Pricing for Athlon 64 leaks

Spitfire_x86 · Aug 22, 2003

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

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

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

jmecor · Aug 22, 2003

$650 for the fastest a64, no way!


My computer is sooo fast,
It finished SETI in 10 seconds.

eden · Aug 22, 2003

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">A sexual experience like never before seen</A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.

Spitfire_x86 · Aug 22, 2003

I didn't see it. When I post it, it wasn't in the same page.

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

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

HardWareBoss · Aug 22, 2003

Wow top line A64 more money than Prescott.

HardWareBoss · Aug 22, 2003

Looks like Amd needs the money to compete with Intel.

Mephistopheles · Aug 22, 2003

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

:evil:

Mephistopheles

HardWareBoss · Aug 22, 2003

Scotty will be cheaper.

eden · Aug 22, 2003

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">A sexual experience like never before seen</A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.

pitsi · Aug 22, 2003

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?

Eradz · Aug 22, 2003

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.

pitsi · Aug 22, 2003

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.

Eradz · Aug 22, 2003

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.

Mephistopheles · Aug 22, 2003

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 NOW. 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:

Mephistopheles

pitsi · Aug 22, 2003

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).

eden · Aug 22, 2003

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">A sexual experience like never before seen</A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.

pitsi · Aug 23, 2003

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!

eden · Aug 23, 2003

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">A sexual experience like never before seen</A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.

HardWareBoss · Aug 23, 2003

Last price I saw was $647.

HardWareBoss · Aug 23, 2003

Amd is still having problems going past 2 Ghz. For A64's

eden · Aug 23, 2003

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

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new">A sexual experience like never before seen</A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.

HardWareBoss · Aug 23, 2003

So the first one hits 2 Ghz. When they get bugs fixed they'll go beyound.

eden · Aug 23, 2003

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">A sexual experience like never before seen</A>
Site has now even more sexy members, for your pleasure.

HardWareBoss · Aug 24, 2003

Ya for them that would diffently be a good jump.

Pricing for Athlon 64 leaks

Splendid

Distinguished

Champion

Splendid

Splendid

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Champion

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Champion

Distinguished

Champion

Splendid

Splendid

Champion

Splendid

Champion

Splendid

Share this page