Bulldozer shipping to OEMs!

[JesseLactin]

If all that is real, i'm going for the 8120. the extra 200mhz price increase is not enough. Besides, they are probably the same chip just with different clock, just like the 955 and 965 were and i am pretty sure the 1090t as well as the 1100t were.

I think that may be the ideal "sweet spot" for this new line-up. AMD has disappointed me already. All I remember from my last post was I hope it has the gigaflops behind it, (FAH bliss, my Phenom II rig has ~40GFlops, while this laptop (AMD Turion X2 TL-64, it's in my sig) has all of 5.) and that the preemptive price cuts scared me. I think they may be "planning to fail" because the price is so low. If not, I'll get an entry level LGA 1155 or LGA 2011 (locked quad core, maybe a decent mobo). I don't have an AM3+ board, so at least my options are open.

 

[nothingspecial]

FX-6100: $155

FX-8120: $185

FX-8150: $230

For sake of interest/estimate, here's what that converts to on Travelex today:

FX-6100: £100

FX-8120: £120

FX-8150: £150

I imagine that'll go up by about £20 or so, but it's interesting if nothing else.

If the 8150 can compete with the 2600k, AMD could be on to something that'll sell...

 

[sheroo]

If the 8150 can compete with the 2600k it will be priced accordingly, these guys are not in the charity business.

 

[nothingspecial]

If the 8150 can compete with the 2600k it will be priced accordingly, these guys are not in the charity business.

True, but if they can produce it for less and undercut the competition by ~£100, they'll know they can shift some serious units.

That said, I can't see the pricing being less than:

FX-6100: £120

FX-8120: £150

FX-8150: £180

 

[sheroo]

Don't get me wrong I hope AMD can stick it to them, and if they can compete on a level playing field then all the better. But if they can, they won't undercut them by a huge margin.

 

[JesseLactin]

Yup. Intel will make a smart price cut in the 1155 arena to stay competitive. I guess the i5 2500K is what, $238? I can see them dropping the price by 30-ish dollars. I bet the i7 2600K will drop more (maybe to like the sub-$250 mark), if BD competes with it, given that the 8150 is $230 (180 quid)

 

[KING_OF_SAND]

For those who are not business savvy, the reason Intel costs so much is because they don't have any viable competition, by that I mean AMD has nothing to compete with Intel. So what Intel does is they jack up their prices. WHY? because they have no competition so you have no choice but to buy Intel if you want speed in a CPU. IF AMD can show that their processors are equal to the 2600k and they are 100 less than Intel, Intel will have no choice but to drop their price IF they want to keep their consumer base. This is how markets work.

 

[UFN]

I am hoping that BD's have what it takes to compete directly with 2nd generation Intels because that would make the market all kinds of exciting

That being said, IMO, I doubt that AMD is suddenly going to erase the past 5 years of Intel's market dominance. AMD have always come across as "Budget" oriented and Intel have always come across as "Performance" oriented (in exactly the same way that AMD and nVidia graphics cards trend); If you want 6 cores for under £200? AMD. You want 6 cores that are going to blow you away? Intel.

While I would love that dichotomy to change, I doubt it will. If anything Intel's second generation processors have encroached on AMD's usual "Budget" airspace seeing as the 2600k/2600/2500k/2500, which are very good performing processors by all standards, aren't bank breakers either.

 

[KING_OF_SAND]

seriously, who is giving me thumbs down consistently?

 

[JesseLactin]

For those who are not business savvy, the reason Intel costs so much is because they don't have any viable competition, by that I mean AMD has nothing to compete with Intel. So what Intel does is they jack up their prices. WHY? because they have no competition so you have no choice but to buy Intel if you want speed in a CPU. IF AMD can show that their processors are equal to the 2600k and they are 100 less than Intel, Intel will have no choice but to drop their price IF they want to keep their consumer base. This is how markets work.

I don't know if Intel "bins" their chip the same way AMD does. If they simply toss chips they can't use because they don't have all the cache working, or it fails to operate at stock clocks at stock voltage, or it has a dead core, etc. I don't think they do bin chips, so they have to pass those costs (unsellable CPUs) on to the customers.

The big question for AMD is can they beat the i5 2500K with the FX 8120 (or the FX 8150). If they can, they got a winner in the mainstream market, otherwise, they'll be labeled "budget" again. If they did, that would impress me.

 

[SmoulderingCircuits]

seriously, who is giving me thumbs down consistently?

Thumbed up, you're right

I can see AMD being more competitive than before but not by much

 

[JesseLactin]

My thoughts exactly. AMD doesn't need to beat SB, only come close. I know it doesn't make sense, but it actually does. If AMD comes close enough in performance, budget minded buyers will lean towards BD because of the price to performance ratio (similar performance, but a much lower cost, ie $30 or so)