-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Will you stay AMD if multi/fsbs stay locked?
- Thread starter Ruiner
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2003
i just started building last year cause a friemd of mine always had his laptop apart in our workspace, while we were in kandahar...he started talking about how great intel was so when he finally convinced me that i would be able to build a pc with the little skills that i have, i bought intel (a P4 1.7 willy)...i think it was $120-130...then i found the oc forums and looked into the amd section just for s4its and giggles...what did i see? the golden 1700 threads....the next week i was out looking for a 1700...the point is, like everyone else has already stated,...bang for the buck...my P4 was 2x the price of that golden 1700 at the time...i could barely get the P4 to 2200MHz and the 1700 (i eventually bought 3 and am in the process of getting another) did 2472MHz...if, next summer, i glance over to the intel forum and see a "golden" chip, that's where i'll go...and if amd's still the better deal, then it'll stay in the case...
Most people here seem to know more than me about this subject, so i was looking for some education. my question is, WHY is amd locking the multi/fsb? i have no doubt each of their actions is aimed towards money, so how is it that they make more money by locking their chips? this is how i see the market taking the new locked AMDs:
97% of market: locked bus? whot bus? how will people get in the bus if it is locked? Duh!
3% of market: I HATE YOUR GUTS AMD for worsening your product!
so how is it that they win with locked chips? or is it a production issue, like its easier or cheaper to build locked chips?
emilio
97% of market: locked bus? whot bus? how will people get in the bus if it is locked? Duh!
3% of market: I HATE YOUR GUTS AMD for worsening your product!
so how is it that they win with locked chips? or is it a production issue, like its easier or cheaper to build locked chips?
emilio
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2003
- Location
- Portland, OR
I am sure that the thought process runs something along the lines of
"If we keep them unlocked we sell a lot of the cheapest chips we make and people overclock them to get the performance of our highest level chips so that we cannot sell nearly as many of our higher level chips. Also, during the overclocking process there are alot of unscrupulous characters that destroy their chips and return them as defective, therefore another loss of revenue we have to eat by replacing chips under warranty. If we lock the chips then more of those people that want the higher performance will have to buy the higher performance chips so we are finally able to move them and get a higher profit margin on what we are selling, therby saving the company."
I am sure it isn't QUITE that simple, but I have no doubt that that sort of thing plays a big role in it. What AMD doesn't seem to notice is that probably their biggest draw to most folks that buy their stuff IS the ability to overclock a cheaper chip to get higher performance than what you paid for. Take a look at the signatures of most of the people on this board and you will see very very few AMD 2800+ and up processors being listed in them. The majority of what you will see are the like 1700+ - 2500+ being overclocked to the speeds or higher than the speeds of the 2600+ and up processors. That isn't really a way that the company could expect to become really profitable anytime soon that I could see.
It is kinda like lets say that Ford manufactures the full line of vehicles that they do now, from the Focus up through the Mustang at the top of the line. Now lets say that the vast majority of purchasers from Ford purchase the Focus or maybe a model just a step or two above the Focus because they know that there are some tweaks you can make to them to get all the performance that the top of the line Mustang offers. People are then paying a fraction of the cost for all of the performance offered by the top of the line, so top of the line no longer sells and the company makes less money overall. Now lets also just say, maybe Ford itself doesn't care about this and maybe they even like it, who knows, but that isn't the only thing that Ford has to worry about. Ford, just like AMD, is responsible to its stockholders and has a duty to make money for the stockholders, not just do whatever they would like to do (unless that corresponds with the goals heh). Publicly traded companies are only beholden to the end user insomuch as it helps them to turn a profit to please the stockholders. Anything that doesn't help to make the company profitable, and therefore more attractive to the stockholders, really isn't nearly as important as those things that do.
"If we keep them unlocked we sell a lot of the cheapest chips we make and people overclock them to get the performance of our highest level chips so that we cannot sell nearly as many of our higher level chips. Also, during the overclocking process there are alot of unscrupulous characters that destroy their chips and return them as defective, therefore another loss of revenue we have to eat by replacing chips under warranty. If we lock the chips then more of those people that want the higher performance will have to buy the higher performance chips so we are finally able to move them and get a higher profit margin on what we are selling, therby saving the company."
