This is why AMD needs a new PR scheme

[Bateluer]

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: Bateluer
I don't follow. The X2 outperform the D's. The D's require a whole new motherboard, RAM, and likely videocard too, adding to their cost.

With the X2, I can drop it almost any s939 mobo, so that 537 cost is all I have to pay. With the D, I have to spend 241 on the 2.8Ghz, 180 for the mobo, around 200 for RAM, and around 300 for a PCIe X800XL. And it'd still be slower than the cheaper X2 system.

So, what is the point you were trying to make?

His point is simple if you weren't such a flaming fanboy.

$537 versus $241
$1001 versus $530

Pretty simple really.

I am not a 'flaming fanboy' I was simply pointing out that there are other costs associated with the processor. On the AMD side, most user's will simply have to buy the X2, one purchase of 537. On the Intel side, they need a new motherboard and RAM at the least, which equals the price; And still leaves you with a significantly slower processor.

Fanboy indeed! Hrmmph.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: Bateluer
I don't follow. The X2 outperform the D's. The D's require a whole new motherboard, RAM, and likely videocard too, adding to their cost.

With the X2, I can drop it almost any s939 mobo, so that 537 cost is all I have to pay. With the D, I have to spend 241 on the 2.8Ghz, 180 for the mobo, around 200 for RAM, and around 300 for a PCIe X800XL. And it'd still be slower than the cheaper X2 system.

So, what is the point you were trying to make?

His point is simple if you weren't such a flaming fanboy.

$537 versus $241
$1001 versus $530

Pretty simple really.

I am not a 'flaming fanboy' I was simply pointing out that there are other costs associated with the processor. On the AMD side, most user's will simply have to buy the X2, one purchase of 537. On the Intel side, they need a new motherboard and RAM at the least, which equals the price; And still leaves you with a significantly slower processor.

Fanboy indeed! Hrmmph.

Why the hell do people ALWAYS say "Blah blah bullsh!t you ned a new motherboard for Intel blah blah not for AMD, AMD rocks".

NOT EVERYONE HAS A FRICKIN' 939 MOTHERBOARD, OR DECENT RAM TO PAIR WITH AN ATHLON X2 YOU IDIOT.
SOME PEOPLE NEED A NEW MOBO/RAM FOR BOTH. STOP SPOUTING BULL.
Most users my ass. Most users use Intel, so they will need to buy everything, motherboard and RAM, whichever route they take.

50% of AMD's production is still of Athlon XP's according to one article, that means a lot of Athlon XP's are still sold, which means a lot of AMD users don't have 939, they probably have Socket A.
Also, a fair few people may have 754 instead, or a minute number with 940, and they will have to buy a new mobo for AMD X2.
Most users having 939 is a load of bull. Except in reference to this particular forum.



(Nothing against you personally, I'm just tired of everyone assuming that everyone has a socket 939 motherboard when it's quite simply nowhere near true)

 

[13Gigatons]

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: Bateluer
I don't follow. The X2 outperform the D's. The D's require a whole new motherboard, RAM, and likely videocard too, adding to their cost.

With the X2, I can drop it almost any s939 mobo, so that 537 cost is all I have to pay. With the D, I have to spend 241 on the 2.8Ghz, 180 for the mobo, around 200 for RAM, and around 300 for a PCIe X800XL. And it'd still be slower than the cheaper X2 system.

So, what is the point you were trying to make?

His point is simple if you weren't such a flaming fanboy.

$537 versus $241
$1001 versus $530

Pretty simple really.

I am not a 'flaming fanboy' I was simply pointing out that there are other costs associated with the processor. On the AMD side, most user's will simply have to buy the X2, one purchase of 537. On the Intel side, they need a new motherboard and RAM at the least, which equals the price; And still leaves you with a significantly slower processor.

Fanboy indeed! Hrmmph.

Why the hell do people ALWAYS say "Blah blah bullsh!t you ned a new motherboard for Intel blah blah not for AMD, AMD rocks".

NOT EVERYONE HAS A FRICKIN' 939 MOTHERBOARD, OR DECENT RAM TO PAIR WITH AN ATHLON X2 YOU IDIOT.
SOME PEOPLE NEED A NEW MOBO/RAM FOR BOTH. STOP SPOUTING BULL.
Most users my ass. Most users use Intel, so they will need to buy everything, motherboard and RAM, whichever route they take.

50% of AMD's production is still of Athlon XP's according to one article, that means a lot of Athlon XP's are still sold, which means a lot of AMD users don't have 939, they probably have Socket A.
Also, a fair few people may have 754 instead, or a minute number with 940, and they will have to buy a new mobo for AMD X2.
Most users having 939 is a load of bull. Except in reference to this particular forum.



(Nothing against you personally, I'm just tired of everyone assuming that everyone has a socket 939 motherboard when it's quite simply nowhere near true)

AMD:
Mobo = $80
CPU = $530 { 4200+ }
DDR = $80
===========================
$690.00

Intel:
Mobo = $228 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=247003
CPU = $310 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80830
DDR2 = $149.00 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=85016-44
===========================
$687.00


For $3 more you could have the 4200 which would crush the 820.

 

[Zebo]

Get em' gigatons..don't let anybody buy that junk

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
To me the cheap pentium dual core is a "loss leader" for Intel. A "bone" so to speak for distributers. "If you keep pushing our overpriced chips, we will give you these dual cores at a price AMD can't compete with"

Thier not a loss. Chips cost like $20-$60 to make. Intel still gaugeing....just not like 1990-1998 times when AMD was a blip and $500 processor was normal from Intel.

Yeah I used the grocery store term "loss leader" to mean Intel is sacrificing potential profits or severely reducing their margins on these chips as an incentive to promote their entire line of chips. I understand that the actual production cost for a CPU is very low and that even at bargain basement prices there is still a gross profit.

But being the "cost accountant" that I am, I must also point out that production cost is only a portion of the cost to market a product. I worked many years for a company making bottled meds, the atctual costs of materials and labor where only like $.40 per bottle. But when you added administrative overhead, amortization of plant buildings and equipment, patents, marketing and selling expenses, etc... the actual cost of sales skyrocketed to around $6-$10 per bottle.

I understand these same ratio's don't apply to the CPU industry, but I would be very surprized if the fully loaded cost of a CPU is less than 3-5 times the $20-60 figure you quote or higher. If the true cost was really $20-60 how the hell did AMD have a net loss last year when their sales prices where $100-$1000 per CPU

 

[cbehnken]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: CheesePoofs

Originally posted by: Maluno
I believe the OP is saying AMD needs better PR, because to an uneducated person, it looks as if buying the intel is a no-brainer. They see high clock speeds and a low price, and think that is all that matters. We know this is faulty logic, but AMD needs to use PR to educate the masses.

I agree with the OP's intentions, but there is still nothing they can do about it. They aren't about to rework their entire architecture just to make it run faster so the idiots of the world will think its faster.

No need to change anything except pro-rate them like cyrix did.

2.2 x 1.63 = 3.6 Ghz
2.2 x 1.72 = 3.8 Ghz

2.4 x 1.66 = 4.0Ghz
2.4 x 1.75 = 4.2Ghz

Multiple by 1.6 for 512k and 1.7 for 1024k and of course always round up.

The problem isn't the product it's the marketing scheme, people love Gigahertz, it's simple and easy to understand.

Hell Hard drive makers have no problem lying about there 200 gig hard drives that aren't really 200 gigs.

They DO THAT ALREADY!

What do you think the 4000+ means? 3000+? etc..

 

[carlosd]

Originally posted by: rgreen83

Originally posted by: carlosd

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: Bateluer
I don't follow. The X2 outperform the D's. The D's require a whole new motherboard, RAM, and likely videocard too, adding to their cost.

With the X2, I can drop it almost any s939 mobo, so that 537 cost is all I have to pay. With the D, I have to spend 241 on the 2.8Ghz, 180 for the mobo, around 200 for RAM, and around 300 for a PCIe X800XL. And it'd still be slower than the cheaper X2 system.

So, what is the point you were trying to make?

His point is simple if you weren't such a flaming fanboy.

$537 versus $241
$1001 versus $530

Pretty simple really.

X2 4200+ at $540 >> Pentium D XE at $1000.

A64X2 consumes 110W Vs PXE 300+W.

Where in the flaming hell did you get your numbers? I agree totally that the X2 uses considerably less power than the pentium D, but 300+ watts? Are you out of your mind? That would burn a hole through your motherboard! Perhaps you are quoting total system draw as cpu only?

Yes, I was talking about the whole system.
Here is the link, at tomshardware which is obviously a pro intel page.
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050509/cual_core_athlon-19.html

The 840 system draws 214Watts idle and 315!!! yeah you read well 315Watts under full load. Oh that's crap. While AMD A64 X2 4800+ system draws only 185Watts at full load, less than the Pentium D 840 at idle!!!!, so you can see the CPU having great impact in total system comsumption.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: Bateluer
I don't follow. The X2 outperform the D's. The D's require a whole new motherboard, RAM, and likely videocard too, adding to their cost.

With the X2, I can drop it almost any s939 mobo, so that 537 cost is all I have to pay. With the D, I have to spend 241 on the 2.8Ghz, 180 for the mobo, around 200 for RAM, and around 300 for a PCIe X800XL. And it'd still be slower than the cheaper X2 system.

So, what is the point you were trying to make?

His point is simple if you weren't such a flaming fanboy.

$537 versus $241
$1001 versus $530

Pretty simple really.

I am not a 'flaming fanboy' I was simply pointing out that there are other costs associated with the processor. On the AMD side, most user's will simply have to buy the X2, one purchase of 537. On the Intel side, they need a new motherboard and RAM at the least, which equals the price; And still leaves you with a significantly slower processor.

Fanboy indeed! Hrmmph.

Why the hell do people ALWAYS say "Blah blah bullsh!t you ned a new motherboard for Intel blah blah not for AMD, AMD rocks".

NOT EVERYONE HAS A FRICKIN' 939 MOTHERBOARD, OR DECENT RAM TO PAIR WITH AN ATHLON X2 YOU IDIOT.
SOME PEOPLE NEED A NEW MOBO/RAM FOR BOTH. STOP SPOUTING BULL.
Most users my ass. Most users use Intel, so they will need to buy everything, motherboard and RAM, whichever route they take.

50% of AMD's production is still of Athlon XP's according to one article, that means a lot of Athlon XP's are still sold, which means a lot of AMD users don't have 939, they probably have Socket A.
Also, a fair few people may have 754 instead, or a minute number with 940, and they will have to buy a new mobo for AMD X2.
Most users having 939 is a load of bull. Except in reference to this particular forum.



(Nothing against you personally, I'm just tired of everyone assuming that everyone has a socket 939 motherboard when it's quite simply nowhere near true)

AMD:
Mobo = $80
CPU = $530 { 4200+ }
DDR = $80
===========================
$690.00

Intel:
Mobo = $228 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=247003
CPU = $310 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80830
DDR2 = $149.00 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=85016-44
===========================
$687.00


For $3 more you could have the 4200 which would crush the 820.

Looks like you need a little smart shopper help.

First of all, show me where you can buy an X2 4200+ for 530.00 right now. Don't you think the price will be gouged when this CPU becomes available? Just like ZZF is asking almost 70.00 over MSRP for the 820D?

Intel PD 820 after gouging is over............................241.00 or less
Gigabyte 945P mobo .............................................136.00 Dropped 3 more dollars from yesterday. Was 139.00.
Only reason to go 955x is if you plan on using more than 4GB of system memory. not.
DDR2 533 512x2 (1GB) OCZ Value..........................92.00

For a grand total of..................................................469.00

 

[carlosd]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: Bateluer
I don't follow. The X2 outperform the D's. The D's require a whole new motherboard, RAM, and likely videocard too, adding to their cost.

With the X2, I can drop it almost any s939 mobo, so that 537 cost is all I have to pay. With the D, I have to spend 241 on the 2.8Ghz, 180 for the mobo, around 200 for RAM, and around 300 for a PCIe X800XL. And it'd still be slower than the cheaper X2 system.

So, what is the point you were trying to make?

His point is simple if you weren't such a flaming fanboy.

$537 versus $241
$1001 versus $530

Pretty simple really.

I am not a 'flaming fanboy' I was simply pointing out that there are other costs associated with the processor. On the AMD side, most user's will simply have to buy the X2, one purchase of 537. On the Intel side, they need a new motherboard and RAM at the least, which equals the price; And still leaves you with a significantly slower processor.

Fanboy indeed! Hrmmph.

Why the hell do people ALWAYS say "Blah blah bullsh!t you ned a new motherboard for Intel blah blah not for AMD, AMD rocks".

NOT EVERYONE HAS A FRICKIN' 939 MOTHERBOARD, OR DECENT RAM TO PAIR WITH AN ATHLON X2 YOU IDIOT.
SOME PEOPLE NEED A NEW MOBO/RAM FOR BOTH. STOP SPOUTING BULL.
Most users my ass. Most users use Intel, so they will need to buy everything, motherboard and RAM, whichever route they take.

50% of AMD's production is still of Athlon XP's according to one article, that means a lot of Athlon XP's are still sold, which means a lot of AMD users don't have 939, they probably have Socket A.
Also, a fair few people may have 754 instead, or a minute number with 940, and they will have to buy a new mobo for AMD X2.
Most users having 939 is a load of bull. Except in reference to this particular forum.



(Nothing against you personally, I'm just tired of everyone assuming that everyone has a socket 939 motherboard when it's quite simply nowhere near true)

AMD:
Mobo = $80
CPU = $530 { 4200+ }
DDR = $80
===========================
$690.00

Intel:
Mobo = $228 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=247003
CPU = $310 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80830
DDR2 = $149.00 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=85016-44
===========================
$687.00


For $3 more you could have the 4200 which would crush the 820.

Looks like you need a little smart shopper help.

First of all, show me where you can buy an X2 4200+ for 530.00 right now. Don't you think the price will be gouged when this CPU becomes available? Just like ZZF is asking almost 70.00 over MSRP for the 820D?

Intel PD 820 after gouging is over........241.00 or less
Gigabyte 945P mobo ..........................136.00 Dropped 3 more dollars from yesterday. Was 139.00.
Only reason to go 955x is if you plan on using more than 4GB of system memory. not.
DDR2 533 512x2 (1GB) OCZ Value........................92.00

For a grand total of....................469.00

Only 200 dollars more for a much faster single thread CPU, a faster multithreading CPU and a much cooler and a lower system comsumption CPU, which will lead to a very quiet system. Also with the pentium D you will have to pay more for the electricity bill and in cooling solutions, and in some of months you will have payed more than the $200, but having that slower, hotter and noisy system. oh! what a saving!

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Actually the D 820 is already available at ZZF.

Yes, Its $310, instead of the advertized $241.......

Thanks, this is like the 3rd or 4th time you've listed this and I'm not sure what your point is. Can you find a X2 at the MSRP price? NO. Will the prices of Pentium D's and X2's go down as more vendors have the cpus in stock? YES.

Any new technology(CPU, mobo, video card) always commands a premium when first introduced b/c of limited supplied and new adopters are willing to pay a premium to be the first to have the new toy on the block.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: carlosd

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: Bateluer
I don't follow. The X2 outperform the D's. The D's require a whole new motherboard, RAM, and likely videocard too, adding to their cost.

With the X2, I can drop it almost any s939 mobo, so that 537 cost is all I have to pay. With the D, I have to spend 241 on the 2.8Ghz, 180 for the mobo, around 200 for RAM, and around 300 for a PCIe X800XL. And it'd still be slower than the cheaper X2 system.

So, what is the point you were trying to make?

His point is simple if you weren't such a flaming fanboy.

$537 versus $241
$1001 versus $530

Pretty simple really.

I am not a 'flaming fanboy' I was simply pointing out that there are other costs associated with the processor. On the AMD side, most user's will simply have to buy the X2, one purchase of 537. On the Intel side, they need a new motherboard and RAM at the least, which equals the price; And still leaves you with a significantly slower processor.

Fanboy indeed! Hrmmph.

Why the hell do people ALWAYS say "Blah blah bullsh!t you ned a new motherboard for Intel blah blah not for AMD, AMD rocks".

NOT EVERYONE HAS A FRICKIN' 939 MOTHERBOARD, OR DECENT RAM TO PAIR WITH AN ATHLON X2 YOU IDIOT.
SOME PEOPLE NEED A NEW MOBO/RAM FOR BOTH. STOP SPOUTING BULL.
Most users my ass. Most users use Intel, so they will need to buy everything, motherboard and RAM, whichever route they take.

50% of AMD's production is still of Athlon XP's according to one article, that means a lot of Athlon XP's are still sold, which means a lot of AMD users don't have 939, they probably have Socket A.
Also, a fair few people may have 754 instead, or a minute number with 940, and they will have to buy a new mobo for AMD X2.
Most users having 939 is a load of bull. Except in reference to this particular forum.



(Nothing against you personally, I'm just tired of everyone assuming that everyone has a socket 939 motherboard when it's quite simply nowhere near true)

AMD:
Mobo = $80
CPU = $530 { 4200+ }
DDR = $80
===========================
$690.00

Intel:
Mobo = $228 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=247003
CPU = $310 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80830
DDR2 = $149.00 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=85016-44
===========================
$687.00


For $3 more you could have the 4200 which would crush the 820.

Looks like you need a little smart shopper help.

First of all, show me where you can buy an X2 4200+ for 530.00 right now. Don't you think the price will be gouged when this CPU becomes available? Just like ZZF is asking almost 70.00 over MSRP for the 820D?

Intel PD 820 after gouging is over........241.00 or less
Gigabyte 945P mobo ..........................136.00 Dropped 3 more dollars from yesterday. Was 139.00.
Only reason to go 955x is if you plan on using more than 4GB of system memory. not.
DDR2 533 512x2 (1GB) OCZ Value........................92.00

For a grand total of....................469.00

Only 200 dollars more for a much faster single thread CPU, a faster multithreading CPU and a much cooler and a lower system comsumption CPU, which will lead to a very quiet system. Also with the pentium D you will have to pay more for the electricity bill and in cooling solutions, and in some of months you will have payed more than the $200, but having that slower, hotter and noisy system. oh! what a saving!

Clear something up for me. Does the cost factor mean anything to you, yes or no?
Because in your last post here, I cant really tell. "Only 200 dollars" tells me you don't think much of costs. "Will have to pay more in electricity and in cooling solutions" Tells me that you do care about costs and btw, what more would you need to pay for cooling costs? Does the CPU come without a fan/hs? "In some months you will have payed mor than the $200" Now suddenly the $200 matters when it was "Only 200 dollars" before?

I can't follow you. Does the cost matter or not, or only when its advantageous to say so.

 

[carlosd]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: carlosd

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: Bateluer
I don't follow. The X2 outperform the D's. The D's require a whole new motherboard, RAM, and likely videocard too, adding to their cost.

With the X2, I can drop it almost any s939 mobo, so that 537 cost is all I have to pay. With the D, I have to spend 241 on the 2.8Ghz, 180 for the mobo, around 200 for RAM, and around 300 for a PCIe X800XL. And it'd still be slower than the cheaper X2 system.

So, what is the point you were trying to make?

His point is simple if you weren't such a flaming fanboy.

$537 versus $241
$1001 versus $530

Pretty simple really.

I am not a 'flaming fanboy' I was simply pointing out that there are other costs associated with the processor. On the AMD side, most user's will simply have to buy the X2, one purchase of 537. On the Intel side, they need a new motherboard and RAM at the least, which equals the price; And still leaves you with a significantly slower processor.

Fanboy indeed! Hrmmph.

Why the hell do people ALWAYS say "Blah blah bullsh!t you ned a new motherboard for Intel blah blah not for AMD, AMD rocks".

NOT EVERYONE HAS A FRICKIN' 939 MOTHERBOARD, OR DECENT RAM TO PAIR WITH AN ATHLON X2 YOU IDIOT.
SOME PEOPLE NEED A NEW MOBO/RAM FOR BOTH. STOP SPOUTING BULL.
Most users my ass. Most users use Intel, so they will need to buy everything, motherboard and RAM, whichever route they take.

50% of AMD's production is still of Athlon XP's according to one article, that means a lot of Athlon XP's are still sold, which means a lot of AMD users don't have 939, they probably have Socket A.
Also, a fair few people may have 754 instead, or a minute number with 940, and they will have to buy a new mobo for AMD X2.
Most users having 939 is a load of bull. Except in reference to this particular forum.



(Nothing against you personally, I'm just tired of everyone assuming that everyone has a socket 939 motherboard when it's quite simply nowhere near true)

AMD:
Mobo = $80
CPU = $530 { 4200+ }
DDR = $80
===========================
$690.00

Intel:
Mobo = $228 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=247003
CPU = $310 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80830
DDR2 = $149.00 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=85016-44
===========================
$687.00


For $3 more you could have the 4200 which would crush the 820.

Looks like you need a little smart shopper help.

First of all, show me where you can buy an X2 4200+ for 530.00 right now. Don't you think the price will be gouged when this CPU becomes available? Just like ZZF is asking almost 70.00 over MSRP for the 820D?

Intel PD 820 after gouging is over........241.00 or less
Gigabyte 945P mobo ..........................136.00 Dropped 3 more dollars from yesterday. Was 139.00.
Only reason to go 955x is if you plan on using more than 4GB of system memory. not.
DDR2 533 512x2 (1GB) OCZ Value........................92.00

For a grand total of....................469.00

Only 200 dollars more for a much faster single thread CPU, a faster multithreading CPU and a much cooler and a lower system comsumption CPU, which will lead to a very quiet system. Also with the pentium D you will have to pay more for the electricity bill and in cooling solutions, and in some of months you will have payed more than the $200, but having that slower, hotter and noisy system. oh! what a saving!

Clear something up for me. Does the cost factor mean anything to you, yes or no?
Because in your last post here, I cant really tell. "Only 200 dollars" tells me you don't think much of costs. "Will have to pay more in electricity and in cooling solutions" Tells me that you do care about costs and btw, what more would you need to pay for cooling costs? Does the CPU come without a fan/hs? "In some months you will have payed mor than the $200" Now suddenly the $200 matters when it was "Only 200 dollars" before?

I can't follow you. Does the cost matter or not, or only when its advantageous to say so.

MY point is that you are trying to save some money in something that will represent with time more costs for you, and at the same time is an inferior product. So this is a false saving. Did you follow or have I to explain it agaaain.

 

[Capt Caveman]

If you're concerned about power consumption, I hope you're using a high energy efficient PSU. I know a good number of folks love the OCZ Powerstream psu's. They're great for overclocking but terrible in efficiency. At load, they're something like 65%, meaning a Powerstream 520w is wasting almost 200 watts of electricity.

I hope you have a Seasonic S12 which is 80% at load.

 

[Markfw]

Believe me, I can attest to what it costs to run boxes... And $10 more a month will pay for itself in less than 2 years... Now if you have AC, like me, the added heat can also be even more ! Maybe another $5 every month you need AC due to the higher cooling required.

Edit Good point Caveman..... My Antec True 550 EPS is >70% it says, but that can use a lot more than 80% I will have to check those out

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: carlosd
MY point is that you are trying to save some money in something that will represent with time more costs for you. So this is a false saving.

False saving? I don't know about that. 218.00 difference doesn't sound false to me.
By your logic and others in here. Even if it costs you 50 extra dollars per year to run a P4D 820, It would take 4 years + to rack up what you saved in the initial purchase.
And who here hangs on to any CPU for 4 years? Most people in here think that 1 year and they are severely out of date. Your argument is kind of losing steam here.
Also, the DC PD820 will best single core A64's and FX's at true mutlithreaded apps will it not? At 241.00 I'd say it is a very nice buy. Sure, the X2's are faster, but they are not THAT much faster where any non professional will notice a difference. People will do just fine if they choose to stay with an intel system. Especially when game devs thread games.
I'm just calling it like I see it man. I would love to own an X2 or a PD. Doesn't matter. But when it comes down to saving a buck or two, that just might matter.

Oh and one more thing. Are you going to be singing this tune when Yonah/ported to desktop, Conroe get here and undercut AMD's power consumption? These posts hang around for a long time man, and can be used against you later on if someone wants to remind you. Not saying I would stoop to that level, but some might.

 

[carlosd]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: carlosd
MY point is that you are trying to save some money in something that will represent with time more costs for you. So this is a false saving.

False saving? I don't know about that. 218.00 difference doesn't sound false to me.
By your logic and others in here. Even if it costs you 50 extra dollars per year to run a P4D 820, It would take 4 years + to rack up what you saved in the initial purchase.
And who here hangs on to any CPU for 4 years? Most people in here think that 1 year and they are severely out of date. Your argument is kind of losing steam here.
Also, the DC PD820 will best single core A64's and FX's at true mutlithreaded apps will it not? At 241.00 I'd say it is a very nice buy. Sure, the X2's are faster, but they are not THAT much faster where any non professional will notice a difference. People will do just fine if they choose to stay with an intel system. Especially when game devs thread games.
I'm just calling it like I see it man. I would love to own an X2 or a PD. Doesn't matter. But when it comes down to saving a buck or two, that just might matter.

Anyway. Buy whatever you want, but please don't tell us this is the best option. You will realize when you have it.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: carlosd

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: carlosd

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: 13Gigatons

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: Bateluer

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: Bateluer
I don't follow. The X2 outperform the D's. The D's require a whole new motherboard, RAM, and likely videocard too, adding to their cost.

With the X2, I can drop it almost any s939 mobo, so that 537 cost is all I have to pay. With the D, I have to spend 241 on the 2.8Ghz, 180 for the mobo, around 200 for RAM, and around 300 for a PCIe X800XL. And it'd still be slower than the cheaper X2 system.

So, what is the point you were trying to make?

His point is simple if you weren't such a flaming fanboy.

$537 versus $241
$1001 versus $530

Pretty simple really.

I am not a 'flaming fanboy' I was simply pointing out that there are other costs associated with the processor. On the AMD side, most user's will simply have to buy the X2, one purchase of 537. On the Intel side, they need a new motherboard and RAM at the least, which equals the price; And still leaves you with a significantly slower processor.

Fanboy indeed! Hrmmph.

Why the hell do people ALWAYS say "Blah blah bullsh!t you ned a new motherboard for Intel blah blah not for AMD, AMD rocks".

NOT EVERYONE HAS A FRICKIN' 939 MOTHERBOARD, OR DECENT RAM TO PAIR WITH AN ATHLON X2 YOU IDIOT.
SOME PEOPLE NEED A NEW MOBO/RAM FOR BOTH. STOP SPOUTING BULL.
Most users my ass. Most users use Intel, so they will need to buy everything, motherboard and RAM, whichever route they take.

50% of AMD's production is still of Athlon XP's according to one article, that means a lot of Athlon XP's are still sold, which means a lot of AMD users don't have 939, they probably have Socket A.
Also, a fair few people may have 754 instead, or a minute number with 940, and they will have to buy a new mobo for AMD X2.
Most users having 939 is a load of bull. Except in reference to this particular forum.



(Nothing against you personally, I'm just tired of everyone assuming that everyone has a socket 939 motherboard when it's quite simply nowhere near true)

AMD:
Mobo = $80
CPU = $530 { 4200+ }
DDR = $80
===========================
$690.00

Intel:
Mobo = $228 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=247003
CPU = $310 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=80830
DDR2 = $149.00 http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=85016-44
===========================
$687.00


For $3 more you could have the 4200 which would crush the 820.

Looks like you need a little smart shopper help.

First of all, show me where you can buy an X2 4200+ for 530.00 right now. Don't you think the price will be gouged when this CPU becomes available? Just like ZZF is asking almost 70.00 over MSRP for the 820D?

Intel PD 820 after gouging is over........241.00 or less
Gigabyte 945P mobo ..........................136.00 Dropped 3 more dollars from yesterday. Was 139.00.
Only reason to go 955x is if you plan on using more than 4GB of system memory. not.
DDR2 533 512x2 (1GB) OCZ Value........................92.00

For a grand total of....................469.00

Only 200 dollars more for a much faster single thread CPU, a faster multithreading CPU and a much cooler and a lower system comsumption CPU, which will lead to a very quiet system. Also with the pentium D you will have to pay more for the electricity bill and in cooling solutions, and in some of months you will have payed more than the $200, but having that slower, hotter and noisy system. oh! what a saving!

Clear something up for me. Does the cost factor mean anything to you, yes or no?
Because in your last post here, I cant really tell. "Only 200 dollars" tells me you don't think much of costs. "Will have to pay more in electricity and in cooling solutions" Tells me that you do care about costs and btw, what more would you need to pay for cooling costs? Does the CPU come without a fan/hs? "In some months you will have payed mor than the $200" Now suddenly the $200 matters when it was "Only 200 dollars" before?

I can't follow you. Does the cost matter or not, or only when its advantageous to say so.

MY point is that you are trying to save some money in something that will represent with time more costs for you, and at the same time is an inferior product. So this is a false saving. Did you follow or have I to explain it agaaain.

ok these long quotes are getting a bit ghey now

 

[carlosd]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Oh and one more thing. Are you going to be singing this tune when Yonah/ported to desktop, Conroe get here and undercut AMD's power consumption? These posts hang around for a long time man, and can be used against you later on if someone wants to remind you. Not saying I would stoop to that level, but some might.

No, it's just that Pentium D power compsumtion is extremely high (ridiculous), A64 compsumtion is accurate and nobody have to make any effort to keep the CPU cool with the stock HSF. So nobody would matter (except you intel fanboy, specially because you are defecnding pressHOT and Pentium DHOT CPUs) complaining about A64 compsumtion while the CPU remains cool with a quiet system as it does.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: carlosd

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Oh and one more thing. Are you going to be singing this tune when Yonah/ported to desktop, Conroe get here and undercut AMD's power consumption? These posts hang around for a long time man, and can be used against you later on if someone wants to remind you. Not saying I would stoop to that level, but some might.

No, it's just that Pentium D power compsumtion is extremely high (ridiculous), A64 compsumtion is accurate and nobody have to make any effort to keep the CPU cool with the stock HSF. So nobody would matter about that.

There, you said it again... What do you mean by "make an effort to keep the CPU cool"?
You buy the PD, put on the intel HSF that came with it, done.

Are you talking about overclocking? I'm not.
Oh, and to your post above, whether or not its the best option is relative to the person buying. Not everyone sees things as cut and dry as you or I might. I think we can at least agree on that.

 

[carlosd]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: carlosd

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Oh and one more thing. Are you going to be singing this tune when Yonah/ported to desktop, Conroe get here and undercut AMD's power consumption? These posts hang around for a long time man, and can be used against you later on if someone wants to remind you. Not saying I would stoop to that level, but some might.

No, it's just that Pentium D power compsumtion is extremely high (ridiculous), A64 compsumtion is accurate and nobody have to make any effort to keep the CPU cool with the stock HSF. So nobody would matter about that.

There, you said it again... What do you mean by "make an effort to keep the CPU cool"?
You buy the PD, put on the intel HSF that came with it, done.

Are you talking about overclocking? I'm not.
Oh, and to your post above, whether or not its the best option is relative to the person buying. Not everyone sees things as cut and dry as you or I might. I think we can at least agree on that.

Didn't you know that presHOT single cores are extremely HOT, well in Pentium D you have Two of them, so it will be even hotter. Most of the time The Stock HSF is not enough to keep 560/660/670 CPUs cool, Pentium D820 will consumes more power than those single cores Pentium CPUs, So the CPU will be very hot (at least for me), the temps will be around 65-70 degrees, while an FX55 wich consumes about the same than X2 4200+ will not pass 45º degrees. That is what I mean. Do you think that the extra power compsumtion of the second core is free, whitout generating any aditional heat? Specially when you are using such inefficient desing using differencial Pair logic, which consumes power when even not activated.

 

[Dookie]

lmao @ this topic.


Back on topic... Perhaps AMD doesn't see the need to assult the public with more advertising. Perhaps they know the majority of their customers know enough about how a computer works to know why their chips are superior and don't see a need to dump an assload of money into an advertising campaign.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Dookie
lmao @ this topic.


Back on topic... Perhaps AMD doesn't see the need to assult the public with more advertising. Perhaps they know the majority of their customers know enough about how a computer works to know why their chips are superior and don't see a need to dump an assload of money into an advertising campaign.

Unfortunately, AMD is still losing money and needs to attract more customers. Advertising is a means of doing that. When AMD says that they have no plans to market their products, that's scary.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: carlosd

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: carlosd

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Oh and one more thing. Are you going to be singing this tune when Yonah/ported to desktop, Conroe get here and undercut AMD's power consumption? These posts hang around for a long time man, and can be used against you later on if someone wants to remind you. Not saying I would stoop to that level, but some might.

No, it's just that Pentium D power compsumtion is extremely high (ridiculous), A64 compsumtion is accurate and nobody have to make any effort to keep the CPU cool with the stock HSF. So nobody would matter about that.

There, you said it again... What do you mean by "make an effort to keep the CPU cool"?
You buy the PD, put on the intel HSF that came with it, done.

Are you talking about overclocking? I'm not.
Oh, and to your post above, whether or not its the best option is relative to the person buying. Not everyone sees things as cut and dry as you or I might. I think we can at least agree on that.

Didn't you know that presHOT single cores are extremely HOT, well in Pentium D you have Two of them, so it will be even hotter. Most of the time The Stock HSF is not enough to keep 560/660/670 CPUs cool, Pentium D820 will consumes more power than those single cores Pentium CPUs, So the CPU will be very hot (at least for me), the temps will be around 65-70 degrees, while an FX55 wich consumes about the same than X2 4200+ will not pass 45º degrees. That is what I mean. Do you think that the extra power compsumtion of the second core is free, whitout generating any aditional heat? Specially when you are using such inefficient desing using differencial Pair logic, which consumes power when even not activated.

I own a prescott. Do you? You are kind of nitpicking now. You have migrated from complaining about the cost of a new Intel DC platform compared to the cost of a new 939 DC platform, to temperatures and electricity, and now to cooling costs. I know Prescotts run hotter than Northwoods (which I also own) and Athlons. This is old news. You think that the hundreds of thousands of people who buy DC Dell computers over the next year or so will have to crack open their cases to place large expensive cooling fans on their Intel Pentium D processors? Oh hell no. When I get home tonight, I will tell you exactly where my Prescott reports its temps at idle and under load. Then you can tell me that my motherboard isn't reporting correctly.

 

[bluemax]

Many people here have mentioned they preferred the HT Pentium4's for their "peppiness" or responsiveness in Windows and general usage. I'm hoping a dual-core A64 can get that same kind of responsiveness. We already know AMD does extremely well in single demanding tasks such as games.

I have to admit - dual P4 cores with Hyperthreading = performance increase in 4 simultaneous apps. Sounds interesting at first glance.

 

[Dookie]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Unfortunately, AMD is still losing money and needs to attract more customers. Advertising is a means of doing that. When AMD says that they have no plans to market their products, that's scary.

That is unfortunate. IMHO I think they'd be better off trying to get more OEM contracts than running a huge ad campaign. I was at Best Buy the other day and I looked at their PCs. There were, I think, 1 or 2 AMD boxes out of the 20 or so PCs.