Intel kicking AMD to the curb?

[Zayras]

Since the i7s are quite expensive, Intel is planning on releasing it's new i5 and i3 processors to make them more affordable for the average consumer. You'll be able to buy (retail) one of these sweet new processors around mid August and the mobos in early August. They will be using a different socket than the i7s 1366, Socket 1156 and therefore you won't need to get an expensive X58 chipset mobo, but rather a new much more afordable mobo with the new P55 chipset.

I'm very excited and can't wait! I was about to build a new PC with a Phenom II X4 processor until I stumbled upon this today. Was planning on building it for late July/Early August, but I don't mind waiting a bit more for the great performance these new processors will bring about. Keep in mind that they will not be better than the i7s as their names suggest. Although some might outperform the i7 920 at a more affordable price.

IMO this is going to kill AMD until they release a new Processor with new a new arquitecture. Even if their Phenom II processors have great prices, they still cannot beat Intel's Core 2 Quad processors clock per clock... who knows where they'll stand against the new Intel processors  .

Sources if you're interested or want to read more:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3585
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3570&p=1 (It's a very long and descriptive 11 page article.)

[kureshii]

I don't think it's happening anytime soon, at least not if Intel's going to price the P55 so lackadaisically. Right now P55 prices are slated to be roughly the price of P45+ICH10 with a slight premium.

This is absurd, especially when you consider that the P55 is nothing more than a tweaked ICH10, now that Northbridge functions have been fully offloaded to the CPU in the Lynnfield architecture. You'd think a single-chip system (ignoring third-party chips for LAN and storage) should cost less than a NB-SB system, but it seems not...

I'm still waiting to see Intel's marketing moves in the mainstream market.

[queenmetroid]

I've had bad experiences with AMD in general. Still, I want to see them succeed, because Intel needs the competition, and nVidia won't be able to make GPU only PC systems for years, if ever.

[kureshii]

AMD's processor performance in the low-end market is pretty respectable for the price (of the processor+platform), but I'm still waiting for them to fix their AHCI problems with the Southbridge... SB600-750, and the issue still seems to be unresolved. Not having NCQ on your SATA HDDs is a real pain >_<

And yeah, I hope AMD keeps nipping at Intel's heels; We won't see their prices come down otherwise.

As a side note, I think it's pretty interesting to see how each manufacturer is moving in their mainstream chipset strategy. Nvidia's focusing on their strength in graphics, by merging their integrated graphics chip with the chipset, in their single-chip Geforce solution. Intel, on the other hand, finally puts both the memory controller and PCI-e channels on the processor, thus doing away with the Northbridge (curse their pricing strategy for the P55 though). I can't wait to see how AMD responds; they're not catching up in the processor market, and they don't seem to be doing much with their purchase of ATi either.

[Lupin]

As a side note, I think it's pretty interesting to see how each manufacturer is moving in their mainstream strategy. Nvidia's focusing on their strength in graphics, by merging their integrated graphics chip with the chipset, in their single-chip Geforce solution. Intel, on the other hand, finally puts both the memory controller and PCI-e channels on the processor, thus doing away with the Northbridge (curse their pricing strategy for the P55 though). I can't wait to see how AMD responds; they're not catching up in the processor market, and they don't seem to be doing much with their purchase of ATi either.

AMD/ATI had a changed of strategy in their graphics division. They no longer design chips for the high end. They design a mainstream chip then combine two of these for their high end parts. Sames them money I guess.

[kyanwan]

Yes.   AMD has been doing that forever.   Kids.   They think AMD is going somewhere.

I think people have been saying the same thing since AMD was making their clone 286s, 386s, 486s, 5x86s, K6s, K6-2's, Athlons, AthlonXPs, Athlon64s, Athlon X2s, ... never mind.   AMD's deathblow has been dealt over 9000 times.  It's not going to happen.

For such a shitty little company- AMD is giving Intel a run for its money.   AMD has a huge *CASH* infusion, and a new investor, new factories, R&D - and effectively - a competitive advantage given to them in a market of extreme difficulty.

Sure, Intel may be superior - but - this is an AMD market, not an Intel market.   You need to look at more aspects, than just "zomg which is better". 

Because the guy on a budget ( eg: your parents, the rest of the world, people who pay rent ) - doesn't exactly want or need an i7.   

For my own case, I'd rather buy a pimp GPU - or 2 - than an i7.   I've never gotten awesome gaming out of an uber CPU.

Though, I've always gotten good results from a good GPU.

-------

kureshii is right.   People easily forget the days when Intel had 90% market share (mid 90s), before AMD bought NexGen and started making CPUs that were a fraction of the cost of Intel - and offered equal or better performance.   PCs were $2000.00 for something decent then.

Intel, was *forced* to bring their prices down when the market split 50-50.

You should be rooting for AMD - or else you probably wouldn't HAVE an i7.  ( or it would have cost you twice as much. )

[Lupin]

For my own case, I'd rather buy a pimp GPU - or 2 - than an i7.   I've never gotten awesome gaming out of an uber CPU.

Though, I've always gotten good results from a good GPU.

This would be the better thing to do.

[Sosseres]

There are a few titles each year that get CPU limited. The most spectacular case in recent time was Supreme Commander, with a high end dual core that game went to a crawl on the larger maps with lots of units. With a quad it took a while longer.

[Reape]

I personally wouldn't like to buy anything bearing intel mark because of some of the more or less recent deeds they have done on the markets in attempt to kill AMD.
Currently having a Phenom II x4 build and I have nothing bad to say about it.

