When AMD release something to rival C2d...

[locutus12]

I thought AMD have priced them at $733 per CPU?

FX-70/72/74 there only sold in pairs. avg price per pair at present, $599, $799 and $999 respectively.

 

[Combat squirrel]

AMD jus need to release an updated processing core, there fsb, hypertransport and on die mem controllers are streets ahead of intel, Amd went the way of doing 'everything then can to uphold and feed the processing core' Intel went the way of 'úber processing core thats needs the rest of the system to now catch up'

 

[Raikiri]

Well, $999 is about £500 + 17.5% VAT, £587.50 + whatever rip off tax/shipping etc we have Not much difference from the QX6700 and the Intel is faster, uses less power, less heat and doesn't need such an expensive motherboard.

While it isn't bad it still doesn't rival the C2Q unfortunarely, lets hope K8L is something special.

 

[locutus12]

Well, $999 is about £500 + 17.5% VAT, £587.50 + whatever rip off tax/shipping etc we have Not much difference from the QX6700 and the Intel is faster, uses less power, less heat and doesn't need such an expensive motherboard.

While it isn't bad it still doesn't rival the C2Q unfortunarely, lets hope K8L is something special.

uk prices are different, indeed to be honest i cant find any... in the USA 2X opty 74`s + motherboard is cheaper than a single Intel kentsfield and the performance is pretty damn in most areas.

 

[Rroff]

i love it when people who own Intel CPU`s say this... go read about the company practices of that CPU your sporting, you may finally realise that there has been NO competition in the desktop CPU market for a good 16 years at least.

eh? what are you talking about?

 

[locutus12]

eh? what are you talking about?

AMD has a long history of litigation with former partner and x86 creator Intel. In 2005, following an investigation, the Japan Federal Trade Commission found Intel guilty on a number of violations. On June 27, 2005, AMD won an antitrust suit against Intel in Japan, and on the same day, AMD filed a broad antitrust complaint against Intel in the U.S. Federal District Court in Delaware. The complaint alleges systematic use of secret rebates, special discounts, threats, and other means used by Intel to lock AMD processors out of the global market. In 2005 and 2006 AMD issued subpoenas against major computer manufacturers including Dell, Microsoft, IBM, HP, Sony, Toshiba.

A recent point of contention between AMD and Intel involves the popular Skype application. Skype version 2.0 added a 10-way conference call feature which could only be enabled on Intel dual-core processors; AMD dual-core processors cannot take advantage of the feature. Intel has acknowledged paying money to Skype to restrict this feature to Intel CPUs, a move which many consider to be an abuse of power. It was widely suspected that the 10-way conference call feature would work equally well on AMD dual-core processors, and that there was no technological justification for the restriction. These suspicions were validated in early March 2006, when noted hacker Maxxuss released a simple crack that enabled the feature on AMD CPUs by simply preventing Skype from detecting that the host computer uses an AMD processor.

theres been an endless torrent of this crap from Intel since 1986. it was originally taken to court in 1987 and fined 10 million dollars(pocket change to intel) in 1992, it appealed and lost.

 

[LoadsaMoney]

My E6600 is my very first Intel chip as ive always been AMD, and wouldn't touch Intel, but the Conroes are just awesome, they are faster, cheaper etc... they really caught AMD with their pants down, be a while before they get them back up imo.

 

[Rroff]

Your point being? theres still competition and innovation involved... I'm not wearing intel on my sleeve just telling it like it is, if AMD had been the ones to bring the conroe out instead of intel I'd have still bought it...

 

[locutus12]

Your point being? theres still competition and innovation involved... I'm not wearing intel on my sleeve just telling it like it is, if AMD had been the ones to bring the conroe out instead of intel I'd have still bought it...

you have no argument from me most people chose the CPU to buy based on price / performance and that i can understand, myself personally im abit of an odd ball and choose my CPU based on the fairer companys as opposed to the fairer price to performance, (i do this with pretty much any product i can to be honest, i.e. fair trade tea and all that ) hence why ive just orderd a new opteron 170 from the states.

all i meant to imply by my comment earlier was that Intel has used every trick in its book including what amounts to out right bribery to hold on to its monopoly position, this became crystal clear when AMD despite having cheaper, less power hungry, more efficient and faster design for 3 years! barely shifted there desktop market share. and this was mainly due to intel paying the larger distributors such as Dell, HP, ect ect not to take on any AMD solutions.

