am2 vs 939 price

[Anthony]

With the AM2 due out very soon I am thinking about upgradig. I dont really
wanna spend much so should I just go wtih the 939 and 3800 x2 or the am2
verrion and spend more on pci express video card and memory? Casue I love my
6600 vid card. Who knows I shoudl just buy parts slowly and do that to who
knows just want advice.

 

[General Schvantzkoph]

With the AM2 due out very soon I am thinking about upgradig. I dont really
wanna spend much so should I just go wtih the 939 and 3800 x2 or the am2
verrion and spend more on pci express video card and memory? Casue I love my
6600 vid card. Who knows I shoudl just buy parts slowly and do that to who
knows just want advice.

The AM2 parts are out now. The prices for 939 and AM2 systems are about
the same. However I would expect to see some fire sales on 939s in the
near future so if you are looking for a bargain you should keep checking
prices from your usual on-line an off-line sources. Next month Intel
releases Woodcrest, Conroe is due to be released a few weeks after that.
When Conroe is out AMD will have to respond with price cuts because for
the first time in two years they won't have the better part.

 

[NoNoBadDog!]

The AM2 parts are out now. The prices for 939 and AM2 systems are about
the same. However I would expect to see some fire sales on 939s in the
near future so if you are looking for a bargain you should keep checking
prices from your usual on-line an off-line sources. Next month Intel
releases Woodcrest, Conroe is due to be released a few weeks after that.
When Conroe is out AMD will have to respond with price cuts because for
the first time in two years they won't have the better part.

With recent announcements regarding Conroe and Conroe-L, it appears that
Intel may not have a superior part. With a Higher TDP, higher L2 latency,
and slower that predicted core frequencies, the Conroe will not be so much
the AMD killer as a proc that can stand on level ground with the Conroe.
Given that Intel is famous for over-promoting it's chips, and the fact that
Intel's prices are higher, many will continue to but AMD since the
performance gap will be no where what Intel had originally claimed.

As multi-threaded apps appear, the superior design of the AMD dual core and
HyperTransport will become more relevant.

Conroe will simply not live up to it's promise.

Bobby

 

[Carlo Razzeto]

As multi-threaded apps appear, the superior design of the AMD dual core
and HyperTransport will become more relevant.

Conroe will simply not live up to it's promise.

Bobby

It's probably too early to be making that kind of claim... I've been a big
AMD supporter since the K6, but Conero is a very insteresting part.

Carlo

 

[General Schvantzkoph]

With recent announcements regarding Conroe and Conroe-L, it appears that
Intel may not have a superior part. With a Higher TDP, higher L2 latency,
and slower that predicted core frequencies, the Conroe will not be so much
the AMD killer as a proc that can stand on level ground with the Conroe.
Given that Intel is famous for over-promoting it's chips, and the fact that
Intel's prices are higher, many will continue to but AMD since the
performance gap will be no where what Intel had originally claimed.

As multi-threaded apps appear, the superior design of the AMD dual core and
HyperTransport will become more relevant.

Conroe will simply not live up to it's promise.

Bobby

We'll all know in a few weeks. There have been a few benchmarks on beta
versions of Conroe that look good. In 6 weeks we'll all know just how good
Woodcrest and Conroe really are. At the very least they will neutralize
AMDs advantage in desktop and small server systems. AMD will retain a big
advantage in large servers for at least another year or two but in single
chip boxes (which will be at 4 cores by the end of the year) Intel will be
at least as good. Intel has fixed their serious problems, the long
pipeline and the uncoolable levels of power consumption.

 

[NoNoBadDog!]

We'll all know in a few weeks. There have been a few benchmarks on beta
versions of Conroe that look good. In 6 weeks we'll all know just how good
Woodcrest and Conroe really are. At the very least they will neutralize
AMDs advantage in desktop and small server systems. AMD will retain a big
advantage in large servers for at least another year or two but in single
chip boxes (which will be at 4 cores by the end of the year) Intel will be
at least as good. Intel has fixed their serious problems, the long
pipeline and the uncoolable levels of power consumption.

Pre-Vista, probably. But with no on-die memory controller, no
Hypertransport, etc., Intel is still
going to hit a wall again. I think competition is a good thing...but you
cannot ever believe what Intel claims, and testing indicates the speed
difference will be less that would justify the extra cost of Intel chips.

As more and more attention is paid to TDP and performance per watt, AMD will
still have the advantage.
I cannot honestly see Intel being able to solve their heat issues if they
continue to fabricate chips the way they are doing now.

Bobby

 

[Yousuf Khan]

We'll all know in a few weeks. There have been a few benchmarks on beta
versions of Conroe that look good. In 6 weeks we'll all know just how good
Woodcrest and Conroe really are. At the very least they will neutralize
AMDs advantage in desktop and small server systems. AMD will retain a big
advantage in large servers for at least another year or two but in single
chip boxes (which will be at 4 cores by the end of the year) Intel will be
at least as good. Intel has fixed their serious problems, the long
pipeline and the uncoolable levels of power consumption.

Intel also doesn't have a substantial number of 65-nm parts available
yet. All of its 65-nm production is happening at its D1C fab in Oregon,
which is its test fab. So far, the only 65-nm production chips coming
out of it are the Yonah (aka Core 1 Solo & Core 1 Duo) mobile chips. I
can't think of anything else that's at 65-nm yet. All Netburst chips are
still on 90-nm. They'll have a second 65-nm fab in Arizona ramping up by
the end of the year. Then maybe a few more over the next couple of years.

Despite all of the hype and hoopla surrounding their "substantial lead
in 65-nm technology" vs. the competition, very few of their chips are
actually coming out of there. They did a "production run" of 65-nm chips
using a relatively low-volume chip category, the mobile chips. Even the
mobile category is not entirely respresented by Core 1, there's a
substantial number that are mobile Celeron which are also 90-nm.

Yousuf Khan