Replies to post #21383 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[yourbankruptcy]

The biggest news is that Intel is not delivering the 3.4 Ghz Prescott yet. I'm sure it will be paper-launched same way they did with EE.

Two paper launches in 6 months is pretty bad for Intel. They are back to 1 Ghz PIII ages.

[kpf]

HailMary, Reseller Mike


If they don't distinguish this in some way, the clueless consumers will assume they are of comparable performance

Hmm. The clueless consumer will look at the same number and the same price. Nothing else. (Talking about Athlon numbers, they usually believe they are talking Megahertz, and barely ever mention the little plus behind the number.)

Now - assuming Mageek has it right and the (list)prices are indeed identical - (the other) Mike has a fundament to speculate on Performance-Rating-monikers. If the (numerous) indications pointing to higher thermals per clock for Prescotts will be validated as well, this fundament looks rocksolid to me.

If Prescott will indeed have rated numbers, I mean, why not? As long as its founded on relative performance, it is completely allright with me.
AMD did it for a while, and the market ate it.

I am personally tending to follow Reseller Mikes idea of putting things together here - unless somebody offers a more plausible approach to explain the pricing strategy as rumoured.

K.

[Petz]

I think you're right. ('E' MHz > 'C' MHz) Just as a P4 3.0C is faster than a P4 3.06B. My only question is, what happened to 'D'?

Petz