Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Intel To Slash Prices Up To 60%

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the desperate-times dept.

227

Chuan-kai Lin writes "According to Bloomberg, Intel will slash product prices by up to 60% in order to regain market share captured by AMD." From the article: "Intel said it will reduce prices of faster dual-core chips by about 15 percent, according to Alex Lin, a product marketing manager at Micro-Star, Taiwan's third-largest maker of motherboards, which connect electronic parts in computers ... Shares of Intel have fallen 33 percent since Otellini succeeded Craig Barrett in May last year. Advanced Micro's stock has gained 77 percent during the same period. Intel fell 31 cents to $17.08 at 12:06 p.m. New York time in Nasdaq Stock Market composite trading. Advanced Micro dropped $1.55, or 5.5 percent, to $26.45 on concerns that Intel will lower prices."

cancel ×

227 comments

My god (4, Insightful)

thePig (964303) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497299)

Does this mean, I was paying up to 160% more than what I should have, till now?
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

Re:My god (5, Informative)

cnettel (836611) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497318)

No, only 150 % more. (100 - 60 = 40, 100 / 40 = 2.5, (2.5 - 1) * 100 = 150)

Re:My god (2, Insightful)

Neoncow (802085) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497914)

So technically, original poster is correct. They said up to 160% more and 150% is well within that bound.

<Wanders back to algorithms assignment ;)>

Re:My god (2, Insightful)

SolusSD (680489) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497335)

no.. it means if a chip costs $100 now, it'll cost as little as $40 after the price drop. In this case you are paying 250% of the new price, or 150% more.

Re:My god (0, Redundant)

ChrisGilliard (913445) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497401)

Does this mean, I was paying up to 160% more than what I should have, till now?

Actually, you would have been paying 150% more because 100%/40% = 2.5. 2.5 - 1 = 1.5, In other words, 150%. But yes, this is why competition is good! :)

Re:My god (2, Insightful)

aristotle-dude (626586) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497544)

No, you were paying the price that the market could bare. Now Intel is sacrificing some of their profitablity in order to regain market share from AMD.

Re:My god (3, Insightful)

morethanapapercert (749527) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497571)

which of course means that once they have enough of the market back in the palm of their hand, it'll be time to resume squeezing......

Re:My god (1)

jdwilso2 (90224) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497851)

Which is, of course, completely and utterly anti-competitive in this case.

Re:My god (2, Funny)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 8 years ago | (#15498010)

A bare market? Sounds fun... don't think my girlfriend would appreciate me "appreciating" the wares, though...

Re:My god (2, Informative)

stinerman (812158) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497796)

To be philosophical, it depends if you believe in the labor theory of value [wikipedia.org] or the subjective theory of value [wikipedia.org] . If the former, you're still being had; if the latter, then by definition you can never pay "more that what you should have".

Re:My god (1)

ChrisGilliard (913445) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497985)

To be philosophical, it depends if you believe in the labor theory of value

In order to believe in the value of labor theory, you have to deny the value of capital. As it says in the "Applicability of LTV" section, describing the value of land (just one example of capital) is problematic with this theory. Or if you believe in socialism, you believe that the government should own all capital and determine it's best use. The capitalist philosophy is that the government cannot make the best decisions about the use of capital and that it should be left up to the free market.

Re:My god (1)

stinerman (812158) | more than 8 years ago | (#15498022)

The thing that most suprises me about LTV is that Adam Smith was a believer in it. Marx was, too, but both had different interpretations of what it meant. For Marx, if I was paid $1 to make 10 widgets to be sold at $1 each, I was essentially robbed of $9.90.

The capitalist philosophy is that the government cannot make the best decisions about the use of capital and that it should be left up to the free market.

Capitalism and free markets are not synonamyous. I didn't really want to get off topic, but read my sig link. I don't necessarily believe it; it just seemed interesting.

Re:My god (3, Insightful)

Surt (22457) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497971)

No, it means you already bought your chip. Prices change. No doubt if you bought a pentium 1 on the day it was released all those years ago for $600 you're feeling like a real rube now that you can get them essentially for free?

Just accept that you amortized the higher price you paid with the additional CPU cycles you got by not waiting.

Cheaper Macs? (5, Interesting)

irablum (914844) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497308)

Does this mean even cheaper macs are forthcoming?

Ira

Re:Cheaper Macs? (1)

CrpnDeth (892755) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497325)

That would be awesome. I personally like Intel, and the biggest complaint I hear from people who don't use Intel is that they are too expensive...well maybe this will even it out. (I know I'm about to get flamed...there are other reasons people pick AMD over Intel, just sayin that price is the most common one I hear).

Re:Cheaper Macs? (1)

twitchingbug (701187) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497374)

While traditionally AMD has been cheaper than Intel, this hasn't been the case with dual core chips. Athlon X2s start in the 300-350 range, whereas the Pentium D's start in the 150-200 range. Of course, you have to factor in performance per dollar to get an equal comparo, maybe someone has this information can post it?

Re:Cheaper Macs? (1)

no_pets (881013) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497381)

True, but it seems as though a lot of /.ers like to root for the underdog as well.

Re:Cheaper Macs? (1)

Darklingza (917284) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497762)

Give it a year or two and /.'ers will be all over Intel again? Or god forbid, Cyrix is resurected and makes some sort of desperate play for our heart$ and mind$.

Re:Cheaper Macs? (2, Interesting)

shawn(at)fsu (447153) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497777)

Thats probably why I like AMD. The whole underdog thing. I hope that as being the underdog the company is forced to make a superior product to stay alive and is probably willing to except a lower margin to gain market share. Thats my hope anyway.

Oh and plus I hate the Blue Man Group.

Price is reason? Stuff it, (1, Funny)

SlashdotTroll (581611) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497837)

I'm waiting for Fry's Electronics to open two cashier-lines, one for Intel purchases and the other for AMD purchases. This is so I can bypass all you hotflash Intelians, and the stock market can be reflected by how many customer checkout lines are dedicated to whicher company.

AMD is a corporation of the United States. Intel is run by a bunch of fuckin' Jews, and a purchase from them jews supports that country with the highest number of human slave trafick: Israentel.

With an AMD processor, was defended from a horde of mutant ninjas and wolverines over summer break, and I never complained. Gosh!

Re:Price is reason? Stuff it, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497957)

Please mod this idiot down to the scum level he belongs at.

Quite Possibly (5, Insightful)

WombatControl (74685) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497392)

It will either mean cheaper Macs, or Macs with more features for the same price.

Remember that Apple is not a company that tries (too hard) to compete for the bottom end of the market. Even the Mac mini isn't designed to compete with a bargain-basement Dell. Apple might very well cut their prices with cheaper chips, or they might sweeten the deal with larger hard drives, making the low-end mini use a Core Duo rather than a Core Solo, etc.

However, as a Mac owner and someone who's looking to replace an iBook with a MacBook (Pro) in the near future, this is good news indeed.

Re:Quite Possibly (1, Troll)

radish (98371) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497486)

It will either mean cheaper Macs, or Macs with more features for the same price.

Or another yacht for Steve.

Re:Quite Possibly (1)

larkost (79011) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497663)

No... "The Steve" seems to go in more for private jets.

Re:Cheaper Macs? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497404)

"Does this mean even cheaper macs are forthcoming?"

What an idiot.

These crappy and burning hot Intel Macs raised in price over the better PPC Macs.

No dummy, this might mean Intel Macs might be a little less expensive.

People dumb enough to pay for an Intel laptop will soon be able to fry their balls for less money!

Re:Cheaper Macs? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497466)

Maybe you could lick my balls to keep them cool.

Re:Cheaper Macs? (5, Informative)

anaesthetica (596507) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497413)

Does this mean even cheaper macs are forthcoming?

No, but it does mean that Apple's margin's will grow slightly larger. I'm sure that as a loyal Apple-user that will warm your heart. It warms mine. Yay!

Re:Cheaper Macs? (1)

Peter Bonte (919202) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497765)

I own Apple stock so yay indeed but i do think some prices will go down, the mini is 100$ to expensive for me or at least a dual core on all models.

Re:Cheaper Macs? (1)

anaesthetica (596507) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497869)

Actually, I agree. I think Apple may reduce the Mac mini pricing by $100's if they can swing it. I bought one of the new intel Mac minis right after they were released and wasn't terribly happy about the $100 price jump that the new intel chip brought. As the minis are their low-end switch-to-Mac-bait computers, I think they stand a good chance of seeing a price reduction, even if none of the other computers among Apple's offerings see a reduction.

