Anandtech Previews 65nm

[sabrewolf732]

Oh!....Enlighten us with your wisdom on how Netburst is so different from the Northwoods to the Prescotts?

if your only respond is going to be "heat", I dobut it, my 650 idles at 34c and highs in the 51c to 53c overclocked at 4.0ghz and at stocks it does 31c. 44c at 4.2ghz max on air. Sure not using Intel's "crappy" Heat-Sink/Fan but a Zalman CNPS series......Power consumption? again, nothing a good quality PSU can't handle. 300x14 common on water, yes I can get my 650 @ x14 multi with my P5WD2-Premium with 0519 BIOS. 250X14 = 3.5ghz and look at the voltage? Stock baby, stock! . I've had it to 260x14 and temps still way under control. Next it'll be CoolerMaster Mini120 water kit and off I go to 300x14.

Heat, and amount of stages , cache increase, sse3

Let's see, you're anti-Netburst, yet you want a Netburst CPU? isn't that being a hypocrite?.....Admit it, you secretely luv Netburst.......let it all out, come out of the closet (not in a queer way) and rejoice what is now the only way to go.

I like to have all machines. Playing with just one kind for a while is boring. Again, I won't be buying a prescott due to heat/power consumption. However the 65nm stuff looks like it can be the next c series.

 

[sabrewolf732]

It's not really that different. I think what he was saying is the application of the NetBurst architecture. The Pentium 4C is known to be the best Pentium 4 core ever made. It gave AMD a serious run for its money. The 20 stage pipeline's penalties were slowly being masked and the muscle of the NetBurst architecture in multimedia began to filter through. Then, they released Prescott. It ran hotter, had a pipeline that was 11 stages longer and had more cache. The L1 cache was said to be slower, and desipte the larger cache, failed to outshine Northwood. The Prescott core is pretty heavily tweaked, but much of the benefits are masked by the 31 stage pipeline.



And when he says heat, look at the TDP. Intels have a record TDP. They level out at 130 watts and that's not the actual power consumption. It is the amount of heat that any given HSF should be able to dissipate. And, i've heard different stories about the heat. Some say it's not that bad while others day that it's horrible. All this will soon be in the past when Conroe awakens.

ty

 

[Donnie27]

I have to agree, almost everywhere I read venice performed a tiny tiny bit worse than winnie. But that's not why venice's oc so good. I will actually prob buy a 65nm p4 since it seems like they got heat under control. If it can hit 4.5GHz on decent air and keep the temps down I'll be happy Maybe the 65nm stuff will be the next "c" series.

Sure it's not the only reason it overcocks better, but it helps. I'm thinking CM@ 4.25 with stock cooler is good. I'm impressed because its the first stepping. AMD and Intel have aways improved steppings and gotten better results. I know folks still buying 30 capper Northwood C for example.

Even after defending Intel, my next build will simply have a 3200 or 3500+. This will give way to a X2 of some sort as AMD moves to their next socket next year. I still like having both and miss not having an AMD based system.

Donnie27

 

[Donnie27]

It's not really that different. I think what he was saying is the application of the NetBurst architecture. The Pentium 4C is known to be the best Pentium 4 core ever made. It gave AMD a serious run for its money. The 20 stage pipeline's penalties were slowly being masked and the muscle of the NetBurst architecture in multimedia began to filter through. Then, they released Prescott. It ran hotter, had a pipeline that was 11 stages longer and had more cache. The L1 cache was said to be slower, and desipte the larger cache, failed to outshine Northwood. The Prescott core is pretty heavily tweaked, but much of the benefits are masked by the 31 stage pipeline.

Not so fast there. P4C didn't give AMD a run for their money, it kicked their asses=P P4B with 533 was already smacking AthlonXP's in many streaming apps and even rushing the Hammer Launch, first Anandtech review was did without a working AGP slot, didn't help. Anand's answer was to use a PCI card on the Intel system LOL! Even the 1.6A NW had a large following because of how cheap it was and how well it overclocked.

Northwood-C's only competition was from the AthlonXP, there wasn't enough Hammers and no cheap ones either. AXP had reached the end of it's life cycle at 3200+ that compared more to the 3.06 or 2.8. 32K+ didn't overclock still sold for $467 for the OEM while a 2.6C that would routinely run between 3.26 ant 3.6GHz was selling for $210. Hammers were low yield and very high priced. In fact many folks waited for Socket 939 and lower speed bins.

