Intel Price Drops April 20th

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: runawayprisoner

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: runawayprisoner

Originally posted by: Markfw900
the only Microcenter around me is way too far to drive...Q9450 is still hard to find, and X3350 is still spendy.

http://microcenter.com/add_pro...49071=TRUE&488940=TRUE

And apply the $50 off total purchase coupon. Next day shipping is only $12.

Dang it, I just Paid $344 shipped less than a week ago ! $305 !!!!! And I ran out of space for boxes..... 8 quads is enough

Haha, I know. That's why...
Gee... price drops are raining really hard on us.

bah...

In less then 2 yr time i had 400 dollar ram + 600 dollar quadcore drop to less then 100 dollars for the ram, and now 189 for the processor.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
bah...

In less then 2 yr time i had 400 dollar ram + 600 dollar quadcore drop to less then 100 dollars for the ram, and now 189 for the processor.

This is the wrong kind of e-penis competition to be getting into, must be an e-fetish thing, and I hate to admit it to non-technical friends over beers let alone knowledgable forum members at AT...but my $1500 QX6700 and my $950 Mushkin 4GB DDR2-1000 Redlines from 15 months ago (Nov'06) are worth maybe $300 these days.

Now that is teh sux6ors.

 

[fritzfield]

Originally posted by: ActiveX
Price Change = n AMOUNT LESS THAN CURRENT MSRP, NOT WHAT IT WILL COST.

Example - Q6600 currently listed @249.99, new price will be @206.99

DESCRIPTION Price Change

Core2Duo E8400 ($2.00)

Deux piastres, ou la la. NCIX here I come!

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: runawayprisoner

Originally posted by: Markfw900
the only Microcenter around me is way too far to drive...Q9540 is still hard to find, and X3350 is still spendy.

http://microcenter.com/add_pro...49071=TRUE&488940=TRUE

And apply the $50 off total purchase coupon. Next day shipping is only $12.

I got in on that microcenter deal. It's already shipped to me Unfortunately, texas people pay sales tax so I ended up at $331 shipped, giving me a still not-too-shabby average price of $327.49 for the x3350 and q9450 Hopefully the q9450 oc's even better...

 

[tallman45]

So based on the above chart a Q6700 +259.00 means $259 LESS than todays MSRP ?

If so that makes it $279.99

In 2 weeks it comes down to

Q6700 for $279.99
vs
Q9450 for $299.00 (available today)

Would seem like the Q6700 is going to be a big roadblock for Q9450 sales

 

[v8envy]

Originally posted by: tallman45


Would seem like the Q6700 is going to be a big roadblock for Q9450 sales

Only for extreme overclocking. For mild overclocking or stock clock usage, the Q9450 has plenty of features to justify a $20 higher (or more!) price tag.

 

[deepinya]

Originally posted by: j0j081

Originally posted by: SuperSix
OP - it is customary to give credit where you get the info. in this case- it's From JonnyGURU's news site, posted by me.

Thanks

this guy never gives credit. you should see his posts in the hot deals section.

Yeah and he flames you for any comments even if his deal isnt hot.

rofl

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: aigomorla
bah...

In less then 2 yr time i had 400 dollar ram + 600 dollar quadcore drop to less then 100 dollars for the ram, and now 189 for the processor.

This is the wrong kind of e-penis competition to be getting into, must be an e-fetish thing, and I hate to admit it to non-technical friends over beers let alone knowledgable forum members at AT...but my $1500 QX6700 and my $950 Mushkin 4GB DDR2-1000 Redlines from 15 months ago (Nov'06) are worth maybe $300 these days.

Now that is teh sux6ors.

LOL you win IDC. Expecially when you found out that you need to be careful with that vapo.

Still dont understand how you skipped go and collected 200 dollars. Meaning how did you manage to skip water.

 

[imported_boe]

I'm stoked they are dropping the price on the q9550 - sure it was "released" in January and still can't be bought ANYWHERE in the US but at least it is two bucks cheaper - that sure gives me the warm fuzzies.

 

[tallman45]

Originally posted by: boe
I'm stoked they are dropping the price on the q9550 - sure it was "released" in January and still can't be bought ANYWHERE in the US but at least it is two bucks cheaper - that sure gives me the warm fuzzies.

All Intel see is that none are getting bought so lets lower the price. (Oops they did not realize they are not in the market place yet)

 

[TankGuys]

I'm pretty shocked Intel is dropping prices on any of the 45nm parts yet - they are selling like mad... so why they are dropping prices in beyond me. I can't keep the Q9450's in stock for more than a day, no matter how many I get. Not sure I see the logic in dropping the price. But hey, good for the consumer, so we won't complain

 

[bryanW1995]

they're making room for the, um, er, yeah... they're probably doing it pre-emptively b/c they're planning to devote much more manufacturing capabilities to 45nm in q2.

 

[imported_boe]

More lies from Intel about their Q9550s.

I got a few e-mails from Intel insisting the Q9550s were released in January - asked them to verify - they verified - yet still no Q9550s.

http://www.cnet.com/8301-13924_1-9903205-64.html

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: boe
More lies from Intel about their Q9550s.

I got a few e-mails from Intel insisting the Q9550s were released in January - asked them to verify - they verified - yet still no Q9550s.

http://www.cnet.com/8301-13924_1-9903205-64.html

What exactly is the lie? Are they released? Yes, Intel says so and it is the manufacturer who gets to define what the term "released" means in context to their own product lines.

Are you mixing up the terminology of "released" with "volume shipping"? Seems like it to me. Volume shipping will definitely take some time, always does.

How long ago was Phenom "released"? And I doubt if anyone would consider it to be "shipping in volume" even now.

 

[runawayprisoner]

Q9550 showed up a month ago... but in very limited quantity.

 

[imported_boe]

They only have had engineering samples so far - I think there were about 5 or so on Stalliontek - I didn't hear of anyone else actually selling any. I'm not confused about the term released - I would compare that to reserving a car and them not having one when you get to the rental center. Is saying you didn't have sex but got a BJ a lie - I think so but I'm guessing you wouldn't Bill.

If Honda said the new accords beginning shipping in October and they release 5 and four months later they still haven't shipped any more would you say they kept their word? Possibly but Honda sells accords by the tens of thousands every month - 5 over a periord of 4 months doesn't exactly feel to me like they kept their word.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: boe
They only have had engineering samples so far - I think there were about 5 or so on Stalliontek - I didn't hear of anyone else actually selling any. I'm not confused about the term released - I would compare that to reserving a car and them not having one when you get to the rental center. Is saying you didn't have sex but got a BJ a lie - I think so but I'm guessing you wouldn't Bill.

If Honda said the new accords beginning shipping in October and they release 5 and four months later they still haven't shipped any more would you say they kept their word? Possibly but Honda sells accords by the tens of thousands every month - 5 over a periord of 4 months doesn't exactly feel to me like they kept their word.

Uh...I'd say you are very much confused on the terms as you continue to insist they mean the same when they do not.

Released != Volume Shipping

You can be pissed at Intel for the rest of your life for not having volumes of Yorkfields hitting store shelves, but everyone around you is thinking "uh, dude, they only said its released, not volume shipping, means two things for a reason".

 

[imported_boe]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Uh...I'd say you are very much confused on the terms as you continue to insist they mean the same when they do not.

Released != Volume Shipping

Now I'm confused - I'm familiar with <>, =, => etc - what does != is that some sort of spanish math notation?

So if I say I'm releasing the new Acura TL in January of 2008 but only ship one - all year - would you consider that releasing it. Technically you did release it and I understand what the difference is between releasing and volume shipping but if they even were ramping up and released 100 in january - 500 in February, 1000 in March - I can see it as being released but if they released 5 samples in 3 months -I don't exactly call that released as I consider engineering samples little more than prototypes.

 

[HOOfan 1]

!= means not equal to

In C based programming languages

 

[imported_boe]

Originally posted by: HOOfan 1
!= means not equal to

In C based programming languages

Thanks

 

[LOUISSSSS]

hmm anything good to upgrade to from a Q6600??

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: boe

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Uh...I'd say you are very much confused on the terms as you continue to insist they mean the same when they do not.

Released != Volume Shipping

Now I'm confused - I'm familiar with <>, =, => etc - what does != is that some sort of spanish math notation?

So if I say I'm releasing the new Acura TL in January of 2008 but only ship one - all year - would you consider that releasing it. Technically you did release it and I understand what the difference is between releasing and volume shipping but if they even were ramping up and released 100 in january - 500 in February, 1000 in March - I can see it as being released but if they released 5 samples in 3 months -I don't exactly call that released as I consider engineering samples little more than prototypes.

!= means "does not equal"

The disconnect I see here is that you have a set expectation (perhaps unrealistic expectation?) of what the timeline ought to look like in a manufacturer going from "product released" to "product shipping in volume".

I am not here to judge whether your expectations are reasonable or unreasonable. This is a personal preference that each consumer gets to decide and it is up to Intel marketing to change your mind. Personally I think Intel is doing the smart thing, from all aspects of their business model.

However, clearly Intel holds itself to different expectations than yours as Intel seems ok with their current timeline for transitioning from "released" to "volume shipping".

This does not make them a liar, but it can cause frustration in consumers no doubt as it raises the perception of intentional foot-dragging and profit milking. (which is what they should always be doing unless they want to defraud their shareholders of increased stock value)

 

[imported_boe]

Fair enough - while we disagree I certainly can understand why others would disagree with me. I'm sure when AMD said they were releasing their quads soon Intel had to have some counter and when AMD didn't come through Intel found no reason to release their CPUs. While AMD messed up, I find Intel's lack of effort quite slimey.

It would be like if I told me client I'd have the new server online by Monday - and the server was actually powered up and connected to the network on Monday - but no apps were installed, no security was configured etc so the client couldn't actually use the new server- I technically did what I said I would but I wouldn't be surprised if my client fired my ass for misleading them.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: boe
It would be like if I told me client I'd have the new server online by Monday - and the server was actually powered up and connected to the network on Monday - but no apps were installed, no security was configured etc so the client couldn't actually use the new server- I technically did what I said I would but I wouldn't be surprised if my client fired my ass for misleading them.

We are agreed, and this is where the market dynamics that lack of competition and effective monopoly makes Intel's situation depart from yours and my daily lives.

We have to work for a living and compete to deliver goods that exceed our customer's expectations or else we risk someone else doing it for our clients and taking our business away.

Intel isn't so worried about that anymore, and they know they don't need to be worried about it for quite some time to come. I hate it too (as a consumer), a sole-source supplier is the worst thing a business can become dependent upon.

Shareholders though (which I am not) expect Intel to leverage their situation into the maximal financial gain possible. If Intel does not do this then they are violating their fiducial responsibility to their owners. Greed is not expected, its mandatory.

 

[imported_boe]

Strangely enough - places on shopping at yahoo had been listing the Q9550 for quite some time as backordered, out of stock have removed the items from yahoo shopping. My guess is they found out that q9550 won't be out for a long time or they got tired of getting so many e-mails and calls asking when it is coming out.