Re:Cheaper Macs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15498039)

Would you be willing to pay `extra' when by rights you *should* be paying less? Put another way - would a slight increase in Apple's per-unit profit make you happier than an equivalent amount of extra dollars in your pocket?

Just wondering...to me Apple's just this company, you know?

Re:Cheaper Macs? (1)

Jozer99 (693146) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497619)

No, it means even higher profit margins for Apple.

Re:Cheaper Macs? (1)

dhasenan (758719) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497670)

It means I might actually be able to get an Intel chip that understands the SSE3 instruction set so I can modify my computer and actually run OS X, at least.

Don't ask me why I'm doing it. I have no idea.

Re:Cheaper Macs? (1)

Chabil Ha' (875116) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497833)

No, it just means that Apple's margins will be higher. You have to realize that part of Apple's image is not 'budget' computer. It is quality. Part of marketing is not just 'better price' but the placement of the product in a consumers mind. Take for instance diamonds, besides the fact that the market is cornered, they are just a rock. If someone sold a diamond for $100 and everyone else was selling them for $500 (assuming quality is equal) then consumers tend to shy away from the cheaper one thinking there's a 'gotcha' somewhere. It's like that with Apple. People associate Apple with prestige, and therefore they need to keep a price (no matter if the PC equivalant guts are equal) that appeals with that positioning.

Re:Cheaper Macs? (1)

Traiklin (901982) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497988)

For Apple to make? Yes.
For you to buy? no.

apple will still charge an arm and a leg for the i(ntel)Mac and just rake in a bigger profit margin from it.

I'd like to get one but when you can't build your own and all their "Pre-configured" models cost $1500 at the cheapest I just lose all intrest when I can build or even buy one (or three) for more then half that.

finally (3, Insightful)

ystar (898731) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497313)

It's about time! Intel has been gouging prices for too long. AMD's chips have repeatedly performed better than Intel's chips at a lower cost. It's good to see Intel learning from their mistakes, and the new Conroe and Merom architechtures have a lot of promise in them. (Lower prices are only going to make the R&D budget tighter, though, which will continue to hurt Intel even more in the long run.)

Finally, someone that understands ME! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497379)

"(Lower prices are only going to make the R&D budget tighter, though, which will continue to hurt Intel even more in the long run.)"

But as long as we're getting what WE want, then it doesn't matter what Intel's future is. Right?

Fantastic! (5, Funny)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497314)

This is just what I've been hoping for! Thank you, Intel, for addressing my needs as a consumer and forcing AMD to drop the prices on those Athlon 64s I love so very very much.

Re:Fantastic! (1)

Trigun (685027) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497367)

Hopefully they drop them far enough that I can afford a decent server for home.

Re:Fantastic! (2, Interesting)

jawtheshark (198669) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497813)

A decent server for home? Boy... I didn't realise I needed Dual Xeons or Quad Opterons for that. Look, about a half year ago I just went insane and bought an AMD64 2800+ with 768Meg RAM for some spare change. Does my home server need this? Of course not! The P-I MMX 166MHz/256Meg RAM machine that it replaced just did everything just fine. The AMD64 is underclocked to 800MHz by now: I don't need more. The system runs OpenBSD:

[mako.sharks:/root] # uptime;top -n | grep 'Memory'
11:02PM up 66 days, 3:45, 4 users, load averages: 0.21, 0.16, 0.10
Memory: Real: 52M/193M act/tot Free: 547M Swap: 0K/1536M used/tot

This machine runs: ssh, sendmail, imap, dhcpd, ntpd, samba, pf, apache, X + Windowmaker, ftp-proxy and whatever I am forgetting right now.

My parents server is similar, well okay, it's full SCSI, but it's a P-III 800MHz. Same services (minus X). It also replaced a P-I 166MHz (non-MMX) with 128Meg RAM. That P-I didn't cope with exactly one thing I tried: IMAP. That was a bit too much. The P-III 800MHz? No problem at all. Oh, and this machine has way more users than the AMD64.

For home servers, one doesn't need much.... Sure, I have an AMD64, but it definately is overkill and I should have gone with something quieter.

Re:Fantastic! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497625)

Who is gonna want Athlon64s when Conroe is there? Faster, cooler, cheaper.

I'm sold! (1)

gforce811 (903907) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497315)

They need to start shoving these in the iMacs and MacBook(Pro)s and I'm sold!

capitalism! (4, Insightful)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497328)

yay! capitalism! good.

Re:capitalism! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497421)

What a fucking moron.

Go away idiot.

Re:capitalism! (1)

stewie's deuce (953163) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497524)

agreed 100% competition forces companies to keep prices low, while maintaining quality... Intels drive to stay in the market and maintain profits mean they have to compete by doing just that. This is the peoples' true voice.. voting with their money.

I have to wonder (4, Insightful)

Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497342)

I have to wonder how Intel is going to rationalize it when people STILL choose AMD over Intel.

Re:I have to wonder (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497478)

communism offcourse

Re:I have to wonder (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497584)

They don't have too. The vast majority of people purchase a PC on brand, not what CPU it has. As such, Intel will have to rationalize with it's vendors, NOT the public.

Re:I have to wonder (5, Informative)

manno (848709) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497604)

Not everyone's a zealot some of us use AMD chips simply because they're faster, run cooler, and suck less juice than P4's. Conroe looks to have adressed these issues, I was going to buy a opty 165 last week, for $325, but then I saw that Intel was scheduled to relese the better performing Conroe next month at some highly competative prices.

1.86GHz/2M for $183
2.13GHz/2M for $224
2.40GHz/4M for $316

Those were the prices posted before this anouncement, I hope they have dropped further. Even if they havn't I'm eyeing that 2.4 with the 4MB cahce HARD. I would gladly pay an extra $80-$90(CPU+Mobo) next month, than get an opty 165 this month that will suck more juice, and be significantly slower. I'm not loyal to any corperation, I'm going to put my money where it will give me the best return on investment...

Re:I have to wonder (1)

thePig (964303) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497660)

Why would you say that people STILL will choose AMD over INTEL?

When the cost goes down, unless AMD cuts costs (they started doing it now), majority of people will NOT choose AMD over intel.

People who are undecided would now go for INTEL.
What the heck, even AMD zealots might now sing a different tune.

Money rules the market.

Re:Nah (1)

crazyjimmy (927974) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497942)

Us AMD Zealots are doing just fine :D.

Today's a good day to buy AMD stock, then! (3, Insightful)

larsoncc (461660) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497345)

Hey, news that Intel is dropping prices a bit doesn't change the near-to-mid term outlook for AMD. They produce some of gaming's monster chips, and power users know that. They continue to establish high profile deals, and they're still leading the move to 64 bit.

Jeez, a buck and a half off of shares. Buy!

(what do you think?)

Re:Today's a good day to buy AMD stock, then! (4, Informative)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497377)

Not only gaming's monster chips, but servers' monster chips.

Re:Today's a good day to buy AMD stock, then! (1)

larsoncc (461660) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497399)

And heck, not just leading the way to 64-bit, but to multiple cores as well!

Re:Today's a good day to buy AMD stock, then! (2, Informative)

Dan Ost (415913) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497498)

I'm sure that both Sun and IBM would disagree with you.

Re:Today's a good day to buy AMD stock, then! (1)

HuguesT (84078) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497652)

They might, however they might worry because the only affordable systems that run Win64 use AMD cpu.

Re:Today's a good day to buy AMD stock, then! (2, Insightful)

ShapeGSX (865697) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497772)

Huh? Intel's Pentium D 805 is a dual core 2.66GHz processor that supports 64-bit that is going to be cut to just $93 in another month. Right now, it is $119.

AMD's cheapest dual core is the Athlon 64 3800+ for $297 at NewEgg right now.

Did you not know that Intel added 64-bit support to the Pentium lineup a while back?

Re:Today's a good day to buy AMD stock, then! (1)

Exocrist (770370) | more than 8 years ago | (#15498002)

Dual core != 64 bit.

About a year and a half ago, I got an AMD64 2800+ for about... $160. The reason I didn't go with Intel, is because 64-bit Intel processors were too expensive. I'll assume that the price has gone down over the past year.