And when he says heat, look at the TDP. Intels have a record TDP. They level out at 130 watts and that's not the actual power consumption. It is the amount of heat that any given HSF should be able to dissipate. And, i've heard different stories about the heat. Some say it's not that bad while others day that it's horrible. All this will soon be in the past when Conroe awakens.

Not Intel's, Prescotts as someone already pointed out. Each stepping Intel and AMD moves too get's better. By better I mean gives off less heat and might even use less power. The last Prescotts are hot but run cooler than the first HotScott Prescotts Intel sold. But isn't that 130W for the Dual Core Procs, not Single core?

Shame on Intel for even selling Hotscott as they were. AMD's Rev-E also improved over the Rev-D and if there is a F or G, it will be even better. Its been that way since at least the 486 days for both. They refine their processes. TDP on the 65nm 3.6GHz is like 87W so Prescott becomes moot anyway.

Donnie27

 

[sabrewolf732]

Not so fast there. P4C didn't give AMD a run for their money, it kicked their asses=P P4B with 533 was already smacking AthlonXP's in many streaming apps and even rushing the Hammer Lauch, first Anandtech review did without a working AGP slot, didn't help. Anand's answer was to use a PCI card on the Intel system LOL! Even the 1.6A NW had a large following because of how cheap it was and how well it overclocked.

Northwood-C's only competition was from the AthlonXP, there wasn't enough Hammers and no cheap ones either. AXP had reached the end of it's life cycle at 3200+ that compared more to the 3.06 or 2.8. 32K+ didn't overclock still sold for $467 for the OEM while a 2.6C that would routinely run between 3.26 ant 3.6GHz was selling for $210. Hammers were low yield and very high priced. In fact many folks waited for Socket 939 and lower speed bins.

Afaik, amd and intel were roughly even until the C series. The c series came out and busted ass with a vengeance. 3200+ didnt come out yet but people expected it to keep up, however it offered minor improvements in performance. FSB did not really help out axp the way it helped out p4's. IIRC, opteron was tested with agp and even ET showed that with it's ddr 333 it would make one hell of a gaming rig. When 754 was finally released iirc, processors were in good quantity but there was a lack of motherboards for overclocking. 754 did bust the c series ass though (in gaming at least). Hopefully intel's 65nm chips will make amd's lead smaller.

 

[Donnie27]

Afaik, amd and intel were roughly even until the C series. The c series came out and busted ass with a vengeance. 3200+ didnt come out yet but people expected it to keep up, however it offered minor improvements in performance. FSB did not really help out axp the way it helped out p4's. IIRC, opteron was tested with agp and even ET showed that with it's ddr 333 it would make one hell of a gaming rig. When 754 was finally released iirc, processors were in good quantity but there was a lack of motherboards for overclocking. 754 did bust the c series ass though (in gaming at least). Hopefully intel's 65nm chips will make amd's lead smaller.

3200+ launched with the Intel 3.2GHz. Many sites were disappointed as the new 3200+ didn't perform that much better than the old 2800+. In fact, in some apps it was slower. It also rendered a lot of motherboards obsolete because they couldn't handle its FSB. So that made that same socket arguement moot as well.

AMD rushed out the Opteron and A64 for two reasons. Northwood-C and Intel delaying the Xeon version (with full 800MHz FSB). My point was saying Northwood C gave AMD a "run for the money" is a GIANT understatement. What it gave AMD was more red ink and a whippin'

The Hammers were far too few and too expensive to change anything. It also took AMD about 18 months to work out the kinks. Prescott and NOT following up on a 90nm Northwood C was Intel's biggest Screwup (NOT AMD). It allowed AMD to keep their prices high. Example 3500+ went up* as high as $339 from $279. That's higher than its launch price. Yes, competition is a two-way street.

Donnie27

 

[headless]

I don't understand all the 'intel vs. amd' arguments. AMD is better for a while, then intel is then amd is again. then intel for a while again. then amd. then intel.. It's been like this for a long time. Put all your eggs in one basket and you'll just end up on the slower side of the race for a while -- eventually. XP's were great, then got stomped by p4c's. Then p4c's got stomped by the a64's and a64's are still stomping all types of p4's. Perhaps conroe will stomp a64's...but if it does, whatever amd comes out with will leapfrog conroe. At which point intel will release something else which leapfrogs that. Rinse and repeat. Quit arguing. go use your PC's and be joyful. JOYFUL I DEMAND IT.

