Why cannot AMD beat Intel by just underpricing them?

quadnad said:
Presumably you saw what has happened over the past year and a half...
Click to expand...
I've been seeing what has transpired in the last decade and a half, if not longer. Look at the age in my profile...
 
APOLLO said:
I've been seeing what has transpired in the last decade and a half, if not longer. Look at the age in my profile...
Click to expand...

lol

I'm not talking about "I've been following the tech industry longer than you" I'm talking about the fact that a massive price war has already led to the current situation, cutting profits and relegating AMD to financial hell.
 
quadnad said:
lol

I'm not talking about "I've been following the tech industry longer than you" I'm talking about the fact that a massive price war has already led to the current situation, cutting profits and relegating AMD to financial hell.
Click to expand...
Well, then I completely lost the message in your previous post since it appears we totally agree.
 
APOLLO said:
Well, then I completely lost the message in your previous post since it appears we totally agree.
Click to expand...

:D

Yeah, the interweb is just one of those places where tone and intonation are lost :(
 
quadnad said:
:D

Yeah, the interweb is just one of those places where tone and intonation are lost :(
Click to expand...
I know, I recently said the same thing to someone on a yahoo group. It can be a bit confusing at times leading to misunderstanding.
 
The short answer is that AMD's CPUs aren't as profitable as Intels.
Currently AMD is about equal with Intel in terms of price/performance, but AMD is racking up major losses while Intel is scraping in the big bucks.
If anyone should be underpricing anyone, it's Intel, because they have the bigger profit margin on their products.
 
I don't have a favorite processor, Intel, Amd both are fine. Intel lately has a faster processor, Amd has new 45nm 6meg L2 cache chips due out 2nd quarter 2008, higher frequency quads, 45nm duals. Insider information has it their comparable to the Intel offerings. I hope so it'll be good for the price competition.

Lately I run an AMD, in the areas important to me it runs about 10% slower than the comparable Intel model. The Intel model cost about twice as much to build. So a ten percent performance hit I'm willing to live with.
 
methious said:
Amd has new 45nm 6meg L2 cache chips due out 2nd quarter 2008-------Insider information has it their comparable to the Intel offerings.-------The Intel model cost about twice as much to build.
Click to expand...

lol?

I don't mean to be an asshole here, because perhaps you're just uninformed...
 
methious said:
Amd has new 45nm 6meg L2 cache chips due out 2nd quarter 2008, higher frequency quads, 45nm duals.
Click to expand...
Will you be here all week? That was a good one. :p

AMD barely got back 45nm samples a couple of weeks ago.
 
Two theories here...

1) AMD mobile processors don't stand up to intel mobile technology, in two ways, performance, and in marketability. You can't custom build a laptop, so you have to go through a big brand company like Dell, and 1 out of 4 of their processors are AMD, so for every 4 laptops sold, Intel sells three, AMD one (hmm profit imbalance much?) Same goes with the big brand desktops.

2)Leading off of one, Intel has contracted out with nearly EVERY computer production company known to man (at least in the US), Dell, Gateway, HP, Mac, Compaq (to name a few). AMD has too, don't get me wrong, but just look at what they sell and you find that there will be 3-4 intel processors for every 1 of AMD's. AMD came into this part of the market too late :(. So Intel receives all of the profits from those big brand compaines. Unfortunately Intel has the market so swallowed up by now that AMD is going to have trouble regaining a hold on the pre-built PC market.

Just think about those...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top