Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

CPU makers to go to war again in July

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 15, 2007 4:33:33 PM

Quote:
With CPU makers having finished a price war in April, the two fighters will cross blades again in July, according to a Chinese-language Commercial Times report citing sources at Goldman Sachs. AMD plans to slash its CPU prices at the beginning of the month while Intel price cuts are set for the 22nd.

The sources pointed out, Intel's price cuts on July 22 will focus on high-end CPUs including its Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Duo series, while AMD will cover all its high-end and entry-level product lineups. Although AMD's July price cuts will not be as much as those in April, they will still range from 20-40%, said the paper.

© DIGITIMES Inc

Competition is a good thing, at least for consumers. :wink:

More about : cpu makers war july

June 15, 2007 4:40:41 PM

Quote:
With CPU makers having finished a price war in April, the two fighters will cross blades again in July, according to a Chinese-language Commercial Times report citing sources at Goldman Sachs. AMD plans to slash its CPU prices at the beginning of the month while Intel price cuts are set for the 22nd.

The sources pointed out, Intel's price cuts on July 22 will focus on high-end CPUs including its Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Duo series, while AMD will cover all its high-end and entry-level product lineups. Although AMD's July price cuts will not be as much as those in April, they will still range from 20-40%, said the paper.

© DIGITIMES Inc

Competition is a good thing, at least for consumers. :wink:


This is crazy. Intel just needs to accept AMDs presence and get back to tech and not price wars. They still have yet to release a better bus or I believe a PCIe 2 chipset.

Sure cheap processors are great but how cheap do they really need to be when everyone got something they could use before the C2D foolishness.
June 15, 2007 5:09:02 PM

Thats a first,somebody complaining because the prices are dropping.
Related resources
June 15, 2007 5:12:40 PM

Quote:
Thats a first,somebody complaining because the prices are dropping.


You must be new here :wink:
June 15, 2007 5:20:11 PM

Quote:

Sure cheap processors are great but how cheap do they really need to be when everyone got something they could use before the C2D foolishness.


What kind of argumentation is that? I don´t want cheaper processor because i could afford what they charged during the last year? That´s a very conservative and static stance against advancement.
June 15, 2007 5:29:28 PM

Quote:

Sure cheap processors are great but how cheap do they really need to be when everyone got something they could use before the C2D foolishness.


What kind of argumentation is that? I don´t want cheaper processor because i could afford what they charged during the last year? That´s a very conservative and static stance against advancement.

That's my opinion. Why make less money? The more you make the more you can put into R&D.
June 15, 2007 5:32:23 PM

Don't bother... He's just worried about his mighty AMD losing their margins
June 15, 2007 5:35:16 PM

Everyone should be worried about that,if AMD sinks you can wave bye bye to the low prices.
June 15, 2007 5:36:54 PM

Hmmm... Intel can maintian it's margins with price cuts... R&D towards fab processes works wonders. :wink:

Price wars drive innovation, not restrict it!
June 15, 2007 5:40:26 PM

This is good news!!!

Maybe Intel will cut prices sooner then July 22 :!:
June 15, 2007 5:48:36 PM

I like the SYF avatar :trophy:
June 15, 2007 5:57:24 PM

Thanks :wink:

Can't go anywhere in my house with out seeing one
Are you in to jam bands?( if so PM me)

So any one think thay will cut prices sooner then July 22 or just stay the course?
June 15, 2007 5:59:05 PM

Quote:
Everyone should be worried about that,if AMD sinks you can wave bye bye to the low prices.

So everybody should buy AMD processors just so they can stay in business :roll: :?:
June 15, 2007 6:00:38 PM

lol
June 15, 2007 6:10:04 PM

That's what I did.

I bought a (4) of x2 3800 CPUs to be part of geeky coasters for my coffee table.

I bought the C2Duo to do my computing.
June 15, 2007 6:15:17 PM

Ok for me it is like this.

Lets say I have a $100.00 USD and AMD's chip at that price is better than Intel I get the AMD. If Intels chip is better at that price I get the Intel.

It is all about performance for me not names.

