I mean, the current non-EE products are not at all up to A64's standard, and EE products are not up to AMD's finest either, yet they carry a big, hefty price tag! The FX's are also no good. They're not worth their prices at all.
...now Intel is going to give us 1066Mhz FSB, but with the EE price tag? This is ridiculous. Next thing we'll know they'll be doing it with EM64T! They haven't announced intentions to do so, but that would be revolting!
What Intel should do is try to get a 3.46F(+J) and 3.73F(+J) as soon as possible available to the general public. Sporting 1066Mhz FSB and 2MB L2 cache, as well as EM64T, <b>but NOT at EE prices!</b> Rather, at regular prices! With the current renewed chipsets, I'd consider buying a 3.46F(+J)!!!
They're adding new technologies, but at the EE price tag. Next thing, the latest tech will always carry EE price tag. Pathetic.
Releasing the 3.73Ghz Prescott as EE is rubbish. It's nonsense. Stupidity materialized. Utterly idiotic.
<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>
once again, Intel is using paper launch to compete with AMD's high end chips, much like how they did with the initial P4 3.2EE. Perhaps, Intel introduced 1066mhz fsb extreme edition for a premium, to enhance product image on benchmarks, and priced to sell in limited quantities. If these chips are competitive against AMD offereings, then once again this makes Intel look good, and will spur People to buying lower performance P4s variants.
Hey canny, that's a fine post. Sure your fanboyism is showing, but you are also spewing mostly truth. I especially like the part about high price due to very limited quantities. These chips are the creme de la creme, I would hate to see them sold as less.
Besides, the first chips I bought were just ordinary intel crap, but the pricetag on them was crazy. In 1988 dollars, an FX chip is a lot cheaper than we paid for the 286 chips then.
Explain that to me, people are willing to buy them at the 'inflated' prices. the FX is still the top of the line. Why would you sell a FX at 3500+ prices?
If you think about the cost to make and the % profit per chip sold and what not....think about this.
How much does it cost to make a CD? top end CD...maybe, MAYBE $1,000,000. If they sold 1 million CD's at 15bucks a CD they are screwing us hard and long.
WELCOME TO A FREE MARKET ECONOMY!! (to those of you in Canada, you can just sit in the corner and watch if you behave) If people are willing to spend $700 for a PCU, why should AMD charge less? To make you happy?
All companies take into account the profit margin for each product and related products....and when they can make more money by reducing the prices....they will.
despite using 90nm process, i still see 2mb cache as expensive to make. These new 1066fsb chips will initially be launched as P4 EE tag, but later i'm sure the lower end Prescotts with 1mb will feature 1066mhz fsb at a far far lower costs, after a few months. JUst the Intel way of marketing. Launch two expensive exotic cpus in the beginning, high-end chips to gain exclusivenss status, and then later use the technology on lower end products at a later date. It works.