IIRC, the Athlon 64 X2 3800 was introduced in late 2005, at the peak of AMD's profits during that timeframe. Almost immediately after that, AMD's profits began to decline year over year. But my memory isn't what it used to be, so maybe I'm mistaken.Originally Posted by Hornet331
Lol wth your talking, I think you forget the P4 vs Athlon time (2004-early 2006). The slowest dualcore was 360$ (x2-3800) and they charged what it was worth, and suprisingly they made there best profits ever.
OK, I re-read your posts. Here's some of what you wrote: "Price is based on performance" and "I can see the 8core BD somewhere around the 500€ mark, cause thats where intels hexacores start." You seem to be arguing that since Bulldozer is speculated to perform similarly to an intel hex, Bulldozer's launch price should be close to today's intel hex prices. You further claim that if Bulldozer doesn't launch at those prices, AMD will be "artificially" cutting margins (whatever that means), missing a huge profit opportunity, and screwing it's shareholders. Did I get that right?No read again what I wrote, if the product has the same performance it should price it a bit lower, but if it has better performance it should be price at least equal or higher depending on how much better performance it offers.
I like how many still think amd is a charity and offers cpu so cheap because they are nice....
Well, I guess one person's speculation about Bulldozer's initial pricing is as good as another's these days. But there's a helluva lot more to pricing than just performance, especially at a product's introduction. You can try to dismiss "Economics 101" all you like, but pricing a new CPU - or any new product for that matter - depends on many different factors and this case is no exception.
By your logic (AMD intros @ 500€), intel may as well say "...oh look...AMD priced their new chip about the same as our comparably performing hexas...that means we can keep our prices the same, because production volumes/market share don't really mean anything for our profitability!"
As far as opinions go, mine is that if this CPU is introduced at 500€ (~$700!), it won't be good for AMD's business - especially in the face of their declining market share. Another consideration is that intel very likely has room to drop prices on their hexes and still sell them at a profit when Bulldozer launches, something I'm sure is not lost on the folks at AMD. If intel sees Bulldozer as a threat, they will almost certainly lower the prices of their competing chips, and it won't be because they're feeling charitable towards their CPU buyers.
Hey, I would love to see a return to the glory days of AMD64 when AMD could command higher prices. Benefits of increased competition and whatnot. But info on Bulldozer's capabilities will require some time to percolate through the marketplace before buyer's perceptions change. If it turns out that Bulldozer's performance is in fact roughly equivalent to intel's hexes, then yes, AMD could eventually raise prices to match intel...but that ain't gonna happen at launch.
I'm starting to think that Particle's rules are coming into play here
Bookmarks