AMD FX Processor Prices Lower Than Expected

[erocker]

I don't take it personally, getting emotional over this kind of stuff is a waste of life. I just found your post to be a bit speculative. Besides, if the chip is awful, I feel sorry for those stuck with an older platform. AMD will still sell chips, but those wanting to upgrade won't have much of a choice and Intel won't be lowering their prices.

[HossHuge]

Originally Posted by trickson

BD is going to be a good CPU just not what every one was expecting and what all the hype has lead us to think for the last 4 years.

What exactly was everyone expecting?

I expect AMD will do what they have always done which is give great price/performance.

"Assuming leads to the darkside" - Yoda

[de.das.dude]

i bought my amd 945 last year for $175 FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUUU

[ensabrenoir]

The moment people heard "FX" many, me included, thought that Amd would come out stomping. setting up shop in intel's zipcode. I'm seriously considering bd. But if. It ain't a high performance product why water down the fx badge. I've seen many ford mustang cobras but never a ford festiva. Cobra or windstar cobra. But if I'm wrong I will apologize to amd users buy a eight core and post my invoice.

[cadaveca]

To me, the FX moniker hints at excellent overclocking, and nothing else. The Guinness record confirms that the FX moniker is quite appropriate...

But yes, I must agree that maybe marketing is missing the mark, but prices are part of marketing too, so you can't just simply say "Oh boy, FX, it should be a top performer!!"...you need to consider everything we know And I say everything, as what we do know now isn't very much.

And please do not forget, that while the "FX" level of chip was around back when AMD was on top for performance, most "hardcore" overclockers were using Opteron chips...NOT the FX. So clearly the situation is not the smae here...I'm pretty sure JF-AMD stated there would be no Opteron chips for the desktop enthusiast space.

[trickson]

Originally Posted by erocker

I don't take it personally, I just found your post to be a bit speculative. Besides, if the chip is awful, I feel sorry for those stuck with an older platform. AMD will still sell chips, but those wanting to upgrade won't have much of a choice and Intel won't be lowering their prices.

Every one has been speculating about BD . No one KNOWS for sure just what it is going to do . The speculation I am doing is biased on the price range . But this is really not a good indicator either as we know AMD likes to keep the prices lower than Intel ( Unless they have a chip that can DOMINATE like the Athlons did ) .

[purefun65]

fx bulldozer is merely a pipe cleaner cpu for future trinty apu. fx=k overclocking capable. christ they will probably release trinity b4 bulldozer. Its like fermi with nvidia. release than tweak. next node competitive. IT IS A SERVER BASED CPU!

[Dent1]

Originally Posted by trickson

The speculation I am doing is biased on the price range . But this is really not a good indicator either as we know AMD likes to keep the prices lower than Intel ( Unless they have a chip that can DOMINATE like the Athlons did ) .

Unless? Your post makes no sense. AMD was cheaper when they did "dominate"

The Athlon 64 was cheaper than the Pentium 4

The Athlon 64 X2 cheaper than the Pentium D

The Athlon Series dominated and was still cheaper. So whats your point?


This thread has become The Bulldozer Information thread 2.0v - full of speculation and no substance.

[purefun65]

llano is the direction AMD is going. trinity is the next step. bulldozer is module for a reason. desktop is not profitable for amd in performance or enthusiast. Amd knows what will sell in their target demograph. llano is selling. interlagos will sell. bulldozer is the red headed step child.

[techtard]

Well, they need the enthusiast market. If not for the enthusiasts trumpeting how awesome the Athlon cpus were back in the day, nobody would have bought them. Heck, even with proof a lot of people went with Intel because of brand name recognition.

Sadly, AMD is viewed as a second-class, knock-off brand by the vast majority of people.
They need to release some kick ass enthusiast chips to get momentum swinging in their favor.
The world record overclock is a nice step in that direction. They just need to keep it up.

If they can hit the sweet spot in price/performance on the first gen of this chip, they might be able to bat one out of the park with some tweaking.

Here's to hoping that the FX line is competitive. If it is, that means more aggressive pricing and lower proces for AMD and Intel fans.

[purefun65]

Originally Posted by techtard

Well, they need the enthusiast market. If not for the enthusiasts trumpeting how awesome the Athlon cpus were back in the day, nobody would have bought them. Heck, even with proof a lot of people went with Intel because of brand name recognition.

Sadly, AMD is viewed as a second-class, knock-off brand by the vast majority of people.
They need to release some kick ass enthusiast chips to get momentum swinging in their favor.
The world record overclock is a nice step in that direction. They just need to keep it up.

If they can hit the sweet spot in price/performance on the first gen of this chip, they might be able to bat one out of the park with some tweaking.

Here's to hoping that the FX line is competitive. If it is, that means more aggressive pricing and lower proces for AMD and Intel fans.

they dont need the enthusiast market. they need more of the server market. we all love our custom desktops. we are a dying breed. smart phones and tablets and laptops are profitable. Its like fast food, people love it. servers are the workhorses with high margins. just look at consoles.The hatred of any true gamer. yet people love them. fast food for ADD sheeple. christ look at gears of war 3. man i didnt think they could have dumbed it down so a 5 year old could play but they did.

[techtard]

They need that segment of the market, so they can evangelize the product, and convince people to buy AMD desktops, netbooks, notebooks, etc.
It won't matter if fusion or other products are awesome if the public perception is that they are second rate.

