Final Words: Conroe Availability and Pricing

While Intel's Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme processors will be released at the beginning of Q3 of this year it will take some time for all of Intel's shipments to be Conroe based.  The scary statistic is that by the end of this year, only 25% of Intel's Performance Mainstream desktop processor shipments will be based on Conroe.  The remaining 75% will still be NetBurst based, meaning they will be Pentium 4, Pentium D and Pentium Extreme Edition. 

Given how competitive Core 2 Extreme is with the Athlon 64 FX-62, you would expect no one to want to purchase a NetBurst based processor if they can get a Core 2 Duo or Core 2 Extreme for a competitive price.  Intel does have a plan to deal with the over availability of undesirable Pentium Ds and limited supply of Conroes; Intel would do what anyone would do if you're trying to move a lot of undesirable product: cut the price.

By the time Conroe ships, Intel's Conroe and Pentium D pricing will be as follows:

 CPU Price
Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 (2.93GHz/4M) $999
Intel Pentium Extreme Edition 965 (3.73GHz/2Mx2) $999
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (2.67GHz/4M) $530
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 (2.40GHz/4M) $316
Intel Pentium D 960 (3.60GHz/2Mx2) $316
Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 (2.13GHz/2M) $224
Intel Pentium D 950 (3.40GHz/2Mx2) $224
Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 (1.86GHz/2M) $183
Intel Pentium D 940 (3.20GHz/2Mx2) $183
Intel Pentium D 930 (3.00GHz/2Mx2) $178
Intel Pentium D 920 (2.80GHz/2Mx2) $178
Intel Pentium D 820 (2.80GHz/1Mx2) $133
Intel Pentium D 805 (2.66GHz/1Mx2) $93



While the Pentium D has never been as attractive as AMD's Athlon 64 X2, at these prices some of them may be difficult to resist.  The $93 Pentium D 805 will be particularly hard to ignore, when was the last time you could build a solid two processor workstation for a few hundred dollars? 

The Pentium D 805 aside, the rest of the Pentium D line becomes extremely attractive after these price cuts take place, especially when you consider that AMD's cheapest dual core offering is still hovering around the $300 mark. 

Intel's price cuts are very aggressive, to the point that they are the talk of the town in Taiwan.  Every single motherboard manufacturer we met with asked us about Intel's price cuts and, more importantly, how AMD would respond.  We've been told that AMD will respond with a series of price cuts of its own, the questions when and how much remain unanswered.  Next week, in Taipei, AMD will be speaking with many motherboard manufacturers about its response to Intel's threat. 

Despite the lower pricing on the Pentium Ds, it's not like Conroe ends up being all that expensive.  The entry level E6300 and E6400 chips are both priced at $183 and $224, respectively, which is far from high.  As attractive as the Pentium D's pricing may be, Conroe's performance and lower power consumption may still end up driving more demand than there is supply. 

For the Dells of the world, Conroe availability shouldn't be too much of an issue because companies like Dell get first dibs.  For years of not going with AMD, all while demanding something more competitive from Intel, you better believe that Dell is going to soak up every last Conroe that it can. 

The problem then becomes what happens after Dell and HP have eaten their lunch, unfortunately the concern is that aggressive pricing won't be enough to reduce retail demand for Conroe.  What we're worried about happening is a very small supply of Conroes on the retail market in late Q3/early Q4, resulting in much higher street prices than what you see in the table above.  In the worst case scenario for Intel, Conroe's limited retail availability could result in a price to performance ratio equal to or worse than AMD's Athlon 64 X2. 

The benchmarks we've seen show Conroe as a very strong competitor to the Athlon 64 X2, availability could be what limits how much lost ground Intel can regain before AMD has a chance to respond with K8L. 

While performance here is extremely strong, we also haven't even touched on the overclockability of Conroe; from what we've seen, hitting above 3.5GHz on the highest end parts isn't too far fetched on air cooling alone. The absolute highest we've seen on air is 3.8GHz from a Core 2 Extreme X6800 processor. By the time Conroe officially launches, we'll be able to provide a full set of performance tests but so far we're seeing even more data to support the idea that Intel really has a winner on its hands.

Gaming Performance
Comments Locked

134 Comments

View All Comments

  • neweggster - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    quote:

    impressive not really, just shows all the benchmarks we were seeing before were close to reality. minus the 40% faster when it closer to 20% faster on avg.

    Does this matter to me no. Will I still be buying a dual core opteron to put in my 939 board yes. I'll check back again in 18-24 months what is on the market then, until then just videocard upgrades for me. All u fanboys can fight over who has the better processor and larger e-penis till the next century. Does intel or AMD care probably not, why cause they make there money from the system builders.