Re:Today's a good day to buy AMD stock, then! (1)

HappyDrgn (142428) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497963)

What about the Xeon? I get them for a few bucks over $200, pretty affordable for a 64bit dual core chip. Comparable AMD 64bit chips where easily $90-120 more. I'm not up to date on win64 (or win* for that matter), but does it not work with the Xeon EM64 chips? The whole system: 1U case, 2x Xeon's, 120Gb RAID (2x 80Gb), 4Gb ram runs me about $1,800.

This should have hurt Intel's stock more than AMD (3, Insightful)

attemptedgoalie (634133) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497422)

This would imply a significant source of free profit is being slashed. They're going to hope to make it up in volume, but they've got an uphill battle. Less profit in the stock should have reduced its value.

The amount of profit they had built in could absorb a class issue in the past. Now, an expensive problem with their chips could hurt their company even more. No more soft landing.

They have to prove they're better than AMD. While there are some that will buy the big name with the new pricing, there are a lot more that will stick with AMD.

Re:This should have hurt Intel's stock more than A (1)

Frenchy_2001 (659163) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497707)

The price of Intel's stock was already reflecting this. The stock has been beaten down with poor results and poor expectations.

Cutting down price was expected and is actually supposed to be a good move for intel: back in competition and on the war path to regain their market share.

AMD stock has been going down since the previews of Conroe and showing that intel will not only compete technically, but also on price lowers their results' expectations.

Intel certainly has been beaten down. (1)

attemptedgoalie (634133) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497843)

My point was just that there should not be a reason for Intel's stock to do better on the prospect of a loss of profit.

The new corporate servers and workstations based on AMD's latest rev chips haven't really been released yet. That will be a good sign of how good Intel's new chips are.

Intel was the gold standard. Now they're the old standard. They have some work to do to make the stock worth picking up based on potential gains.

Too late (4, Insightful)

sidfaiwu (901221) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497353)

AMD has already captured this share of the market (me). Their chips have provided my home assembled computers with excelent processing power, no glitches, and at a lower cost.

Re:Too late (1)

Sebastopol (189276) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497858)

No glitches?

Please elaborate on what you mean by this.

Some Other Suggestions For Intel (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497355)

Ok, that's a start. No one wants your chips anymore, drop the prices.

Some other things for you Intel guys to try:

1) Start leveraging your compiler to inflate SPEC scores - special case and hardcode as many parts of SPEC as you can

2) Keep adding more cache so more synthetic benchmarks fit completely in high speed memory to inflate those SPEC scores

3) Dump truckloads and truckloads of cash on x86 hardware sites

4) Leverage Steve Jobs - there is no limit to how much he will lie about performance - you saved his ass when he got his annoying ass dumped by IBM, he's owes you guys big time

I could go on, but you get the picture.
Good luck guys!

Re:Some Other Suggestions For Intel (1)

level_headed_midwest (888889) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497426)

Heh, don't think that Intel is the only one that tries to optimize SPEC scores, although if you WRITE SPEC to favor your chip... I have an AMD manual on compiler options and switches to use for best performance with AMD64 applications, and on the last pages, it has the GCC switches to compile SPEC2000 with to give the highest scores possible with the chip.

Re:Some Other Suggestions For Intel (4, Informative)

DrDitto (962751) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497709)

2) Keep adding more cache so more synthetic benchmarks fit completely in high speed memory to inflate those SPEC scores

LOL! Now we criticize Intel for their superior SRAM technology (Intel can fit twice as much cache capacity as AMD for the same chip area). Server workloads see much higher working sets than SPEC. Even assuming you have AMD's fast on-chip memory controller, every cache miss will result in the processor spending 50+ nanoseconds doing nothing (the instruction window will fill up in no time). With a 3-issue superscalar at 3GHz, this is ~ 450 lost opportunities to retire an instruction.

So yeah Intel, keep adding more cache "to inflate those SPEC scores".

You forgot #5 and #6 (1)

SlashdotTroll (581611) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497739)

As stated in the Slashdot story,
according to Alex Lin, a product marketing manager at Micro-Star, Taiwan's third-largest maker of motherboards, which connect electronic parts in computers

5) Abandon solder in favor of these important motherboard things! The solder does nothing!

6) Do not talk about the Fight Like A Girl Club, for obvious reasons.

