First E6850 Benchmarks With Aggressive Pricing

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
8O 8O 8O

Holy flip flops batman :!:

8O 8O 8O

AMD better get crackin 8O
Click to expand...

I think this may crack them

We had better hope it doesnt; Seriously is that what any of us wants? wouldnt it be better to promote boycotting intel than to see AMD buried for good?

Seriously What intel is doing is bad for everyone.

Of course not. :x

But I dont see how they can survive that price scheme, regardless of how great K10 may or may not be. I just cant see how AMD can compete. At those prices, Intel is just one step above giving CPUs away in cereal boxs or as CrackerJack prizes.

With those prices, I now ( :roll: ) must agree with Baron. But, this is all just prediction. We'll have to wait and see when the chips hit the market. At this point, Im considering buying several and storing them before AMD cracks and Intel jacks its prices up.

Someone should go to Hectors and Henris houses. To make sure they have no rope or guns.
 
I'm all for $266 quad cores. I think it's a reasonable price. Personally I've always thought that the $350 and higher prices for high end cpus were for people that want to give away money. I'd be happy to buy a quad core for under $300.

The good logic for Intel, and for AMD later, is simply that people will buy these, because it's a *real* upgrade. A decent quad core is far better than any dual core, IMO.
 
We had better hope it doesnt; Seriously is that what any of us wants? wouldnt it be better to promote boycotting intel than to see AMD buried for good?

Seriously What intel is doing is bad for everyone.
Click to expand...

None of us wants AMD dead. I think only Intel wants that.

But how can one refuse the price/performance perspective of a 3Ghz, cool running (65W), awesome overclocking Core 2 E6850 for just over $260? Or for some people, a Quad Core Q6600 at the same price point might be a better choice. These prices are simply insane.



Even a die hard intel-ian wants amd around to keep prices in line - $1000 chip days may be over - if not for amd and intel back and forth we still be paying $1000 for 8088!


ok IBM and Motorola help too
 
I am in Intel boycott mode,as it serves only ill to all of us for them to permanently damage AMD.They have a great chip but they are lousy human biengs;Henri richard should join them.
Click to expand...

Hey, hey...lousy human beings?!? C'mon.

Don't try to make a corporation into some sort of entity with emotions, thoughts, or any other thing.

I work for Intel, and even though those that work with me might think I'm a lousy human being for pushing them, don't go clumping all people that make up Intel as lousy human beings. That's pretty low.

If you have a love/hate thing with Intel (THE CORPORATION) that's fine and dandy...but don't go grouping the humans within the business as "lousy human beings".
 
I think it would be smart for AMD to price their desktop (non-server) quads well under $400, and have at least one under $250, because they could make a *lot* of money selling a large number of $250 chips, in big volume. It's a lot better to sell 50M chips at a $150 profit than 5M at a $500 profit of course. Sparking conumer demand, and the subsequent software evolution will benefit both Intel and AMd a great deal. The real pot of gold is if average people with 5 yr old computers all start upgrading their desktops/laptops.
 
I think Intel has sufficiently made its point, they dont need to get that personal about it. especially since it will screw us all to have AMD dead.
Click to expand...

I do not think intel is making a point i think they are going to show good profits next quarter or so.
its up to amd to compete and they better get the dies smaller or making some really cheap silicon metal
 
I am in Intel boycott mode,as it serves only ill to all of us for them to permanently damage AMD.They have a great chip but they are lousy human biengs;Henri richard should join them.
Click to expand...

Hey, hey...lousy human beings?!? C'mon.

Don't try to make a corporation into some sort of entity with emotions, thoughts, or any other thing.

I work for Intel, and even though those that work with me might think I'm a lousy human being for pushing them, don't go clumping all people that make up Intel as lousy human beings. That's pretty low.

If you have a love/hate thing with Intel (THE CORPORATION) that's fine and dandy...but don't go grouping the humans within the business as "lousy human beings".


Vern

Bro, I have to agree with Dante. It may suck, but its just business.
 
I think it would be smart for AMD to price their desktop (non-server) quads well under $400, and have at least one under $250, because they could make a *lot* of money selling a large number of $250 chips, in big volume. It's a lot better to sell 50M chips at a $150 profit than 5M at a $500 profit of course. Sparking conumer demand, and the subsequent software evolution will benefit both Intel and AMd a great deal. The real pot of gold is if average people with 5 yr old computers all start upgrading their desktops/laptops.
Click to expand...

Improbable for AMD to sell in competitive volume and price.

They are severely capacity limited when compared to Intel.

If Intel makes this pricing move about the only thing which will save them may be the Dell deal.

Which I doubt will keep them afloat for long or that they will be able to keep it for long if Intel is really going for the jugular.
 
I think Intel has sufficiently made its point, they dont need to get that personal about it. especially since it will screw us all to have AMD dead.
Click to expand...

As long as Intel is making a profit at these prices (i.e. not being predatory), I don't have a problem with it. AMD will just need to streamline & optimize to compete - as with any other industry.