I am sure it isn't QUITE that simple, but I have no doubt that that sort of thing plays a big role in it. What AMD doesn't seem to notice is that probably their biggest draw to most folks that buy their stuff IS the ability to overclock a cheaper chip to get higher performance than what you paid for. Take a look at the signatures of most of the people on this board and you will see very very few AMD 2800+ and up processors being listed in them. The majority of what you will see are the like 1700+ - 2500+ being overclocked to the speeds or higher than the speeds of the 2600+ and up processors. That isn't really a way that the company could expect to become really profitable anytime soon that I could see.
It is kinda like lets say that Ford manufactures the full line of vehicles that they do now, from the Focus up through the Mustang at the top of the line. Now lets say that the vast majority of purchasers from Ford purchase the Focus or maybe a model just a step or two above the Focus because they know that there are some tweaks you can make to them to get all the performance that the top of the line Mustang offers. People are then paying a fraction of the cost for all of the performance offered by the top of the line, so top of the line no longer sells and the company makes less money overall. Now lets also just say, maybe Ford itself doesn't care about this and maybe they even like it, who knows, but that isn't the only thing that Ford has to worry about. Ford, just like AMD, is responsible to its stockholders and has a duty to make money for the stockholders, not just do whatever they would like to do (unless that corresponds with the goals heh). Publicly traded companies are only beholden to the end user insomuch as it helps them to turn a profit to please the stockholders. Anything that doesn't help to make the company profitable, and therefore more attractive to the stockholders, really isn't nearly as important as those things that do.
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2002
- Location
- Huffing Water Wetter
Regardless of AMD's motivation for locking the multiplier, I don't think it's going to have the effect they are looking for. We are not going to buy the more expensive chip just to get unlocked multipliers.
We are a very tiny portion of AMD's sales, but I belive we have a fair amount of influence. I don't know about the rest of you but I'm the computer geek for my friends, family, and co-workers. in the past two years I've built a fair number of rigs for people as well as advised people on computer purchases (the Best Buy salesmen literaly run from me). A large portion of those had never considered AMD untill they talk to me.
Am I saying I won't recomend AMD to friends and family that don't overclock. I will absolutely recomend AMD, But if I got my panties in a bind I wouldn't.
What I'm trying to say is we have a larger sphere of influence than we are given credit for.
We are a very tiny portion of AMD's sales, but I belive we have a fair amount of influence. I don't know about the rest of you but I'm the computer geek for my friends, family, and co-workers. in the past two years I've built a fair number of rigs for people as well as advised people on computer purchases (the Best Buy salesmen literaly run from me). A large portion of those had never considered AMD untill they talk to me.
Am I saying I won't recomend AMD to friends and family that don't overclock. I will absolutely recomend AMD, But if I got my panties in a bind I wouldn't.
What I'm trying to say is we have a larger sphere of influence than we are given credit for.
"If we keep them unlocked we sell a lot of the cheapest chips we make and people overclock them to get the performance of our highest level chips so that we cannot sell nearly as many of our higher level chips. Also, during the overclocking process there are alot of unscrupulous characters that destroy their chips and return them as defective, therefore another loss of revenue we have to eat by replacing chips under warranty. If we lock the chips then more of those people that want the higher performance will have to buy the higher performance chips so we are finally able to move them and get a higher profit margin on what we are selling, therby saving the company."
but your thought line does not include the fact that a VERY TINY portion of the market overclocks, say 3% of AMD market, now say that half of them will move to the higher chips, the other half can't afford it. And then, less than a quarter of that half burns a chip and returns it. it ends up being a very little increase in sales/decrease in RMA, not worth risking the 3% oc community.
