Intel to halve prices on all chips

[erl]

'It seems that AMD will have a battle on two fronts since not only are they lagging in GHz power but Intel is also approaching their prices pretty fast.'

Why no mention of AMD chips with significantly lower "GHz power" consistantly kicking Intel chips' butts?

[samwichse]

The sad thing is is that Intel "approching" AMD's price is a threat to AMD. They held a far superior price/performance ratio for quite a while, even had the fastest performing chips availible for the desktop market, but never took more than a small portion of Intel's market share. It is sad to me that Intel can make AMD twich just by doing something they should have done long ago, cutting their own prices.

[daveleau]

http://www.sysopt.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/015695.html

A sad, often overlooked side-effect of this type of action.

Dave

[ragtop]

I was waiting for the price to drop on a 1GHZ PIII for the last 3 months, but they remained high. So I just sold my socket 370 motherboard & I'm waiting for a new T-Bird and ECS motherboard to arrive. Now they're going to have 1.1 GHZ Celerons for around $100??

Intel lost me as a customer because they waited too long to bring prices into line. I won't be back any time soon.

[Jeffy]

I read in my local newspaper of the 2 ghz p4. They don't even mention the fact that amd's athlons are on par or better in real world apps with the faster clocked p4's. Amd will really need to flex their abilities to prove to the world that they are just as good.

[DiscoLando]

Probably because 90% of PC users don't read benchmarks and subsequently see 2GHz compared to 1.4GHz and say, 'Oh, 2 is bigger than 1.4'

Besides, once SSE2 apps start coming out, AMD won't have quite as big of an advantage in performance. The P4 does have the advantage of being future-ready, just not present-ready.

[CMonster]

Oh -I see, once again it's time to "Celeron" AMD.

[radio1_mike]

While it is nice to see Intel dropping prices and it's disconcerting to think the average user may not understand the performance that AMD offers; what does it matter?

AMD has always been *the choice* for people in the know; and while I wish they had more than the 20% market penetration they have; they seem to be keeping their fiscal head above the water. Except for my first PC, I've always had AMD (or Cyrix) onboard. I can't say I'd switch to Intel (even with this price drop) because of the resentment they've built up over the past few years.


This month's PC Magazine says AMD's Sledgehammer should debut at 2.5 to 3.0 GHz.

I'll keep my fingers crossed, though.

[elroy]

Intel knows that 90% of machine buyers don't understand squat about the machines they buy and the numbers game is where it's at. Anyone can understand that 2 is more than 1 and 1.8 is more than 1.4. AMD is still an unknown company with the general public. Tell someone they should buy AMD and they say "what?".

[jcontonio]

So you're all sticking up for AMD, which I am too...but what about Apple? It's the same argument. Better performance, lower MHz. AMD and Apple should team up, make Mac OS X available only on AMD processors, and AMD should buy the G4 from Motorola and make a new processor...one that kicks intels ******. That's my 2 cents.



[This message has been edited by socalgal (edited 08-30-2001).]

[radio1_mike]

Nice point. It'd be interesting to see what would come from that marriage.

But, the point is not entirely target.

AMD vs. Intel is still based x86/Windows architecture and software. Apple is not.

AMD is cheaper. Apple is not.

I, and maybe I am alone on this; would like to have an Apple computer. But they are too expensive for what performance you do get; and they are not techie-friendly. They ain't made for tinkerers. You may consider that a strength or a weakness depending on your POV.

[BBA]

AMD has always been *the choice* for people in the know

Quite the opposite was true until the K7 first surfaced. I cant tell you how many people I converted from AMD K6's to P2/Celerons...just by letting them play games on my P2's and Celerons. Performance was king back then when money DID matter ( Intel was way more than AMD was, but frames were frames in Q2...and AMD could not pump them the way Intel did. )

Now things are much better for AMD...they came a long way and were helped out by a rambus fiasco, along with a crappy Intel marketing dept.

BTW, Intel already has a running 3.5GHz CPU that is actually showed running Q3 and two video streams simultaneously...I would say that rules for now.

My point is that for the general public...the AMD is still known as the second rate chip company...that fact alone will hurt AMD for a long while to come.

AMD hopefully will NOT revert to PR ratings...it has earned a stigma of BS from the general public since it was first used...that would only discredit AMD more.

AMD still has a tough fight ahead!