We have a few questions for AMDers to get an idea of what they’re likely to do in the near future.
First, we give you a scenario with a number of likely assumptions about products, pricing, performance and overclockability. Then, on page two, we ask you a few questions (either two or at most four questions).
Please send your response to the special email address listed on page 2 and to that address only.
Thank you for your participation!
Assume the following:
It is November. Socket 939 launched in June, with the lowest price for a socket 939 chip (2.2GHz, 3500+) being around $400. In September, AMD slips in a 3300+, and between that and price cuts around that time, the entry level price for a socket 939 chip becomes about $210.
At the same time, AMD gets desktop 90nm Hammers out at the 2.4/2.6 GHz level. They start off at prices around $400/$600.
Another round of price cuts at the end of October gives you the following price lineup for Athlon 64s:
Around this time, word gets out that while AMD will eventually come out with 90nm versions of the 3500+ and 3300+, there’s no
way in hell they’re going to sell a socket 939 chip for less than $150, ever.
Assume that good socket 939 motherboards will cost about $120-130; also assume that memory prices drop down to the level they were a couple months ago. Assume you can get these in either PCIExpress or AGP versions. Forget DDR2 memory until well into the second half of 2005. Assume dual-core Hammer will come out around then, too, but they’ll cost an arm and an leg.
Also assume that Windows x86-64 comes out by November, but that only a fairly small number of games, professional graphics/media apps, and server apps use it, and this doesn’t change much in the months after introduction.
Finally, assume these chips can overclock, with high-end air, pretty regularly to 3GHz, and that Intel has no equivalent to match that.
At the same time, AMD introduces “Paris.” This is a socket 754 chip, 130nm, 256K cache, no x86-64. Clock for clock, it performs about 10%-15% worse in 32-bit than the socket 939s, say 25% worse than a socket 939 using x86-64 apps. It performs about 5% worse than current socket Athlon 64s (which stay above $150 in price). It does do 15% clock-for-clock better than an Athlon XP Barton.
90nm versions of these chips will not come out until the end of 2005.
AMD’s pricing on these is as follows: