Saturday, June 10, 2006

Intel's 60% price slashing reflects true value

I have analysed the consequence of Intel's pricing collapse. It is unfortunate that Intel will see red. But Intel's chips indeed only worth about 40% of AMD's chips. Here is why.

1) Total cost of ownership: Considering the power consumption difference and the electricity costs, running an AMD CPU saves at least $150 over three years, assuming energy prices remain stable.

2) Performance and longevity: Athlon 64 is faster than Pentium under 32 bit Windows, that's the situation now. Going forward, with Windows Vista approaching quickly, Intel's P4 with EM64T will see 10-20% performance drop under 64 bit, and AMD64 will see 10-40% performance increase under 64 bit. As a result, current EM64T owners will get a big downgrade and current AMD64 users will get a free upgrade. Under 64 bit, an Athlon X2 3800+ will run like a X2 4400+, and a Pentium 965 XE will run like a Pentium D 805. A Pentium D 805 will run like, well, a Celeron D.

If you look at AMD's AM2 chips, they have even higher potential value

1) They support VT. You can run Windows XP and Windows Vista the same time.
2) They support 4x4. You can't get that from anywhere else.


Blogger Surya said...

Sharikou, I must admit your blogs are quite fun to read. But only a few more months and we will find out if AMD will truly be able to maintain their lead or not. No one is going to care at the moment too much about quad cores coming out because of the huge price in getting a single quad core. It is in dual cores where most people will be interested. I guess time will tell whether Intel was lying through their teeth and thus prove you correct or whether Intel was telling the truth and they do have a champ in their corner and you will look be honest, that seems more fun for me to watch than the Intel AMD battle because I will always go with the company who in my eyes are making the better product. Good luck! By the way all my new computers are AMD dual cores.

12:58 PM, June 10, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We will see. Let's wait a month or two.

1:25 PM, June 10, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In the voice of Cramer:


3:25 PM, June 10, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Conroes are half as good as Intel claims they are, then Intel shouldn't just slash the price of its hot, noisy, energy-wasting Pentium Ds. Intel should be paying people to take them.

6:43 PM, June 10, 2006  
Blogger Ajay S. said...

the fun part is in predicting the future and seeing if it goes that way,

even a wall street analyst can reel off past statistics and reasonably say what may happen in the next three quaters!

techies with good market knowledge can provide insights valid for the next two or more years.

People who go beyond that are called science fiction writers. ha ha

this is somewhat like gambling, except there is no personal money involved, and its a lot more logical

I too would like AMD to succed as they seem to design their products in a way that takes the industry forward while addressing user's genuine concerns.

Intel only seems to live for the next two quaters, and they are doing badly even in that

Sharikou's blog is a nice stopover everyday, and does give clear insights into the two competitors architectures, advantages and disadvantages, even if he is a wee bit biased towards AMD.

There seems to be no other site that does such a comprehensive coverage on this topic

Keep up the good work Doctor, and thanks for the great info you provide

12:09 AM, June 11, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So much for AMD being able to keep it's price point up because their will not be enough Conroe's to go around.

Good for the consumer, not good for AMD financials possibly ?

12:02 PM, June 11, 2006  
Anonymous george said...

CORPSE2/CONrow is just another failed chip it only wins in some games because of cache period!! amd is going to frag them. CONrow will be just another Pentium4 dead end.

11:50 AM, June 17, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home