Intel Needs to Drop CPU Price to Meet Ultrabook Goal

[exfileme]

PC vendors and manufacturers say that Intel needs to cut CPU prices if it expects them to stay within the sub-$1000 ultrabook price range.

Intel Needs to Drop CPU Price to Meet Ultrabook Goal : Read more

 

[wintermint]

I thought Intel set aside a fair amount of fund to support ultrabook. I would assume they're providing some sort of subsidy because I'm not going to lie.. Intel CPUs are very expensive.

 

[bustapr]

Vendors may not be willing to push these sub-par devices thus missing Intel's 40-percent market prediction.

40%? if they cost more than $500 they most certainly wont get even close to that. With all the money intel makes a year, I think they can afford to make things cheaper for OEMs.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Competition is a good thing, lets hope it comes, let the margins fall

 

[dalethepcman]

Intel lost $2B in court for subsidizing its CPU cost's to keep AMD out of certain markets, I don't think they will be doing that again no matter how much the manufacturers complain.

As to the AMD Troll bait from Octacon, I'll bite. The below information is from Wikipedia. AMD has five mobile quad core Llano APU's that consume 35-45w of power, priced at $109 and up. Intel has seven mobile quad core CPU's that require require 45-55w of power, the starting price is $378. As a point of reference, the slowest mobile chip Intel makes is 1.2Ghz dual core Celeron, priced at $128.

AMD has quad core laptops for as low as $500, the cheapest Intel quad core laptop is around $800. (google shopping) Your right, AMD needs to make something to compete with Intel.

 

[aznshinobi]

I actually think Llano is priced quite competitively, I've seen them in stores as low as $500-$600 and $300 for netbooks. Which is pretty solid considering the Intel laptops coming close to that price offer terrible graphic performance since they usually don't have a dedicated card. Plus they offer pretty decent performance. Also Llano's TDP gives it a fair advantage in both netbook performance and power consumption.

 

[sonofliberty08]

[citation][nom]wintermint[/nom]I thought Intel set aside a fair amount of fund to support ultrabook. I would assume they're providing some sort of subsidy because I'm not going to lie.. Intel CPUs are very expensive.[/citation]
but the stupid fanboi willing to pay for the expensive cpu that come with crappy gpu inside, just like the crApple fanboi do

 

[zanny]

[citation][nom]dalethepcman[/nom]Intel lost $2B in court for subsidizing its CPU cost's to keep AMD out of certain markets, I don't think they will be doing that again no matter how much the manufacturers complain. As to the AMD Troll bait from Octacon, I'll bite. The below information is from Wikipedia. AMD has five mobile quad core Llano APU's that consume 35-45w of power, priced at $109 and up. Intel has seven mobile quad core CPU's that require require 45-55w of power, the starting price is $378. As a point of reference, the slowest mobile chip Intel makes is 1.2Ghz dual core Celeron, priced at $128.AMD has quad core laptops for as low as $500, the cheapest Intel quad core laptop is around $800. (google shopping) Your right, AMD needs to make something to compete with Intel.[/citation]

This, most people are thinking of the desktop CPUs that intel has to price for consumers (thus, you get things like the i5 2500k that is amazing price for its performance), its mobile chips have a huge markup because they only bulk sell to laptop manufacturers.

Maybe if we got a standardized laptop framework and motherboard specification we could have a consumer laptop DYI market

 

[Darkerson]

If Intel wants this to succeed so much, then they should be willing to make a few concessions themselves. Otherwise, I hope they meet resistance at every angle.

 

[mikeasaurus]

Wait.... Apple is able to do an "ultrabook" at 1000.00 for their low-end thin & light laptop. With Intel top tier pricing, but that's what other PC manufacturers get too. Am I missing a point? why can't ACER doit?

 

[digiex]

Use AMD processors.

 

[DjEaZy]

Intel Needs to Drop CPU Price to Meet Ultrabook Goal? NO!!! Intel need's to discontinue it!!! It is just a expensive MacBook Air copying...

