NewEgg still wants $245 for the AMD 965.

[nss000]

Well well ... the specs are in for INTELs new i5 ... and they walk-all-over the AMD-965. But, NewEgg is stone-walling the 965-price. Still $245. Should be abput $180. For how long can they do this without selling the AMD part?

Or will they just drop-the-part outa spite ! PAY INTEL WHAT THOU OWEST !!!

 

[someguy7]

The i5 does not walk all over the 965. And retailers dont adjust prices due to how well or bad the competing company's chips are. The chip makers do that.

Stop this Intel fanboy nonsense.

 

[redwave3099]

+1 to someguy7's post, seems lots of Intel fan boys are popping up.

 

[thegeeesta]

+2

the i5 doesn't walk all over the 965
and i still think that's great performance for $245 considering that all the other existing hardware needed is cheap

 

[medjohnson77]

+3 enough said.

 

[someguy7]

IMHO I never would recommend the 965. The price premium over the 955 was just not worth it to me. Maybe if the person was not going to overclock....

 

[someguy7]

The I5 walks all over the 965. 22 out of 25 tests in a and a tech's comparo. Love all the amd fanboi's thinking the 965 isn't a piece of *** when in reality it is.

The 965 has a 700mhz advantage in clock speed over the 750 and it STILL gets beaten down by the 750. Cry for us Amd Fanboi's :lol:

Clock speed is irrelevant. It may technically win most of those benchmarks but get out of here with that walks all over it nonsense.

 

[redwave3099]

The I5 walks all over the 965. 22 out of 25 tests in a and a tech's comparo. Love all the amd fanboi's thinking the 965 isn't a piece of *** when in reality it is.

The 965 has a 700mhz advantage in clock speed over the 750 and it STILL gets beaten down by the 750. Cry for us Amd Fanboi's :lol:

speaking of fan boys........

 

[Boxa786]

Did u ever here that sayin, dont feed the troll? When then guys "dont feed the troll"!
Lol

 

[someguy7]

Easy. Clock speed means nothing between to different archs.. If one has a 700mhz clock speed advantage and it is competing in the same market segment as the lower clocked cpu that is what matters. The AMD has a higher base black. The Intel has turbo/HT.. well not in the case of the I5. Point is you compare cpus/systems that cost about the same to build and see whats better.

"The 965 has a 700mhz advantage in clock speed over the 750 and it STILL gets beaten down" Keep in mind that turbo will make up alot of the 700mhz anyways.

 

[redwine01]

I need some trools for my aquarium. Any good trool interested?

 

[loneninja]

Doesn't the I5 "Turbo" up to 3.2Ghz for most of those tests that it is compared to a 3.4Ghz Phenom II? Not to much of a clock speed difference there.

Yeah I agree the I5 is better, but it doesn't really walk all over the Phenom II. However the Phenom II does need a price cut now that the I5 was released. It's a matter of when AMD does the cut, not the retailer.

 

[medjohnson77]

I am running the 940 b.e. and it is not a piece of $hit so I really doubt the 965 is either. beat down, walked all over, lol.

 

[threednonsense]

Whaaa?

I quote from Tom's article...

"The engineering sample we're using runs at 2.66 GHz by default and supports a single bin of Turbo Boost acceleration, locking it in at 2.8 GHz."

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i5-lynnfield,2379-2.html

For a cpu rated at 2.66 ghz and binned by the turbo at 2.8 ghz, yeah, that's called walking all over the amd offering especially since it's priced lower. Hmmm, the AMD is more expensive, less performance, clocked 700 mhz higher, meaning less room for overclocking and I ain't going to get into detail with overclocking... Overall, this has got to be the worst beatdown I've seen in the cpu market yet.

Not only did you people count you chickens before they hatched, you tried to count the eggs before they were layed... Not good at all...

@Someguy

I suppose your a novice and never heard of overclocking.

@psychosaysdie

They just don't get it do they?...

 

[loneninja]

Whaaa?

I quote from Tom's article...

"The engineering sample we're using runs at 2.66 GHz by default and supports a single bin of Turbo Boost acceleration, locking it in at 2.8 GHz."

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i5-lynnfield,2379-2.html

For a cpu rated at 2.66 ghz and binned by the turbo at 2.8 ghz, yeah, that's called walking all over the amd offering especially since it's priced lower. Hmmm, the AMD is more expensive, less performance, clocked 700 mhz higher, meaning less room for overclocking and I ain't going to get into detail with overclocking... Overall, this has got to be the worst beatdown I've seen in the cpu market yet.

Not only did you people count you chickens before they hatched, you tried to count the eggs before they were layed... Not good at all...

@Someguy

I suppose your a novice and never heard of overclocking.

@psychosaysdie

They just don't get it do they?...

LMAO Did you even read that article. All 4 processors at clocked at 2.8Ghz, that is not a 2.8Ghz I5 walking all over a 3.4Ghz Phenom II.

 

[threednonsense]

LMAO Did you even read that article. All 4 processors at clocked at 2.8Ghz, that is not a 2.8Ghz I5 walking all over a 3.4Ghz Phenom II.

