AMD fanboy, but because AMD stuff makes me happy.

People are allowed to support products merely because they like the parent company, not based on perfomance. Im just sayin...
-cm

Oh, yeah: Mousemonkey is my hero.



That's exactly the point I always try to make. This is a capitalist society so people can choose to buy the brands they want. The BMW got faster than the Audi and people didn't burn ther Audis.

Value, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Brand loyalty is fine, as long as it isn't blined loyalty based on falsehoods, and that one doesn't try and convince everyone else of the same to prop themlseves up with an emotional crutch.

The car analogy is not a good one though even though we're partially in agreement for once. A car, especially to some nationalities, is not just functional and is very visible and can be aesthetically pleasing. They brand the way they look and style as well as the corporate image around the car.

A chip sits out of sight inside a case. Ok, you might want to put a silly badge on the outside if you feel you need to, but that's neither here nor there. You also don't drive your CPU out in public every day. Sure, you 'take your CPU online' everyday, but of course nobody knows what you use unless you shout about it. And so we go back to my first point....

Please, it's the same thing. People can buy what they want. PERIOD! If you start with a 3800+, you get good gameplay on most games, so 70fps vs 80fps is a joke. The eye can't tell the difference.

The car analogy is perfect cause it's just another product people can choose from.

No, you're missing the point which is not surprising as you've been missing this and others wilfully or otherwise since you arrived here.

Yes, people can buy what they want. Does that make it better? No. And people shouldn't make stuff up to try and claim that it is, often just to make themselves feel better.

The car analogy is poor for the reasons I already outlined before which you chose to ignore or maybe couldn't understand. A car is visible. It can have unique shapes and forms. It can be pleasing to the eye. You can form a judgement on it just by seeing it.

For all relevant purposes, a CPU chip is invisible. It's stuck in your PC case. Nobody else sees it. Nobody knows what you're using, unless you feel the need to stand up and tell everyone about it.

It is a very poor comparison. A better one might be your choice of ISP. Nobody can tell who you use by looking at the phoneline. You can't see how fast or slow it is. There are of course different features in terms of speed, price, contention etc but these only become apparent if you tell someone else about them. Otherwise it's just a wire outside your house.


People are saying FU I buy what I want. Being the fastest isn't necessary for a good experience. I bought the 4400+ not the 4800+ or 4600+. Why because it had to suit my needs not be the fastest chip.

It's all the same and you Intel ho s just can't get enough of downing AMD.
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 9, 2006 4:31:05 PM

[quote="The_AbyssIt is a very poor comparison. A better one might be your choice of ISP. Nobody can tell who you use by looking at the phoneline. You can't see how fast or slow it is. There are of course different features in terms of speed, price, contention etc but these only become apparent if you tell someone else about them. Otherwise it's just a wire outside your house.[/quote]

And yet people still use different ISP's 8O :?
October 9, 2006 4:32:22 PM

Quote:
The car analogy is perfect cause it's just another product people can choose from.


If so, then who would buy a new yet slower and smaller car that is based on old tech, and burns more fuel than current muscle cars that perform better plus get better mileage and has future upgradebility, and even costs less initially...
October 9, 2006 4:38:59 PM

Quote:
Can someone explain to me why the FX62 still costs around $700 when it gets beaten on all performance metrics by the C2D 6600 that costs half as much?

Also why are there so many people posting here about setting up new systems with all new components and still buying AMD's? Are they just stupid or something?


There are plenty of reasons... a topic with this subject and a post asking if people are stupid doesn't make anyone think much of you.

If you'd actually read the sites content:
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/10/06/price_performance_cha...
You'd see at least one good reason to do it.

Its kind of like HDD's, you can buy a 750 GB HDD but it isn't the best deal, now if you want the benifit of one drive then you pay the premium over getting say 2 400 GB drives with a better price per GB.The e6600 is not a budget chip, it is more like the 750 GB HD and the x2 4200 is like the 400 GB HDD, sure you get more performance from the e6600 but you pay a relative premium for that performance(or price per instuction, well this works well for the analogy ;)  ), whereas the 4200 has less performance overall but the price per instruction is cheaper.


And as someone mentiod the Pentium D's are still $999, explain that one....
October 9, 2006 4:45:55 PM

Oooooooooo! goJDO got owned by Baron Matrix. You have no idea what you are talking about, goJDO. AMD EE chips are no underclocked they just run at lower speeds in idle mode. They also run 100% utilization at about 60W. Next time goJDO do your research.
October 9, 2006 4:46:02 PM

Quote:
Can someone explain to me why the FX62 still costs around $700 when it gets beaten on all performance metrics by the C2D 6600 that costs half as much?

Also why are there so many people posting here about setting up new systems with all new components and still buying AMD's? Are they just stupid or something?


There are plenty of reasons... a topic with this subject and a post asking if people are stupid doesn't make anyone think much of you.

If you'd actually read the sites content:
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/10/06/price_performance_cha...
You'd see at least one good reason to do it.

Its kind of like HDD's, you can buy a 750 GB HDD but it isn't the best deal, now if you want the benifit of one drive then you pay the premium over getting say 2 400 GB drives with a better price per GB.The e6600 is not a budget chip, it is more like the 750 GB HD and the x2 4200 is like the 400 GB HDD, sure you get more performance from the e6600 but you pay a relative premium for that performance(or price per instuction, well this works well for the analogy ;)  ), whereas the 4200 has less performance overall but the price per instruction is cheaper.


And as someone mentiod the Pentium D's are still $999, explain that one....

I wouldn't use the E6600 as a comparasion for the 4200+. The E6300/6400 would be a better comparasion chip. If you are looking at price/performance, those two CPUs are equal or better than the 4200+/4600+ on most benchmarks. If you're going to use the E6600 (which is not a budget CPU, as you mentioned), then you would have to compare it with the 4800+/5000+, even the FX-62 CPUs.

The PD 965EE is that price only for stupid people who think that the higher the price the better the product. The 965EE is overpriced, and shouldn't even be offerred anymore, imo.
October 9, 2006 4:51:26 PM

Quote:
Please, it's the same thing. People can buy what they want. PERIOD! If you start with a 3800+, you get good gameplay on most games, so 70fps vs 80fps is a joke. The eye can't tell the difference.

The car analogy is perfect cause it's just another product people can choose from.

Oh........I thought that one of your 1000 job is being a "dev" :roll:
Are "dev"s playing games?

My friendly advice for you:



So developers can't play games? WHat does that have to do with the post? I don't think I'll go looking for some cute pic to try and make you look bad so I'll just say Bite Me.

I have one job and lots of hobbies. Let's see if I can push you over the edge too.
October 9, 2006 5:07:14 PM

Just stop it. Seriously. There were not HALF as many stupid threads about Intel EE cpu's for the last few YEARS as there have been in the last couple of months about the FX's. Doesn't matter which brand/manufacturer you buy from, when you purchase the top-of-the-line CPU, you get ripped off. As long as tech companies keep leap-frogging each other, us consumers will be fine. If you want to complain about price to performance of something, how about a thread about HD-DVD and Blu-ray bringing almost nothing to the table with prices that are astronomical and holographic media only months from production? At least that would be a NEW thread.
!