Bookmark and Share


Intel Corp., the world’s largest supplier of x86 computer chips, has reduced pricing of several microprocessors and for the first time lowered the pricing of desktop quad-core chips to the level below $200. Even though price reductions are not really significant, they are noteworthy.

As a result of 14% price-cut, quad-core Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 processor, which operates at 2.40GHz clock-speed and features 8MB of level-two cache, now costs $193, only $10 more compared to the new price of Intel’s top-of-the-range dual-core Core 2 Duo E8500 processors that works at 3.16GHz frequency and sports 6MB of cache.

As a result of the price-drop, Intel’s mainstream customers will now have to choose between the higher clocked chip with two processing engines or a central processing unit with four cores, but relatively low frequency.

Intel also cut prices of certain quad-core Xeon processors made using 65nm process technology, though, the decreases are in the range of 11% - 12%.


Comments currently: 4
Discussion started: 07/29/08 10:06:36 AM
Latest comment: 07/30/08 10:50:47 PM


Intel is holding back deliberately to let AMD catch up a bit. Their Core 2 series can easily scale to 4Ghz, and yet, they're only just hitting over 3Ghz in official speeds?

Hacker91, THINK before you TYPE. You do NOT bury the competition in an "anti-trust suicide mission". That's nothing but mindless fanboy talk. (filled with emotion of jealousy, hatred, etc).

If Intel loses an anti-trust case, it gives future cases evidence (to establish the background behaviour of Intel). Instead of a single case, it'll be a string of cases in the future for Intel. (This is exactly what happened to Microsoft). So instead of spending money on making better and better solutions, they'll be wasting money on paying off fines! Do you really want that?

What Intel is doing, is playing with AMD. Like a cat playing with its ball of woolen yarn. They know that competition remains important if they're to be the "good guy" in an anti-trust case.

Its also wrong to say Intel has nothing to lose. They have plenty to lose. Being the dominant provider means you value something...Marketshare. Marketshare -> Sales -> Profit.

Its important to understand that there needs to be competition. If not for competition, there would be no innovation and price cutting. Which would result in being bad for us.

So I say again. THINK before you TYPE.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 07/30/08 09:05:38 PM]


Add your Comment

Related news

Latest News

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

10:48 pm | LG’s Unique Ultra-Wide Curved 34” Display Finally Hits the Market. LG 34UC97 Available in the U.S. and the U.K.

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

12:52 pm | Lisa Su Appointed as New CEO of Advanced Micro Devices. Rory Read Steps Down, Lisa Su Becomes New CEO of AMD

Thursday, August 28, 2014

4:22 am | AMD Has No Plans to Reconsider Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Cards. AMD Will Not Lower Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Solutions

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

1:09 pm | Samsung Begins to Produce 2.13GHz 64GB DDR4 Memory Modules. Samsung Uses TSV DRAMs for 64GB DDR4 RDIMMs

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

10:41 am | AMD Quietly Reveals Third Iteration of GCN Architecture with Tonga GPU. AMD Unleashes Radeon R9 285 Graphics Cards, Tonga GPU, GCN 1.2 Architecture