Now, if Nvidia would start lowering prices like this, I would be concerned for AMD - I don't know if they have the resources to fight pricewars on two fronts.
 
I think it would be smart for AMD to price their desktop (non-server) quads well under $400, and have at least one under $250, because they could make a *lot* of money selling a large number of $250 chips, in big volume. It's a lot better to sell 50M chips at a $150 profit than 5M at a $500 profit of course. Sparking conumer demand, and the subsequent software evolution will benefit both Intel and AMd a great deal. The real pot of gold is if average people with 5 yr old computers all start upgrading their desktops/laptops.
Click to expand...

Improbable for AMD to sell in competitive volume and price.

They are severely capacity limited when compared to Intel.

If Intel makes this pricing move about the only thing which will save them may be the Dell deal.

Which I doubt will keep them afloat for long or that they will be able to keep it for long if Intel is really going for the jugular.

AMD only needs to utilize it's own capacity efficiently and sell the output. AMD doesn't have to sell in Intel volume to make good profits.
 
:?: Listen to all of you. "omg this will kill AMD" "AMD cant compete with that" maybe this is what Intel needs to compete with K10. Yea I said it, it had to be said. Here we go :wink:
 
I am in Intel boycott mode,as it serves only ill to all of us for them to permanently damage AMD.They have a great chip but they are lousy human biengs;Henri richard should join them.
Click to expand...

Hey, hey...lousy human beings?!? C'mon.

Don't try to make a corporation into some sort of entity with emotions, thoughts, or any other thing.

I work for Intel, and even though those that work with me might think I'm a lousy human being for pushing them, don't go clumping all people that make up Intel as lousy human beings. That's pretty low.

If you have a love/hate thing with Intel (THE CORPORATION) that's fine and dandy...but don't go grouping the humans within the business as "lousy human beings".

I am talking the executive staffers,my apologies and nothing personal; but as far as the fellows and executives go,if they werte on fire i wouldnt pee on them.

This is too far,they flexed their muscle and made a point; I said what I thought and i meant every syllable. Your ultra high head honcho's are friggen creeps;spiritually bankrupt landfills is all they amount to.

Again, those people are simply doing their jobs. Yes, it seems a bit vindictive, but again, it's business, and nothing more.

If AMD was still in a more superior CPU position, would you lambast their executives if they acted the same way? Or tried the same tactics?

Don't go pulling your beliefs about how a person is, only cause they run a company. Spiritually bankrupt landfills? Friggen creeps? Please. You seriously need to just back away and take a break.

They became executives for a reason - to try to make money for investors. So, if you want to call out the "bad people", call out the people who invest in such a "soulless" corporation, since they keep it going.

I usually don't care when people attack Intel or AMD, but you've taken it too personally, and really need to step back a bit, and stop the righteous stance against a company doing business - no matter how much you might not like the way they are doing it.

Again, I don't have any ill will towards you, but I truly believe you're taking this a bit too personal.

*edit*

Sorry, but I read your reply to Turpit and I hate to say this, but - you're beginning to sound like Sharkiou with all the "soulless, creeps, spiritually bankrupt, etc" adjectives. Seriously...take a breather. I know you don't want the overpriced CPU prices to come back, I don't either - but damn.
 
yeah, AMD just needs to be creative in it's response. The obvious thing is to drop a lot of low end dual cores and make more quads.
 
I am in Intel boycott mode,as it serves only ill to all of us for them to permanently damage AMD.They have a great chip but they are lousy human biengs;Henri richard should join them.
Click to expand...

Why is it that if Intel is bringing the competition to AMD, you are mad at intel? competition is good for the consumer. What do you expect Intel to do? I think they are far ahead on 45 nm that they are moving to the next step while pushing AMD around. You expect Intel to play nice after being sued by AMD? This isn't a fight between Intel & AMD by the way, it is Intel on one side and IBM+AMD on the other. Another front is Intel+Micron vs Samsung in the NAND Flash market. Samsung is also buddies with the IBM alliance. This war has not been nice for anyone and Intel now trying to make the best of it and people like you crying foul?? Isn't this what anyone would expect intel to do? would you rather they keep prices artificially high? AMD brought it upon themselves by suing Intel, period.
 
You know - as i type and talk with you guys next to me is my core 2 duo e6300 gamer - i am burning a dvd, encoding it, and playing muisc from the same machine, and my spysweeper and avg is on and about 20 programs running and my ai says i am using 3% of my cpu!

i think its going to a long time before the average user needs a quad core!

this is bad for amd!
 
this sounds great...BUT....it sounds liek intel is going to shoot itself in the foot with a rocket launcher. think about it. do you really think intel will sell their chips for this low? even if they sell in large quantities, they will still not make as much money.

and what are they going to do if amd pulls a fast one. say amd released barcelona...it sucks and it's priced high...then intel drops all of their prices to try to kill amd...then a week later, amd releases a "new" chip, and kills the very best intel chip in performance, power, everything...but they price it at 500 dollars. seems like a far stretch, yes, but if those intel prices are possible, then so is this.

i guess lets just wait and see. i for one, do not believe this. just a little too hard to believe that intel is this retarded.
 