Dell have now finally after ten years started to ship some AMD products, but the range is very very limited, and besides which, the damage is already done, Intel used illegal business practices to maintain market share (basically it used its massive profits to maintain its place in the market) over a far smaller rival who had a far better product until the time came when it could compete with core2duo.

 

[Final8y]

you have no argument from me most people chose the CPU to buy based on price / performance and that i can understand, myself personally im abit of an odd ball and choose my CPU based on the fairer companys as opposed to the fairer price to performance, (i do this with pretty much any product i can to be honest, i.e. fair trade tea and all that ) hence why ive just orderd a new opteron 170 from the states.

all i meant to imply by my comment earlier was that Intel has used every trick in its book including what amounts to out right bribery to hold on to its monopoly position, this became crystal clear when AMD despite having cheaper, less power hungry, more efficient and faster design for 3 years! barely shifted there desktop market share. and this was mainly due to intel paying the larger distributors such as Dell, HP, ect ect not to take on any AMD solutions.

Dell have now finally after ten years started to ship some AMD products, but the range is very very limited, and besides which, the damage is already done, Intel used illegal business practices to maintain market share (basically it used its massive profits to maintain its place in the market) over a far smaller rival who had a far better product until the time came when it could compete with core2duo.

I have to agree
And that Skype move really took the cake

 

[SGCWill]

Personally, I don't think it matters if it says Intel or AMD or even Peugeot, as long as its faster than the one i had before, it doesnt matter, does it?

Of course if the AMD processor is equal speed to the Intel, then I choose the cheapest one, which is why i bought a c2d, it costs the same as my old x2 only is almost twice as quick.

Besides it goes around in cycles, its intels turn to be the fastest, and then in a few years time AMD will get another breakthrough and so on.

 

[easyrider]

Personally, I don't think it matters if it says Intel or AMD or even Peugeot, as long as its faster than the one i had before, it doesnt matter, does it?

Of course if the AMD processor is equal speed to the Intel, then I choose the cheapest one, which is why i bought a c2d, it costs the same as my old x2 only is almost twice as quick.

Besides it goes around in cycles, its intels turn to be the fastest, and then in a few years time AMD will get another breakthrough and so on.

I agree,

I'll get the fastest for my money at the time.

I'm a consumer I want speed and value for money.

I want overclockability,

I certainly dont care about the companies that make PC components.

I mean why should I?
They do not care about me,they care about money.

If anyone not buying C2D now is doing so because they think they are helping out AMD then they are naive to the exstreme.

 

[NathanE]

The K8L is going to have a pretty slow rollout. I really hope it wipes out Conroe by about 20% because Intel is releasing Penryn probably not long after the K8L has fully rolled out. That's what AMD should be concerned with, a Conroe on steroids. Conroe is already about a year old (including A0 steppings) and should be perceived by AMD as old technology by now. I don't know why I'm saying this, it's just the age old game of swings and roundabouts afterall... I guess the fact that AMD has only beaten Intel at the game once (with the K8) makes me uncertain if they'll be able to pull it off again without luck on their side this time.

this became crystal clear when AMD despite having cheaper, less power hungry, more efficient and faster design for 3 years! barely shifted there desktop market share. and this was mainly due to intel paying the larger distributors such as Dell, HP, ect ect not to take on any AMD solutions..

Bit of a bad example really. Just because the K8 took ages to grab any market share doesn't make it Intel's fault or doing. AMD grossly underestimated demand for K8 and were unable to supply. Couple this with their questionable marketing strategy of plastering the "64 bit" word everywhere - making average joes a bit scared thinking their Windows XP would no longer work... and it already erodes away most of your statement.

It's not as one-sided as you make out. Yes Intel gives incentives to their partners and customers to stay with them - as does any company with spare cash. AMD have made mistakes in their product rollout, time and again in fact, which simply cannot be ignored as key reasons why their market share is still relatively small and why it's taken years to increase.