How can you talk about price discounts today.... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497385)

...when the mastermind of al Qaeda in Iraq has been eliminated from the Earth? Where's this nation's priorities?

Re:How can you talk about price discounts today... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497608)

...when the mastermind of al Qaeda in Iraq has been eliminated from the Earth? Where's this nation's priorities?
You misspelled - it's "quesadilla." Hmm... quesadilla...

(con carne ;-)

Sounds Alright But... (4, Interesting)

Valthan (977851) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497388)

If they are doing it to capture the AMD market I think that it is going to fail because those of us on this side of the fence are here for more reasons than the "Hey, its cheaper... right?!" crowd. This will however be amazing if the price drop makes its way into the Macs, I have wanted one since they get their upgrade but I can't justify the cost...

Re:Sounds Alright But... (1)

Dan Ost (415913) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497516)

I'm under the impression that they're dropping the price in order to move
chips that they're currently paying to store. They need to flush out the
channel before the new chips hit the market otherwise they'll be undersold
by their own product.

Re:Sounds Alright But... (1)

Atzanteol (99067) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497930)

I think you're spot on. I heard Hector Ruiz recently talking (on CNBC I think) about how Intel had lots of inventory to move, and how it's and advantage for AMD to not have so much old stock to push out the door.

Re:Sounds Alright But... (1)

fitten (521191) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497525)

...are there any P4 based Macs?

I think you'll find these drops are to get rid of inventory and to clear the shelves for Core2 parts.

Re:Sounds Alright But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497667)

Well, I'm an AMD user myself (athlon64, opteron, etc.,) and wouldn't buy an Intel box for -myself- (well, dunno about core 2 duo). On the other hand, I've bought 3 dell (Intel) boxes for members of my family. Price does matter: and for normal folks who wanna browse the web/check email/watch dvds, etc., it simply doesn't matter...

(ie: Intel -will- capture the market with this... they won't capture 1% that cares for quality/speed and not price... but the other 99% of the population simply doesn't care: cheap dell box generation).

Price cut or garage sale? (4, Insightful)

Gadzinka (256729) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497408)

I'm too lazy to RTFA (hey, this is /. ;), but isn't the price cut the same I've read couple of days ago, which basically boiled down to cleaning up inventory of crappy Netburst processors (a.k.a. Pentium D) in order to focus on PentiumPro-derived Core architecture? Yeah, go buy yourself dual core netburst processor. With both cores communicating via external, shared FSB...

Gawd, I was afraid that Intel would never put to sleep this monstrosity...

Robert

The prices drops are for the P4 (5, Insightful)

ajiva (156759) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497425)

Notice that the price drops are the same day as when Core 2 Duo is released (July 23rd), that means
the price drops are on the older P4s. That's great if you don't mind getting a P4, but Intel is doing what any other company would do. Drop prices on older products to clear out space for newer ones. Makes sense.

Re:The prices drops are for the P4 (2, Insightful)

fitten (521191) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497507)

Yeah... amazing at how the obvious is completely ignored. This price drop is *obviously* to get rid of any inventory of chips that no one would otherwise buy because of the release of Core2. Price drops on P4s have little to do with "regaining marketshare", they are to cut losses of shelved inventory.

Drop prices TO instead of BY please. (2, Insightful)

Vo0k (760020) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497434)

How will Intel products fare compared to AMD, benchmark point per dollar now? The main problem with Intel was that it offered worse bang for the buck, you'd have a faster AMD for the same money or same AMD for less. This will certainly make Intel more competetive, but HOW competetive? ...now I expect AMD to slightly cut on their overall profit margins and drop the price too. Just to remain a step ahead. Let the price war begin, likely there will be no casualities, but the winners will be us, customers.

AMD's joining the party (4, Informative)

adam1101 (805240) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497440)

Begun these Price Wars [anandtech.com] have.

those are non-dualies (1)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497921)

AMD is only putting rebates on single core chips.

If you've seen the info on the Intel cuts, they will be cutting all current products, including Pentium Ds.

Me, I'm getting a Core 2 Duo, so I guess I won't benefit.

