AMD's Silver Lining It's Not All That Bad

[AngelfireUk83]

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/01/18/amd-gloom-silver-lining

They only lost $1.77 Billion in the last quarter and Wall Street didn't expect that but ATi is draggin the company down.

 

[Kuroimaho]

They claimed to break even in Q4 and failed again.
By the time they get B3 out the door Q6600 will be 220$ and Q6700 takes it's place in Intel's product line so AMD prices need to be sub 200$, their future doesn't look bright either.

 

[AlabamaCajun]

I doubt you will see Q666's below 250 except for special sales, only the Q67 may drop. The volume of sales is way too high to drop prices. It's a big advantage for the top dog when everyone jumps in their favor and the net trashes the competition. Diversity is lost and the world dips into the doldrums of slow growth.

Who cares about intel here, even with the fastest chips, IMO they still suck!

ATI is actually doing OK, it's the lack of market that created a loss in paper revenue. Slow Phenom sales, channel processors (Athlon LExxxx's and BExxxx's) along with stong sales in Video that kept losses down. I only expect AMD has about 2 quarters of life left in it at current levels. The hope is that B3s work and Opteron sales pick up. With a recovery in Opterons, AMD would be scraping it's axels on the ground but have a chance to pull up with more production.

 

[hUMANbEATbOX]

I doubt you will see Q666's below 250 except for special sales, only the Q67 may drop. The volume of sales is way too high to drop prices. It's a big advantage for the top dog when everyone jumps in their favor and the net trashes the competition. Diversity is lost and the world dips into the doldrums of slow growth.

http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/Intel_Desktop_CPUs_Price_Cut_Schedule/5510.html

q6600 ~$224, q6700 ~$266 (note those are volume prices).

 

[AlabamaCajun]

http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/Intel_Desktop_CPUs_Price_Cut_Schedule/5510.html

q6600 ~$224, q6700 ~$266 (note those are volume prices).

Do you think we will see sub 250 prices beyond special sales?
Reading that I might expect 245 on average.

AMD has a price slot of 180-250 for similar speed Quads and 60-200 for duals. 2.6G Phenoms that do 3.0G easy will be a hot item even though they lack the ability to do the 3.2-4.0G we get on the Q666. As for the rest of AMDs line, they have a good margin with Dell and HP with much home boxes. I looked at that sector this weekend for a work project.

 

[jonspd]

When the 45nm intel are more readily aval yes.

 

[hUMANbEATbOX]

Do you think we will see sub 250 prices beyond special sales?
Reading that I might expect 245 on average.

TBH, I was shocked to hear of a drop on them at all. Usually they would be EOL and would remain more expensive than the 45nm stuff. But the volume price on q6600's currently is around $266 I think, ~$280 retail. So yeah, I think a retail price of ~$235-240 should be expected, ~$280 for a q6700.

 

[Kuroimaho]

Who cares about intel here, even with the fastest chips, IMO they still suck!

I guess most of us care, with the majority of the market behind them they have a huge effect on AMD's future. BTW there were hundreds of people in AKIBA yesterday night waiting the launch of the 45nm Intels, they seemed to care as well.

2.6G Phenoms that do 3.0G easy will be a hot item

No doubt, a 125W at stock 2.6G proc pushed to 3G must be hot, but I doubt 3G will be easy did not see every Pehnom do 2.6G so far.

As for the rest of AMDs line, they have a good margin with Dell and HP with much home boxes.

With the prices what Dell and friends pay for their procs ?

TBH, I was shocked to hear of a drop on them at all.

Me too, but I guess they won't be able make enough 45nm procs to statisfy the market therefore they offer an alternative, nice move.

 

[dealmaster]

Who cares about intel here, even with the fastest chips, IMO they still suck!

First of all, I can't even begin to understand this quote. They're better, but THEY STILL SUCK RIGHT?

