AMD will have lower priced X2's

[Elcs]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: stmok
The "waterfall effect"...Hmmm.

This is the way I see it.
(1) AMD does NOT currently have the production capacity to meet demand for dual-core. (This is being addressed with a new Fab that is under construction).
(2) AMD prices the CPUs this high to starve off demand until they are ready.
(3) They are priced in a distinct segment to avoid confusion. (ie : If you want dual core now, be prepared to pay)
(4) As production ramps up, more X2s can be put into the market. (Lower speed ones, etc)
(5) This, as a result is no different from when the A64 was released. It started off expensive at first, but gradually trickled down in price and speed grades as production increased.

I think (5) is the waterfall effect.

Good call.

Termed in Marketing as 'skimming'.

Perhaps they will release a cheap and slow Dual Core processor that makes the Intel price equivilent look like a snail.

Perhaps the 4200-4800 X2's are the height of technology, aimed at getting money from the early adopters and the people who desire the fastest. Afterwards, introduce something like a dual core 3200+ @ 1.6ghz at a lower price point to blow Intels 'cheaper processor' tactics.

 

[Vegitto]

Isn't the waterfall effect just that newer, better models get introduced at the same price the previous top-end models where? Like now: X2 4800+ = $1000, and in a month or 2, they'll introduce X2 5200+ for $1000, and the X2 4800+'d cost like $800, thus being lower in price.

 

[cbehnken]

Originally posted by: Crazyfool
Buying CPU's for sport is a good way to keep AMD and Intel knee-deep in cash.

I refuse to buy a new CPU until I can see a clearly better solution for under $200.

My aged Northwood HT P4 3.06 running much faster(and unbelievably cool) at default voltage leads me to believe that I am better off waiting. Intel's latest offerings are too hot-running. AMD's offerings are hard to o/c without issue and require a new motherboard... and aren't even close to cheap either. :shocked:

Which brings me to another question.... how often do some of you guys change motherboards? I look at the videocard forum and they act like everybody should have a PCI-E videocard... Umm, the rest of my system is running very fine... why should I have to replace a motherboard every time I replace a cpu/videocard/fillintheblank?

Guess I am just getting lazy when I don't wanna rip the guts out of my system every other month or so, lol.

Because it's fairly easy to upgrade everything in your system for almost nothing if you shop right and sell the old parts in FS/T. I went from Socket 754/6800 AGP to Socket 939/x800XL PCI-E for about $100.

If you wait too long then your parts now are worthless. Six months is pretty reasonable for an upgrade cycle unless you are really happy with what you got. I'll probably be good for a long time now (1-1.5 years), because people who upgraded to socket 939 boards can (for the most part) upgrade to dual core for just the price of the processor.

No flamefest wanted here, but how can you say AMD's offereings aren't cheap? If you are comparing single core chips like the one you have they are ever bit as reasonably priced as Intel.

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: cbehnken

Originally posted by: Crazyfool
Buying CPU's for sport is a good way to keep AMD and Intel knee-deep in cash.

I refuse to buy a new CPU until I can see a clearly better solution for under $200.

My aged Northwood HT P4 3.06 running much faster(and unbelievably cool) at default voltage leads me to believe that I am better off waiting. Intel's latest offerings are too hot-running. AMD's offerings are hard to o/c without issue and require a new motherboard... and aren't even close to cheap either. :shocked:

Which brings me to another question.... how often do some of you guys change motherboards? I look at the videocard forum and they act like everybody should have a PCI-E videocard... Umm, the rest of my system is running very fine... why should I have to replace a motherboard every time I replace a cpu/videocard/fillintheblank?

Guess I am just getting lazy when I don't wanna rip the guts out of my system every other month or so, lol.

Because it's fairly easy to upgrade everything in your system for almost nothing if you shop right and sell the old parts in FS/T. I went from Socket 754/6800 AGP to Socket 939/x800XL PCI-E for about $100.

If you wait too long then your parts now are worthless. Six months is pretty reasonable for an upgrade cycle unless you are really happy with what you got. I'll probably be good for a long time now (1-1.5 years), because people who upgraded to socket 939 boards can (for the most part) upgrade to dual core for just the price of the processor.

No flamefest wanted here, but how can you say AMD's offereings aren't cheap? If you are comparing single core chips like the one you have they are ever bit as reasonably priced as Intel.

Yep, it is fairly easy to minimize cost if you upgrade often, as odd as that sounds. Hunt around for killer deals on the latest technology, and when you get bored of it in 4 months like I do, sell it for 90% of what you paid for it. Works for me all the time

I usually upgrade motherboards twice a year, and CPUs three times a year. Video cards probably twice a year as well. It's like a drug.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Tell me about it. I set-up my current rig in the last three months and could get a Pentium D 830 for less than $100, after selling my 640. But now, I'm planning to go with a X2 instead. Yeah, I'm an idiot. I needed hyperthreading for multi-tasking earlier in the year, so I went from AMD to Intel. Now, it's time to go back to AMD.

 

[apairoflegsanyone]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05/13/intel_confirms_netburst_end/

Maybe with this news, I can finally invest.

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: ProviaFan
I'm wanting to go from an Abit NF7-S v2 with an Athlon XP 1700+ to some mainboard and an X2 4400+... is that ok with the upgrade police?

<-- doesn't upgrade much, if that wasn't obvious

That's exactly the same upgrade I'm doing, I have an NF7-S 2.0 and 1700+ (although at 2.4GHz) right now too.

Edit: And I will be buying a 4400+ as well, as soon as I can drain my bank account for one :thumbsup:

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: SynthDude2001
That's exactly the same upgrade I'm doing, I have an NF7-S 2.0 and 1700+ (although at 2.4GHz) right now too.

My 1700+ only hits ~1.9GHz, sadly.

The X2 4400+ is a much better solution, fortunately.

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Someone explain to me term "waterfall effect"

Where I work, waterfall is used to describe a product based on a component configuration of a more stringent product that can't quite meet the specifications. Generally the less stringent product is termed the 'waterfall' product.

This is the case with all processors. They have more stringent tests for a 3800+ than a 3000+. I know my Venice certainly failed 3800+, as I am not stable at 2400MHz unless I increase voltage to be pretty much exactly 1.4v (my board undervolts some from what I set it to). I expect the same will occur with the X2s.

Based on what I've seen with the Venice core though, and assuming similar performance from the X2s, I doubt they'll NEED to waterfall much below 2200MHz.

Previous processors have demanded reasonably priced versions, but for the X2 it may be a while before that happens, as the single core CPUs fill in the price points of the cheaper processors.

I wouldn't expect too many cheap X2s until Intel's cheaper dual cores start picking up volume. At that point AMD will be forced to move dual cores into the lower priced market segment. Intel has a huge advantage over AMD here because it has significantly lower production costs, and it can afford reduced margin at this point.

Like any new technology, Intel is PUSHING it at consumers. AMD tends to have more of a pull philosophy. where AMD tends to introduce as demand requires and not earlier, Intel has more of a push and force quick conversion (like what they did with 915/925 where they REQUIRED mobo makers to buy more than 1 915/925 chipset to be ALLOWED to puchase an 865/875 chipset, basically forcing adoption of 915/925 before the market really wanted to).