Seems like it already happened (4, Interesting)

Wylfing (144940) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497492)

I do my own whiteboxing, and whiteboxing for all the friends and family around (Ubuntu only of course!), and I have always used AMD processors. This has been mainly a price decision. AMD chips and boards have always been much less expensive than Intel. However, I recently did my first Intel box. It was a success, and the price was more or less the same. I was pretty impressed, and I gave up a little of my AMD snobbishness.

AMD is laughing (3, Insightful)

popsicle67 (929681) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497515)

Intel could give the damned things away and I'll still buy AMD. Along with cheaper power the company also has a lot of good board makers behind it. I couldn't believe it when I could build a screamer with second string stuff for nothing darn near. I had been a faithful Intel drone for years and turned my brain off to everybody saying good things about AMD, a bad socket 7 box years ago, so I was surprised at how well low end stuff was doing against intel's best. I got a sempron 3100+ in a biostar Tforce 6100 skt754 1 gig3200 ddr and a nvidia 6600le pcie card. It blows everything away including the dell xps my dad got this year. Intel will have to really blow everybody away to get market share back,cheaper crap is still crap

Re:AMD is laughing (1)

IGotYourSidekick (980994) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497665)

C'mon now... if it was free you'd take the INTEL chip just as we all would. Btw, I've had AMD chips in all my boxes since the k62's, so i'm no Intel fanboi. AMDs are great because of the incredible price vs. performance. It's been taken for granted that AMDs would always be cheaper than INTEL with better performance. If the new INTEL chips are as fast as the street is saying they are, and they're the same price as the AMD chips, then I think AMD is going to have a pretty tough time justifying their value.

Re:AMD is laughing (1)

popsicle67 (929681) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497807)

I would only take one if they would fit in the same boards that my AMD does. Like I said I got that setup and was running FEAR,UT2K4,HALO,GTA SA, and others full speed right away and without any tweaking. I never got that kind wear from any board built for Intel.

Re:AMD is laughing (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497786)

Intel could give the damned things away and I'll still buy AMD... I had been a faithful Intel drone for years and turned my brain off to everybody saying good things about AMD

So you used to be an Intel drone and now you're an AMD drone? Have you ever considered not turning your brain off or being any kind of drone? You could actually... you know... evaluate the choices and pick the best product for what you need to do at any given time?

Right now I see Intel winning for most of the laptop space. They are faster, using less power, per dollar than AMDs. For desktops, it is about even. You really need to find your price point and see what fits in it. For servers, AMD seems to be winning on price. Of course all of this changes every month as new products are released and prices change. For reliability, it is a draw as well.

I guess I just don't understand why people get so fanatic about supporting some particular company. If they make the best fit for what you want, use it. If they don't, don't.

Re:AMD is laughing (1)

popsicle67 (929681) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497847)

I have the luxury of using an Intel centrino laptop and an AMD powered laptop side by side and I gotta say that If intel is doing so much better how come I don't see it. I am not a drone, I just won't be going back without some serious consideration.

Re:AMD is laughing (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497929)

I have the luxury of using an Intel centrino laptop and an AMD powered laptop side by side and I gotta say that If intel is doing so much better how come I don't see it.

There are dozens of good chip comparisons out there. I'd say it depends upon which two chips you have and what the other specifications are. Intel leapfrogged AMD at the beginning of the year when the released the core duo chips. Centrino is a marketing term for a pairing of chips, motherboards and other miscellany. If your laptop says "Centrino" instead of "Centrino Duo" then your laptop likely precedes the switch, or is one of the low end models OEMs are still trying to get rid of.

I am not a drone, I just won't be going back without some serious consideration.

You said you always went with Intel and then switched and made comments about how you'd never go back to Intel. That says to me, you aren't evaluating chips, you're just blindly going with a brand.

Re:AMD is laughing (1)

Donniedarkness (895066) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497806)

No offense, but the Sempron is craptacular no matter how you look at it. Does it beat any of Intels newer P4's? I don't think the issue here is the processor-- your dad's XPS must be a spyware zombie or something (any XPS machines I've seen were pretty good machines...this could have changed in the last several months, though).

I'm not saying that you've not got a good box-- hell, you can probably do anything you want on it-- I'm just saying that I don't see the Sempron beating strong P4's at all.

Disclaimer: The only machine I have is an Athlon64 3500+ and I absolutely love it.