    Boys and there toys, you would think things would change as some of u guys get older. nope just like grade school.



    If that was the case then you wouldn't be posting on a enthusiast website meant to show performance and benchmarks of new technology, surely you took the time to get registered to post.

    If you hadn't been so interested in this community then why make a posts. I see nobody else bashing enthusiasts on these forums, lol its out of context someone coming here saying we are like grade schoolers because we are interested in technology.

    Take a clue, technology runs this world and the people in it, also it is mainly a big market where 100's of thousands of people work in this type industry. Perhaps if you don't like the people who post here who are so eager for the next best thing then don't come reading the stuff lol. PEACE!
  • Makaveli - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    first of all I love technology And I think both companies are great. my complaint is u lil kids and your fighting over pointless shit all the time. its never ending. I actually like coming to the forums to read stuff that is intelligent and that I can learn from. All the fanboyism shit gets old quick. The point of my post is Who give a flying fuck which cpu is faster. as long as it fits in your budget and meets your needs. That is one of the reason's I hardly go to tom's Hardware anymore they use to be now the forum is over run with lil kids and my intel this my AMD this. None of these companies Care what u think they just want your money. yet u guys fight like your in a war for there loyalty. I just wish some of u would grow the fuck up.

    end of my rant.
  • Xenoid - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    We have all seen the top AMD vs the top Intel cpu, but for those of us who don't own 5 Ferraris and a Maybach, when can we expect realistic reviews.

    I would like to see the lower 3 Conroes (2.4ghz in particular as it has the bigger cache) vs normal AMD cpus in the same price bracket.

    As for my fandom since I have to explain it or else face certain flaming, I own 3 Intels and 3 AMD cpus. That will be all.
  • IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    quote:

    We have all seen the top AMD vs the top Intel cpu, but for those of us who don't own 5 Ferraris and a Maybach, when can we expect realistic reviews.

    I would like to see the lower 3 Conroes (2.4ghz in particular as it has the bigger cache) vs normal AMD cpus in the same price bracket.

    As for my fandom since I have to explain it or else face certain flaming, I own 3 Intels and 3 AMD cpus. That will be all.


    Not really worth it as the $530 chip is gonna beat the FX anyway. At same price point it won't be even worth comparing.

    And congrats to AT(especially Anand) for making an early and non-biased review.
  • bob661 - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    quote:

    Not really worth it as the $530 chip is gonna beat the FX anyway. At same price point it won't be even worth comparing
    I don't think that's what he meant. I think he wants to see some more realisticly priced Conroe's and X2's. Of course, if you actually read what he said, you would know that.
  • IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    quote:

    I don't think that's what he meant. I think he wants to see some more realisticly priced Conroe's and X2's. Of course, if you actually read what he said, you would know that.


    Doesn't matter, because at this rate, it won't be worth considering at the same price point, so why look. He can see, but its like those people who wants to see CPU performances at 2048x1536 4xAA/8xAF when there will be no difference between top of the line and Celeron D. It's already know, do you just have to see it??
  • smitty3268 - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    Well I would still be interested in a full review, of all the speeds of Conroe with a few X2's thrown in the mix as comparison points. Which I'm sure is what AT's final review will be like.

    Presumably AMD is also going to do some significant price cutting until K8L is released in order to stay competitive. Anyone know this for sure?
  • neweggster - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    Toms Hardware has the slower 2.66 conroe up against the Fx-62. Im sure AMD is lowering prices, already seen significant drops in AMD CPU's in past week.
  • Xenoid - Wednesday, June 7, 2006 - link

    I don't read Toms.

    To rephrase what I said for the ignorant masses, I want to see the lower clocked Conroes compared to X2s of the same price (300~) and hopefully we will have that when it is released.
  • IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, June 6, 2006 - link

    quote:

    We have all seen the top AMD vs the top Intel cpu, but for those of us who don't own 5 Ferraris and a Maybach, when can we expect realistic reviews.

    I would like to see the lower 3 Conroes (2.4ghz in particular as it has the bigger cache) vs normal AMD cpus in the same price bracket.

    As for my fandom since I have to explain it or else face certain flaming, I own 3 Intels and 3 AMD cpus. That will be all.


    Not really worth it as the $530 chip is gonna beat the FX anyway. At same price point it won't be even worth comparing.

    And congrats to AT(especially Anand) for making an early and non-biased review.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now