It isn't "so poor". It just isn't any better than the same CPUs (bar the memory controller change) on 939.
That's the point that I think people are overlooking - this is a platform change without new CPUs. Oh, sure, you need an AM2 CPU, so it's new in that respect, but those AM2 CPUs are the same as the 939 ones bar the memory controller. There isn't a new CPU design.
It isn't dramatically different to when Intel went from 478 to 775.
What makes it very different in practice is that this time the competitor has a genuinely new CPU range in the wings (Conroe/Core 2). AM2 won't have the "working in" time that 775 had. People with 939 already have no reason to buy AM2 kit. People who are looking to do an upgrade from older kit or get a new PC will certainly consider waiting for Conroe/Core 2 and making do in the meantime. So why bother with AM2?
AMD need a whizz-bang CPU range for AM2 or a huge price advantage to maintain strong sales in the majority of the market. Otherwise, they are going to lose ground fast. Not only does Conroe/Core 2 look rather good, it's a new design and that means speed increases as production is refined. Athlon64 is not a new design and seems to be pretty close to topping out on speed.
I would normally consider it likely that the next lot of AMD CPUs will be on AM2...but AFAIK the next design is a quad-core CPU and I'm dubious about whether that will just drop into an existing socket.
AMD needs to bring out the K9 design soon and it will need to have some bite.
I couldn't pass up on that opportunity for a cheesy pun.