Plus, i have a company of my own and do my own marketing. I know one of the facts of marketing 101 is: Bad publicity grows three times faster than good publicity. If AMD does things right, they get some nice feedback and more buyers. If they do things wrong, they get a cult-sect of haters, an overwhelmed email server from all the flames, and the general feeling that 'AMD did something wrong' in the less informed crowds. Sounds too far off? take the million examples out there: if Enron had gotten a 25% profit for their stockholders, would you have heard of it? would i, in argentina? yet when they messed up we ALL heard of it. Now, i doubt folks at AMD don't know this, and are willing to create bad publicity for a minor gain. there's gotta be something more here.
emilio
but your thought line does not include the fact that a VERY TINY portion of the market overclocks, say 3% of AMD market, now say that half of them will move to the higher chips, the other half can't afford it. And then, less than a quarter of that half burns a chip and returns it. it ends up being a very little increase in sales/decrease in RMA, not worth risking the 3% oc community.
Plus, i have a company of my own and do my own marketing. I know one of the facts of marketing 101 is: Bad publicity grows three times faster than good publicity. If AMD does things right, they get some nice feedback and more buyers. If they do things wrong, they get a cult-sect of haters, an overwhelmed email server from all the flames, and the general feeling that 'AMD did something wrong' in the less informed crowds. Sounds too far off? take the million examples out there: if Enron had gotten a 25% profit for their stockholders, would you have heard of it? would i, in argentina? yet when they messed up we ALL heard of it. Now, i doubt folks at AMD don't know this, and are willing to create bad publicity for a minor gain. there's gotta be something more here.
emilio
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2003
- Location
- California
im AMD Loyal and all, but only because of price/performance ratio. i like amd because they provide cheap computer processors. i may jump the boarder soemtime in the near future just to test the water out. my next computer, im considering Intel.
ill probably go back to amd when prices drop on their new 64 chips.
ill probably go back to amd when prices drop on their new 64 chips.
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2003
- Location
- Portland, OR
Well Tazon, that paragraph I posted is not MY thoughts, just something I can easily imagine some weasel in upper management thinking and building a plan of action on. As to the amount of people buying AMD for overclocking or not, I do not know how accurate your figures are but would be interested in seeing some stats showing that. I can only base my figures on what I have personally seen, and in my experience, about 75% of the people I know and have met that buy AMD specifically buy them because of lower cost and the chances of lower cost with overclocking potential. The folks I know and have met that are not interested in overclocking at all tend to go for an Intel system. I cannot say I know exactly why that is, but it is the way it plays out. Any day of the week that I could go down to the Fry's electronics and see people looking at AMD processors with their friends they are talking about steppings and which ones have best overclock chances and etc etc. Again, my experience only, but like 75% of them are like that.
I have nothing against AMD and I would use AMD again myself, locked or not. But I am not going to have some brand loyalty just because of the brand name. As I said before, neither AMD or Intel care about me in any way other than the money I give them, therefore I care nothing about them except the performance that they give me for that money. If I had not upgraded at the specific time that I did last and got in on a sweet stepping of 2.4b I probably would have been in on another AMD system, but over 1GHz overclock at stock voltage was just too nice to pass up. My next upgrade will be to whatever works best, whoever it may be. Who knows, maybe that means VIA processor next! hehe
I have nothing against AMD and I would use AMD again myself, locked or not. But I am not going to have some brand loyalty just because of the brand name. As I said before, neither AMD or Intel care about me in any way other than the money I give them, therefore I care nothing about them except the performance that they give me for that money. If I had not upgraded at the specific time that I did last and got in on a sweet stepping of 2.4b I probably would have been in on another AMD system, but over 1GHz overclock at stock voltage was just too nice to pass up. My next upgrade will be to whatever works best, whoever it may be. Who knows, maybe that means VIA processor next! hehe
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2003
- Location
- California
I'll go where there's a cheap CPU for my builds. I understand that this is a business and AMD needs to make money in order to stay competitive with Intel. I have used processors from both camps and like them both, but since I build PCs for friends and family and for their various reasons I suggest AMD for some and Intel for others.
