hardware

AMD trims processor pricing

Hurmoth   on 25 October 2006 - 00:55 · 12 comments & 10941 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Fall is here, and so are processor price cuts.

AMD earlier this week lowered prices on notebook processors and a few desktop units, mostly to make way for new products.

The TL-60, a dual-core Turion chip for thin notebooks that runs at 2GHz, dropped 26 percent, from $354 to $263. The TL-56, which is a similar chip that runs at 1.8GHz, dropped from $263 to $220. The TL-52, which runs at 1.6GHz, waterfalled from $220 to $184. On the desktop front, the Athlon 64 FX-62, a 2.8GHz monster chip for gamers, declined from $827 to $713. AMD posted more of its updated prices on its website, but did not list the previous prices.

AMD also said today that it is on track to ship chips produced on its 65-nanometer lines during the quarter. These chips will be faster, smaller and, ultimately, cheaper to produce than chips made on the 90-nanometer line.

Intel hasn't had a large-scale price cut since the summer, so a broad price cut, along with new products, will likely occur in the relatively near future. PC makers early next year will also release notebooks based on the Santa Rosa platform, which will also usher in faster notebook chips and, in all likelihood, notebook price cuts.

View: Full Article @ c|net News.com

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 12 additional comments
(4 replies) #1 +Kushan on 25 Oct 2006 - 01:28
About time AMD started attempting to catch up to Intel.
#1.1 iOsiris on 25 Oct 2006 - 05:56
What do you think they did during the entire NetBurst/P4 era?
#1.2 +Kushan on 25 Oct 2006 - 06:39
They developed an awesome set of CPU's. I'm talking about now, where once again they are lagging behind due to the likes of conroe.
#1.3 Xavien on 25 Oct 2006 - 08:53
considering AMD had better processors than Intel for the better part of 2 1/2 years, I'd say we can afford AMD that much to catch up with Intel.
#1.4 carl0ski on 25 Oct 2006 - 10:37
Quote - Kushan said @ #1.2
They developed an awesome set of CPU's. I'm talking about now, where once again they are lagging behind due to the likes of conroe.


Little closed minded really

Intel might of had a product ready for years however it isnt worth releasing unless it is better than the competitor.

The fact the slowest conroe is as fast as the fastest Athlon is no coincidence Intel wont release any slower otherwise it would take the shine away from intel new chip series.

Intel learned that from 1.6ghz Pentium 4 versus 1.2Ghz Pentium 3

Pentium 3 quickly pulled from the shelves.

AMD if they have learned anything from Intel
will not splash any new processor across the media
until they are satisfied they have a superior product to Intel.
#2 vetslimy on 25 Oct 2006 - 02:10
Price cuts are good
#3 +guylaroche on 25 Oct 2006 - 03:44
Perhaps I'll get an AMD on my new system....
#4 yudi_lks on 25 Oct 2006 - 03:45
AMD rocks
(1 reply) #5 RAID 0 on 25 Oct 2006 - 08:35
All this power, and prices falling.. GOD I LOVE IT! I just picked up a Core2 Duo with MB for friggin 160 bucks... I CAN'T WAIT till AMD ups the speed of their CPUs. Does anyone else think AMD has any tricks up their sleeve?
#5.1 carl0ski on 25 Oct 2006 - 10:46
Quote - RAID 0 said @ #5
All this power, and prices falling.. GOD I LOVE IT! I just picked up a Core2 Duo with MB for friggin 160 bucks... I CAN'T WAIT till AMD ups the speed of their CPUs. Does anyone else think AMD has any tricks up their sleeve?

most definetely

but i don't expect to see anything it till mid to late 2008.
since AMD will not want to rush a product to displace Conroe.

AMD is targeting low power high future scalability
a full desktop / mobile solution
this takes time.

so AMD will probably wait for 65nm to achieve this,
i also expect an ATI GPU to slip into AM2 Torrenzo late next year maybe.
long before the GPU/CPU package.
#6 l33t on 25 Oct 2006 - 11:48
price cuts are ftw!
#7 Mistwaver on 29 Oct 2006 - 21:12
Eh, Intel isn't as far ahead of AMD as people try to claim. Sure, right now they're edging AMD out in the benchmarks by an average of about 10%, but it's not so bad that Intel chips are able to do stuff that AMD chips can't.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)