Yeah, I did, but obviously you didn't because I don't see no 965 Deneb in that article. I don't see what's so funny either.

 

[medjohnson77]

I just have to laugh at the statements being made about the I5's beating down the Phenom II's. MY PII does everything I need it to do, runs very stable at 3.6 ghz, is a great processor for my gaming rig and who cares about some bench marks, I care about real world performance and the Phenom II's handle that just fine. To say that the Phenom II's are a $hit processor is just a pure fanboy statement.

Looking at the new release on the 1156 socket's for Intel also makes me laugh, because they are releasing this as a main stream product line, and yet looking at the price's for the I7 860 and 870 your looking at $300-580 dollars just to get into there main stream products plateform. Looks like just another socket release from Intel to get you money. Don't get me wrong, sure the bench's look good for the new I5's and I7's on the 1156 socket. However, we all know that Intel does well on alot of the benchs compared to AMD, to base a purchase based only on Benchs, is just a waste of money. I will stick with my Phenom II 940 b.e. at 3.6ghz and wait for the 5800's cards to come out and really upgrade my build when they do.

If all you fanboys want to give Evil Intel (the evil empire) your money, then please feel free to do so.

AMD for life!

 

[nss000]

Glad someone could see the truth.

WEll -- comparing the new i5 & old BE.965 perhaps I shouldn't have said "walks all over..." but something kinder like: GROUND INTO THE DUST ... or "MARINATED, GRILLED and EATEN. hehehe

But really ... my question is one of "timing". As an occasional builder I will NOT jump on the unscrubbed i5 platform ; only kids can tolerate that pain! My fav Ubuntu OS will do just fine with MSI_G70/ AMD_965/nv_260 supercomputer kit. In the ol'-dayz I did polymer-folding simulations on an < APPLE2+ > ... the moden x4 kit is all very impressive.

So .... when will AMD gag-N-bag da price on its BE_965 ??

 

[medjohnson77]

WEll -- comparing the new i5 & old BE.965 perhaps I shouldn't have said "walks all over..." but something kinder like: GROUND INTO THE DUST ... or "MARINATED, GRILLED and EATEN. hehehe

But really ... my question is one of "timing". As an occasional builder I will NOT jump on the unscrubbed i5 platform ; only kids can tolerate that pain! My fav Ubuntu OS will do just fine with MSI_G70/ AMD_965/nv_260 supercomputer kit. In the ol'-dayz I did polymer-folding simulations on an < APPLE2+ > ... the moden x4 kit is all very impressive.

So .... when will AMD gag-N-bag da price on its BE_965 ??

Who cares about the price on the 965. Atleast AMD doesn't try to charge $580-$1000 dollars for there flagship processor, and release the same processors at lower clocks(2.66ghz) for $300 dollars, knowing that you can just OC it to the performance level of there flagship processor. If I wasn't happy with my rig, I would just buy a 955 B.E. and call it a day, at $185 dollars looks like a very good deal to me.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

I would say "walk all over" wouldn't be accurate. However, the i5 is faster than the 965BE in most benchmarks. It's also only 95 watts. The 965BE does have the unlocked multi, but it doesn't have much headroom because of its stock 140W rating.

I do agree that prices drops are in order. I think $190-200 should be the range for the 965BE.

Until AMD drops their prices NewEgg will probably have to stay higher with less volume so they don't eat a loss.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Who cares about the price on the 965. Atleast AMD doesn't try to charge $580-$1000 dollars for there flagship processor, and release the same processors at lower clocks(2.66ghz) for $300 dollars, knowing that you can just OC it to the performance level of there flagship processor. If I wasn't happy with my rig, I would just buy a 955 B.E. and call it a day, at $185 dollars looks like a very good deal to me.

You do know that back in the day AMD used to charge $1000 for their flagship desktop parts, right?

They don't do it now because they simply can't, their processors aren't good enough.

 

[medjohnson77]

I believe back in the day any company that produced computer parts charged high prices for there products. I understand that all companys have done it, My dad payed around $700 dollars for a Kaypro II computer and thought he got good deal back in 92.

I think the point I was making is that to say any of the Intel line at this point in time grinds, smacks, etc. etc. AMD's Phenom II's line up is just something a fanboy would say. Like I have said in the real world, Phenom II's are a very good processor, and handle everything that can be thrown at them. Just as the I5's and the I7's and the core2quads, and core2D are very good processors, Software, and most games are so far behind the hardware right now, I don't think we will see most hardware can really do until they catch up. If all these processors handle every thing thrown at them very well, who cares if one line or the other gets 10 more frame rates, or a 10-15% better bench mark score. Given the way the Phenom II's perform, I believe AMD is and has been giving us very good offerings at a reasonable price. Can one really look at Intels offerings and there $300-580 dollar pricing for there new main stream processors over others and say the same? I believe the only reason Intel is still charging these kinda price's is because there's people buying them. So keep buying them, and get that extra 15% of bench mark performance so that way Intel will continue to charge $580 bucks for a main stream processor. If AMD did the same right now, I would not be bying there processors.

 

[someguy7]

Whaaa?

I quote from Tom's article...

"The engineering sample we're using runs at 2.66 GHz by default and supports a single bin of Turbo Boost acceleration, locking it in at 2.8 GHz."

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i5-lynnfield,2379-2.html

For a cpu rated at 2.66 ghz and binned by the turbo at 2.8 ghz, yeah, that's called walking all over the amd offering especially since it's priced lower. Hmmm, the AMD is more expensive, less performance, clocked 700 mhz higher, meaning less room for overclocking and I ain't going to get into detail with overclocking... Overall, this has got to be the worst beatdown I've seen in the cpu market yet.

Not only did you people count you chickens before they hatched, you tried to count the eggs before they were layed... Not good at all...

@Someguy

I suppose your a novice and never heard of overclocking.

@psychosaysdie

They just don't get it do they?...

Fist off all the I5 750 clocks up to 3.2Gghz.

The AMD 965 was overpriced even before the new Intel cpus. Yes it is clocked higher but they can still overclock. Yes please dont go into details about overclocking. Considering that you dont even know the specs of the one of the chips we are talking about...

Overall this by far NOT the worst beatdown in the the cpu market yet. When did you start to pay attention the cpu market? Last week maybe?

For all you rabid Intel fanboys here. I am not saying the AMD is a better chip. It always was overpriced. What is not is a piece of sh#T. It does not get walked all over by the i5 750.

The i5 is better and will force to AMD to drop prices. You Intel fanyboys are just as bad as the resident AMD trolls we got around here.

Here is a classic from physco "Here's what i learned from that article. Clock for clock the X4 gets destroyed by the I5. The X4 needs that 700mhz advantage to stay with the 750. Without it it just plain sucks" Again with the clock speed. Great logic there. Just as bad as the AMD trolls. Compare the cpus as is. None of this without that and that it sucks. IT HAS IT. i5 has turbo and it works great. Turn it off and match the clocks of the two cpus is if you really want a clock per clock comparison. Which you don't. You just simply want to wave your Intel pom poms.

 

[medjohnson77]

Fist off all the I5 750 clocks up to 3.2Gghz.

The AMD 965 was overpriced even before the new Intel cpus. Yes it is clocked higher but they can still overclock. Yes please dont go into details about overclocking. Considering that you dont even know the specs of the one of the chips we are talking about...

Overall this by far NOT the worst beatdown in the the cpu market yet. When did you start to pay attention the cpu market? Last week maybe?

For all you rabid Intel fanboys here. I am not saying the AMD is a better chip. It always was overpriced. What is not is a piece of sh#T. It does not get walked all over by the i5 750.

The i5 is better and will force to AMD to drop prices. You Intel fanyboys are just as bad as the resident AMD trolls we got around here.

Here is a classic from physco "Here's what i learned from that article. Clock for clock the X4 gets destroyed by the I5. The X4 needs that 700mhz advantage to stay with the 750. Without it it just plain sucks" Again with the clock speed. Great logic there. Just as bad as the AMD trolls. Compare the cpus as is. None of this without that and that it sucks. IT HAS IT. i5 has turbo and it works great. Turn it off and match the clocks of the two cpus is if you really want a clock per clock comparison. Which you don't. You just simply want to wave your Intel pom poms.

You said, "Intel pom poms" :lol:

 

[threednonsense]

Fist off all the I5 750 clocks up to 3.2Gghz.

The AMD 965 was overpriced even before the new Intel cpus. Yes it is clocked higher but they can still overclock. Yes please dont go into details about overclocking. Considering that you dont even know the specs of the one of the chips we are talking about...

Overall this by far NOT the worst beatdown in the the cpu market yet. When did you start to pay attention the cpu market? Last week maybe?

For all you rabid Intel fanboys here. I am not saying the AMD is a better chip. It always was overpriced. What is not is a piece of sh#T. It does not get walked all over by the i5 750.

The i5 is better and will force to AMD to drop prices. You Intel fanyboys are just as bad as the resident AMD trolls we got around here.

Here is a classic from physco "Here's what i learned from that article. Clock for clock the X4 gets destroyed by the I5. The X4 needs that 700mhz advantage to stay with the 750. Without it it just plain sucks" Again with the clock speed. Great logic there. Just as bad as the AMD trolls. Compare the cpus as is. None of this without that and that it sucks. IT HAS IT. i5 has turbo and it works great. Turn it off and match the clocks of the two cpus is if you really want a clock per clock comparison. Which you don't. You just simply want to wave your Intel pom poms.

For a processor at about 2.8 ghz to beat a 3.4 ghz cpu in almost all benchmarks and priced 50 dollars lower? That's beat downs man. I don't know where you've been but that's horrible. And, I did say "overall".

Perhaps, I don't know the specifications of the chips, and I ain't claiming to be an expert on it, but that's a quote from Tom's website and I linked to it, so unless your telling Tom's to wave their pom pom's, I suggest you take a back seat with the rest of the chumps.

To the rest of your comments, you got your facts twisted man. Read the article...

The only ugly trolls here are the people that are putting in opinions without getting their facts straight.