But as other posters have mentioned too, I'm not going to stop using AMD just because they start locking CPUs, I'll buy depending on what I need or want.
But as other posters have mentioned too, I'm not going to stop using AMD just because they start locking CPUs, I'll buy depending on what I need or want.
ajrettke said:
Why doesn't AMD put in a software multiplier? That way if you switch MBs it returns to its true speed. Also if I was smart I would put in a BIOS that gives back a false speed on POST, and hack the system properties box to a differnt speed. That way Joe will never know unless he pulls out WCPUID.
No sorry been with AMD since it first Athlon and have had a total of twelve cpu for my own rigs let alone rigs i built for folk.Some suggest it was a price to performance thing why they like AMD with me it because i like to play around with thing make me feel like im incharge.If i carnt play around im off back to intel.Sorry AMD but your commiting suicide who the hell do you think got you a good reputation anyway?Well ill tell ya us the enthusiasts.
Ferret
Ferret
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2002
- Location
- Just East of the mall
I'll stay with whomever provides the best price/performance ratio. That being said, I don't like huge monopolies and tend to give a bit more of a nod (purchase-wise) to the underdog. THAT being said, it also gives me some comfort to go with a more common platform.
As long as AMD stays at their currently price/performance level, I'll probably continue to get their chips.
As long as AMD stays at their currently price/performance level, I'll probably continue to get their chips.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2001
Personally I never had any brand loyalty, if AMD doesn't give me bang for buck then i don't buy it.
bergtkeller
Disabled
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
- Location
- omaha
I predict people will adopt the nforce 2 method.. IT UNLOCKS MULTI"S BY ITSELF !!!
Not much longer and we wont have to fill pits and buy defogger kits for our pc's !! LOL
Anyways Just Toking One Away Waiting for ASUS To Give Me My Mobo Back !! F^$%$^'S Man they Are Good Boards But Warranty Could Be Better !! LOL !!!
Not much longer and we wont have to fill pits and buy defogger kits for our pc's !! LOL
Anyways Just Toking One Away Waiting for ASUS To Give Me My Mobo Back !! F^$%$^'S Man they Are Good Boards But Warranty Could Be Better !! LOL !!!
ColtIce
Disabled
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2002
- Location
- 9 months 43202 summer months 98951
i bought an amd KNOWING that the multi was locked.I just could not afford to buy an intel.thats not to say i wouldn't buy intel,I'll see where prices are next year when i upgrade again.
bergtkeller
Disabled
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
- Location
- omaha
AMD is definelty qaulity !! They have yet to show anything phenominal but so has intel .. I think cpu's are going to get real interesting late 2005. 64 bit will have a foot in the door and windows will have new os. Man only thing that need to happen now is exceptional memory and faster HD transfers.. LOL
Cant wait till we are using RAM as Hard Drives !! SUPER FAST !!
Cant wait till we are using RAM as Hard Drives !! SUPER FAST !!
I will go in the direction that fulfills the needs of my dollar. Right now I am switching back to Intel. A Barton 2500 was my last AMD chip. Considering that only a small percentage O/C, where is AMD losing money.
I can upgrade my auto engine with aftermarket goodies, I can improve my video and audio, so why would I want a run-of the -mill computer.
It aslo appears that some of the motherboard suppliers are backsliding too. Why can't they build a board that supplies the power needed to do the job and then some. They advertise that they build a board to O/C with, but then we are stuck with a substandard board, this is not where I want to spend my $$$$.
Why do we have to mod our boards?
O/Cer's buy lots of chips and boards. enough said.
Al
I can upgrade my auto engine with aftermarket goodies, I can improve my video and audio, so why would I want a run-of the -mill computer.
It aslo appears that some of the motherboard suppliers are backsliding too. Why can't they build a board that supplies the power needed to do the job and then some. They advertise that they build a board to O/C with, but then we are stuck with a substandard board, this is not where I want to spend my $$$$.
Why do we have to mod our boards?
O/Cer's buy lots of chips and boards. enough said.
Al
