Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Pricing for Athlon 64 leaks

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 22, 2003 12:26:40 AM

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11150" target="_new">Insane prices</A>


----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>

More about : pricing athlon leaks

August 22, 2003 12:36:23 AM

$650 for the fastest a64, no way!

<font color=blue>
My computer is <b>sooo fast</b>,
It finished <b>SETI</b> in <b>10 seconds.</b>
<font color=blue>
August 22, 2003 2:07:26 AM

Dude, it's already been posted, it's on this very same page in fact.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=green><b>A sexual experience like never before seen</font color=green></b></A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.
Related resources
August 22, 2003 2:34:37 AM

Wow top line A64 more money than Prescott.
August 22, 2003 2:35:20 AM

Looks like Amd needs the money to compete with Intel.
August 22, 2003 3:02:24 AM

Wow... over $650? This better be one hell of a processor...

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
August 22, 2003 3:07:09 AM

Scotty will be cheaper.
August 22, 2003 5:25:04 AM

How can you tell?

It's Intel, INTEL. It doesn't need rocket science to be sure they will sell Prescott for 650+$.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=green><b>A sexual experience like never before seen</font color=green></b></A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.
August 22, 2003 8:02:04 AM

What are you talking about? This is the pricing for their faster, dual-channel model which is supposed to be released at 2.2GHz. If this is the case, then this processor should be at least equal to the Pentium 4 3.2c (plus it will have the same advantage of 64bit support). So what's the problem for AMD asking the same money as Intel? Doesn't the 3.2c costs $650 now?
August 22, 2003 8:29:04 AM

If the a64 does out perform the p4 3.2c and get damn close to the scotty then they should be able to price it in the same range as the intel items. But if the scotty beats down the a64 then they will have to lower the price to target the mid-market ppl. But this could also go the other way around, where a64 owns the scotty thus the price for the a64 could be more then the scotty. We will only know once they come out with official benchmarks. The more money you are willing to spend should give you the faster results. Why would you buy a processor for $600 when it wont out perform the 200$ one? Just wait for the benchs to hit.
August 22, 2003 9:14:39 AM

That's what I said! Based on the benchmarks we saw from AMDZone, the 2.2GHz model will be able to have a close fight to Pentium 4 3.2c. Many will say of course that AMDZone is not a site that can be trusted for its benchmark tests but for me, that review was a good indication of A64 FX performance. Maybe not 100% accurate but a good indication. So I don't see why people in here have already started accusing AMD of over-pricing their processors, when their pricing is on par with Intel's. If Scotty is later on released, and it's 10% faster than the 2.2GHz A64 FX and costs the same money then yes, critisise AMD as much as you want. But I don't see a reason for doing so now.
August 22, 2003 10:18:21 AM

I agree with you man. This is what im thinking of, Ok we have AMD which is not yet on the same power level as intel yet(im not no intel or amd fan boy but its true). So they had lower prices to snag the lower end market cause they arent up there with intel speed. So now that they are coming even closer to the intel speed they can raise the price. So they finally got a processor that can keep up with intel but costs more then the normal for them. You get that speed for price issue again. Now amd is in the running with intel so they dont have to lower prices to sell there product. Thats when the consumer comes in and complains about the over price because they are use to the lower prices of the mid level processors. They are now up with intel so they can charge just as much but its still up to the consumer which one they will purchase.
August 22, 2003 5:50:18 PM

There is no problem in asking for $650 for a top-performing processor, just as Intel does it. However, you said it yourself: the problem is that the 3.2c is out <i>NOW</i>. The 3200+ A64 will probably compete well with it; however, you have to compare at the same time frame. Comparing the 3200+ A64 with the 3.2c is comparing old to new, and that is not fair. The only possible reason for pricing an A64 at equal footing with Scotty is that it actually performs that well. So that's why I said "this better be one hell of a processor"...

:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
August 22, 2003 6:36:11 PM

Just a correction. The Athlon 64 3200+ (single-channel) will NOT be priced at $650. That's the cost of Athlon FX-51. I just wanted to clear that up. Anyway I don't think that the A64 3200+ will be able to even compete with the Pentium 4 3.2c. That's the job of FX-51, which is the dual-channel CPU, probably clocked at 2.2GHz, and which will be priced at $650 (as the Inq reported).
August 22, 2003 8:05:51 PM

Oh if only FX-51 was a 2.4GHZ CPU, if only... :frown: *cries*

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=green><b>A sexual experience like never before seen</font color=green></b></A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.
August 22, 2003 10:42:04 PM

If it is not clocked at 2.2GHz, the way I see things it's more likely that it'll be clocked at 2GHz instead of 2.4GHz!
August 23, 2003 2:20:17 AM

AHHH!
Already a bad start to a fresh model number LOL.
Damn AMD screws fast...

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=green><b>A sexual experience like never before seen</font color=green></b></A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.
August 23, 2003 2:28:41 AM

Last price I saw was $647.
August 23, 2003 2:31:19 AM

Amd is still having problems going past 2 Ghz. For A64's
August 23, 2003 2:34:49 AM

The news about them giving up any version below 2GHZ says otherwise.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=green><b>A sexual experience like never before seen</font color=green></b></A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.
August 23, 2003 2:39:51 AM

So the first one hits 2 Ghz. When they get bugs fixed they'll go beyound.
August 23, 2003 5:24:16 AM

I meant if the news was true, the minimum AMD can go is 2GHZ. And considering at 2GHZ, 66MHZ jumps are useless, they will go by 133-200MHZ grades likely. That should be good.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=green><b>A sexual experience like never before seen</font color=green></b></A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.
August 24, 2003 3:23:49 AM

Ya for them that would diffently be a good jump.
!