AMD goes back to old Formula

[Mark Larson]

Re: Re: Re: AMD goes back to old Formula

I own a Hyundai Elantra GLS 2001. It's a Budget car for a great price. That's why I have it. I love the car. For the Price I paid NOTHING is better. But if it cost the SAME as a Nissan Sentra SE-R I would get the Sentra SE-R. Do you get my point? AMD is a budget CPU, and that's ok. That doesn't mean that it doesn't have amazing performance for the price and in certain cases can be the competition...

Its common knowledge that whoever brings up cars in a computers-related discussion is losing. Anyway, your comparison doesn't really apply, because cars have a lot of things that are different from CPUs (surprise surprise)
Cars aren't measured by one or two metrics (top speed or 0-60), while processors are.

 

[Overclocker456]

Re: Re: Re: Re: AMD goes back to old Formula

Its common knowledge that whoever brings up cars in a computers-related discussion is losing. Anyway, your comparison doesn't really apply, because cars have a lot of things that are different from CPUs (surprise surprise)
Cars aren't measured by one or two metrics (top speed or 0-60), while processors are.

actually I don't think this is a win or lose situation. I have nothing to win or lose. I was just making a point. take it as you wish. This was about informing people, that's it.

 

[Demont]

I don't understand your assertion that AMD cpu's are inherently inferior to Intels. Please explain.

If two processors perform the same, then they perform the same, right?

 

[Overclocker456]

I don't understand your assertion that AMD cpu's are inherently inferior to Intels. Please explain.

If two processors perform the same, then they perform the same, right?

Yes.. If they perform the same, then they perform the same. Unfortunalty with AMD vs. Intel stuff it's very complex. This thread isn't about that. Both are great processors in their own ways.

 

[Mark Larson]

Yes.. If they perform the same, then they perform the same. Unfortunalty with AMD vs. Intel stuff it's very complex. This thread isn't about that. Both are great processors in their own ways.

Please elaborate. I'm sure all we people who've been misled into buying processors solely on the basis of performance would love to hear the lore of the Pentium and how there are more factors than performance.

 

[Demont]

Please elaborate. I'm sure all we people who've been misled into buying processors solely on the basis of performance would love to hear the lore of the Pentium and how there are more factors than performance.

haha... well... price, heat, reliability... so on. I wouldn't say intel really has the lead in those categories though. amd has done a lot of catching up in the heat category. intel has a lot of catching up to do in price.

 

[DarkJediSleikas]

Please elaborate. I'm sure all we people who've been misled into buying processors solely on the basis of performance would love to hear the lore of the Pentium and how there are more factors than performance.

I'd hate to see this thread turn into another Intel vs. AMD thread. However, I can probably safely say that some of the other factors include reliability/durability (on 2 fronts: don't cause computer to lock up, and don't die premature deaths), power consumption, heat output, price (of course), overclockability, compatibility (E.g. not buying a P4 because one has an Athlon mobo), or motherboard/chipset quality (among ones available on the current/future market).

When AMD lowered its prices, it admitted that it could not make decent money by selling its equivalent processors for the same price that Intel does. It is a major defeat for AMD, and it may mean the end of them. I would hate to see them go. Since the Athlon processor came out, AMD has kept Intel from slouching and charging ridiculous prices (anyone remember when PIII's sold for over $1000?).

Why can't AMD sell their equivalent processors for the same price that Intel does? Is it because their processors are inferior? No. The problem is that, as many of you were saying, the average "Joe" doesn't see AMD as a brand name. Almost every "Joe" has heard of the Intel Pentium Processor, and almost none have heard of the AMD Athlon processor. Given a choice between a household name and a no-name at the same price, almost every "Joe" will pick the brand name.

 

[7keys]

AMD must learn how to advertise affectively or perish.

 

[penetrecion]

How long have people been saying that if AMD doesn't do something they will go out of business?

I don't see it folks...

I have, personally, bought 4 AMD CPUs in less than a year... K6-2 550, XP 1700+ Tb A, XP 1700+ Tb B, and an XP 2000+ Pally... all since around October last year... all new. (Plus an XP 1800+ on ebay but AMD doesn't see that $$$)

How many folks, ON THIS WEBSITE ALONE, have purchased new AMD chips recently (due to the massive price slashing)? In business it is better to sell at reduction than to not sell at all. AMD is reducing the prices to reduce their losses.

Losses are not that big of a deal in big business, especially now-a-days... even Sony is being hit HARD, but they will do some write-offs, make some changes and continue on. This is business.

I will be very surprised if AMD EVER goes out of business.

Myself, I feel that some of you guys are overeacting to overclocker456's post. I did not take his statements in a derogatory manner AT ALL.

Everyone knows INTEL because of those rediculously stupid commercials... I change the channel when they come on... and most people are being brainwashed by what they see on tv and simply regurgitate what they see and hear. Just like that stupid MSN butterfly guy... (SOMEBODY GET ME A SHOTGUN!)

 

[dropadrop]

I'm with onx on this one. Amd needs to get recognised, and lately it has done just that more and more. They will still make some money from the processor, and actually on the short term their profit in selling 1000 processors with 10$ profit each, or selling 2000 with 5$ profit will cause them the same loss. On the long term it can easyly mean that the person will choose amd the next time he get's a processor. Even if it costs as much as an intel.

I guess the biggest reason they should be charging more, is that they need the money now, not in two years time. I hope they get their new cpu's on the market fast.

 

[arnoldma]

That's exactly right. AMD would be much better off if they could reorganize their marketing department. How many times a night do you see a commercial with the Intel logo? The AMD logo? Chances are you've rarely if ever seen and AMD commercial. That is their problem. Yes they make a great processor and yes they sell them cheaper. What good is that, however, if nobody knows who they are. I remember when I bought my first computer, it was a Gateway(but don't hold that against me) and the top AMD they had was a 950mhz. A month or so after having the computer I had some issue with it and went looking on the site for it to find the answer. To my surprise, there wasn't an AMD to be found anywhere on the site. I just checked the desktop part of the site and still, all you see are p4's and celerons. AMD really needs to get back in good with these large computer sellers. If they can do that, and start showing the occasional commercial on tv, they'll be much better off in the long run.

ditto

 

[Audioaficionado]

AMD must learn how to advertise affectively or perish.

I see a total of 30 minutes of AMD advertizing every day.

Too bad it's an informmercial that airs at 0200

 

[Overclocker456]

You know I do remember a old TV commercial for AMD... It had to do with 3Dnow.. It was actually quite good.

 

[Demont]

the closest I've seen to AMD advertising is those bits on the shopping channel (i think) where the guy babbles about some overpriced super-accesoriezed computer package... quite often its an AMD chip in them.

 

[Overclocker456]

Just Curious, and please answer honestly.

If you had the choice of Pentium4 3.GHz C or a AMD 3000XP at the SAME PRICE. Lets says both cost $450. which would YOU pick?

 

[Overclocker456]

the closest I've seen to AMD advertising is those bits on the shopping channel (i think) where the guy babbles about some overpriced super-accesoriezed computer package... quite often its an AMD chip in them.

yeah I know what you're talking about.. The sad thing is that they are charging CRAZY money for a PC that has a $95 CPU.

 

[Audioaficionado]

the closest I've seen to AMD advertising is those bits on the shopping channel (i think) where the guy babbles about some overpriced super-accesoriezed computer package... quite often its an AMD chip in them.

That's the one.

Originally posted by Overclocker456 yeah I know what you're talking about.. The sad thing is that they are charging CRAZY money for a PC that has a $95 CPU.[/B]

But don't forget that includes M$ XP Media Center

 

[Demont]

Just Curious, and please answer honestly.

If you had the choice of Pentium4 3.GHz C or a AMD 3000XP at the SAME PRICE. Lets says both cost $450. which would YOU pick?

I would take the 3000xp, no question about it. Then I wouldn't have to spend upwards of 200 dollars on a new Intel board and heatsink. Probably new ram too, because you can only overclock with FSB on Intel's.

What you didn't explain earlier, but I think I'm beginning to understand now... is that you are comparing MHZ to PR. I don't find some of the PR ratings to be accurate, and I assume you don't either. I'm also guessing the answer you wanted to the question I just quoted was that I would take the 3.0 C.... well, no, I wouldn't. But I will agree that the 3.0 C is probably a better processor than the 3000+, all things being equal(including price!). However, who cares? I can figure out how AMD and Intel chips compare at a given clock rate by reading lots of benchmarks on lots of websites. I can also include all the factors that matter to me as well, price, overclockability.... so on. If you want to hear that Intel probably has the best high end platform... I might agree with you... but again, who cares... you dont have one, I don't have one. The point is, if you take and AMD chip and an Intel chip at the same average performance level in a variety of benchmarks.... the AMD chip is going to be cheaper, and it will also have a lower total cost of ownership. as well as be able to overclock roughly the same percentage-wise... if not better.

 

[Mark Larson]

I'd hate to see this thread turn into another Intel vs. AMD thread. However, I can probably safely say that some of the other factors include reliability/durability (on 2 fronts: don't cause computer to lock up, and don't die premature deaths), power consumption, heat output, price (of course), overclockability, compatibility (E.g. not buying a P4 because one has an Athlon mobo), or motherboard/chipset quality (among ones available on the current/future market).

The starting poster obviously wanted to get a rise out of the AMD supporters, hence his posting in this section saying, essentially, "Intel r0x0rsz and j00 AMDroids r 2 p00r"

Regarding reliability and durability, i don't think AMD has any problems. Maybe if the builder is incompetent (many of them are, unfortunately). Frankly, you'd have to be pretty stupid [not a flame to you] to mess up an installation of an AthlonXP any more than a P4 chip. I say P4 because prior to the P4, Intel's chips were much more prone to cracking than Athlons. However, more cheap and new people bought Athlons and gave them a bad name. A P3 FCPGA was just as easy to crack as an Athlon, if not more so because they didn't have those four pads.
As regards heat and power, AMD has been beating Intel for a while now. The only time Intel was in the lead was with the 1.6-2.2Ghz Northwoods. Before and after that, Athlons and AthlonXPs have been just as cool, if not cooler. The 1400 Tbird was hot, sure, but it was the fastest processor available too. Intel can't even claim that with the 3Ghz.

Intel motherboards are consistently more expensive than Socket A boards for the same features. Atleast a portion of that is the Intel tax.

 

[Anaxagoras1986]

Mark, I know they are cheaper in relation to other 64Bit chips and I know that the Opteron was designed to go against the Xeon and other server chips. I just hope the A64 is much cheaper, which I am sure it will be after it matures for a short while.