[bloody000]

I personally wouldn't like to buy anything bearing intel mark because of some of the more or less recent deeds they have done on the markets in attempt to kill AMD.
Currently having a Phenom II x4 build and I have nothing bad to say about it.

ah the usual "oh but but they play dirty it's not fair" crying.

If you actually say something more relevant like Phenom II is cheaper, runs just as good as C2Q, and is highly overclockable I would've agreed with you.

[Reape]

I personally wouldn't like to buy anything bearing intel mark because of some of the more or less recent deeds they have done on the markets in attempt to kill AMD.
Currently having a Phenom II x4 build and I have nothing bad to say about it.

ah the usual "oh but but they play dirty it's not fair" crying.

If you actually say something more relevant like Phenom II is cheaper, runs just as good as C2Q, and is highly overclockable I would've agreed with you.

Well sorry for thinking that even economy has its rules to protect consumers.
And if you think all those other things you mentioned weren't on my mind when I bought my Phenom II you're horribly wrong.

[bloody000]

I personally wouldn't like to buy anything bearing intel mark because of some of the more or less recent deeds they have done on the markets in attempt to kill AMD.
Currently having a Phenom II x4 build and I have nothing bad to say about it.

ah the usual "oh but but they play dirty it's not fair" crying.
If you actually say something more relevant like Phenom II is cheaper, runs just as good as C2Q, and is highly overclockable I would've agreed with you.

Well sorry for thinking that even economy has its rules to protect consumers.
And if you think all those other things you mentioned weren't on my mind when I bought my Phenom II you're horribly wrong.

Benefiting consumers is only a bonus, every corporation's primary concern is its own profit.
Also I can't read minds. If you only say you won't buy Intel because they are evil, I will think you buy AMD just because it's not Intel.

[Reape]

Benefiting consumers is only a bonus, every corporation's primary concern is its own profit.

Of course it is, but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to step down on consumers any way possible. They can and will still make plenty of money even if they wouldn't use such dirty measures.

[Tatsujin]

Since the i7s are quite expensive, Intel is planning on releasing it's new i5 and i3 processors to make them more affordable for the average consumer. You'll be able to buy (retail) one of these sweet new processors around mid August and the mobos in early August. They will be using a different socket than the i7s 1366, Socket 1156 and therefore you won't need to get an expensive X58 chipset mobo, but rather a new much more afordable mobo with the new P55 chipset.

I'm very excited and can't wait! I was about to build a new PC with a Phenom II X4 processor until I stumbled upon this today. Was planning on building it for late July/Early August, but I don't mind waiting a bit more for the great performance these new processors will bring about. Keep in mind that they will not be better than the i7s as their names suggest. Although some might outperform the i7 920 at a more affordable price.

IMO this is going to kill AMD until they release a new Processor with new a new arquitecture. Even if their Phenom II processors have great prices, they still cannot beat Intel's Core 2 Quad processors clock per clock... who knows where they'll stand against the new Intel processors  .

Sources if you're interested or want to read more:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3585
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3570&p=1 (It's a very long and descriptive 11 page article.)

Core i7 is like what, around 250 US dollars? 50 dollars more than whatever AMD's latest processor is? .... o_O;; I'm an Intel guy so I won't bother with AMD's processors. I'll get Core i7 or whatever their newest processor is in the next 2 or 3 years. I'm running Quad 2 Core and I'm loving this baby.

[bloody000]

Benefiting consumers is only a bonus, every corporation's primary concern is its own profit.

Of course it is, but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to step down on consumers any way possible. They can and will still make plenty of money even if they wouldn't use such dirty measures.

They don't count 1-2-3 then turn around and shoot. Get real.

[Reape]

Benefiting consumers is only a bonus, every corporation's primary concern is its own profit.

Of course it is, but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to step down on consumers any way possible. They can and will still make plenty of money even if they wouldn't use such dirty measures.

They don't count 1-2-3 then turn around and shoot. Get real.

Now that sounds like you think I want the whole market to be 100% controlled and thats not true at all... I just don't think that compeletely everything is acceptable. Intel gave price reducements from their products to companies that refused to use AMDs products wich is like bribing them to embargo AMD... and that goes beyond the line of whats allowed and whats not imo. You can try to trip your competitor a little, just not in every possible way. The perfect situation of course would be where the competition happens purely on who has the best price/quality while the companies still make solid profits, but even if that is compeletely unreachable does it mean we shouldn't even try to get closer to it?

[kureshii]

I pledge no allegiance to either company and neither will I boycott either company. Both need plenty of ass-kicking IMO; Intel's pricing for their lower-end processors is silly (and they get away with it through some shady marketing), while AMD seriously needs to decide their direction, in addition to fixing that Southbridge issue and building on their Hypertransport architecture.

I've used both company's offerings for both low and high-end builds, and will continue to do so. Have an Intel E5300+G41 (family desktop) and a PhIIX4-940+790FX (project rig), planning AthX2-7750+780G (homeserver) and i7-Lynnfield (personal desktop) builds in time to come.

[IceRiccy]

the I7 expensive? Only if you get above the I7 250. The 220 and 240 are very mainstream prices with as alittle as 200 euro's for a core.

[Lupin]

the I7 expensive? Only if you get above the I7 250. The 220 and 240 are very mainstream prices with as alittle as 200 euro's for a core.

The processor itself isn't that expensive but configure a whole system. The last time I did that, the i7 system is $200 more than the AMD system.

[relic2279]

I like non-seasonal price drops, and leaps in the tech (core replacing netburst for example) but there is a drawback to that.
Less competition. I use intel myself, but I want AMD to always be competitive. Or at least in the game. Competition breeds innovation and that leads to better chips for cheaper prices.