Just my 2 cents
June 15, 2007 6:17:24 PM

Thats the smart way to do it.Undying loyalty to manufacturers is stupid.
June 15, 2007 6:25:15 PM

Quote:
Thats the smart way to do it.Undying loyalty to manufacturers is stupid.



No it's not. I'll never buy any receiver but Onkyo and only Sony DVD players. Maybe there's an electronics forum where I can see fanboys for stereos. The word undying is a little harsh.

Plenty of people ( about 80%) bought HeatBurst. People get pissed at me for saying it but I think Intel skirts the line to much with price drops. They do control the market so they can't just drop the bottom out to hold the competition down but I guess my opinion as to why no one looks at it is correct.
June 15, 2007 6:30:46 PM

Quote:
That's what I did.

I bought a (4) of x2 3800 CPUs to be part of geeky coasters for my coffee table.

I bought the C2Duo to do my computing.


:lol:  To be fair though AMD X2 processors still have enough power to do any computing task, but I think it's going to get allot worse for AMD when Intel cut prices further even when AMD try to cut prices too.

Quote:
Undying loyalty to manufacturers is stupid


Totally agree
June 15, 2007 6:32:17 PM

So if you where going to buy a receiver tomorrow and a better quality one was available at a lower price you would walk past it to buy a Onkyo?
Doesn't sound like very smart shopping to me.
June 15, 2007 6:33:56 PM

Like I said... Don't bother...
June 15, 2007 6:42:37 PM

WTF to start anyone how knows receivers knows its Yamaha then Denon then Onkyo for high end receivers. In that order!
June 15, 2007 6:46:57 PM

Quote:
With CPU makers having finished a price war in April, the two fighters will cross blades again in July, according to a Chinese-language Commercial Times report citing sources at Goldman Sachs. AMD plans to slash its CPU prices at the beginning of the month while Intel price cuts are set for the 22nd.

The sources pointed out, Intel's price cuts on July 22 will focus on high-end CPUs including its Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Duo series, while AMD will cover all its high-end and entry-level product lineups. Although AMD's July price cuts will not be as much as those in April, they will still range from 20-40%, said the paper.

© DIGITIMES Inc

Competition is a good thing, at least for consumers. :wink:


This is crazy. Intel just needs to accept AMDs presence and get back to tech and not price wars. They still have yet to release a better bus or I believe a PCIe 2 chipset.

Sure cheap processors are great but how cheap do they really need to be when everyone got something they could use before the C2D foolishness.
Seriously. But, if you look closely, Intel is already going back to being lazy(slowly but surely). The first sign: Intel's apparantly not needing to make a true quad-core chip. Intel will get screwed when AMD moves to 8-core, when AMD just puts 2 Barcelonas on a CPU. You can't put 4 dies on a chip.
June 15, 2007 6:59:24 PM

I heard they have 8 core Nehalem chips scheduled for 08,so they must have figured something out.
June 15, 2007 7:01:05 PM

Quote:
So if you where going to buy a receiver tomorrow and a better quality one was available at a lower price you would walk past it to buy a Onkyo?
Doesn't sound like very smart shopping to me.


Even if Panasonic, etc comes up with something comparable I would still buy the Onkyo. It's all about this being a free country. if I want to buy only AMD that's my choice.
June 15, 2007 7:05:44 PM

Absolutely,but that doesn't always make it the smart choice. Whether its AMD,Intel,Nvidia,Ati whoever.
June 15, 2007 7:11:58 PM

Quote:
Absolutely,but that doesn't always make it the smart choice. Whether its AMD,Intel,Nvidia,Ati whoever.


Right on man!!!

This is going to end badly

*walks away from this thread*
June 15, 2007 7:29:04 PM

And they have alot more power than most of the systems I am running.
Just less power than my most recent systems which are C2Duos.

(I do alot of lab testing so I lots of systems that I normally keep until it's time to give them away because they are no longer useful.)

I actually do recommend AMDs for folks on a very tight budget.
They will do just fine and the AM2 motherboards will take the new AMD chips if they ever ship.
June 15, 2007 7:40:17 PM

Quote:
Absolutely,but that doesn't always make it the smart choice. Whether its AMD,Intel,Nvidia,Ati whoever.