I can't wait to see what kind of clocks 'mature' .65nm will result in, on both sides of the fence. I wub die shrinks.

 

[sabrewolf732]

I don't understand all the 'intel vs. amd' arguments. AMD is better for a while, then intel is then amd is again. then intel for a while again. then amd. then intel.. It's been like this for a long time. Put all your eggs in one basket and you'll just end up on the slower side of the race for a while -- eventually. XP's were great, then got stomped by p4c's. Then p4c's got stomped by the a64's and a64's are still stomping all types of p4's. Perhaps conroe will stomp a64's...but if it does, whatever amd comes out with will leapfrog conroe. At which point intel will release something else which leapfrogs that. Rinse and repeat. Quit arguing. go use your PC's and be joyful. JOYFUL I DEMAND IT.

I can't wait to see what kind of clocks 'mature' .65nm will result in, on both sides of the fence. I wub die shrinks.

genius

 

[chrisf6969]

STFU noobs, my VIA 1Ghz pwns you all!

Anyway, back to the original topic. I can't wait to get my hands on a 65nm chip. I've always jumped when there was a good stepping or die shrink. IE: 600e & 700e, 1.6a, 2.4C..... my favorite 4 chips were all great overclockers with 50% overclocks!
600e did 900Mhz
700e did 1050Mhz
1.6a did 2.4Ghz
2.4C did 3.6Ghz
I thinking maybe a 3Ghz 65nm chip will do 4.5Ghz and keep my string of 50% overclocks going.

 

[Donnie27]

I don't understand all the 'intel vs. amd' arguments. AMD is better for a while, then intel is then amd is again. then intel for a while again. then amd. then intel.. It's been like this for a long time. Put all your eggs in one basket and you'll just end up on the slower side of the race for a while -- eventually. XP's were great, then got stomped by p4c's. Then p4c's got stomped by the a64's and a64's are still stomping all types of p4's. Perhaps conroe will stomp a64's...but if it does, whatever amd comes out with will leapfrog conroe. At which point intel will release something else which leapfrogs that. Rinse and repeat. Quit arguing. go use your PC's and be joyful. JOYFUL I DEMAND IT.

I can't wait to see what kind of clocks 'mature' .65nm will result in, on both sides of the fence. I wub die shrinks.

Yup and I got jumpped for saying the same thing about leapfoggin'. According to many AMD folks, AMD has ALWAYS been better=P I mean come on Dewd, as was said on this thread, P4C gave AMD a run for the money? X2 is AMD's real champ. Before X2, Intel could truely compete with Hyperthreading, X2 put an end to that and easily beat it and Intel's rushed Dual Cores. A64FX had chinks its armour, namely multi-tasking and steaming apps.

I got into trouble with a Mod for saying that eventhough P4C was kicking the crap out of XP and there were only very small limited numbers of Hammers, this forum was still a very solid 70% AMD _________s and followers. Polls taken here proved that much.

Cedar Mill might be more popular than many might think if it overclocks to 4GHz Plus with Stock coolers.

This is from Oct-12---> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26870

Donnie27

 

[sabrewolf732]

2GHZ??? Am I the only person saying WTF?!

 

[headless]

2GHZ??? Am I the only person saying WTF?!

LOL, a 2ghz p4...and this is a NEW release? i thought p4's were ALL above 2.8ghz these days..

Oh, and re: hyperthreading allowing intel to compete with a64's which were way faster -- only in specific situations. For those of us who run low-cpu usage background apps OR one intensive program on our PC's (read: gamers.) the a64 stomped everything intel could deliver, hyperthreading or not. Hyperthreading does nothing to help a single applications performance in most situations...
But all that is neither here nor there. Point being, nobody's ever on top for long. Why argue about who is going to stay there and for how long? just see what comes out and see how it performs, then buy whatever is fastest.

 

[coldpower27]

LOL, a 2ghz p4...and this is a NEW release? i thought p4's were ALL above 2.8ghz these days..

