Holy crap, Phenom II 720 SOLD OUT! (05/20/09)

croc

Distinguished
BANNED
Sep 14, 2005
3,038
1
20,810
Reminds me of AMD 64 days... AMD had good product, but mediocre MFG. So they couldn't supply both channel and OEM fast enough to meet demand. Must've been that bad ole Intel, right? So now, more of the same. I see another antitrust suit in Intel's future, as they must now be holding back AMD's fabs.
 
Im sure their production is higher now, as its a much smaller node, and the wafers are much larger as well. Its more a 3core issue I think. Its good they run out now and then. It means either theyre selling like crazy, or yields are very good, and the 9xx's are selling well
 

croc

Distinguished
BANNED
Sep 14, 2005
3,038
1
20,810
...Or, their yields are not up to snuff, and they're wasting more of each wafer? Perhaps the handover to GF is having an effect? AMD is keeping a pretty tight lid on yields of various cores these days.

I'm not a 'glass half full' or a 'glass half empty' type. I'm more of a 'show me the money' type. If you are so impressed, buy some AMD stock...
 
I could understand if yields are bad, tri cores would be plentyful, but it may be the opposite, and theyre harder to come by.
This is a new AMD, at least in the sense theyre trying differing approaches, with a more capable lineup. In this day of "good enough" cpus, and this economy, pricing is the thing
 


They were supposed to be out of the red two quarters ago. Words mean nothing. Only sales in the end, and you know that well.

As for the sales it could mean anything. Remember since these are just "defective" quads AMD wont have as many as they would quads. It could also be because they are transitioning to the GFs which might limit the production for s short period of time.

But I think its because they don't get as many as they do quads so the supply will always be limited.

You know, they could rebrand the old Phenoms as Phenom II X3s by just disabling the 4th core.... but that would be sneaky.....
 
I think everyone is reading way more into this than there is, but that seems to be the way the majority of people work these days....jumping to conclusions on every whim.
Why does this turn into an AMD problem all of a sudden?

I say the more likely "problem" is someone from Newegg simply forgot to order the damn things, or their restock triggers are set too low, or whatever. I doubt just because Newegg runs out of a certain Phenom processor that AMD has burnt to the ground or anything.
 

Chronobodi

Distinguished
Feb 19, 2009
498
0
18,780


Dual-core Phenoms! Just think of the cheap prices, the possible unlocking of the 2 cores, bla blah...

I say the price should be $90, just to be fair with the prices of the triple and quads.

like this, add $50 (give or take) for an extra core, up to the 810 at least.

Phenom x2 550 = $90

Phenom x3 720 = $139

Phenom x4 810 = $169

that kinda makes sense, but you have to pay $80 more for Phenom II x4 955, but, overall, i think that's what the prices should be.
 




/signed


I would also like to add it's not necessarily an AMD victory either, and for the same reasons. Looking at a very small sample (one reseller) is an exceedingly poor basis for making sweeping claims of huge sales success, let alone "AMD out of the red". We will know if/when AMD are in the black when AMD management issues the press releases and 10Q/10K reports saying so.

All this stuff means is that Newegg ran out of stock. No more, No Less.
 
Well, if this happened with Intel stock, several things would happen. The guy at Newegg would be fired or, people would be wondering why this happened or people would be speculating as to why this happened. Since its happened to AMD, I suspect we see the same results
 

sdf

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2007
231
0
18,690
I'm curious why AMD couldn't/doesn't just make a native tri core? I'm kind of asking those that are more knowledgeable than me but if you make a native tri core couldn't you put more transistors on it increasing its performance, in theory? At least use the space that is being taken up but the disabled core.
 




Conversation:

Newegg Mgr: Heya Dave, it looks like we ran out of SKU <blah de blah de blah>

Dave: Hmm.. Lemme see.. Yup, we're out. Strange... The computer should have auto-ordered when we fell below 20 units... Let me check.


***
<later>


Dave: Heya - On that SKU <blah de blah de blah>, I put in a call and have a tray coming. And I re-set the inventory system as well. Should properly restock now...

Newegg Manger: Thanks, Dave.

****







This
 

Amiga500

Distinguished
Jul 3, 2007
631
0
18,980
Oh, and AMD's problem is not their raw performance vs. Intel...

It isn't even their price-performance vs. Intel.


It IS their manufacturing costs-performance versus Intel. Until they improve that ratio against Intel, they will always be chasing the game.
 

MarkG

Distinguished
Oct 13, 2004
841
0
19,010


Because there's no real market for triple cores at quad-core prices. You won't be able to clock it much higher and the extra cache you could use the other 25% of the chip for won't gain you much, so you'd just be paying the same amount of money as a quad-core to build a CPU that was slower on anything that uses four threads.

As for triple core yields indicating process problems, I'm not so sure: it depends a lot on which parts of the chip can fail and still allow them to use three of the cores. When I worked in the chip business we planned to sell failed chips with the defective pipelines disabled as cheaper and slower parts, but in practice we didn't get very many because in most cases either the whole chip worked or something fundamental was also broken that prevented us from using the parts that did work (e.g. broken memory interface, or whatever).