Re:AMD is laughing (1)

popsicle67 (929681) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497920)

In the lineup I saw that sempron did end up in the middle of the pack of p4's they had tested for speed and heat and power consumption and it also performed as well as many of the p4's in the lineup and loads better than the celerons and pentium d's. It took no small amount of convincing to get me to switch and finding out that I would spend much less for the same power was just gravy. The XPS I couldn't tell you about but I know it didn't like ut2k4 at all.

costly gamble? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497607)

It seems like Intel is killing two birds with one stone: getting rid of old stock and garnering market share. The latter is particularly significant because Intel's move forces the Pentium 4 and Pentium Ds into the budget segment while the Core 2 hits the mainstream and enthusiasts.

Of course, all at a cost.

But it must have shocked them to see their market share fall so much since AMD's 64 arose. Perhaps now it is AMD's turn to tremble as their Socket 940 brings little improvement and K8L is still on way beyond the horizon.

Intel Slashing Prices? (-1, Troll)

pedalman (958492) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497627)

Sure. I'll believe it when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is dead and has reached room temperature...

Uhhhhhhhhhh...never mind.

And the price of fish stays the same... (2, Interesting)

Darklingza (917284) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497683)

This is either fantastic news or the start of something truly terrible. For the last couple of years, I have encouraged everyone I know who was upgrading to go the AMD route for this very reason. Out of pure curiosity, I would really like to know where we would be if AMD wasnt on the scene, still dragging along at 2Ghz perhaps? Now my concern is that at some point the two companies decide to stop competing, Intel goes off and corners the ultra high-end server processor market, and AMD sticks to standard desktop processors, and we are all left we were before AMD came along. Then Cyrix will come back into the picture with an Athlon killer processor, now I dont know about you, but im not really interested in going through this whole cycle again. Im buying a Mac just in case. Disclaimer: This post may contain traces of nuts.

Re:And the price of fish stays the same... (1)

freeweed (309734) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497874)

Im buying a Mac just in case

You know Macs these days come with Intel CPUs, right?

Re:And the price of fish stays the same... (1)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497974)

That's collusion, and it's illegal.

OK, that's nice (3, Interesting)

La Camiseta (59684) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497696)

But can they also slash the energy requirements and the heat produced by their CPUs? Seriously, between choosing an Intel CPU, or an AMD one that runs cooler and uses less energy, I'll go with the AMD.

Re:OK, that's nice (1, Informative)

Sebastopol (189276) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497831)

Yes. There's something called google.com, you can look up current websites discussing hot trends. Maybe you're new to this interweb thingy. So, look anywhere, or on any techie website (anandtech, tomshardware, cnet) and see that Core 2 Duo power requirements (to be released this month) is way below anything AMD has for then next 1~2 years.

Price correction? How about old-model clearout! (4, Insightful)

Mr.Fork (633378) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497853)

This is NOT a price drop but a price correction for Intel since they've introducted a new product line. Sort of like when Chevy does for their 2007 models arrive this fall with their 2006 still on the floor. It's NOT a 'let's get our marketshare back from AMD' but a 'oh crap, we still have a tonne of P4 chips left. Sheesh!

Software price-drop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15497916)

Now it's obvious how bad is the Microsoft virtual monopoly.
When was the last time something similar happened?

For the first time (1)

PingXao (153057) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497970)

For the first time I can ever remember I have a PC that's about to turn 2 years old and it's not obsolete. They have no choice but to cut prices. Maybe I'll jump in and spring for a replacement motherboard for my Dell 8400 which I saw surplused last week for $50. If the P4 3.2 GHz - I think it's a Prescott - drops low enough it will make a nice system-in-waiting for when this one croaks. I'll be able to fend off the DMA nasties a while longer.

If nobody's buying them anyway, drop the price (2, Insightful)

doodlebumm (915920) | more than 8 years ago | (#15497976)

Intel's current CPU strategy:
Nobody want them. The new CPUs are coming, so that gets rid of your loyal customers. AMD is kicking your butt, so you don't get the loyal AMD customers to buy your CPUs. So drop the prices so that you can clear off your shelves of the CPUs nobody is buying anyway, and you can force AMD to lower their prices. You loose profits yourself, but you leverage your action to hurt your competitor.

So, what should AMD do?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...