I care about the fastest processors I can get. I like AMD and like to see them win, but they've really dropped the ball, so I'm not going to spend my money on an inferior processor. You can try to say Intel sucks, but the fact is:

Their CPUs are more efficient clock for clock.
Their stock clocks are equal to or greater than AMD's.
They are able to overclock higher, much higher.
They consume less power.

That's better than AMD in just about every possible way. Any way you slice it, AMD's processors are just not as good as Intel's right now. There's no two ways about it. I've been an AMD fan for years, but my next CPU is going to be Intel for sure. AMD just doesn't have anything to offer right now. Heck, my 5600+ at 3.2GHz competes with a stock E6600 in a ton of Sandra benches. That's pretty sad that it can't even beat a 2.4GHz dual core.

 

[Careface]

First of all, I can't even begin to understand this quote. They're better, but THEY STILL SUCK RIGHT?

I care about the fastest processors I can get. I like AMD and like to see them win, but they've really dropped the ball, so I'm not going to spend my money on an inferior processor. You can try to say Intel sucks, but the fact is:

Their CPUs are more efficient clock for clock.
Their stock clocks are equal to or greater than AMD's.
They are able to overclock higher, much higher.
They consume less power.

That's better than AMD in just about every possible way. Any way you slice it, AMD's processors are just not as good as Intel's right now. There's no two ways about it. I've been an AMD fan for years, but my next CPU is going to be Intel for sure. AMD just doesn't have anything to offer right now. Heck, my 5600+ at 3.2GHz competes with a stock E6600 in a ton of Sandra benches. That's pretty sad that it can't even beat a 2.4GHz dual core.

While thats all very well and good, you seem to have failed to grasp the idea AC is getting at.

With Intel having

Their CPUs are more efficient clock for clock.
Their stock clocks are equal to or greater than AMD's.
They are able to overclock higher, much higher.
They consume less power.

and AMD not being able to combat it, AMD are looking at losing more and more each quater, until eventually they go out of business, or at the very least cant afford to make better/more competative procs.

With this the market stagnates. Intel will have very little reason to progress (progression for progression's sake, rather than progression for competitions sake) in which case they can simply stay with their current stuff longer. Nehalem will be pushed well back.. I mean, why beat your own product?




I think thats what AC was trying to get at. Not fanboyism, as it seems youve interpreted his post as.

 

[rumbl3]

i dont think they would go outta business, someone else would buy them. Basicly nothing ever goes out of business nowadays. It's usually bought up by some other company that either turns it around or produces more junk till they sellout to another company.

 

[ratbuddy]

i dont think they would go outta business, someone else would buy them. Basicly nothing ever goes out of business nowadays. It's usually bought up by some other company that either turns it around or produces more junk till they sellout to another company.

Hey, that's not fair. Polaroid makes some dang fine products

 

[Zerix01]

Who cares about intel here, even with the fastest chips, IMO they still suck!

Lol, well the few C2D's I have used have been limited to at work but they did feel more sluggish than my X2 at basic things and I think the C2D's had double my RAM. But on the other hand it was Windows vs Linux, IE vs Firefox, 32-bit vs 64-bit and AV vs no VA running, so take my experience as just that, my experience, but given this narrow view I'll agree with you... yeah Intel still sucks lol!

 

[AlabamaCajun]

While thats all very well and good, you seem to have failed to grasp the idea AC is getting at.

~

I think thats what AC was trying to get at. Not fanboyism, as it seems youve interpreted his post as.

QFT, Thanks. I noticed the IMO was missing. My opinion or view of intel is it sucks despite faster procs. It's not a product issue, it's a corporate issue.

They waited until pressure from the world to go green.
Practices with the OLPC project reek of dirty tricks (To many details not clear making this a weak case).
Monopolistic marketing practices (See what HT and other open interconnects are about).

These are just some of my reasons. I once blindly bought intel until I looked around the facade. I now buy for what a product provides for me. A q6600 makes a great folding rig but the Phenom is of great interest and has a lot of potential being so close. People can continue crapping the AMD threads but it won't change my stainding. That's not fanboyism but sheer commitment.