Smarter Choice? Isn't that AMDs marketing line? I'm typing this on a Turion andit seems to actually work fast enough that I don't wait for much. I never buy the newest and fastest when it comes to PC parts.

Besides, I think I hate Intel. I used to think it was the ridiculous fanboys, but I realized it's because they kinda suck and don't act like the market leader. They act like Tony Soprano.
June 15, 2007 8:19:39 PM

Quote:
Absolutely,but that doesn't always make it the smart choice. Whether its AMD,Intel,Nvidia,Ati whoever.


Smarter Choice? Isn't that AMDs marketing line? I'm typing this on a Turion andit seems to actually work fast enough that I don't wait for much. I never buy the newest and fastest when it comes to PC parts.

Besides, I think I hate Intel. I used to think it was the ridiculous fanboys, but I realized it's because they kinda suck and don't act like the market leader. They act like Tony Soprano.

Half of what you say makes sense to me. It is a free country and you can buy what you want. I too never buy the newest and fastest when it comes to PC's. But that is just me I am practical.

But you need to be an informed consumer. Electronic components change every couple of months. That brand of stereo receiver you picked up last year is not the best rated this year. Before I purchase anything I do the research and pick the best that fits my budget and needs. So I dissagree with you about your brand loyalty. I used to by American made cars. Now I buy Japanese made cars. I will be informed and practical not loyal.

I would not say that you hate Intel, you just prefer the under dog. There is nothing wrong with that. Just like a lot of people like the budget CPU's because they can over clock them and it is like getting extra cpu power for nothing from the "under dog."

I liked my little 1.4 celeron tutlan that I OC to 1.6 or my XP 1700+ that I got to 2200+ I kinda wonder why Intell makes cpu's that overclock so well. I would be more inclined to buy the cheaper cpu and just overlcock then get the high end one and blow a big wad of cash. But hell only a very small minority of people over clock their cpu's. Intell is putting the squeeze on AMD but you better believe they are not loosing any money.

Me personally I would like to see more competition in the cpu gpu market place. Come on VIA and XGI................. :wink:
June 15, 2007 8:30:51 PM

so baron, what you are actually saying is

"I know I am on a computer enthusiast forum but I dont care about speed, I like the slow stuff but so, its my right so there na na naaaa na na naa "

I seem to remember a much simpler time when the best cpu was the one to get, around the same time AMD had a performance advantage, spooky.
June 15, 2007 8:42:09 PM

Quote:
so baron, what you are actually saying is

"I know I am on a computer enthusiast forum but I dont care about speed, I like the slow stuff but so, its my right so there na na naaaa na na naa "

I seem to remember a much simpler time when the best cpu was the one to get, around the same time AMD had a performance advantage, spooky.



Definitions of enthusiast on the Web:

an ardent and enthusiastic supporter of some person or activity
fancier: a person having a strong liking for something. :wink:

So is this some kind of different enthusiast forum or just the regular old enthusiast forum.... :wink:
June 15, 2007 9:08:03 PM

Quote:
so baron, what you are actually saying is

"I know I am on a computer enthusiast forum but I dont care about speed, I like the slow stuff but so, its my right so there na na naaaa na na naa "

I seem to remember a much simpler time when the best cpu was the one to get, around the same time AMD had a performance advantage, spooky.


Slow is relative. If I want to play Q4 at 1280 with all the eye candy and I get a chip that allows it, how does it matter if there's something faster? Most AMD packages are cheaper than the comparable Intel package. Look at Dell's site or HPs site. My Turion is slower than Merom but it's more than fast enough for presentations and reviewing code in Visual Studio.

That's my point.


When AMD did have the perf crown I didn't rush out and by an FX60, I bought a 4400+ and a 7800GT.
a b à CPUs
June 15, 2007 9:22:53 PM

Quote:
So if you where going to buy a receiver tomorrow and a better quality one was available at a lower price you would walk past it to buy a Onkyo?
Doesn't sound like very smart shopping to me.


Even if Panasonic, etc comes up with something comparable I would still buy the Onkyo. It's all about this being a free country. if I want to buy only AMD that's my choice.