AMD is now looking more focused and stronger than ever. They have a chipset business again (ATI) which they've not had for donkey's years. They've got plans for the future (Fusion) and most importantly they've realised their mistake from the K8 (demand/supply) and are steadily rolling out new fab' factories.

 

[locutus12]

Bit of a bad example really. Just because the K8 took ages to grab any market share doesn't make it Intel's fault or doing. AMD grossly underestimated demand for K8 and were unable to supply. Couple this with their questionable marketing strategy of plastering the "64 bit" word everywhere - making average joes a bit scared thinking their Windows XP would no longer work... and it already erodes away most of your statement.

its a well known fact that AMD were unable to supply the volumes that intel can, nobody disputes that. what they did have ample capacity for was to supply a few lines to the likes of Dell, HP, Compaq, ect. as for the "questionable" marketing... whats questionable about the creators of 64bit technology (which intel had to licence off AMD to use...) calling their chips A64... im sorry but call a spade a spade, its a 64 bit chip, they can use the word 64bit how ever the hell they damn well please.

as for average joe, average joe doesnt think about 64 bit, average joe barely knows what graphics card he has, average joe goes to places like dell or that purple pc place, drops £600 on the desk / over the phone and walks away with a brand new oc he knows squat about other than it works. that is average joe so please dont worry about the average joe with the "oh noes the 64bit adverts so confusing i may just cry" he really couldnt give a flying copulation.

It's not as one-sided as you make out. Yes Intel gives incentives to their partners and customers to stay with them - as does any company with spare cash. AMD have made mistakes in their product rollout, time and again in fact, which simply cannot be ignored as key reasons why their market share is still relatively small and why it's taken years to increase.

and the chuckles keep coming here don't they.... read up on "monopoly rules" and no, i dont mean the board game .

you said...

"Yes Intel gives incentives to their partners and customers to stay with them - as does any company with spare cash"

If Intel and AMD were in equal positions, even then it would be an unlawful business practice regardless of whether you think its common place or not. But for Intel its a far graver thing to do as it is a "monopoly" theres that word agin, go read the laws governing the way monopolys can operate in europe, they are losly based on american monopoly laws although a little stricter, and you may find out why Intel are being sued in Germany, Japan, and the USA.

AMD is now looking more focused and stronger than ever. They have a chipset business again (ATI) which they've not had for donkey's years. They've got plans for the future (Fusion) and most importantly they've realised their mistake from the K8 (demand/supply) and are steadily rolling out new fab' factories.

had they have been allowed to grow properly in the first place, and im talking about right from the get go, back in 1987. they would have already had the FAB`s in place. the last 20 years have been nothing but a tale of collosal back stabbing and unethical practice and all of it from Intel.

for example, in the cross development of 386 in 87, both companys shared engineering specs and research data, yet one of the company's was feeding the other data that was pretty useless for a number of months. and which company was doing the dirty ? Intel.

mid 90`s, Intel starts paying the larger suppliers millions in illegal discounts on condition that they do not ship or approach AMD or any other X86 maker.

2005, caught paying a software manufacturer to intentionally sabotage their software when ran on an AMD platform (Skype). totally and utterly illegal.

2005 intel being sued in 3 country's and for once, not just by Intel but by monopoly commissions themselves, they have had their European offices raided, and they stand accused of grossly misusing their dominant position in the market to maintain that dominant position through an illegal use of company profits via the aforementioned discount schemes.



as ive always said, ive got absolutely nothing against core2, its a good chip. i just hate the company behind it, about as much as i hate nestle, haliburton, pfizer (who are actually far worse than intel as they are responsible for the death of thousands) and a couple of other company's whose products i wouldnt touch for all the money in the world.

 

[NathanE]

Shrug. Gave you the facts... like it or lump it

 

[HighlandeR]

I think Intel just really delivered this time round... it was like what AMD did to Intel with there 64bit spin on things..
They were untouchable and Intel couldnt counter them for a good 2-3 years.

We still get customers daily in the store coming in and saying hey I hear AMD dual core/64bit is way better then Intel is that true.... Im like lettme get a coffee and thats just for the customer not myself.

I personaly reckon AMD are gonna be in the same boat and dont expect to see anything from AMD to counter intel for a good 1-2 years time.