XP2200+ for only $153

And the price to performance ball is back in AMD's court! Check Pricewatch!

Then again, maybe not so for us overclockers, the 1.6A is only $129 and the max overclocks for both processors should put them both at the same performance levels...

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>
10 answers Last reply
More about xp2200
  1. How the hell is it so low!
    Is AMD releasing two new speeds at once?

    If that is the case, then maybe we got ourselves a budget 1.6A beater, without competing its OCability!
    Remember that the price for an Intel P4 system requires expensive RDRAM for optimum performance, and the motherboard costs are often even more, so maybe, just maybe AMD has something finally back in the court!

    Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?
  2. Yeah, wow. But do remember AMD's gotta push down prices, or they'll not sell any AXPs.

    BTW, was the forums down today? I couldn't access them til now!![angry]

    <i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
  3. I think AMD is trying to knock the wind out of Intel's sails with Intel's price cuts not schedueled for a couple weeks.

    <font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>
  4. Yeah me too, damn forum problems!
    FREEDIIIIII!!! (Fred Flinstone voice)

    Push prices down? You gotta kid me man, I mean I am all for price cuts, but if AMD does anymore, I'll start feeling pity! 153$ is so freakin' low, not to mention most sell them below the MSRP, so that's even lower! Get an OEM one and it's even more! If they can safely OC (the new steppings) to 1.9GHZ or maybe 2GHZ, they are definitly 1.6A competitive.

    Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?
  5. I checked out the AMD website and it seems like MSRP is actually $230 for the XP2200+ :eek: .

    <i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
  6. I was wondering if your getting both prices off pricewatch. If you are then, notice that they just say P4 1.6 for $129. Clicking the link you would find out its a Willy that is $129(the description says 256k cache). The lowest priced northwood 1.6 is listed at $174.
  7. I think you got your 4 and 7 backwards, I'm now seeing them for $146 + 0.95 shipping, $147. The place advertizing the 512k for $129 either changed their add, removed it, or deleted it after I posted last. Heck, even the 2.0A is going for $167, which is less than $174. Use the keyword 512 instead of the A, my search is "Pentium 4 2.0GHz 512"

    <font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>
  8. Hrm... in the past, such deep price cuts usually were a prelude to a new product... but there doesn't seem to be anything on the AMD radar until September. Now, with the stock market tumbling and taking tech stocks with it, I can't understand AMD's reasoning behind lowering the ASP of their processors. That will really piss the stockholders off... <i>unless</i> they are phasing out the older chips (the 1500 and 1600, namely) and the Palomino's in general, and flooding the market with T-breds (possibly downbinned?) of the 1700s on up. That would make sense, since theoretically the T-breds are cheaper to make, so a cut in price wouldn't cut the margins. Also, AMD may have been saving up all the T-breds that were too slow to make it to the 2200+ range, but too fast to be downbinned to the mobile market, so they have an over-abundance of orphan T-breds lying around, needing a home in a warm 462 socket somewhere. If you go to newegg.com, you'll see that they are having a "Blow Out Special" with "Limited Quanities" on the 2000+ OEMs, possibly in an attempt to clear out the Palominos?

    Really, though, if I was an investor in AMD right now, I would be looking for answers as to why they aren't making a run at profitability. Yes, the flash market is in the $h!itter, but so is everything else (including my place of employment, yet we still have a 20% profit margin), so why are they content to sit in the red, and why, if the Hammer is ramping so well as AMD indicated at various times, have they not accelerated the launching of it? Maybe, if it's so damn good, they should release some product to the reviewers to give actual hard data, and actually have basis for the foaming-at-the-mouth mentality that we power-users have for new things. Sure, it would be in limited, expensive quanities, but the ASP of them could be astronomical for the first few months until production ramps up to full capacity. Plenty of people out there would clamor to have one if the performance proved good. Sell them for $350+ a piece (still cheaper than Intel's flagship at the moment), and even if you only sold 10,000 before production was ramped, thats an extra $3.5 million in sales that would probably only have been half of that if those 10,000 units were 2200s, 2400s, or 2600s. Also, remember that OEMs buy in large quanities, and if IBM, Sun, or HPaq decided to buy 20,000 or so to put into Christmastime machines, that's even more in the pot. AMD said at some point that they would be able to produce 100,000 Hammers by year's end. If they sold all 100,000 @ $350 (a likely thing, even if few are to the actual public), that's 35 million. How much was AMD in the red last quarter? Even if those 100,000 sold would be 100,000 less t-breds sold, they could still net twice the amount.

    Really, I'm not sure what is holding AMD back right now. Somewhere in the pipeline, there is a hold up. Either marketing isn't ready (doubtful, since they usually promote products that don't exist yet), senior management doesn't want to rock the boat right now, and willing to sit on their hands (hard to believe that Sanders would sit idle for anything...), or engineering is having issues either with the CH and Opteron (Opteron problems were revealed at Comdex... or something). The last seems the most likely of the three, even though AMD has consistantly said that the Hammer is on schedule (though what that schedule ever was, we will never know).

    The lastest rumor I heard was of a pre-Christmas (think middle of December) launch of the CH, so that there was just enough time for last-minute shoppers to pick up a brand-spankin' new CH computer for the brats at home (bundled with a "state-of-the-art" GeForce2MX, 256MB of PC1600, and a high-speed, high-capacity 5400RPM 40GB HDD, most likely). That way, it would prevent AMD from having a shortage of parts from "stronger-than-forcasted" sales, as after Christmas, no one wants to spend any cash. Gives AMD plenty of time to quietly ramp production, iron out the kinks, and get ready for a spring refresh.

    Truely, I apologize for the extended rant. The momentum carried me. I just want something innovative from the CPU makers, other than a faster clockspeed (P4s seems to all be 3GHz+ chips, but they are only up 2.53GHz... imagine if AMD wasn't around at all?) The Hammer may not live up to the hype (most likely), but at least it's something "different." And, it's forcing Intel to rethink its introduction of Prescott, accelerating the release date, possibly, and making them add more improvements in an attempt to outdo anything AMD can do (all those who think that AMD and Intel know prefectly well how the other's products perform, even the ones months from launch, raise their hand). Things aren't helped by the uncertainty in the markets, though with interest rates still at rock-bottom levels, you'd think someone out there would have the balls to grab a few loans and really try to invigorate their R&D and capex budgets.

  9. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
  10. There's always a critic. :tongue:

Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Performance Font