If amd was in intels position ?YOU BET YOUR AZZ ID BE BACKING INTEL.
Click to expand...

That's the thing...you can't really do anything to stop either company from forging along with their finanical plan.

If AMD were stomping Intel, I probably wouldn't have a job because of it, but you know what, I wouldn't be all disgruntled towards AMD. I would just find another job. I won't take any of it personally. I would be more upset at Intel for not putting up a better fight. That's probably what the AMD folks are thinking. I know I felt that way during Netburst. You don't know how embarassing it is to not recommend a CPU you helped build to friends and family when asked what they should get.

I don't want the return of the $1k CPU. I like the prices the way they are now, but I understand your stance about how Intel could possibly remove AMD, and then jack up prices. Yes, it's not a comfortable proposition, but that's something that only AMD can stop, and they can only stop it by producing a signifigantly competitive CPU.
 
this sounds great...BUT....it sounds liek intel is going to shoot itself in the foot with a rocket launcher. think about it. do you really think intel will sell their chips for this low? even if they sell in large quantities, they will still not make as much money.

and what are they going to do if amd pulls a fast one. say amd released barcelona...it sucks and it's priced high...then intel drops all of their prices to try to kill amd...then a week later, amd releases a "new" chip, and kills the very best intel chip in performance, power, everything...but they price it at 500 dollars. seems like a far stretch, yes, but if those intel prices are possible, then so is this.

i guess lets just wait and see. i for one, do not believe this. just a little too hard to believe that intel is this retarded.
Click to expand...

I understand this thinking, but....the real problem for both companies is the overcapacity compared to current market demand.

If they can offer more compelling value than their current chips, then people will have more incentive to upgrade. If quads become the new common computer, then the evolution of software to use more power will accelerate, and that will be very much in Intel's and AMD's favor.

What they need is more consumer demand for chips really. This is a way to get it sooner rather than later.

btw, everyone, I don't know the precise marginal cost of chips, but one estimate put it nearer to $50 than to $100. Does anyone know the actual marginal cost to make an additional chip? This is one fab's cost of labor, materials, electricity, and taxes for one day divided by the output of one day for the fab.
 
funny thing is, since C2D the amd chips are so cheap i been buying lots more of them!

i love all these cheap amd chips $350 fx-60 with os from tiger
fx-62 on ebay $325

open box 4200+ for $142 newegg - they have so many open box 939 chips either they are new and they have to say used, or dell sold them to newegg!
 
Wow. My next upgrade will definitely be a quad core so the faster dual cores don't interest me personally, not on the desktop side. I'd be happy to buy a Turion X2 laptop but I'm switching over to Mac for my next portable. Kentsfield and quad-core K10s don't interest me either because of their higher power requirements. I'll patiently wait for a quad core with a TDP of ≤ 75 watts. I don't think AMD will achieve this with K10, at least not within the next 12 months. Intel probably will with Penryn.

With Nvidia slashing prices on G80, and Intel joining the fray in late 2008, I just don't see how AMD can keep up on the GPU side either. IBM could come in as a white knight and save AMD but I doubt they'll spend US$20 billion just to keep Intel honest. They might do it for the fabs but would probably decide to use those to build their own chips. AMD is better served right now doing volume business with OEMs (if profitable) and concentrating on Opteron for servers, GPUs (if they can remain competitive) and chipsets for everyone. They should even pull out of the laptop and desktop markets if necessary. I'll maintain my tactical pro-AMD bias for the foreseeable future (including builds or recommendations to family/friends) but that only works if they can offer equal performance for more or less the same price.

I don't like Baron any more than he likes me but I really would love to hear his take on this whole matter. No cheap shots, no scoring points (from either side), just an honest assessment of the situation. Maybe there's something we could do as a community to help. I don't want AMD going down in smoke; there's too much brain power and innovation at stake. Hopefully they'll settle with Intel (for at least a few billion, which they deserve) and start over with a clean slate.
 
If AMD was still in a more superior CPU position, would you lambast their executives if they acted the same way? Or tried the same tactics?
Click to expand...

i for one, would say the same thing if amd did this to intel. the thing is that intel is kicking amd while it's down if this is true. yeah, it might be only buisness, but i didnt see them making major price cuts with the pentium 4's. why? cuz they weren't on top. now that they are, they want to see how much they can flex their muscle. lets face it. amd cannot defend themselves right now because they do not have the production power that intel has.

to be fair, if the tables were turned, and amd tried to pull this on intel, i would again be throwing flags. you already beat up and humiliated your opponent...dont kick him while he's down. let him get up, get a second wind, and then go back at it. what ever happened to "the spirit of competition". now everyone is trying to crush everyone else and saying it's "just business".
 
If AMD hadn't gutted their balance sheet to buy ATI and expand capacity they wouldn't be in trouble now. They chose to overextend themselves at the very moment that Intel finally came back and retook the lead. Very stupid indeed.

30% market share at any cost? That cost may well be chapter 11.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom