Advanced Micro Devices, the world’s second largest maker of x86 chips, will not be able to sell its latest desktop AMD Phenom central processing units (CPUs) for $1000 a piece for several months from now, but next quarter it hopes to be able to target higher price-points than today with AMD Phenom models 9700 and 9900.
“AMD intends to offer the following new processors in Q1 of 2008: a processor model 9900 (2.60GHz) priced below $350 and a Phenom processor model 9700 (2.40GHz) priced below $300,” a spokesperson for AMD said, referring to prices for large customers in 1000-unit quantities.
The recently unveiled quad-core AMD Phenom 9000-series processors are made using 65nm process technology and are initially available at 2.20GHz (model 9500) and 2.30GHz (model 9600). The new chips have thermal design power (TDP) of 95W, a not so low value. AMD Phenom processors 9600 (2.3GHz) and 9500 (2.2GHz) are now available for orders by AMD customers for $283 and $251 respectively in 1000-unit pricing.
Presently, $283 per chip is the highest price that AMD currently asks for a desktop microprocessor. The company also offers dual-core AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+ Black Edition processor clocked at 3.20GHz for $220 in business quantities as well as dual-core AMD Athlon 64 FX-74 (3.0GHz) chips for 2P platforms for $599 a pair; but the FX-series chips are hardly popular nowadays.
AMD badly needs to be able to increase pricing of its microprocessors as well as improve its profit margins these days. The company lost $1.6 billion in its fiscal year and currently has debts that equal $5.3 billion. Moreover, after the chipmaker acquired graphics and multimedia chip developer ATI Technologies, it lost inconceivable share of its revenues and profits, which now also pulls the whole company down.
Provided that the numbers of the new Phenom chips with higher frequencies are sufficient and the products are introduced on time, the introduction of the AMD Phenom 9900 processor in Q1 2008 will help Advanced Micro Devices to boost its revenues substantially, as the chip has all chances to become popular among certain groups of end-users.
Intel Corp. currently sells its Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 (2.66GHz) chip for $530 and if AMD’s Phenom 9900 (2.60GHz) shows higher performance amid lower price, then the new CPU will be successful on the market. But if Intel drops the price of the model Q6700 tangibly, AMD’s model 9900 will have to show its potential, or reduce the price.
Comments currently:
13
Discussion started: 11/29/07 08:07:30 PM
Latest comment: 03/27/08 05:47:18 PM
Expand all threads |
Collapse all threads
[1-10]
1.
Yury , this is a very well written article !
anyway, in page 3
" The step is 10 cycles high. The frequency multiplier of this CPU is 10, too. "
I suppose this is about 11 cycles? The multiplier of 2200MHz dual core is 11x IIRC.
[
Posted by: chargie
|
Date: 06/27/06 06:00:25 PM]
2.
Intel can afford to cut more prices since their chips will be cheaper to manufacture at 45nm...
AMD can just settle for the low-end segment and other scraps and crumbs from Intel...
[
Posted by: Being a Fanboy just sucks!
|
Date: 11/29/07 08:07:30 PM]
+ expand thread (2 answers)
- collapse thread
What chips? the all entire line is made of 65nm processors.
The very rare/few ones manufactured at 45nm cost $$$$$$$$$
[
Posted by: Joker
|
Date: 12/01/07 09:59:27 AM]
the KEYWORD idiiot is WILL BE....
read some news... the 45nm penryns WILL be coming this january!
besides AMD's 65nm sucks like hell... Intel's 65nm is already mature... and they still kick AMD's butt
AMD can just have the low-end (low margin) segment of the market!
[
Posted by: Being a Fanboy just sucks!
|
Date: 12/03/07 09:23:55 AM]
3.
What is this IF in the last paragraph. There are numerous benchmarks out there comparing the 9900 to the Q6700, and the Q6700 wins. In fact, in a majority the Q6600, which retails at about $280, beats the 9900.
In addition, that will become moot because in January Intel will release the Penryns, and the Q9450 which is supposed to retail at $316 throttles the 9900 in benchmarks.
[
Posted by: James
|
Date: 11/29/07 08:43:45 PM]
4.
1st quarter of 2008 will surely be the time that AMD will get more than a slap in the face for their pathetic product and pricing!
[
Posted by: Anti-AMD FANboy!
|
Date: 11/30/07 12:21:26 AM]
5.
You got that right James.
The Phenom 9900..... Oooooo big freaking deal.... Before we even see it, here comes Intels' STAR DESTROYER Q9450!!!
It is cheaper then a 9900, and easily overclocks 3-4ghz on air, yet is probably way better even at stock speeds.
Gah, will we even still have AMD 1 year for now, or will they be bankrupt by then? =\
[
Posted by: gamebro
|
Date: 11/30/07 01:31:50 AM]
6.
AMD are doing all the wrong stuff!!!
Who thought them marketing??
Sure they want more margins but right now they should be focusing on market share,especially when Intel is outperforming them in price-performance, and has the ability to under cut them without losing much(or anything for that matter)
Hector Ruiz is gonna run AMD to the ground
[
Posted by: radicalx
|
Date: 11/30/07 02:48:14 AM]
7.
Wow, AMD doesnt want to sell processors anymore.
Highest price AMD can do is (Q6600 - $50) and this will never change.
[
Posted by: 1234
|
Date: 11/30/07 03:18:56 AM]
8.
AMD has some big customers that it treats well so that alone will help it survive. It also provides a better upgrade path as you don't need to buy a new motherboard every time they introduce a new processor. Intel's next high end CPU will not run on X38 motherboards which are barely even poping up in stores!!. The fact that they are making AM2+ and AM3 Processors backwards compatible with AM2 motherboards is one of the reasons I'm staying with AMD for now and ordering a socket AM2+ motherboard.
Still AMD needs to make better use of ATI, which will be too little too late if they wait any longer, in order to at least get some revenue from their graphics solutions until they stop bleeding money from their CPU buisness. Selling off and shutting down one of their Fabs while they still had high demand was a very stupid decision and they really can't afford to make any more of those.
[
Posted by: Megamanx00
|
Date: 11/30/07 11:00:42 AM]
+ expand thread (2 answers)
- collapse thread
The upgrade path is just cheap talk IMO.... Sure you can stick with the AM2+ board, but will you want to? The next processors will work on the old boards but who knows how many badly needed features you'll give up staying on the old board.
Generally when I want a new process I WANT a new mobo too, for all the new features that come out each year.
There is a serious risk that staying on a mobo from today, might badly bottleneck (or something to that sort) the processor of next year....
Don't buy into the upgrade hype AMD is pushing hard!
[
Posted by: gamebro
|
Date: 11/30/07 11:53:35 AM]
I will buy an AMD system right now if I have some money because Intel processors lack the grunt that I am used to when using an AMD system.
Higher FSB and higher clock for Intel processors is also cheap talk. Do not get me started about Hyperthreading and EM64T. Intel processors lacks real 64-bit computing for their desktops, notebook, and server processors.
[
Posted by: linunerd
|
Date: 12/02/07 06:36:07 PM]
9.
are you on drugs too??? lack of 64-bit in Intel processors... that's the reason why they have EM64T.... they're inoperable with A64 extensions... beside 64-bit applications are still rare....
lack the grunt?!? have you read any of the benchmarks lately?!? its been almost more than a year that A64 and X2s are being kicked on the balls by CORE 2 chips
[
Posted by: Being a Fanboy just sucks!
|
Date: 12/04/07 06:30:03 AM]
10.
oh well...i hope AMD bounces back...i'd hate to see no competition for intel, that'd really suck...remember, intel was also kicked on the balls when the first A64's came out...i just hope there'd still be some real competition between AMD and intel...
[
Posted by: as
|
Date: 03/27/08 05:47:18 PM]
[1-10]
Make Home Page
Add to Favorites
XbitLabs is using Twitter
Windows Live Alerts