Oh, and re: hyperthreading allowing intel to compete with a64's which were way faster -- only in specific situations. For those of us who run low-cpu usage background apps OR one intensive program on our PC's (read: gamers.) the a64 stomped everything intel could deliver, hyperthreading or not. Hyperthreading does nothing to help a single applications performance in most situations...
But all that is neither here nor there. Point being, nobody's ever on top for long. Why argue about who is going to stay there and for how long? just see what comes out and see how it performs, then buy whatever is fastest.

The 65nm sample seen earlier this year was running at a mere 2 GHZ, but that was a engineering sample on the early 65nm process, but as we can see, Intel has reached production level clockspeeds of 3.4GHZ at least on Cedar Mill. Intel is still currently on top, just not in the performance arena, there are more things to being on top then pure performance and such.

 

[sabrewolf732]

The 65nm sample seen earlier this year was running at a mere 2 GHZ, but that was a engineering sample on the early 65nm process, but as we can see, Intel has reached production level clockspeeds of 3.4GHZ at least on Cedar Mill. Intel is still currently on top, just not in the performance arena, there are more things to being on top then pure performance and such.

if this wasn't [H] then you'd be right Seriously though, 2GHz??? WTF? That is some seriously low clockage even for a a64. Maybe they meant 2.8?

 

[coldpower27]

if this wasn't [H] then you'd be right Seriously though, 2GHz??? WTF? That is some seriously low clockage even for a a64. Maybe they meant 2.8?

No, I am right,they were refering to a 2GHZ Pentium 4 65nm seen a while ago when the 65nm process was very young. It was there to demonstrate that the 65nm process was healthy and they had working silicon. You don't need to ramp clockspeed if all your doing is debugging and making sure the process is in working conditions, they were still at least 3 Quarter from release. Like I said, Cedar Mill should be at shipping clockspeeds now, no more need to talk "old" 2GHZ samples.

There were also 1.5GHZ or so Yonah cores being demoed as well, thier shipping clockspeeds are supposed to be 2.167GHZ.

AMD does it too, and had 1.4GHZ K8 samples, I believe a year or so before the release of the actual Athlon 64, that were still quite far from the 2.2GHZ shipping clockspeeds.

The lowest shipping Pentium 4's on the 90nm node now, that I can recall, are Pentium 4 505/506 2.66GHZ for LGA 775 and 2.4GHZ for S478. They are both 533 FSB value versions that aren't listed on Intel's official pricing lists

Now that I read through, ah yeah I get what you mean by you think I am wrong as Most people at this forum will look at just performance. Though you do have to keep in mind the reasons that, Intel doesn't need to command the performance crown, there is more at stake here then that, Intel cares for it's profits first, hence why they created NetBurst high clockspeed marketing campaign in first place.

 

[sabrewolf732]

No, I am right, they were refering to a 2GHZ Pentium 4 65nm seen a while ago when the 65nm process was very young. It was there to demonstrate that the 65nm process was healthy and they had working silicon. You don't need to ramp clockspeed if all your doing is debugging and making sure the process is in working conditions, they were still at least 3 Quarter from release. Like I said, Cedar Mill should be at shipping clockspeeds now, no more need to talk "old" 2GHZ samples.

There were also 1.5GHZ or so Yonah cores being demoed as well, thier shipping clockspeeds are supposed to be 2.167GHZ.

AMD does it too, and had 1.4GHZ K8 samples, I believe a year or so before the release of the actual Athlon 64, that were still quite far from the 2.2GHZ shipping clockspeeds.

The lowest shipping Pentium 4's on the 90nm node now, that I can recall, are Pentium 4 505/506 2.66GHZ for LGA 775 and 2.4GHZ for S478. They are both 533 FSB value versions that aren't listed on Intel's official pricing lists

Erm, what I mean is the inq. link says intel will be shipping 2GHz 65nm p4's

 

[coldpower27]

Erm, what I mean is the inq. link says intel will be shipping 2GHz 65nm p4's

Which link? Could you point me to it?

 

[coldpower27]

Which link? Could you point me to it?

Nevermind.

The Pentium 4 introductions will be the 950 ($635), the 940 ($420), the 930 ($315), and the 920 ($240). These clock at 3.4GHz, 3.2GHz, 3GHz and 2GHz respectively. They have 800MHz buses, use the LGA775 socket, and each has 2X2MB caches too.

Obviously, "TheInuiqrer" doesn't proof read its shit, you know of course they mean 2.8GHZ. They just left ot the .8 part.