 

[kyuuketsuki]

[citation][nom]digiex[/nom]Use AMD processors.[/citation]
This. I'd totally go for an ultrabook with a good Llano in it.

 

[CaedenV]

What makes ultra books ultra is the fact that they are a novelty item that few people have. Make them expensive as hell, and very nice. Over price them, and sell them to a few professionals. Let them pay for the development costs, and then when they figure out the manufacturing process, and as demand kicks in then you get the $1000 Ultrabooks after 2-3 years. It simply cant happen out the gate if you want quality.

 

[mosu]

The prices will go down when AMD chips will kick in the ultrabook market with Trinity APU's, so why all the Intel hype?

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]mikeasaurus[/nom]Wait.... Apple is able to do an "ultrabook" at 1000.00 for their low-end thin & light laptop. With Intel top tier pricing, but that's what other PC manufacturers get too. Am I missing a point? why can't ACER doit?[/citation]
I think that the price listed at least in Europe for acer ultrabook is lower than the macbook air.

 

[deksman]

Problem with AMD is that adoption in the consumer market (when it comes to the notebook segment) is not exactly stellar.
Besides, their mobile offerings aren't really that powerful to compete against SB (although to be honest, those who use their laptops for media, internet, office, etc... - general tasks) then Llano is enough for such individuals.

Though I do think that Intel's pricing is extreme as it is.
They overcharge too much money for a small bump in speeds.
I'm sorry but $100 for 0.2 GhZ improvement in speed is way too much.
Heck, even $100 for 0.4GhZ is not what I would call 'value for money'.

Intel can overcharge their items because they are in a position to do so.
If they are meeting resistance, then even better.
I'm not ready to drop insane amounts of money on a cpu that will deliver marginal performance at best while being priced at premium levels because it has certain features I may never even use.

 

[HalfHuman]

[citation][nom]dalethepcman[/nom]Intel lost $2B in court for subsidizing its CPU cost's to keep AMD out of certain markets, I don't think they will be doing that again no matter how much the manufacturers complain.[/citation]

Intel did not pay subsidy, but bribed individuals in companies to NOT sell AMD stuff. as a consequence they sold at big price points the magnificent P4 thing. this was not done in the open but rather in the back alley as it was and still is illegal.

 

[eddieroolz]

I'm having a tough time comprehending this. If Apple, with their markup, can build a MacBook Air for under $1000 then I fail to see how OEMs cannot.

Unless, Intel is placing a double-standard in terms of CPU pricing, with favors going to Apple.

 

[americanbrian]

Apple has it's own OS, as stated in the article the OS is the second most costly component of the build.

That is why Apple can compete on the price of the macbook air.

 

[Archean]

@american
Even then the cost of OS has to be factored in overall price. Perhaps it is more like a case of 'production efficiency' ....

 

[Graham_71]

[citation][nom]dalethepcman[/nom]Intel lost $2B in court for subsidizing its CPU cost's to keep AMD out of certain markets, I don't think they will be doing that again .[/citation]

If Intel charged a sensible price for their CPU in the first place they wouldn't need to subsidise it.


[citation]As it stands now, the biggest cost for ultrabook manufacturers is the CPU and the operating system. [/citation]


as for the OS, give consumers the choice, windows, linux or none, I know what i'd opt for

 

[nebun]

Intel makes some wonderful and very capable processors, but like it or not they are a little overpriced

 

[-Fran-]

Intel thinking about making less money in favor of the people? That defies logic! It's almost unthinkable! /sarcasm

The ultrabook concept is just another way to monopolize a new market, since they no longer can compete in the netbook and cheap notebook arena thanks to the E series and A series from AMD. These vendors are better off asking AMD for chips and let Intel (shareholders, actually) rot in their own greed.

Cheers!

 

[lazymangaka]

Better just stick with AMD then, PC manufacturers. It's the only way to salvation.