Yeah isn't it great, in a free country you can be a dumb-ass and they let you. Buying a product by name and not by quality/cost/performance is like betting on a sports team cause you like their jersey's. In both instances it's like throwing your money away.
June 15, 2007 9:34:18 PM

Quote:

That's my opinion. Why make less money? The more you make the more you can put into R&D.


Maybe AMD shouldn´t cut prices then.
a b à CPUs
June 15, 2007 9:41:41 PM

Quote:
Ok for me it is like this.

Lets say I have a $100.00 USD and AMD's chip at that price is better than Intel I get the AMD. If Intels chip is better at that price I get the Intel.

It is all about performance for me not names.



But what if you only have $70?
June 15, 2007 9:43:44 PM

Quote:
Ok for me it is like this.

Lets say I have a $100.00 USD and AMD's chip at that price is better than Intel I get the AMD. If Intels chip is better at that price I get the Intel.

It is all about performance for me not names.



But what if you only have $70?

LOL
June 15, 2007 9:44:04 PM

Buying an inferior product to support a company HURTS that company in the long run.

Please see the US auto industry.
June 15, 2007 10:05:40 PM

Quote:

Seriously. But, if you look closely, Intel is already going back to being lazy(slowly but surely). The first sign: Intel's apparantly not needing to make a true quad-core chip. Intel will get screwed when AMD moves to 8-core, when AMD just puts 2 Barcelonas on a CPU. You can't put 4 dies on a chip.


Just so you know, Intel is in fact currently working (and has been) on a native quad core design

As with everything else, there are benefits and deficits to Intels choice to use an MCM vs a native quad core. Apparently Intel decided the benefits outwieghed the negative aspects, and I dont think it had much to do with work ethics.

The Benefits
- It allowed Intel to get a quad core CPU to market faster than designing a native quad core...which was important to them because....
-Intel was aware AMD was designing Barcelona and wanted to beat AMD to market with the first quadcore.....bragging rights essentially
- By using current design, Intel is able to reduce waste. If a core is bad, its only a 2 core die thats wasted vs a 4 core die, which translates directly to less waste per wafer/increased margin per wafer.
- Improves production standardization- By using the same cores for both its dual and quad core CPUs, Intel need only produce those cores, rather than both a native dual and native quad.
-Decreases "programed" wafer waste - that 'overhead' waste not associated with defect waste, due to the reduced size of dual core vs quad core dies - just a simple geometry problem, but a money saver.

Deficit
On the bad side, AMDs IMC design is more advanced than Intels bus design. By multiplying cores on design that uses a front side bus, (the "data path" from the northbridge and memory bus to the CPU) the possibility of bus saturation exists, that is the demand for data from the CPU exceeds the capacity of the bus to transmit that data. This would result in bottlenecking. As such, you could get to the point where multiplying the number of cores on a CPU beyond the capacity of the FSB to serve the CPU would be pointless.

There are also potential latency issues (time delays) associated with the FSB design, however, to date niether problem has demonstrated any significant negative impact in Intels C2Q series performance.

The reverse is not true however. Because of its IMC, AMD would have encountered more dificulties trying to use a MCM rather than a native design for its quadcores (when they show up), but at the cost of having to accept the additional programed and defect waste.

So I dont think laziness really factored into either companies choice or route to intitail quad core products.
June 15, 2007 11:01:20 PM

Quote:
So if you where going to buy a receiver tomorrow and a better quality one was available at a lower price you would walk past it to buy a Onkyo?
Doesn't sound like very smart shopping to me.


Even if Panasonic, etc comes up with something comparable I would still buy the Onkyo. It's all about this being a free country. if I want to buy only AMD that's my choice.

Yeah isn't it great, in a free country you can be a dumb-ass and they let you. Buying a product by name and not by quality/cost/performance is like betting on a sports team cause you like their jersey's. In both instances it's like throwing your money away.


Here we go again. You're like sheep. Onkyos have higher amperage and cleaner sound with the same wattage. I actually listened to Onkyo, Sony, Panasonic and got the Onkyo.

