In response to Intel quad core price cuts, AMD cuts Phenom II prices.
As of tomorrow they will cost:
Phenom II X4 940 - 225$
Phenom II X4 920 - 195$
(in tray of 1000 CPUs).
Source: AMD.
Printable View
In response to Intel quad core price cuts, AMD cuts Phenom II prices.
As of tomorrow they will cost:
Phenom II X4 940 - 225$
Phenom II X4 920 - 195$
(in tray of 1000 CPUs).
Source: AMD.
That was quick, but expected. 12 days before a pricecut.
that just shows how well they are doing on sales and that they priced the PII's a little high
Before Q1 is done and dusted, I expect that they will be pricing the 940 where the 9950 was before Deneb's introduction.
price drop already visible in main eu land -40eur that's 190eur for a 920 and 220eur for 940, puts again a lot of pressure on intel's 9300-9400
These price cuts are mirroring intels price cuts.
Both 920 and 940 modeles will be soon eol(Q2 iirc) and AMD will introduce 2 more models(top of the line,945,950) and replace 920 with 925(DDR2&DDR3 support).There will be also a whole gamma of quads with less L3/no L3,tri cores and duals,so AMD practically covered all market segments except the uber high end(which they may cover with dual socket boards for desktop or six core FX part in Q4).
AM3 will be basically the only lineup in Q3 ,while AM2+ 9xxx/9xx series will be eol.
Actually do you have a link?Quote:
Originally Posted by xoqolatl
AMD's pricing on their website doesn't indicate this, at least not where I could see.
hehe, well that hasnt been reflected on newegg.ca yet, its actually up 13$ versus yesterday, at 323 :P but the q9550 did drop but only 15$ from 380, to 365 :/
in the new p2 series amd has and will have only one cpu to compete with intel in the near future and it is 945 (and 940 but i dont and wont count them as two different cpus also 950 which has 100 mhz higher speed :D).
There goes the Phenom 8XX pricing...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
I think not. 170 is still far. Plus this pretty much seals the deal with pricing issues.
Well 950 will have 100Mhz higher core speed and also a higher Northbridge speed and DDR3 support(940 has the lowly 1.8Ghz NB clocks,which really is holding it down in a few tests,since this is also the frequency of the L3 cache in NB block).Quote:
Originally Posted by kromosto
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
yup it's still 275$ for 940 and 235$ for 920 on amd's site.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/...00.html#phenom
I checked it as well but I doubt they will update the page a day ahead, maybe few days later, those analysts have a nasty habit asking about margins when AMD publishes their quarterly results.
So where did the OP get his info from then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuroimaho
He states the source is AMD, but it is not on their website.
Like someone said, these pricecuts are already effective in some shops in europe.
190€ for à 920 and 220€ for a 940.
At this price it's really tempting, but I'll wait for the AM3s.
Distributor info.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Someone on Lowyat.net also mentioned something like that ~10 hours ago...
I got my info from an AMD rep. You can choose not to believe it until it is confirmed by AMD website.
I believe it, but it is easier for me to convince others on a different site if I had the ready made link.Quote:
Originally Posted by xoqolatl
It's still unofficial info and that's why there is no "link".I would expect an official statement today or over next few days.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Demand for PC's/CPU's in Q1 will be even worse than the shocking Q4 results that are pouring in, so if Deneb is cheaper to make than Phenom I, I suspect that this is where they will end up on pricing, as AMD can still make money on them and if people on this forum are any indication, you have a lot of people setting themselves to wait for the AM3 versions, and I don't know if that is what AMD will accept without a fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
The price cuts may not be implemented in Q1, but I think it more likely than not they will at least be announced in Q1, to take effect in early Q2.
But this price cut does seem a little too obvious in stalling C2Q 45nm momentum instead of anything general related to demand.
On a whole this seems more like AMD rolling a speed bin down.
950 replaces 940/5 replaces 920/5 replaces 910 (original price) replaces... gah you know how it goes.
950 might have some other leverage for its price. Maybe OCing capabilities. Maybe the price is lower too, at ~$250 instead of $285.
I think it is always tough for a CPU maker to dramatically increase the asking price of their top bin products(even if they are reasonably faster) than the pricing structure they had in place just before the introduction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
Didn't Conroe/Penryn come in at the same price or cheaper? Yet in the case of Conroe, it was a massive improvement over what it replaced in Prescott.
Aren't the i7's similar in price to what Intel was charging on the C2Q's before the i7's introduction?(Obviously there is a platform cost issue here as well)
I know when I was looking at the prices of the AMD Quads, I got use to seeing their fastest Quad at a tad under $AUD300, so to then see the 940 at almost $AUD500, would induce a lot of buyer resistance I would imagine.
Falling prices are good for consumers. Time to start ragging on my friends to upgrade to Phenom II. At these prices, it's an even better deal for people not already on this platform.
Well i say its true because at OcUK it has just been slashed by £60 less than an hour ago.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/search...earch=phenomII
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...1#post13321243
Didnt they just release these things? Talk about poor mamagement skills.
They probably always knew they were going to have to do this(Intel's price cuts were due) and wanted to at least get a few weeks worth of better profits.Quote:
Originally Posted by situman
So I don't see this as any reason to be critical of AMD's management, they soaked the pent up demand that was there and that is exactly what they should have done in their position.
It still reeks of poor taste, but at least it wasn't as drastic as the GT200 cuts. Mostly this just evens out the 940BE.
How many more cpus could have they have possible sold in those two weeks or so? Now it just makes them look incompetent and clueless as to whats happening in the market. WHy not price them accordingly to begin with to make it look like ur one step ahead of Intel? Now its just telling everyone you are the same old reactive AMD.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Doesn't seem to have bothered their fanbase for the last few years. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by situman
Maybe they were worried Intel would then make bigger cuts to their CPU's and they would still end up cutting again almost immediately after Intel flagged their prices.Quote:
WHy not price them accordingly to begin with to make it look like ur one step ahead of Intel?
QFT! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Oh look piling on in an AMD thread. What a twist!
definitely a deal.
But where are AMDs margins.
Good for consumer but bad for amd. People with AM2+ mb had no choice but to get a phenom II.
I knew I should have waited. Oh well, at least I got $15 from Newegg.
http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/h...-alone-guy.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by MrMojoZ
O.K last time I use it but come on man, Cry us a river and then go look at the comments from the AMD crew in the Intel budget quad thread http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=214970. I am sure you will agree that if it was a thread about AMD and some one said negative things then someone like you would have been crying "leave AMD alone" by now. Why are AMD fans so sensitive?
OTQuote:
Originally Posted by gallag
Do you want me to try and write in Intel threads ;)
AMD fans is not even close to the sensitiveness that Intel fans has.
On topic:
In Sweden the pricescuts is starting to show :)
Now, this is really tempting, 225 US$ quad, hmm, i wonder what AM3 chip would be priced later on. For me, quadcore migration will be commenced in Q2, whether staying in Intel platform or hoping to AMD wagon, while video card will be replaced with DX 11 part later on. Seems like a decent personal roadmap, not too expensive yet right on timingwise.
AMD just doesn't have the money Intel has....
What you are saying doesn't make sense. No one really cares in such a situation, overclockers buy the chips if they clock well and average joe does not even know what a quadcore is.Quote:
Originally Posted by situman
It would be madness not to milk early adopters, especially in such a dire situation.
ooops, wrong thread...nm
It's real simple why they cut the prices. They just don't understand that they have to make a profit. It's what has got them in the dire situation they are now in. They keep making the same mistakes over and over again, and expect different results. They are still trying to compete at a low level with near nil profit margins and expect to survive and it's not working...it never has. You'd think that over the entire period of time since X2 they would've realized that.
Until they get a top level performing chip that will compete with their competition's finest and sell them at prices that will make them money they are never gonna be able to get out the pit they've created.
I keep saying it ad nauseum...
Companies are supposed to be in buisness to make money. That is the ONLY reason they are in buisness. When they don't they cease to exist.
Wow price cut already? It just launched!
:yawn2:Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
neweggs price has dropped
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819103471
good news for me, helps put more money twords my dry ice pot :)
You''re still writing stupid things :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
No everyone like can buy a 1000$ CPU!
For you 200$-250$ is low level. And you're the guy crying about economy crysis!
You really think mainstream market is "near nil margin"?
For five Rockfeller guys like you buying extreme edition cpu, there is 40 guys "low level" mainstream cpu. I know from where Intel and AMD will get the most money :rolleyes:
PhII 940 was priced to be between Q9550 and Q9400 based on it perfomance same for PhII 920, between Q9400 and Q9300.
And now after Intel pricecut? They are still at the same place!
A place where they will sell well.
i think this is a good move by amd..... i'm thinking of having a p2 setup just for the hell of it.....
Well this is probably cause the better Q9550 is dropping in price.... true?
Bud, I don't cry about anything. I'm not like you kids on here. I understand *why* things are the way they are. Wanna know why? Becasue of failing companies just like this one causing people like me that pay taxes to have to buy their sorry tails out of it. I don't feel a bit sorry for them, and we shouldn't be doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
FYI, I got where I'm at today becasue I worked my ass off for it. I didn't go looking for free rides and handouts. I used my head for something other than a hat rack and realized that a day like this would come when I needed to put food on the table.
If you really casred about AMD you wouldn't just be looking for the cheapest thing out there and begging them for chips at prices they can't afford to sell them for. That's precisely what has ran them into the ground. It's AMD's biggest fanboi's that are killing it quickly.
damn definitely buying a 940 now....$235 on newegg sweet!
AM3 CPU´s will make a new bump in sales to AMD cpu´s.
In February 6 new AM3 CPU´s come together so they should do way better then with PH1 in sales despite de crisis.
Judging from your response you're "in the know" somehow... So my question, do you have any idea what their profit margin might be?Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
Anand already thought they were hurting(margins) before the price cuts.
Don't get me wrong, I like AMD's pricing(considering building a PII rig)... That does not dismiss his "profit margin" point, which IMHO is probably razor thin.Quote:
This is the downside to AMD's pricing strategy; while it's great for consumers it's not particularly great for AMD's profit margins.
AMD OPTERON(QUAD-CORE) MODEL 8384Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
$2,204.07
AMD OS2384WAL4DGI - OPTERON(QUAD-CORE) MODEL 2384
$1,050.97
desktop prices don't reflect all profits.
I was with T Flight up until "I'm not like you kids on here."
Now if that's not the most presumptuous and pompous thing I've ever heard...
Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
Maybe you should let them know what they are doing wrong when you attend thier board meeting on tuesday. :yawn2:
Hey forgot to tell you genius, it's "ad nauseam" and we got there due to all your anti AMD rants. You just can't keep them to yourself even if no one is interested in them. Sounds like some old fool growling in his beard :rofl::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
This is what I was waiting for .... quad price war! Whoohoooo
EDIT: Why wait.... whoohoooo
Lol! You pay taxes for AMD? Explain this to me, I don't understand how? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
I will explain ...Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
He is not complaining about paying taxes for AMD, he is complaining about corporate welfare in general. The world has evolved into an abhorrence of the idea of 'failure', to the point that governments around the world will spend money like a drunken sailer providing a safety net for businesses that have proven to be non-viable with failed business models. As a taxpayer he is tired of governments throwing millions of dollars to support companies that cannot turn a profit.
He is speaking of the govornment bailouts hapening here in the U.S. with our tax money.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
He has a habit of talking about things he knows nothing about like he is a expert. He has no idea of AMD's profit margins and yet he preaches about it :rolleyes:
then he should probably be complaining about his elected officials, who have a responsibility to the people versus a company who has a responsibility to turn a profit for shareholders by any means they can within the "law" ^^Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
Edit: Also!! yay for quad wars! :D
Exactly! If I want a company to succeed, I will buy their product. But hand out free money they did not earn--- darn striaght --- do I blame them for asking and taking? Nope, I blame the politician who pulls trigger and hands it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by villa1n
But why blame AMD? Only the German Tax payers have paid them anything. I've heard nothing about AMD getting any money from the US Government, zero. We do know that they got seed money from New York state but those are state taxes. Since then folks from the UAE have stepped in. The rest of AMD prop-up money came from banks and large lenders.Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
Bad for AMD, good for us but I expect them to fall even more. I don't believe AMD is making any profit Right now. This due more to the economy than Intel. But that's just the opinion of someone who according to "LowRun" who can't read:rolleyes:
OT
The Crash Course
Ready to learn everything you need to know about the economy in the shortest amount of time?
http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse
Pardon the question, but are you really THAT thick ? I mean, if AMD has a competitive products against Intel top flight chips at the moment, that they can charge more accordingly, don't you think they would have done so ? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
They charge as much as what the market would accept, that's the bottomline. Yes, they're in a hole and making mistakes, but that doesn't mean they have to lie down and surrender, LOL. :rofl:
What are you suggesting in THE SHORT RUN, charge 400 US$ for a Phenom II 940 simply for maximizing profit per unit count ? You can always play "coulda, shoulda, woulda" game, but AMD has to fight with what they have at hand right now. :yepp:
The future will take care itself, for the better or worse, we don't really know, though i must say this failing situation isn't exactly a new territory for them -those AMD K6 days, bleh. Put down your AMD bashing stick, it's getting lame by the minute. :down:
Hey, I didn't pretend to know what the exact numbers were. I just know the end result...Quote:
Originally Posted by G0ldBr1ck
They ain't enough to get them out of the red so they obviously ain't high enough are they?
Good try at taking the focus off the problem though. :yepp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
i dont know what to say
http://www.robbyslaughter.com/images/head_in_hands.jpg
Don't say anything, the rants of this guy are hazardous. They can seriously damage your brain :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by soundood
A huge portion of AMD's bleeding is from the ATI acquisition for which was over valued at the time of purchase and lost allot on intel chipset sales which further cut ATI's earning potential. If AMD had not bought ATI they would not have the millions in loan payments to make and would have been a much leaner company.
The bread and butter of cpu sales is not the $300+ cost cpus, I would say generally most people go for a pre built computer with a cpu thats a little more expensive than the cheapest.
You don't need a high end product to sell to the masses, you need a good affordable product, nobody needs say i7 for web browsing or office suites.
You DO need a high end product to sell to the enthusiast that is more demanding and more apt to use the extra power.
:rofl::ROTF::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
:ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Man so many people miss that point about ATI on even Intel chipset motherboards. ATI wasn't selling enough Intel based boards to even count. Once ATI lost rage built in there wasn't much left them. I remember a lot of us here waiting for ATI's effort (motherboard).Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
Anyway, prices cut and will be cut some more.
I don't think you got the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
The point is AMD does not make an incredible amount of profit when they sell their top end chip for 225 dollars because the cost of the chip itself and R and D. They also have to lower the price of their other chips because it starts to compete with the rest of their line because of the similar pricing.
It also doesn't help that these chips are not made by them, but by a third party. This 50 dollar price drop has removed a huge portion of the profit margin on this chip that probably had lower margins than the competition in the first place. What the point of selling a million chips if you are making pennies on each one. Margins are not the same thing as volume, which I think is the thing your thinking of.
AMD needs new technology so that they can bring the price of their average chip up, so they can create larger margins and make more profit. AMD was at its most profitable when their average chip price was high, which also coincides when their chip were at their most competitive. Everyone knows this. AMD was losing the most money when its average price was at its lowest because of the paper thin margins on each chip sold.
Although the economy is bad, if you make a fast enough chip, people will still buy. Especially if you have affordable MB and ram to accommodate it.
This is the scenario NV is in at the moment they have an expensive chip but they have to sell it for very low margin because the competition is strong and they cannot let AMD gain marketshare.
However the situation AMD is in, they cannot afford this approach because they do not have piles of extra cash nor do they have a tremendous marketshare to lose which is why this approach is used in the first place.
Cheap chip for all benefits everyone but the company.
You have said this many times and im very curius how you can actualy think that AMD fans are hurting the company. AMD fans make no decisions for AMD, AMD fans do buy the products that AMD are in busness to sell, AMD fans tend to invest in AMD.Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
The first few times you have said this I figured you were just rambling but you keep saying it. Evidently you believe this and are trying to make a point that most of us do not see so if you would inlighten us........
As far as price cut, It was enough to get me to order a 920 today when I already have a 940.
I don't understand you guys....you want AMD to price their parts higher against products that outperform? Do you understand VOLUME? Volume parts are not priced at $500+, AMD is priced to fit in the mainstream, where they will sell more chips. Intel selling a $1k processor is just catoring to the die-hard enthusiast who can afford it. How many of those are there vs the average joe who buys a laptop, or a cheap desktop?Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
None of you can begin to make estimates about the margins on their new tech, nor can you know the yields of the new process.
PH II 920 and 940 are having much more sucess then PH I. AMD was erased from Retail market and is now coming again with this new CPU.
And only came out 2 models.
Wait for February with 6 AM3 models and it will be much better the it was with PH I. Many people (90%++) is waiting for AM3 models.
And Intel new quad-core and price cuts where very very agressive response because they know that this PH II is going to give them harder times then with PH I.
AMD has reported a gross margin of around 50% for the last two quarters, the cheap chips can't be hurting them very much or this figure would be much lower.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
The vast majority of the population using computers are not particularly interested in cpu performance. Whether AMD offers a $1000 high end chip isn't going to drastically impact their bottom line in the retail market simply because there are much less machines sold at that level in retail. If AMD can offer a solid product in the meat of the market they should be able to maintain their margins.
Just look at the success the ATI division has had with targeting the mainstream market with affordable performance while Nvidia was elephant hunting and had its sites on the big dollar enthusiast market.
Price drop on newegg brings it to 235, not 225. Its already up. And I just bought it. Couldn't pass up the deal.
If that was the case, AMD would not be losing money at the rate it is. It gross margins are undoubtedly worse than Intels.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
I don't think T Flight was saying we need 1000 dollar chips. I think this is the implication of the 1000 dollar chip. When you can sell a consumer level chip at the 1000 dollar level and it will actually sell, that means you have technology that is cutting edge and derivative using the same technology will sell well enough to the mainstream or make a profitable lineup of chips.
AMD cannot produce a 1000 dollar consumer chip simply because its technology is not good enough. Considering the size of the company compared to the competition, it's no surprise.
AMD targetting the mainstream consumer has not been nearly as profitable as NV when they could charge what they wanted because they had no competition.
I don't think you got the point too. Either T_Flight don't have it.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
You speak about competition like in old days, AMD speaks about competitiveness.
Highest performance is not necessarily the key to sucess. Just look at Nvidia-ATI. Nvidia have the performance crown but which company sell the most :rolleyes:
2008 Nvidia margins were ridiculous. That's wh they badly needed 55nm. They earned pityful money with 260 and a little more with 280 GTXQuote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
.
That actually is true...Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Gross margin for 3q08 was 51%: http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/cont...Financials.pdf
For comparison, Intel's was 59%: http://www.intc.com/secfiling.cfm?fi...50134-08-18805
You might as well say Toyota won't be successful as Chevy since they don't have a Corvette or that Hyundai and Kia can't compete successfully with their lower prices and smaller margins as the other automakers with flashier faster more powerful models.
AMD doesn't need a fast enough chip to compete at the $1000 price or even the $500 price point to be competitive in the mainstream market where a vast majority of sales are made.
One thing for sure AMD is loosing allot of money paying installments on a multi billion dollar loan and interest for an asset that doesn't generate enough income to cover itself and isn't worth what they originally paid for it.
