I like that AMD is bringing out a x3 based off of the Athlon II's. This makes sense, so they can sell more chips/wafer. I think for the $12 difference I'd rather have the x4 620, but that is just me. I do like that they have come out with more power friendly CPU's too, especially for those thinking of a quieter HTPC!! I know that the Intel CPU's generally OC better, but most people don't OC at all so having a cheaper/better based clocked CPU is a win/win for consumers. Maybe we'll see a price drop during the Christmas rush, maybe not.

Reply

It's funny, AMD will never get any profit and still loss after 3 years consecutively. I belive you can not buy any AMD product when Intel roll out the Larrabee. I believe Intel will win in this market too and will crush NVIDIA like AMD before. Intel will own all and everyone will be happy both customers and the consumer.

Reply

There is so much wrong with your post it's not funny, but I'll point some out.

1) We have no idea how Larrabee will perform.

2) nVidia ATI/AMD are not going anywhere soon.

3) Intel got beaten by ATI and nVidia in the Graphics card market before when Intel released the Intel i740i AGP graphics card.

4) With Intels history of poor driver support for there Graphics solutions, I don't have much faith in Larrabee being different, I hope I'm wrong though, the added competition would be awesome.

5) If Intel owns the Chipset/CPU/Graphics markets 100% that would be -bad- no competition to keep prices low, remember when a decent computer would cost over 3 thousand bucks?

6) Both ATI and nVidia have had YEARS of experience in the Graphics industry, they will not let a new player into that market without a fight.

7) I would -not- be happy if we lost any extra company's especially AMD and nVidia, it would be all-round bad for everyone, I wouldn't have been able to build a stupidly cheap Quad-Core system (Athlon 2 x4 620) if it weren't for AMD.

Reply

5) If Intel owns the Chipset/CPU/Graphics markets 100% that would be -bad- no competition to keep prices low, remember when a decent computer would cost over 3 thousand bucks?

Kind of like Apple does now, then. ;)


Reply

Intel will not jacks up the prices at random. Intel is a good company with many OEM's respect to Intel. Intel did not do anything wrong, with its dominant power. This is AMD's own fault that it did not has manufacturing capacities for its processors production. This is the fate of Intel that Intel will own all.

Reply

"no competition to keep prices low"

[sarcasm] Thats right, if only there was no COMPETITION prices could be LOW... it is a well known FACT that competition serves only to raise prices! [/sarcasm]
That is the dumbest thing I have heard in a very long time.

Reply

wow. Way to fail at reading comprehension.

The man is say if there was no competition there would be no reason to keep prices low. He was saying "if there was no competition to keep prices low, intel would raise prices"

So lets read next time before we call anyone else stupid.

Reply

Not quite... at least, not in my opinion.

On page 6, maddoctor posted:

"Whatever AMD product throws to market, rubbish is a rubbish. Intel products prices will make AMD's prices room tighter, and AMD is going to sink into oblivion. I love it because Intel prices will be cheaper to consumer."

I may have misinterpreted this, but his post seems to be indicating that if AMD were no longer in the game, Intel would have no competition and would LOWER prices in accordance. Something which, as we all know, not only wouldn't happen but is totally contrary to common business practices. If there's only one supplier, you're not going to go find cheaper options from somebody else; you'll be tied to that one supplier and they will feel less need to improve their designs.

As odd as it may seem, that's what I believe he was referring to.

Reply

You do fail at reading comprehension.

Reply

Interesting statement to make when you fail to back it up.

Reply