 

[sabrewolf732]

Nevermind.

The Pentium 4 introductions will be the 950 ($635), the 940 ($420), the 930 ($315), and the 920 ($240). These clock at 3.4GHz, 3.2GHz, 3GHz and 2GHz respectively. They have 800MHz buses, use the LGA775 socket, and each has 2X2MB caches too.

Obviously, "TheInuiqrer" doesn't proof read its shit, you know of course they mean 2.8GHZ. They just left ot the .8 part.

hehe that's what I thought until you said intel does have a 2GHz p4 I was like "rofl wtf?!"

 

[osirus35]

what will be the first chipset to support the conroe? I want to upgrade my graphics card but since i have agp i would need to buy a new mobo. And i want conroe but if i can i dont want to end up buying a new motherboard when the chip comes out.

 

[Duke3d87]

what will be the first chipset to support the conroe? I want to upgrade my graphics card but since i have agp i would need to buy a new mobo. And i want conroe but if i can i dont want to end up buying a new motherboard when the chip comes out.

the 975 series is the only chipset to my knowledge. I would expect via to have a chipset for it though. They have one for dual core processors and PCI-E and AGP in the came pc. It might be conroe ready.

 

[Team Obi Juan]

Nevermind.

The Pentium 4 introductions will be the 950 ($635), the 940 ($420), the 930 ($315), and the 920 ($240). These clock at 3.4GHz, 3.2GHz, 3GHz and 2GHz respectively. They have 800MHz buses, use the LGA775 socket, and each has 2X2MB caches too.

Obviously, "TheInuiqrer" doesn't proof read its shit, you know of course they mean 2.8GHZ. They just left ot the .8 part.

Yeah, they had to F that up... The GHz decrease in nice increments and then it goes 2.ZERO LMFAO yeah that has to be wrong.

 

[1c3d0g]

the 975 series is the only chipset to my knowledge. I would expect via to have a chipset for it though. They have one for dual core processors and PCI-E and AGP in the came pc. It might be conroe ready.

Ahaha, don't count on it though...Via...ahaha...what a joke!

/me won't touch Via with a ten foot pole...

 

[Donnie27]

Ahaha, don't count on it though...Via...ahaha...what a joke!

/me won't touch Via with a ten foot pole...

No one trashed out VIA as much as I have over the years. But since VIA signed a License Agreement with Intel and others for industry standards, I hope it changed them from the better.

Donnie27

 

[JetUsafMech]

No one trashed out VIA as much as I have over the years. But since VIA signed a License Agreement with Intel and others for industry standards, I hope it changed them from the better.

Donnie27

From what I've noticed, VIA does seem to be more better. Funny thing, I used to think VIA's PR department lived by the "Bad publicity is still publicity" rule.

 

[Donnie27]

From what I've noticed, VIA does seem to be more better. Funny thing, I used to think VIA's PR department lived by the "Bad publicity is still publicity" rule.

VIA's stand was, "If you webmasters report negative news about us, we'll pull our ad money", this hurt them more than many of us will ever know. This affected this site at one time. During the AGP 3.0 spec fights. At least 4 large sites complained.

They are being noticed and for doing the right things this time. I liked the FACT that they stopped half baked warezing that led to a lot of their problems and etc... Making smart buys: Envy for example. I remember buying a motherboard that had problematic USB. I just used someone else's computer with USB 2.0 (VIA) and has a perfectly working VIA based 1394 chip.

This market is slow to change. But if VIA stays the course, there's no reason for them to not do well as they use to. That is, at least make money and get out of the red.

Donnie27

 

[osirus35]

did intel mention anything of dual core cpu based off of conroe?

 

[savantu]

did intel mention anything of dual core cpu based off of conroe?

Conroe itself is dual core from the start.The Celeron based on Conroe might be a single core variant ( probably defective dies ).

 

[Alpha_One]

Erm, what I mean is the inq. link says intel will be shipping 2GHz 65nm p4's

Am I the only one drooling upon reading that Intel will be shipping 2GHz 65nm's?

Think about it...

$50 65nm CPU idling at freezing

+decent mobo

+DDR2

mmmmmmm....

 

[Donnie27]

Conroe itself is dual core from the start.The Celeron based on Conroe might be a single core variant ( probably defective dies ).