Whenever I price AMD vs. Intel the AMD is always cheaper. SOme peopel are more concerned about price and now that even a 3600+ is overkill for most usage, no one will be ripped off buying AMD.
June 16, 2007 12:13:38 AM

Quote:
WTF to start anyone how knows receivers knows its Yamaha then Denon then Onkyo for high end receivers. In that order!


BM you need to go look at THD on receivers.
June 16, 2007 12:31:14 AM

Quote:
Whenever I price AMD vs. Intel the AMD is always cheaper. SOme peopel are more concerned about price and now that even a 3600+ is overkill for most usage, no one will be ripped off buying AMD.


If AMD has such a clear price/performance advantage then why are they still cutting prices? Just because Intel is cutting prices doesn't mean AMD has to follow suit, especially if it means cutting into their already unhealthy margins.
June 16, 2007 12:41:43 AM

Quote:
Slow is relative. If I want to play Q4 at 1280 with all the eye candy and I get a chip that allows it, how does it matter if there's something faster? Most AMD packages are cheaper than the comparable Intel package. Look at Dell's site or HPs site. My Turion is slower than Merom but it's more than fast enough for presentations and reviewing code in Visual Studio.

That's my point.

When AMD did have the perf crown I didn't rush out and by an FX60, I bought a 4400+ and a 7800GT.


Dumb is relative too. ;) 

It doesn't matter if AMD is 'fast enough', most people, given the choice, would still go for the faster chip. Why do you think Intel marketshare declined during the latter Netburst days?
June 16, 2007 1:22:53 AM

Quote:



Here we go again. You're like sheep. Onkyos have higher amperage and cleaner sound with the same wattage. I actually listened to Onkyo, Sony, Panasonic and got the Onkyo.




You compared Onkyo to Sony and Panny? That is it?

Ever hear of Denon, Yamaha, HK? Maybe something a little more high end like ML or Krell?

Your Onk may be a kickass receiver, but how about comparing it to some real competition before you start bragging on the product.
June 16, 2007 1:38:09 AM

Quote:
Slow is relative. If I want to play Q4 at 1280 with all the eye candy and I get a chip that allows it, how does it matter if there's something faster? Most AMD packages are cheaper than the comparable Intel package. Look at Dell's site or HPs site. My Turion is slower than Merom but it's more than fast enough for presentations and reviewing code in Visual Studio.

That's my point.

When AMD did have the perf crown I didn't rush out and by an FX60, I bought a 4400+ and a 7800GT.


Dumb is relative too. ;) 

It doesn't matter if AMD is 'fast enough', most people, given the choice, would still go for the faster chip. Why do you think Intel marketshare declined during the latter Netburst days?

Leave him alone. If he doesn't like quality products and is happy with slower and less competitive products, good for him.

And I love Barron's argument about how X2 3600+ "is overkill." Yea, my old FX-55 is fast enough too! :roll: Too bad it's 200% slower than my E6600 @ 3.6GHz and takes hours to encode my vidoes while the E6600 does it in minutes.
June 16, 2007 2:48:51 AM

BaronMatrix, seriously, whats up with the huge contradiction? At one point you're parading the ridiculous idea that Intel should not bother cutting prices but rather focus on R&D (because for some reason you decided they can't do both at the same time), and then another post you are telling people that the AMD chips are fine and can run pretty much everything and whats the point in upgrading?

Dude, pick your thoughts carefully.

And I laugh when you say AMD always wins when priced against Intel chips... oh wow. I don't know where you are pricing your stuff at, but the things I have matched in terms of over clocking, temperatures and performance, Intel has been ahead of AMD substantially. There are some instances in which AMD wins, and it really depends on what you plan on using them for. Trust me when I say I am no Intel fan boy. I have never owned an Intel chip (other than an old P200 and a P3, but those came into my hands recently, and free), and have solely bought AMD components. I currently have a Sempron 3100 overclocked to 2.6 GHz and it runs along with my X800 XT rather nicely, even the new games.

Perhaps you're wondering why we care so much about your affinity for AMD processors. Well, if you notice, a lot of people read these forums, and gain information. Then there are people like you, that sew poor opinions in the minds of the uneducated, and have a much higher possibility of screwing themselves over. I personally used to be an AMD fan boy, and ATI as well. Then, I realized what an idiot I was, and began to love competition. You may care about a company, but that company certainly doesn't care about you, even if you work for them. It's all about money. Personal preference is fine, but people are impressionable by nature and it does them well to see opposing points.

