At this point, considering that we have nothing else to go on in regard to performance, then yes. That would show that AMD has the confidence to go up against the i7-990X in what will probably the 8 core Bulldozer's strongest suit, heavily multi-threaded applications, and it would give AMD back some of their premium brand status instead of the "second rate, budget/value brand" image that I believe is hurting them in the desktop space and possibly even in the server and workstation market. I also still doubt that Bulldozer will be able to compete with the i7-2600K in terms of single-threaded performance but I would be happy to be surprised.I do not know why I keep hearing that since BD is priced similar to SB then it would mean that its performance should be around the price point it is competing against. Who knows AMD might want to price it similar to Intel offerings but may have a huge performance advantage at the same price point.
Would it make the CPUs from AMD look better in terms of performance if they priced their FX-8130P at $999?
At this point, considering that we have nothing else to go on in regard to performance, then yes. That would show that AMD has the confidence to go up against the i7-990X in what will probably the 8 core Bulldozer's strongest suit, heavily multi-threaded applications, and it would give AMD back some of their premium brand status instead of the "second rate, budget/value brand" image that I believe is hurting them in the desktop space and possibly even in the server and workstation market. I also still doubt that Bulldozer will be able to compete with the i7-2600K in terms of single-threaded performance but I would be happy to be surprised.
Well, I will make the following argument:
AMD is trying to sell CPUs, and they want to draw away people who will buy Intel. So what better way to "beat" Intel in this multi-core frenzy than to..."out-core" them! For marketing purposes, nobody (i.e. Joe Blow) cares about whether the 8 core AMD gets decimated by a 6 core Intel. All they care about is "having more cores".
In fact, I was spec'ing out a system for my buddy. He went with an Athlon II x4 (for budget reasons) and would constantly tell me that he got a "quad core" for much cheaper than I got mine. Then he bought an 1100T and began saying, "Wow, I got a 6 core for $200! Still cheaper than your i7!"
Despite my explanations that per-core and per-clock, my CPU was faster, hence the higher price, he didn't care 'cause he had 6 cores.
Most people are like this, and AMD is going after sales by marketing "cores" like this. And I believe it will help them because why should I buy Intel's $600 Gulftown when I can get AMD's FX 6110 for only $240?
Clock-speed race, anybody?
EDIT: And they would ABSOLUTELY sell their top end chip for $999 if it performed at that level. They did so in the past! Because if it really did, they could price their other chips accordingly (FX 8130 = $999, FX 8110 = $600, FX 6110 = $399, FX 4110 = $200) . But these prices (which I'm becoming more and more convinced are legitimate) preclude this possibility, unfortunately.
What's next, cache wars?
Current CPUs are fast enough for anyone who doesn't play games, transcode, do 3D rendering or edit large volumes of media. The CPUs in low-end Dell and HP builds overshoot the needs of that market by a few times.
I don't see that changing any time soon. So, CPUs won't have mainstream 'wars' and will increasingly focus on the markets that needs any and all advances in perf/watt they can get - servers, workstations and phones/tablets. All of which involves selling to integrators rather than consumers, so bullet point based marketing won't work.
Or AMD is expecting to sell every processor the foundry gives them despite having a slight performance deficiency. Lets check our bases:What's more interesting is that the FX4110 is going after the i5-2400 and not the 2500. So either BD performs similarly to SB(Like Phenom 2 vs Core 2.Less than 5% diff on average). Or that BD demolishes SB and Amd is expecting the 2500 to drop to the FX4110's level.
What's more interesting is that the FX4110 is going after the i5-2400 and not the 2500. So either BD performs similarly to SB(Like Phenom 2 vs Core 2.Less than 5% diff on average). Or that BD demolishes SB and Amd is expecting the 2500 to drop to the FX4110's level.
My guess is that the FX8k's are poised to deal with SB-E and bring down SB's for the FX4/6K to deal with.
I would love to see AMD come back into the game, but I'm not so sure they will. I honestly think BD will be the next step past the current 6 core cpu's. This in turn means that they will be subpar to SB.
I hope I am wrong but I do not think they will be on par with Intel. I would also like to see them bring chips with hyperthreading, that would help them out dramatically as well.
I use my cpu's mainly for distributed computing and the hyperthreading makes a huge difference. I always have to go where the computing power is and Intel has been killing it for some time now. Wish AMD could be right there with them.
For the avg user however; AMD does just fine and they would not see any difference going w/intel. AMD systems are usually cheaper as well which is what the avg consumer goes for. I believe this is one reason why AMD is still doing as well as they are.
That really depends. The higher margins of the workstation, server and enthusiast markets might make them more lucrative than the lower segment even with its much greater volume, especially for a company such as AMD that has always been constrained by capacity.for one thing AMD really doesn't care about users like you nearly as much as the average user.
they focus on midrange, it is sort of what ATI did as well when nvidia was trying to make giant huge die video cards like the GTX 280 compared to say a radeon 4850/4870.
how many people really buy i7-2600ks, or i7 990s to begin with. its probably 5% of computer users. if you can sell to the vast majority of users with llano, zacate and bulldozer in the "near highest end" its probably better than having the top cpu and nothing for the average user (and well llano it sounds like will be a better "average user" cpu than a core i3 sandy bridge)
AMD names their chip architecture after race tracks?...although that's still possible to do at the server side with Valencia and Interlagos.
@Khato
Assuming these prices are factual. Then Amd is positioning the FX8k's to take on SB-E. Where as the FX6k's will take on the LGA1155 i7's. And Llano is poised to deal with the low-end i5's and i3's.