I guess that prediction made at one site was right the AMD 64 socket 939s are close to what the 754s

[XXXX]

A site made the prediction close to Xmas the 939s would be around the
$200 or less range.

Someones posted this already elsewhere

http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merc...Code=M&Product_Code=120421&Category_Code=NA_2

939 3200 OEM is now $233 - low price
Theres still about a 30-45 buck gap between the 754 and 939 with the
754 falling a bit more recently but the huge gap has disappeared.

Its 188 for the 3000.

So youll probably be able to get a 3200 939 + PCI express board around
Xmas for a reasonable price. The only thing is Intel is really turning
up the heat. Now if the AMD fell into the low $100s killer price it
would be more in the old XP territory.

 

[S.Heenan]

A site made the prediction close to Xmas the 939s would be around the
$200 or less range.

Someones posted this already elsewhere

http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merc...Code=M&Product_Code=120421&Category_Code=NA_2

939 3200 OEM is now $233 - low price
Theres still about a 30-45 buck gap between the 754 and 939 with the
754 falling a bit more recently but the huge gap has disappeared.

Its 188 for the 3000.

If the information from Monarch is accurate, the other large American
retailers should soon drop their prices.
The pictures posted on the Monarch site look to be S939.(a "D" in the part
#)

I can't find a supplier in Canada with the Socket 949 A64 3000+ or 3200+.

 

[Matt]

So youll probably be able to get a 3200 939 + PCI express board around
Xmas for a reasonable price. The only thing is Intel is really turning
up the heat. Now if the AMD fell into the low $100s killer price it
would be more in the old XP territory.

I know Prescott runs hot, but I don't think that's what you mean.
What do you mean by Intel turning up the heat?

 

[JK]

A site made the prediction close to Xmas the 939s would be around the
$200 or less range.

Someones posted this already elsewhere

http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merc...Code=M&Product_Code=120421&Category_Code=NA_2

939 3200 OEM is now $233 - low price
Theres still about a 30-45 buck gap between the 754 and 939 with the
754 falling a bit more recently but the huge gap has disappeared.

Its 188 for the 3000.

So youll probably be able to get a 3200 939 + PCI express board around
Xmas for a reasonable price. The only thing is Intel is really turning
up the heat.

Intel turning up the heat? Intel's 64 bit chips are still very expensive. They
also don't have integrated memory controllers.

Now if the AMD fell into the low $100s killer price it
would be more in the old XP territory.

Pricing will be based on supply and demand. It looks like AMD might ship
1.5-2 million K8 chips in the last quarter of the year. That compares to an
estimate of around 600,000 for the third quarter.

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20040920A1002.html

 

[kony]

A site made the prediction close to Xmas the 939s would be around the
$200 or less range.

Someones posted this already elsewhere

http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merc...Code=M&Product_Code=120421&Category_Code=NA_2

939 3200 OEM is now $233 - low price
Theres still about a 30-45 buck gap between the 754 and 939 with the
754 falling a bit more recently but the huge gap has disappeared.

Its 188 for the 3000.

So youll probably be able to get a 3200 939 + PCI express board around
Xmas for a reasonable price. The only thing is Intel is really turning
up the heat. Now if the AMD fell into the low $100s killer price it
would be more in the old XP territory.

Intel ISN'T really turning up the heat at all.
With specific apps proven to benefit from P4 architecture,
then the cost must be weighed against performance, but
otherwise, Intel is charging WAY too much for their CPUs,
excepting the Celeron-D series.

Too many people rely on benchmarks of apps they don't use.
I've said it before and say it again, benchmarks of specific
new apps do NOT correspond to performance in general with
most apps the avg. person already has. Sure, anyone can buy
these new apps but that's additional expen$e. IS it a
cost-be-damned workstation or the far more common PC power
user?

There is one reason the average user could possibly want an
Intel platform, (well, two), either they understand that
PCI-Express is more important in the long run for many uses,
and want the most mature PCI-Express platform possible, or
they're really wanting essentially a workstation devoted to
specific apps optmized for P4... since a P4 is certainly
not the best choice for the "average" processing done on the
"average" PC, but has clear benefits in particular
situations.

If you buy OEM, ask questions!
"Do these applications have specific P4 optimizations"?
"Do these optimizations guarantee performance greater than
seen with an A64 of same price?" (in general, if they offer
BS then ask for specific, applicable benchmarks, remembering
that salespeople offer only what helps make sales). Of
course, these questions must be asked from vendor selling
both products.