It can almost be considered like the current housing market where you have someone who bought say a million dollar home only to find out its only worth half what you paid for it but you still have to pay the mortgage, unless you default.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
He trolls every AMD/ATI thread. Its best to just ignore it and not let that crap throw a perfectly good disscussion off course.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Yes we all know you predicted the largest global recession since the great depression. We all know. :shakes:
Amd makes money not only by selling these chips but also by generating interest in their products. They also have chipsets and graphics cards to sell for use with their cpu's. System builders have to be informing their customers about the great deals and performance they will get by using amd's products. Even though intel has the perfomance crown atm, with the economy the way it is, people that need a decent performing computer can't afford to overlook amd.
Amd new chips are pretty good, i use to be a loyal amd fan in the fx days, then i went to intel because thats where the peformance is, i think intel, and amd need to drop prices, with the struggling economy, people are holding tight to the cash, but when prices drop its definitly going get people to buy who were holding back.
My prediction is amd will in the next 2 years take the processor crown back, even though there struggling financialy right now, and rebuilding there company, if they survive these hard times, they will bounch back in a big way, i hope they do, nothing like some good competition between intel and amd, where before when buying, or building a new computer its a no brainer your buying a intel chip. I like it when you have to go :rolleyes::confused: which processor do i buy amd or intel.
What has led you to this belief?Quote:
Originally Posted by neo mike
Why do you want to know? So you can flame him for his ideas/opinion?:shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Why does anyone want to know things?Quote:
Originally Posted by rk7p5
Try being a bit less obnoxious in future.
You guys need to do a better job getting the word out there. Many enthusiasts/avg. users still don't care to understand AMD's architecture, or why higher NB clocks and DDR3 will make AMD that much more competitive. I'm actually most excited about the 950. I have the feeling it's going to gain AMD back a ton of respect.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I was talking about T flight point. Which just simply talks about margins. I think everyone knows AMD cannot overcharge for the price of the Phenom II because it simply won't sell, especially with the AMD name. I think what he was getting at is AMD needs to release a better product than Intel because competitive is not enough. Remember when people bought celeron over AMD because it had the Intel name?Quote:
Originally Posted by AbelJemka
A product that cannot simply be countered with price cuts(i.e what core 2 initially had) and thus have high profitable margins. This means products in the Intels lineup cannot compete with AMDs with a simple shift in price. I agree the most money right now is between 100-300 dollars considering the economy, but this is obvious. AMD does not need to compete with core i7, but it would not hurt. Forget what I have just said.
AMD needs to release a product with core i7 like or better performance and charge C2Q prices. That's what it will take to beat Intel. This might seem irrational and impossible, but that what Athlon X2 initially offered and this is when AMD was at it strongest, nonetheless just matching intels marketshare.
Say AMD is making 40-50 percent margins(which is a stretch since anand even says the margins on these chips are not fantastic(someone above posted margins) on phenom II, with this pricecut, AMD gross margins have dropped 20 percent, leaving them with a paltry 20-30 percent. Add in the other cost not included in gross margins, debt on interest and they are still not making any money.
You cannot compare the car market to the processor one. I.e Car reliability > processor reliability, fuel consumption > energy use. Car performance is also too difficult to compare to Processor performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
Heck the graphic sector is different enough that you can't use them as comparisons simply because Intels marketing name is better than AMDs, where name in graphic card does not play that much of a role to the consumer(not fanboy).
As I have mentioned before, AMD needs to diversify with new tech that will trickle down to lower segments. This will involve releasing product at higher price points and reducing its line up to reduce redundancy and also cutting down on AMD own products competing with itself.
AMD has more than 20 processors available for the consumer segment. Yet the highest priced chip is 225 dollars. From my perspective, AMD killed half of its line with the release of phenom II, its too closely priced with the rest of its line. However if phenom II had better performance and thus justified perhaps 499 and 350 and 250 dollar price point. AMD gross margins would more than double and AMD would not need to give their lower end chips away to sell them.
Sure the best selling chip might be the 250 dollar one. But as time goes on, the 350 dollar chip would become the 250 dollar chip and larger price gaps gives the product a longer shelf life as well as create incentive to buy when price cuts do occur. The 250 dollar chip could go down to 180 allowing more mainstream people to adopt. It might be bad for the consumer, but it allows AMD to milk the high profit margins ship as long as possible. It also gives AMD enough time to improve yields to the point where costs have lowered that such a price point is still profitable.