The end. 8O
June 16, 2007 5:35:28 AM

Of course Baron, when purchasing that receiver you verified that it has discreet amplification? Right? You also verified its THD versus others? Right?

Oh and I am sure the Sony DVD player is the best!! Because there is no way a Denon is better right. Cause the 1920, 2910, and 3930 are absolutely horrible. Especially in their ability to upscale video to HD. But you knew that right! And forget about the fact that those Denons support SACD.

Baron when are you getting your Blu-ray player? Make sure to get a PS3 too cause they are a great deal and they contain a Sony DVD/Blu-ray. That has to make it best.

Hey while you are there at BestBuy you should pick up a digital camera from Sony too. Ohhhh man what a great device with the proprietary memory config and all. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Maybe at that time you can pay $600.00+ for another AMD Turion based notebook?

Ohhh ohhh maybe they will have a sale on Chevrolet Chevettes (mint condition of course) in the parking lot? I hear they get great gas mileage. That is some serious price vs performance there. And when they break down they are so small that they are easy to push!! Bonus!!

I love to see informed consumers such as yourself.

Hey you have a great evening!!

AMD pricing makes them great!! But if Intel pricing is really good that makes them bad.... and If Intel puts out a quicker product you should not buy it because the lower performing AMD chips are "enough". However if AMD puts out the performance leader your should buy them to support the industry underdog.. I think I got the logic right? Is that right Baron?

Is this how I am supposed to think?
June 16, 2007 5:51:06 AM

Maybe everyone should buy Bose too.

Especially the Acoustimass Series!!

Those cubes are awesome!! Especially since they give true 5.1 or even 7.1...

But the best is the 2.1 system that replicates a 5.1 system. That is the stuff there.

Intel is pricing the way they are to maintain/regain market share. It would seem that it is working.

Funny thing is folks who make the server purchase decisions usually go with the partnered company for their hardware. If it turns out their partner is providing/maintaining/servicing Intel products then they will likely purchase that. It would seem that some of the major players might be going back the way of Intel. I even heard tell of a possible Intel offering from Sun 8O 8O.

Sun? Proprietary/AMD only Sun? Creating an alliance with Intel?
Linkage of very old news!.

Yup companies like Sun need to be "BRAND LOYAL"... What were they thinking. Nope not like the Baron at all... Man I wonder which would be right?
June 16, 2007 6:21:04 AM

Quote:
With CPU makers having finished a price war in April, the two fighters will cross blades again in July, according to a Chinese-language Commercial Times report citing sources at Goldman Sachs. AMD plans to slash its CPU prices at the beginning of the month while Intel price cuts are set for the 22nd.

The sources pointed out, Intel's price cuts on July 22 will focus on high-end CPUs including its Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Duo series, while AMD will cover all its high-end and entry-level product lineups. Although AMD's July price cuts will not be as much as those in April, they will still range from 20-40%, said the paper.

© DIGITIMES Inc

Competition is a good thing, at least for consumers. :wink:


This is crazy. Intel just needs to accept AMDs presence and get back to tech and not price wars. They still have yet to release a better bus or I believe a PCIe 2 chipset.

Sure cheap processors are great but how cheap do they really need to be when everyone got something they could use before the C2D foolishness.

Normally I respect what you say, but this is insane. Intel IS going to tech, and they're doing it better than AMD is with Barcelona, AND they're dropping prices to dominate all price points.

How, exactly, is any of that bad for Intel or the consumer who wants the best price/performance. Trust me, Intel will still be making much more money than AMD after the price drop.

I'm no fanboy, I'm using an AMD Athlon64 X2 3800, and I've generally preferred AMD products. But right now and especially after the price drop, give me one good reason for buying AMD (besides keeping the company alive for competition's sake).
June 16, 2007 6:26:06 AM

Why do you need to update?

I'm using a Opteron 165 right now, and I see no reason to update. My system is still smoking.
!