In the end, it boils down to price. Few people upgrade
every time a new product comes along that offers (even
slightly) higher performance. If the PC's primary (or only)
app needing ultimate performance is proven to benefi from a
P4, then it's clearly the CPU of choice, but all too often
someone assumes things not backed by evidence but rather
marketing... Intel spends a lot on marketing but AMD does
not (relatively speaking).

This is not a bash against intel... if you really don't care
or have any particular reason to choose one cpu over
another, choose Intel for the more mature PCI-Express
platform, "today", but if CPU raw performance matters, AMD
has the better product.

In summary, intel isn't turning up the heat at all with
their CPUs, but their motherboard chipsets are still
industry leading except for integrated video.

 

[JK]

Intel ISN'T really turning up the heat at all.
With specific apps proven to benefit from P4 architecture,
then the cost must be weighed against performance, but
otherwise, Intel is charging WAY too much for their CPUs,
excepting the Celeron-D series.

Too many people rely on benchmarks of apps they don't use.
I've said it before and say it again, benchmarks of specific
new apps do NOT correspond to performance in general with
most apps the avg. person already has. Sure, anyone can buy
these new apps but that's additional expen$e. IS it a
cost-be-damned workstation or the far more common PC power
user?

There is one reason the average user could possibly want an
Intel platform, (well, two), either they understand that
PCI-Express is more important in the long run for many uses,
and want the most mature PCI-Express platform possible

not quite

, or
they're really wanting essentially a workstation devoted to
specific apps optmized for P4... since a P4 is certainly
not the best choice for the "average" processing done on the
"average" PC, but has clear benefits in particular
situations.

Those are the same situations that will probably benefit
greatly from a move to 64 bit software though.

If you buy OEM, ask questions!
"Do these applications have specific P4 optimizations"?
"Do these optimizations guarantee performance greater than
seen with an A64 of same price?

One should ask that question with the thought in mind of running
64 bit software on the Athlon 64.

 

[John]

I know Prescott runs hot, but I don't think that's what you mean.
What do you mean by Intel turning up the heat?

Well like most AMD fans --- I assumed INTEL sucked . I knew they
finally recovered from their disasterous initial RAMBUS deal --- but
their prices were still far higher than AMD. However AMD had started
falling behind more and more with the plain old XP which they couldnt
push any higher. For the price they were great but the days when they
ruled on performance and price was over. Actually I think they had
other periods too like that when they had an old design and when they
began a new one which tended not OC that well like the T-birds etc.
Now they came out with the 64s its kind of like that. They are in the
game again but their prices are much higher.

And then you have INTEL lowering prices and their prices are kind of
similar now even on the prescott line at the mid and lower range. And
then you add the fact the boards are surprisingly cheap 120-130 for
the 915 and can use DDR and DDR2 and already has PCI express.


Not only that you have AMD awkwardly transitioning 754, 940 to 939.
This 939 thing is great news though. A lot of posters - though the 754
has been selling it seems pretty well with DIYers -- obviously some
wanted the better upgrade path and dual mem stuff of the 939 though
not a big deal , its still a plus. And now with the PCI express boards
coming out though the Nforce stuff may not AGP too like the SIS and
VIA are supposedly going to have --- it puts them in a much more
competitive position.

Then you dont have to keep clinging to the 64bit hype. Most sites make
it seem like its a long way off and to not even factor that into the
equation for buying. Some AMD fans have been hyping it like crazy
moving the dates up more and more like its going to come out in a few
months and takeover. I really doubt it but it may catch on sooner than
people think who knows.

But thats what Ive been waiting for since the beg of summer - 939 less
than 200 bucks around Xmas - a 3200 with PCI express and AGP. Of
course Im hoping theyll come out with a new process 90nm I think its
called - the winchester chip , that has much better yields and runs
much cooler enabling the chips to OC like crazy and be real cheap.

So cheap 3200 w/PCI express around Xmas - 64 bit WIN and Winchester
chips that OC like crazy like the old days - cheap as both upgrade
paths for users of AMDs.

So many things to get. Ive been planning on getting Magnepans this
month (speakers) and theres that 199 17" LCD deal . Dont really need a
LCD though but I wouldnt mind one.