And yes, the server market is their bread and butter. But it's nice to have some extra something on the side.

[Dent1]

Originally Posted by techtard

Well, they need the enthusiast market. If not for the enthusiasts trumpeting how awesome the Athlon cpus were back in the day, nobody would have bought them. Heck, even with proof a lot of people went with Intel because of brand name recognition.

AMD (and Intel) don't care less about the odd system builder like us. Just because we buy a high priced CPU once every 1-3 years doesn't make us desirable consumers or profitable.

AMD are concerned with fullfilling BIG orders of thousands of OEM CPUs to retailers and e-tailers. 1 order from techtard, trickson or anyone else every few years is not profitable.

Originally Posted by techtard

Sadly, AMD is viewed as a second-class, knock-off brand by the vast majority of people.
They need to release some kick ass enthusiast chips to get momentum swinging in their favor. The world record overclock is a nice step in that direction. They just need to keep it up.

The reason they're viewed as second class is because they've been trying to cater to the enthusiasts in the past with their ultra fast Athlon/Duron series which wasn't appealing to the general public enough for AMD's brand to go mainstream. If AMD keep worrying about performance only and breaking overclocking records they'll always be second class to 99% of the average joe because in REAL LIFE nobody cares about that geeky stuff.


It's like AMD can't win. They can only build their brand if they go mainstream and appeal to the wider audience, but then you guys complain and want them to deliver spectacular performance which keeps them niche and unknown. Then you complain because they are unknown due to your demands for a niche product.

Originally Posted by techtard

If they can hit the sweet spot in price/performance on the first gen of this chip, they might be able to bat one out of the park with some tweaking.

Here's to hoping that the FX line is competitive. If it is, that means more aggressive pricing and lower proces for AMD and Intel fans.

What AMD need to do is sell more of those low end Llano chips to home users (desktop, laptops, tablets) and force it down their throats until the average joe see them as a credible house-hold name. Once they've got brand loyalty they can focus on other areas, like performance records.

[purefun65]

Originally Posted by techtard

They need that segment of the market, so they can evangelize the product, and convince people to buy AMD desktops, netbooks, notebooks, etc.
It won't matter if fusion or other products are awesome if the public perception is that they are second rate.

And yes, the server market is their bread and butter. But it's nice to have some extra something on the side.

You follow the money. 90% of people can barely operate a computer, click on browser,read email. im someone and post on your wall, play flash game or twitter some crap. They dont even use the potential of their pc. Why would they need more? answer they don't.

[ivicagmc]

Originally Posted by stupido

2600K = 4 cores = 8 threads (HT = on)
2500K = 4 cores = 4 threads (HT = NA)

I tough on bulldozer cores... 8 core to be competition to 2600K and 6 core to 2500k...

[jaydeejohn]

Originally Posted by random

I hope the performance at least compete with the 2500/2600k I want to see price dropping battles .

Me too

Just posting to apologize for the double post. I did see this thread but when I saw it was more than 6 pages long I figured it couldn't have been from today - guess I should have actually read it. Oh well. Mea culpa.

[DannibusX]

I can barely keep all the BD threads straight, Twi!

[rangerone766]

the only thing i care about is, will this chip be faster than my q9550@4.1ghz? i'm itching to upgrae and sandy is a bit out of my price range.

[eidairaman1]

Originally Posted by trickson

I am not sure I agree with you on this point . AMD has ATI and well ATI is a HUGE GPU chip maker . The word is getting out because of this one small fact . I love ATI and AMD has made ATI stronger . I hope this price dropping is not indicating how they are going to perform against Intel . If so I see another FAIL from AMD ( Not a big FAIL just another one . ) . AMD need to really step up and take the lead soon . Why ? Because Intel is still charging way too much for there CPU's ! If AMD can take the lead it will force Intel to make price changes for there stuff .

I say Gen 2 of Bulldozer aka FM2 model, not sure how well the AM3+ Models will roll.

Dont get me wrong ive always noticed AMDs prices were reasonable compared to intels even when AMD Kicked Intel in the ass with the 940 Claw n Sledge Hammer CPUs

[btarunr]

Added a poll.

[Fx]

Originally Posted by xenocide

Except all those pesky CPU-heavy games like L4D, SC2, The BF-Series, GTAIV, etc. Those see rather large improvements in performance when gaming. You're also not considering that the entire PC Experience is affected by a better/more efficient CPU.

AMD's CPUs took care of me on L4D, BF and Supreme Commander and easily handles WinRAR, transcoding and file conversion to suit my needs

FX will be an improvement in all regards since it is a new microarchitecture intended for servers and high-end desktops so it will be another win in my book especially coming out of the gates at these awesome prices

having said that, I am waiting for piledriver because I am altering my buying cycles from early-adopter to buying my CPU & GPU once they have matured at least 6 months from release

[v12dock]

Intel and AMD exist in a wonderful country where capitalism exist, which allows us to create competition in which companies strive to beat each other. Either way a new processor is always a win win to the consumer

[Swamp Monster]

If that price tag is real, then it's a win for me. Looks good Price/Performance wise, even if we don't know anything about performance - it's still 8 core. And yes, AMD already explained some time ago, that those are real 8 cores.

[Fatal]

Like a lot of people have been looking for BD information I see they have a FX-8170 due to come out in Q1 2012. That makes me wonder why this is so? Unless they added it to compete with the upper performing Intel's.