You might say why is core i7 not flying off the shelves. Easy answer, the price of the MB and RAM, which is a cost consumer consumer are less willing to splurge on, makes the entry price of core i7 too high.
Again, shoulda coulda woulda game being played, LOL. Sure AMD should produce something that's so powerful it can put Core I7 on its knees, but CAN THEY at this moment ? Do you have to keep on beating a dead horse ? AMD doesn't have :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: to compete in the high performance segment for atleast the next 6-8 quarters, we know it, Intel know it, AMD know it too, do you suggest they should have stopped doing their bussiness ?
AMD CPU bussiness is just in survival mode at the moment, it's no secret, and Bulldozer seems quite afar in the horizon, fusion is still taking shape, until then, they have to live with what they've got, why is that so hard to understand ? :confused:
AMD Phenom II Pricing Drops 17%
A price war....W00t!..:)
(not so, but it came close)
Actually, we know nothing. What happened in the GPU market six months ago, just confirms it. EVERYTHING goes.Quote:
AMD doesn't have $$$$ to compete in the high performance segment for atleast the next 6-8 quarters, we know it, Intel know it, AMD know it too, do you suggest they should have stopped doing their bussiness ?
Nah, as much i would love to believe otherwise, AMD CPU roadmap is just not too promising, and a revolutionary CPU design that can change the competition scenery, won't come anytime soon. Unlike GPU roadmap that can be more secretful and volatile, CPU roadmap must be more predictable and stable, because of different market target, that's why i don't think there would be many surprise waiting in the corner for AMD CPU division in the near future.
Whoahh, you're still pissy because you had to admit you were wrong :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
I hope we're not going through another round of this BS.
I was wrong! You got a PM!Quote:
Originally Posted by LowRun
You should stop digging that hole you have fallen into ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
No, I PM-ed you so you would keep the BS out of thread.;) Looks like you can't help being the jerk that you are and that truly was my point.:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by LowRun
Don't try to make yourself look like the nice guy, you bring the stuff in the thread and afterward PM me so you can say "Hu, i PMed you to keep the BS out the thread". You're just mad because you had to admit you were wrong, damn you even suggested i was using multiple accounts and whatnot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
Told you before, i feel sorry for you buddy.
Donnie can't you see that even unintentionally you are able to derail AMD thread in an instant? Why you have such and urge to do such things is beyond me.It is not that hard to just stay out of these touchy topics,or at least don't get personal in debates?I understand you are an older man,but some of your posts are pretty childish (no offense,I'm just noticing the obvious).
On topic,techreport says that Newegg already updated the prices on Phenom II.
New price of 940 and 920 models at the newegg are 235$ and 195$.
Good move for the customer... too bad for the ones that got one already. But that's the price we all pay when buying stuff at launch date...
The only thing I'll say to some of you... Is that you can't just look at one aspect and ignore all others. If you want to be at all fair anyway.
If you think the only way for AMD to be "successful" is to beat Intel in the straight performance race, that's a fine opinion to have.
But there's good arguments for the opposing side that the most effective way AMD can be competitive is in the mid-range. They simply
can't compare to Intel's high end, so they don't try.
I'm sure that if AMD could launch a $1200 3.8 ghz Phenom II 975 that would OC to 8 ghz they'd do it. Of course those chips have a great
margin, that's why Intel even bothers to make "extreme edition" chips. But ultimately, the bulk of sales aren't going to be $1000+ chips.
Your normal computer user, and I don't necessarily mean a complete nub, just doesn't often have that sort of money to spend on one single
part.
But to be honest, if you guys want to debate AMD's profitability, good luck. I suspect that if the solution to all their problems were so simple,
it would have been enacted long ago.
Only on XS will people put down a company for dropping its prices... I don't know what things are coming to anymore. It appears blatant
fanboyism has taken place over well reasoned arguments.
In any case, I don't mean to offend anyone or further derail this topic. But some of you need to consider if what you're saying you truly believe.