amk-aka-Phantom
Distinguished
mihaimm :
Remember the glory days of Pentium III? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Pentium_III_microprocessors
Check the introduction prices on those bad boys... And tell me... why do you think that was?
Could it be that Intel had NO serious competition that the market was aware of? Or was it the FUD on any seriously competing product? Or maybe the abuse of monopolistic position to 'convince' manufacturers to exclusively use Intel CPUs...?
Let me put things into perspective if you still don't get it... Let's say Ivy is 3x faster than Sandy. This would leave AMD in the dust. They would struggle to compete but will eventually would go the Via way (become insignificant in the market). At that point Intel will release a new revolutionary architecture 3x faster than Ivy, discontinue Ivy, and sell only top of the line CPUs for 1000+. Nobody will worry... "that's a top CPU, I don't need that and Ivy is still very good". But, as stocks get emptied, you will be surprised to see the not so top of the line CPUs coming out considerably more expensive than the old Ivy. And as stocks get empty, even prices on Ivy start to climb... not much... just a bit. And by popular demand, Intel starts making Ivy again, on a new process, but... just a bit more expensive (to account for the lower TDP).
That's how Intel gets to sell 2 (and only 2) lines of CPUs, marginally improving each of them, perhaps pursuing the tick-tock but at a much lower pace, and offering us 1k$+ CPUs.
Who's the winner? You of course, because you no longer have those crappy AMD CPUs selling for peanuts... and now everybody agrees with you on the forums: Intel CPUs are the best.
Check the introduction prices on those bad boys... And tell me... why do you think that was?
Could it be that Intel had NO serious competition that the market was aware of? Or was it the FUD on any seriously competing product? Or maybe the abuse of monopolistic position to 'convince' manufacturers to exclusively use Intel CPUs...?
Let me put things into perspective if you still don't get it... Let's say Ivy is 3x faster than Sandy. This would leave AMD in the dust. They would struggle to compete but will eventually would go the Via way (become insignificant in the market). At that point Intel will release a new revolutionary architecture 3x faster than Ivy, discontinue Ivy, and sell only top of the line CPUs for 1000+. Nobody will worry... "that's a top CPU, I don't need that and Ivy is still very good". But, as stocks get emptied, you will be surprised to see the not so top of the line CPUs coming out considerably more expensive than the old Ivy. And as stocks get empty, even prices on Ivy start to climb... not much... just a bit. And by popular demand, Intel starts making Ivy again, on a new process, but... just a bit more expensive (to account for the lower TDP).
That's how Intel gets to sell 2 (and only 2) lines of CPUs, marginally improving each of them, perhaps pursuing the tick-tock but at a much lower pace, and offering us 1k$+ CPUs.
Who's the winner? You of course, because you no longer have those crappy AMD CPUs selling for peanuts... and now everybody agrees with you on the forums: Intel CPUs are the best.
Bullshit. Intel does that, they'll get pwnd by ARM as consumer will shift to tablets and smartphones to check FB and e-mail. Intel learned their lesson well. We're NOT gonna see overpriced BS from them any time soon.