NVidia is also a competitor but they play fair in the market.

 

[tuskenraider]

Lol, well the few C2D's I have used have been limited to at work but they did feel more sluggish than my X2 at basic things and I think the C2D's had double my RAM. But on the other hand it was Windows vs Linux, IE vs Firefox, 32-bit vs 64-bit and AV vs no VA running, so take my experience as just that, my experience, but given this narrow view I'll agree with you... yeah Intel still sucks lol!

So your comment on comparing two completely different systems provides what kind of useful information?

I used AMD for years and went Intel for my current build. I say buy what provides the best value to the consumer, me, and AMD ain't it anymore. I can walk up to my old system, now the wifes(Opty 165/NF4) to be reminded how much better my new rig is everyday.

 

[dealmaster]

QFT, Thanks. I noticed the IMO was missing. My opinion or view of intel is it sucks despite faster procs. It's not a product issue, it's a corporate issue.

I totally agree, I hate their corporate policies and I think they're a very underhanded and nasty company, AND most people I've dealt with professionally or in an educational way from Intel have been extremely arrogant. This was quite a few different people, seems to be the corporate culture there.

That being said, I will buy whatever processor does the best for me and is the best value. I think that it's impossible to say that, for an overclocker, an AMD processor is a wise choice right now. That's really what I was saying.

Also, don't deceive yourself. If by some miracle AMD trounced Intel and put them out of business, they would have no incentive to innovate either. Intel's corporate policies should have nothing to do with how good their processors are viewed to be.

 

[AlabamaCajun]

~ Intel's corporate policies should have nothing to do with how good their processors are viewed to be.

True, as I've owned several and most have been great!

 

[Careface]

True, as I've owned several and most have been great!

Hey, my next build is going to be an Intel, and I am a self-proclaimed fanboy of AMD. Ill always <3 AMD.. Ive been hooked on them since my 386SX lol. But Intel at the moment have the edge when it comes to SETI, which is about all I use my pc for nowadays.. maybe when the next break from university comes Ill get back into gaming and whatnot, and when that happens maybe AMD will be back to where they were a couple of years ago.. producing chips that, although got owned in SuperPI, completely freaking owned in gaming.

If that doesnt happen, then I guess Ill review then. Until then, let me give a nice big "less than three" to AMD for being.. well... there.

<3.

 

[Kuroimaho]

Yes their problem is that hard to find any of their procs worthy to pay for unless the very low end.
Go for performance and choose Intel better clock for clock and has huge OC potential.
I go for silence, so powerconsumption comes first and performance is secondary, with the new Intel's I can OC while still staying cool but Phenom does not look like a promising upgrade path.


OLPC is really messy story, Intel Paid the most for them last year and with leaving the project they give competition to Negroponte's private company.
In every AMD thread it is brought up that the world would end without them, then wouldn't children benefit from two competing projects ?

Found the article which shows Intel's side of the story. LINK

In short:

Last summer, I contacted Nicholas and asked him a question. It was 'is your goal to get every kid a laptop, or to get every kid an OLPC laptop?' He laughed and said 'the former, of course.' With that answer, I said we would like to work together.

Last fall, Nicholas demanded that we drop our work on Classmate (this fact was reported with a quote by Nicholas in the Wall Street Journal). He felt that our work was causing less success to OLPC as a competitor. I reminded him of his answer to my question when we talked in the summer. He disregarded it and said that he had changed his mind.

 

[AlabamaCajun]

This is what your beloved chip company does http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5256&Itemid=1

It's a lie, the 45nm stuff has a problem that intel will not release.
All I have to say is to AMD is, Bring it on DAAMIT!

edit; OLPC, read on http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS9319220192.html
IMO an Xi intel version may have been doable but instead it was more important just to leverage their own product. Intel can sell it's own product to countries with the money to buy personally but that would cut into sales of higher ended centrinos. GREED!