Yup! All Celerons, Durons and Semprons are defective waste leftovers. Even the mainstream processors like 754 Single Channel hammers where everything worked but the part of the memeory controller and Prescotts with Broke HT sold as 533 FSB Prescott A I think they called them. Nothing is wasted if possible. ATI and nVidia will do the same with GPUs for example.

Donnie27

 

[Donnie27]

did intel mention anything of dual core cpu based off of conroe?

Intel's Presler is a trade off. It is two very cheap to make Cedar Mill Processers on one page. People can say compared to AMD it doesn't work but at what cost? At least Intel admits this was is cheaper. AMD isn't being honest either. If you guys think X2 is just a follow on and Hammers were built from the start to go Dual, then we have AMD ripping off its customers, not giving them a good deal as Fans always say.

Look at an X2 layout? Break the Single core Processor into 3 parts.
The First Part = Core + L1 & L2 Cache
The Second Part = Crossbar Memory Interface
The Third Part = HT links and Memory Controller

Now here we have 3 parts of the Processor and to make X2, AMD only adds "The First Part" but then doubles the price of the Processor. Meanwhile, Intel is Laughed at for Selling two *WHOLE processors on one package. With X2, what you have is One Athlon64 plus One 64bit Sempron attached to it BUT paying for TWO Athlon64s. Now this works great so I'm NOT knocking it but, it most certainly is NOT fair IMHO!

Conroe will be a mix of Dothan + Netburst. The two cores can snoop and share eachother's data or run NUMA and even run multiple OS's (well two anyway) at the same time with VT. With 14 pipes or stages X 2, two cores solves the sucky streaming performance that Dothan suffers from. Meanwhile one improved 14 stages core will run games with ease. Last but not least, there may be as many as at least 6 FABs stampping them out.

Donnie27

 

[sabrewolf732]

Am I the only one drooling upon reading that Intel will be shipping 2GHz 65nm's?

Think about it...

$50 65nm CPU idling at freezing

+decent mobo

+DDR2

mmmmmmm....

Not when Inq says they're $215 =P but it's a typo.

 

[osirus35]

i thought conroe was not going to use netburst?

 

[Spike]

Do those guys ever get tired of being AMD cheerleaders?

Donnie27

Is it even possable?

 

[robberbaron]

i thought conroe was not going to use netburst?

It will still probably have a quad pumped FSB, like how Dothan uses the Netburst 4xFSB. Also a double pumped ALU wouldn't hurt Conroe.

 

[Alpha_One]

Not when Inq says they're $215 =P but it's a typo.

Yeah, I know it's a typo. But logically speaking, Intel won't price a 2GHz 65nm chip at $215, or they wouldn't clock a $215 65nm chip at 2GHz. Heheheh.

 

[robberbaron]

Yeah, I know it's a typo. But logically speaking, Intel won't price a 2GHz 65nm chip at $215, or they wouldn't clock a $215 65nm chip at 2GHz. Heheheh.

Yonah should be right around 2GHz, which should be an awesome mobile chip.

 

[sabrewolf732]

Yeah, I know it's a typo. But logically speaking, Intel won't price a 2GHz 65nm chip at $215, or they wouldn't clock a $215 65nm chip at 2GHz. Heheheh.

if they price one at $50 or even $80 Ill get one. DDR2 is so cheap.

 

[Donnie27]

if they price one at $50 or even $80 Ill get one. DDR2 is so cheap.

Why? I mean come on, why would Intel sell a Dual Core or Dual Processor Single package cheap? AMD isn't and no one is complaining. Even if that were a Dual Core 2GHz (yes should have been mentioned right from the start as a FU), Intel would be crazy to sell it for less than $200. For the record, there is talk of Low/Ultra Low voltage models running from 1.6 to 2GHz Double Processor Single Package. These would then be sold as Xeons.

Meanwhile, moving to Pentium M first Yonah, then Pentium-M + the best of Netburst is still Progress. Intel folks still have a lot to look forward to. IMHO, I think folks might be underestimating how good Cedar Mill's bang for the buck will be. It might not take top performance honors, but what folks will get for money spent will be sweet, unless Intel Screws that up as well.

Donnie27

 

[sabrewolf732]

Why? I mean come on, why would Intel sell a Dual Core or Dual Processor Single package cheap? AMD isn't and no one is complaining.

Because I would buy it.