Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 10 Dec 2010.
Anything that leads to intel lowering prices will in turn cause AMD to do the same. It's potential win for everyone.
Whether you actually see any of these cost savings passed on to the consumer is another matter. The more cynical amongst us may see this as a way of maximising potential profit, which afterall is what business is about.
Although any news that could 'potentially' bring about a general reduction in pricing is welcome.
Doubt it. AMD are already so far behind, anything that puts Intel further ahead could reduce competition. AMD can't run at a loss forever. And let's not forget, competition is good for consumers.
AMD is already cheaper than Intel, but hopefully it will drive them to improve their production methods also. If not then they are going to continue to fall behind, giving Intel an even bigger chunk of the market which = bad.
Competition = good... monopolies = bad lol
Cheaper Intels = Potential win.
This might drive and to invest more in graphics and abandon the CPU manufacturing, sine - as said above - they can't operate at loss forever
How far behind? Please provide some current (or at least recent) numbers..
i don't think a bigger wafer is going to make THAT much of a difference. i'd expect a $10 drop at most. keep in mind, just because intel does something cheaper, it doesn't mean they're doing it for YOU.
for example, if apple really is going for amd next year, apple is going to be paying much less for manufacturing their computers, but if you compare an amd mac to an intel mac with near identical performance, the amd would be considerably cheaper for apple to make but the price tag for the consumer will barely change.
you can say the same about taxes. lets say you're paying taxes for your kids to go to public school. one day the taxes rise, because the teachers want to get paid more and food is getting more expensive. but then, a new private school comes along, and takes maybe 15% of the public school students. the school has a lot less to be paying for at this moment, but you're not going to see a tax drop.
the point is, if a company/organization finds cheaper ways of doing things, they're doing it for them. YOU aren't going to get anything different.
AMD aren't that behind
Thats a huge generalization man... they very well may lower their prices substantially. Though I agree that what your saying is often true there are definitely arguments that go the other way. That Intel will lower their production costs so they can lower their end prices while maintaining a consistent profit margin.
If they reduce their production costs and bring their product to the consumer at a lower price, they create an opportunity to bring their high end CPUs down to an AMD price range, creating an tremendous opportunity to take more of the market from AMD. More market means more sales, means more profit. It just depends on how much they are reducing their own costs by and what their sales/marketing teams are looking for.
on a side note I agree with your comment about Apple... but that example is talking about a company in particular who over prices everything they produce. Nice products certainly... but in no life would I pay such a premium for a nice machine in a pretty case...
According to what I knoe of economics, if it became cheaper for intel to supply their processors then the market price of the processors would go down due to market forces.
Although the article seems to imply that intel will still get the same yield from the larger wafers; just that 22nm has a lower % yield, and so increasing the wafer size would increase actual yield... or have I completely misunderstood that (it seems to happen a lot )
they might as well if they are going 22nm anyway.. sure they have their reasons- I'm a intel fanboi last couple of years though
GlobalFoundaries hasn't been able to deliver on 32nm even a year after Intel came to market with it.
At least AMD's Fab is behind.
Let's see. Retooling plants cost a fortune, so they'll then lower prices to, what? Lose money? Intel? Have I suddenly entered some alternate universe?
Just because in the end-run Intel ultimately reduces their production costs does NOT equal lower consumer prices. It'll just increase Intel's profit margin.
Come on people! I dropped out of Economics (i.e., "How to rip-off the everyday person.") in college and even I realize this.
I'm also a fan of Intel. Ever since I could afford the best cpu's extant.
So what about Microsoft and the x-box 360? Companies sometimes have long term business plans to return their investment lol, maybe you should have stayed in econ mate. What you said is definitely true, but its not true 100% of the time. Again its a huge assumption about Intel's intentions. I definitely think what your saying is a more likely scenario but just for the sake of playing Devils advocate, its not the only scenario thats possible
i see what you mean, but the reason i feel intel won't lower their prices is because they easily could have already. amd can't afford to keep the prices they're at right now, they're doing it because its the only way they're going to get any business. intel made $11 BILLION in the last quarter. all of their products are expensive, so i think they're charging what they are because they know people will buy it. if you are the best at something or the only one of your kind, then you can charge whatever you want and get away with it. however, if amd's new CPUs end up being better than intel's (which i think is probable considering the apple situation), their customers are used to their low prices. they will lose a lot of their targeted audience if they charge the most just because they're the best. people are used to intel being expensive, so whether intel keeps their prices or drops them, they're still going to profit.
agreed, haha. Hopefully AMDs new chips are as good as they've sounded thus far!
Separate names with a comma.