Is AMD the Next Intel?
 

AMD took advantage and acquire more market share by providing value and performance in a single package. AMD has always been known to deliver value, which is one of the reasons why its 64-bit microprocessors were adopted so quickly by the enthusiast population. However, with AMD’s recent announcement of its dual-core microprocessors, I fear if AMD is the next Intel in pricing terms of pricing.

Article Link: http://www.cooltechzone.com/index.ph...k=view&id=1276

uhm, HELLO, the Athlon FX CPU's have always been overpriced, more so then Intel's CPU's

I believe AMD has ~40% gross margin on CPU while Intel has ~60%. I may be off on the numbers.

Euhm, Intel Dual cores almost cost $1000, and I don't think a low clocked single core costs near $1000.
Intel dual cores are slower than AMD dual cores (in terms of Mhz), they are hotter and need a new mobo, and still they cost more than an AMD X2.
And yes, the FX is overpriced, but it's like getting an Intel ES, it has its multi's unlocked and they were higher clocked than the others.
But then again, I realy like these fast AMD's that only cost you €80

that's AMD's problem, their biggest sales are made with these products, but they don't take enough profit on it; nor have enough customers who take these CPU's in large quantities.

read www.overclockers.com a bit,

Intel dual cores expensive?!? LMAO... 2.8gig dual core costs about 230€

AMD's entry lvl dual core costs about 500€ :^D

and intel's run slower clock per clock yeah ok, great, I wonder when we will be seeing 3Gig amd's :rolleyes:

other then in games, Intel keeps pretty good pace with AMD



and ONLY those who already own a s939 motherboard will only have to upgrade their cpu if they want dual core... socket A, s754, s478 will all have to buy cpu+mobo... If those people want budget dual core, Intel is the way to go in my humble opinion.

Woops :shrug: . Didn't knew they had that cheap DC's.

I waited a few days before I could think thru what the hell is going on with this topic.

Consider the following -

Intel:
It will again take another new board to go Dual Core. And, if you don't have DDR2 you would have to ante up for more. So, for DC Intel, one will have to get another new board that he/she just purchased in 2005.

AMD:
If you already have S939 board since its introduction, you are well into the upgrade and keeping your DDR.

DC cost Intel = Board + CPU + DDR2 + PCIe; and Intel Boards aren't cheap.

Best scenario you already own DDR2 + PCIe = Board + CPU

DC cost AMD = Board + CPU (assuming you have DDR and AGP card)

Best scenario is only CPU cost.

With reviews coming out showing AMD is ahead of Intel in performance, you decide if you are "crushing benchmark" or playing games.:)

The most important last point, you only need regular air cooling to run AMD DC; haul it to any Lan Party in winter and summer.

Bottom line, I think AMD is smart to have a higher price point because at th end the system costs less.

Upgrade cost for Intel would be like:
CPU: 2.8Ghz: E245 | 3.2GHz: E516 | 3.2Ghz EE: E943
Mobo: Asus P5WD2 Premium: E197
DDR2: 512Mb CL4: ~E40 | CL3: ~E55
PCI-e: depends, E60-> +E1000

Upgrade cost for AMD would be like:
CPU: 4200+: $537 | 4800+: $1001
Mobo: E80 -> E200
DDR: 512Mb CL3: E35 | CL2.5: E40 | CL2: E58 | TCCD: E120
AGP/PCI-e: depends: E60-> +E1000

You can make different scenarios, for Intel, the new mobo (the only one that I could find nearby) and of course CPU are needed. It could be possible that you already have DDR2 and/or PCI-e.

For AMD, there are a few more options, you can make lots of combo's, already having a mobo and mem and no PCI-e, etc...