Computex report: intel to discontinue cheap i7s?

[human_error]

Been reading some info from computex and the following two pieces of information look worrying:

Intel to discontinue cheaper i7 cpus to leave room for i5

Intel p55 motherboard material costs higher than p45 motherboard material costs

Both reports cite motherboard manufacturer sources, so it could be incorrect/subject to change but both these things worry me.

From the reports intel will stop the i7 920 and 940 cpus from being manufactured to prevent them stepping on the toes of i5 which is going to launch 1st september apparently.

The second report says that the i5 motherboards could cost more than the p45 motherboards as intel are charging the same amount for the southbridge on the p55 as they do for the northbridge and southbridge on current boards, which seems a little unfair. This drives the cost of making the motherboard to above that of a p45 board. The rumoured prices are between £150-£200 at the moment (US users be aware that is probably with the UK charge-more-for-no-reason tax put on electronics so it won't directly translate to US$).

Other information included is that the integrated graphics based i5s wont launch for a while.

All this info is bad really - discontinuing cheap i7s, expensive i5 boards and not launching i5 with integrated graphics for a while make me

 

[h3llb3nd4]

That's not very nice
I just hope that i5s can match the i7

 

[iandh]

Charge more for less, sounds great!

 

[The Haunted]

They just realized that there is no point in buying a 1000$ cpu when you can get a 4ghz i7 for 250$ (i7 920).

 

[human_error]

This is exactly what happens when intel loses competition at the high end - they charge more and more for no reason. AMD remain competetive against the core2 series but unless they can start competing with core i5 fully then this is how it's gonna be. :shadedshu

At least Intel are being sporting and giving AMD a chance to catch up at the high end again.

 

[vbx]

This is exactly what happens when intel loses competition at the high end - they charge more and more for no reason. AMD remain competetive against the core2 series but unless they can start competing with core i5 fully then this is how it's gonna be. :shadedshu

At least Intel are being sporting and giving AMD a chance to catch up at the high end again.

I don't see why AMD can't compete with the high end cpu's. I mean, they have the resource to do so, all they have to do is make them, and just charge a bit less then what Intel is offering.

It's not like AMD can't produce high end cpu's. I think they just don't want to charge a leg and and arm for it. But AMD should realize that there is a huge market and AMD should just take some chances.

 

[Assassin48]

i agree they should make a processor that can hit 4.2ghz on air

don't forget

Real Men Use Real Cores

lol

 

[human_error]

I don't see why AMD can't compete with the high end cpu's. I mean, they have the resource to do so, all they have to do is make them, and just charge a bit less then what Intel is offering.

It's not like AMD can't produce high end cpu's. I think they just don't want to charge a leg and and arm for it. But AMD should realize that there is a huge market and AMD should just take some chances.

I didn't say they couldn't compete ever, athlon 64s were amazing compared to intel's pentium 4s. They can't compete at the high end now is the issue as none of their cpus can match i7 and probably i5 in cpu intensive applications. Plus the "all they have to do is make them" part is the hard part - if they could they would but it's not a simple task, especially with how powerful modern day cpus are.

 

[El Fiendo]

The i5 doesn't have the IMC right? Ugh I'm skipping builds for the next year. I don't like this different pin count / differing chip feature bull.

 

[human_error]

The i5 doesn't have the IMC right? Ugh I'm skipping builds for the next year. I don't like this different pin count / differing chip feature bull.

i5 has the memory controller on the same package, but since there is the cpu die and a northbridge die and the northbridge die is the one with the memory controller then yeah it lacks an IMC - still better than core2's memory setup as the penalty for not having the memory controller on the same die is a lot less with i5 (it uses a QPI link to the northbridge part of the package i believe). The pin count thing is terrible - we have core i7, nehalem ex i7, i5 without igp and i5 with igp sockets now, which is horrible.

 

[Darren]

Guys,

AMD have their roadmap planned for the next 2 years, they've already announced a Instanbul 6-core CPU, they could fast track it and start manufacturing it immediately and give i7 competition but why bother? They are making plenty of money from OEMs and enthusiasts with their Phenom II range, AMD even announced that their Phenom II X3 range is selling like hot cakes so why mess-up the money when they can cream as much money from the Phenom II X3 range as possible first?

i7 can be as fast as it wants but if know one can afford it Intel makes little profit which defeats the purpose! Ask yourself would you rather be the loosing boxer and get paid £10 million or be the winner in the fight and get paid £2 million?

I would rather be the looser very time!

Personally I want Intel to raise the prices more so I can buy the opposing brands product for cheaper

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

Guys,

AMD have their roadmap planned for the next 2 years, they've already announced a Instanbul 6-core CPU, they could fast track it and start manufacturing it immediately and give i7 competition but why bother? They are making plenty of money from OEMs and enthusiasts with their Phenom II range, AMD even announced that their Phenom II X3 range is selling like hot cakes so why mess-up the money when they can cream as much money from the Phenom II X3 range as possible first?

i7 can be as fast as it wants but if know one can afford it Intel makes little profit which defeats the purpose! Ask yourself would you rather be the loosing boxer and get paid £10 million or be the winner in the fight and get paid £2 million?

I would rather be the looser very time!

Personally I want Intel to raise the prices more so I can buy the opposing brands product for cheaper

Until ur rep catches up to you and ppl wouldnt watch you for free

 

[human_error]

Guys,

AMD have their roadmap planned for the next 2 years, they've already announced a Instanbul 6-core CPU, they could fast track it and start manufacturing it immediately and give i7 competition but why bother? They are making plenty of money from OEMs and enthusiasts with their Phenom II range, AMD even announced that their Phenom II X3 range is selling like hot cakes so why mess-up the money when they can cream as much money from the Phenom II X3 range as possible first?

i7 can be as fast as it wants but if know one can afford it Intel makes little profit which defeats the purpose! Ask yourself would you rather be the loosing boxer and get paid £10 million or be the winner in the fight and get paid £2 million?

Personally I want Intel to raise the prices more so I can buy the opposing brands product for cheaper

More expensive intel = more expensive amd. We won't see phenom prices increase of current cpus but new models will have their prices reflect the price of the competition - amd will charge what it can to get the best balance between volume sales and profit per unit sold - if intel's competing products are all more expensive then amd can afford to increase their cpu prices and suffer no loss of sales - they are still $x cheaper than the intel competition.

Plus the 6 core istanbul cpu isn't going to destroy the i7 lineup as intel has a 6 core i7 variant with HT giving 12 logical cores lined up for release on the 32nm production node for the end of 2009/early 2010.

 

[Darren]

Until ur rep catches up to you and ppl wouldnt watch you for free

lol, very true.

But when you are competing with a boxer that has a existing good rep (Intel) the viewers will watch and pay regardless.


Edit:

lol, very true.

But when you are competing with a boxer that has a existing good rep (Intel) the viewers will watch regardless.


Edit:

human_error,

Hopefully AMD doesn't increase prices as Intel increases prices. Hopefully AMD has enough sense to keep prices low as its their bread and butter of making profit.

I do not want to speculate on the i7s vs Istanbul performance wise, i would rather wait and see the benchmarks when the time comes in 2010. But even if the Istanbul isn't faster as long as its cheaper the OEMs will be happy and yet again enthusiasts would view the i7 as "too expensive" a bit like today.

 

[Binge]

That sounds like a load of sh*t to me. If they discontinue the 920 they are basically f*cking the sh*t out of their entire workstation level chipset. This leads me to believe either this website is serious or they aren't giving us the full story. The full story being that if they stop making the 920 then the W3250 will be it's replacement. Can anyone say Xeons? I still call BS. None of my sources have said a thing about discontinued i7 processors this year.

 

[1Kurgan1]

This is exactly what happens when intel loses competition at the high end - they charge more and more for no reason. AMD remain competetive against the core2 series but unless they can start competing with core i5 fully then this is how it's gonna be. :shadedshu

At least Intel are being sporting and giving AMD a chance to catch up at the high end again.

I don't think you will see AMD making a $1000 proc anytime soon. They just released a very successful line of processors that do very well midrange and will compete with i5's (not the $500). And the top end BE's with no cold bug crush the i7's right now for WR's, so there really is just no point in releasing anything more.

I wouldn't really call that giving AMD a chance, after January AMD as been doing pretty good, and with the release of the 4770 the AMD/ATi lineup is doing even better. Not saying they are matching Intel sales, but they don't have to maintain profitability as a smaller company.

But either way I still don't see the issue. It's going to probably be a bit more than the p45, but the p55 is still going to be quiet a bit less than the x58. And the i7 920 will be gone, you the low end i5 and a p55, will still be quiet a bit less than the i7 920 and cheapest x58. So it helps Intel move farther into the AMD market since the x58 boards aren't the cheapest. Seems like a good move to me, but it will all depend on how the midrange i5 does compared to the i7 920, if it has the same performance then no biggie, but if it doesn't hold up then they will be loosing out on the high end midrange segment.

 

[Wile E]

I don't think you will see AMD making a $1000 proc anytime soon. They just released a very successful line of processors that do very well midrange and will compete with i5's (not the $500). And the top end BE's with no cold bug crush the i7's right now for WR's, so there really is just no point in releasing anything more.

I wouldn't really call that giving AMD a chance, after January AMD as been doing pretty good, and with the release of the 4770 the AMD/ATi lineup is doing even better. Not saying they are matching Intel sales, but they don't have to maintain profitability as a smaller company.

But either way I still don't see the issue. It's going to probably be a bit more than the p45, but the p55 is still going to be quiet a bit less than the x58. And the i7 920 will be gone, you the low end i5 and a p55, will still be quiet a bit less than the i7 920 and cheapest x58. So it helps Intel move farther into the AMD market since the x58 boards aren't the cheapest. Seems like a good move to me, but it will all depend on how the midrange i5 does compared to the i7 920, if it has the same performance then no biggie, but if it doesn't hold up then they will be loosing out on the high end midrange segment.

AMD isn't releasing a $1000 cpu simply because they can't offer a cpu that's good enough to charge $1000. If they could, they would. And Phenom doesn't crush all world records. Perhaps they have the top in a few 3D benches, making it a one-trick pony, but Intel embarrasses them in cpu benches. Not to mention, the official 975XE benches haven't released, so the king still remains to be seen.

At any rate, Intel isn't going to phase these chips out. Well, technically, they are phasing out the 940, but replacing it with the faster 950, at the same price point, so that doesn't really count.

Too great a market exists for them. Plus, if anything, they'd rather sell these chips on the i7 platform, and prune similar performing cpus from the i5 lineup, as they would make more money that way.

 

[fire2havoc]

This seems like a rumor...

 

[yogurt_21]

AMD isn't releasing a $1000 cpu simply because they can't offer a cpu that's good enough to charge $1000. If they could, they would. And Phenom doesn't crush all world records. Perhaps they have the top in a few 3D benches, making it a one-trick pony, but Intel embarrasses them in cpu benches. Not to mention, the official 975XE benches haven't released, so the king still remains to be seen.

At any rate, Intel isn't going to phase these chips out. Well, technically, they are phasing out the 940, but replacing it with the faster 950, at the same price point, so that doesn't really count.

Too great a market exists for them. Plus, if anything, they'd rather sell these chips on the i7 platform, and prune similar performing cpus from the i5 lineup, as they would make more money that way.

Plus the i7 920 is the best selling out of the i7 line I seriously doubt they discontinue it. well unless they are planning a revision for slightly higher, I could see that. but I seriously doubt they'd make their cheapest i7 649$ (the 950).

 

[vbx]

I didn't say they couldn't compete ever, athlon 64s were amazing compared to intel's pentium 4s. They can't compete at the high end now is the issue as none of their cpus can match i7 and probably i5 in cpu intensive applications. Plus the "all they have to do is make them" part is the hard part - if they could they would but it's not a simple task, especially with how powerful modern day cpus are.

I'm pretty sure they could. The reason they do not is because they want to target a different market and to charge less. They can charge more and make one that are in the high end, but the price would go up and AMD, for now, wants to sell processors at a lower cost compared to intel.

I mean, with your Logic, you're saying Nissan can't compete with BMW. But they can, with Infiniti. Of course the prices of an Infinti are more than a Nissan. Weak analogy I know.

 

[a_ump]

I'm pretty sure they could. The reason they do not is because they want to target a different market and to charge less. They can charge more and make one that are in the high end, but the price would go up and AMD, for now, wants to sell processors at a lower cost compared to intel.

I mean, with your Logic, you're saying Nissan can't compete with BMW. But they can, with Infiniti. Of course the prices of an Infinti are more than a Nissan. Weak analogy I know.

i have to say i agree with others, if AMD could make a processor for $1000, that would mean they'd have to have an architecture that can compete and fight back and forth in benches/performance with the i7. If they did have that, don't u think that Phenom II would be a better performing chip? Not to mention that if they did have such architecture, there'd be no hesitation about manufacturing the chip as chips that expensive are for enthusiasts who would know that the chip was on par or better than the i7. I do not believe they could make a chip that good right now, as i'm pretty sure they'd push it out fast just to show that they are equal with intel again, and as a marketing gimmik of "look at us, we're at the top". I am interested in how they do with their next CPU as they've been doing much better financially this year so they should be able to put more time and money into developing a much better chip.

 

[Darren]

i have to say i agree with others, if AMD could make a processor for $1000, that would mean they'd have to have an architecture that can compete and fight back and forth in benches/performance with the i7.

AMD have had faster architectures many times in the past and never charged $1,000!


By no means are AMD broke, they are financially able to develop a powerful CPU if they wanted, but like I said earlier they are out to make money, you do not need the fastest architecture to make money. Their business plan at current and previously was to focus on the enthusiasts whom want a cheaper alternative especially now due to the economical down-turn enthusiasts can not afford Intels offerings.

Even when AMD was on top in performance their high-end desktop CPUs were always cheaper than Intel’s. I can remember the Athlon 64s being a lot cheaper than the Pentium 4s and I can remember the Athlon X2s being cheaper than the Pentium Ds and yet again AMD was ontop and still remained cheaper!

My point is even when AMD was ontop their business plan was never to overcharge and exploit it with unrealistic prices, competitive prices was always built into AMDs business plan whether the architecture is faster or slower.

 

[a_ump]

AMD have had faster architectures many times in the past and never charged in $1,000!


By no means are AMD broke, they are financially able to develop a powerful CPU if they wanted, but like I said earlier they are out to make money, you do not need the fastest architecture to make money. There business plan at current is to focus on the enthusiasts whom want a cheaper alternative due to the economical down-turn.

Even when AMD was on top in performance their high-end desktop CPUs were always cheaper than Intel’s. I can remember the Athlon 64s being a lot cheaper than the Pentium 4s and I can remember the Athlon X2s being cheaper than the Pentium Ds and yet again AMD was ontop.

My point is even when AMD was ontop their business plan was never to overcharge and exploit it with unrealistic prices, competitive prices was always built into AMDs business plan whether the architecture is faster or slower.

i wasn't into computers much when AMD was on top but i do remember my bro having told me the athlon x2's were better than PD. Well even if they don't want to develop an architecture to challenge intel around $600+, i'm confident that if they had a chip that would perform at the top to challenge say the i7 920, then it'd sell just fine. Like mad i would thk if AMD would price it less than the i7, which they would.

 

[rpsgc]

True or not, it's one more good reason to get myself a cheap Core 2 Quad and hold on to it until hexa and octo-cores arrive. It's not like i7 is that much faster at gaming than a C2Q

 

[a_ump]

very true, it's not ahead of the q9650 at all, cept for well multi-threaded apps like Supreme commander. Even my q6600 is plenty acceptable as long as it's overclocked to 3.2ghz+.