Quad-core price war breaks out

Quad-core price war breaks out

Summary: AMD has already cut prices for its flagship 45nm processor--which the company announced on January 8--for competitive reasons.The 3.

TOPICS: Processors, Hardware

AMD has already cut prices for its flagship 45nm processor--which the company announced on January 8--for competitive reasons.

The 3.0GHz Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition is now priced at $225 and the 2.8GHz Phenom II X4 920 is selling for $195. At launch, those two chips were priced at $275 and $235, respectively.

Mark Hachman at PC Magazine first noticed that AMD's new Phenom II X4s were selling for a lot less than the listed prices. AMD apparently confirmed that it had cut prices, but a spokesperson said the company wouldn't make any announcement or update its price list because it was in a "quiet period" prior to reporting quarterly earnings later today. Nevertheless AMD's processor price list now reflects the 17-18 percent price cuts.

On Sunday Intel slashed prices on many of its Core 2 Quad processors. Intel cut the price of the 3.0GHz Core 2 Quad Q9650 a whopping 40 percent from $530 to $316. The prices of other Core 2 Quad processors were cut 16-20 percent. The 2.83GHz Q9550, 2.66GHz Q9400, 2.50GHz Q8300 and 2.33GHz Q8200 now sell for $266, $213, $183 and $163, respectively.

With the release of the Core i7 chips in November, the Core 2 Quad are no longer the fastest horses in Intel's stable, but reviews (links below) show that that they still compare favorably to AMD's latest and greatest on benchmarks. That is probably why AMD is already feeling compelled to cut prices.

AMD Phenom II X4 reviews:

  • AMD Phenom II X4 940 & 920: A True Return to Competition [AnandTech]
  • AMD Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition Review [ExtremeTech]
  • AMD Phenom II X4 940 Processor Review [Legit Reviews]
  • AMD's Phenom II processors [Tech Report]

Topics: Processors, Hardware

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • AMD is the best value for me.

    Since I don't do much gaming anymore the AMD platform always seem to be the best value. The AMD based motherboards always seem to have a great feature set at a great price and the CPUs always seem to offer decent performance for excellent prices. Also the fact that AM3 chips will be supported on older AM2 and AM2+ motherboards ensure the longevity of any current AMD platform.

    I've been eying Intel for a big build but I keep ending up finding the best value for performance.

    Hopefully these price cuts will broaden my selection of value components.
    • Even with gaming...

      if you're looking at being on a budget, you're better off getting an AMD mobo, and saving money there, while sinking the savings into multiple graphics cards of higher caliber...

      after all, games are nowadays more and more GPU based, as opposed to CPU based (they still put a fair load on the CPU, don't get me wrong, it's the balance of where the weight goes that has changed)
  • AMD is still in business???

    Won't be for long. They didn't learn anything from their last "price war" with Intel.
    • Hey, Intel fanboy!

      Wait until AMD drops the price of AMD Phenom II X4 940 down to $180! ]:)
      Grayson Peddie
      • As I predicted.

        We had a huge argument here on Zdnet back just as the Conroes were getting ready to be released and the AMD fanboys called the testing results from independent websites etc. a bunch of lies, some even claiming that the Conroes would be the fall of Intel because they would fail to produce and AMD would trounce Intel with their new releases and Intel's dying days were on the horizon. Sure, what I am saying sounds a little nutty now, but to me it sounded absolutly nuts back then. I predicted right here on Zdnet almost exactly what has since happened with Intel and AMD and I will go one further now that it turns out I was more on target then I could have even expected.

        If AMD is ever going to be anything again they are going to have to change their marketing strategy so much they will take on a profile something quite different then a "leading edge" CPU producer for a while or they are going to have to find a lot of cash, a whole massive big lot of cash so they can stop wasting production resources on the back seat product they are producing now, and put that big big cash they need to somehow find into about 2 years of insane research in the hope that turning their sights away from selling what are largely none salable items, towards strictly CPU research and development then in about 2 years they might have a product innovative enough to be able to compete with Intel. Gods honest truth, thats how far ahead Intel is. I'm not saying thats good for anyone, its just the facts.
      • Oh! By the way, June 5th 2006, for one...

  • RE: Quad-core price war breaks out

    Prior to the release of the Athlon chips I was without a doubt stuck on Intel. Since then AMD has always provided me with value, performance and reliability. When I do a build I am generally drawn to these three factors and end up going with AMD.
    • E8400/i7

      With the E8000 core duo series comparing well against AMD Quads and overclocking like a bandit you need to do current research. If you need power, the smallest i7 processor is blowing away the AMD numbers and the previous Xeon numbers. AMD better get the graphics side pumping in some dollars or they are going to be in bad shape.
      • I recently bought a 4870 AMD graphics card

        and so far I'm very happy with it!
        Absolutely eats the nVidia 8800 GTS it replaced, and at a great price as well.

        Man, if it wasn't for AMD, we'd be here in 2009 just about to break the Giga Htz CPU barrier.

        Don't talk AMD down. Competition like this is terrific for all of us. The behemoths, like Intel (and Microsoft) won't move unless there is a reason. AMD is keeping Intel honest. Hmm!? Who is keeping Microsoft honest?
        I am Gorby
        • Competition

          I work at Intel and to be honest, I hope AMD makes it. Gotta agree AMD USED to be a really big subject. I noticed that we're not so concerned anymore. Now we keep running because we don't want them to ever be able to catch up. If they don't come back, it's hard to imagine anyone ever giving us any real competion again. That would be a shame.
  • Here we go again

    People, people, what is with the negativity and bad mouthing a company. The industry needs competition. Did you sleep during social studies ????
    How about some good answers to how to inprove things.
    Are you up to the task ????
    • Yes, Father

      I was already only going to say that I wonder how much the economy was propelling this from both companies, rather than strict competition.

      It seems both companies are like sharks, and need to keep pumping out product like mad-hatters to survive.
  • RE: Quad-core price war breaks out

    My view is that AMD makes a good processor, price and performance come together just right to make it a great value.

    Most processors are fast enough today that actual usability is the same. For what the majority of people do the faster processor is only going to show up in the benchmarks and the pocket.

  • RE: Quad-core price war breaks out

    It was about time that Intel abandoned the Front Side Bus and moved to a faster topology. The only drawback is the cost of the move. $1000 for CPU, $300 for mainboard and $150 for memory is a bitter pill to swallow in ANY economy.

    If the costs make it down into an affordable range then we could see a more serious adoption of this new platform.

    Speed and performance of the new chips are outstanding but AMD still takes the cost of ownership crown.
  • RE: Quad-core price war breaks out

    I record TV shows with Beyond TV. I have several tuner cards so I can record multiple shows at the same time. Beyond TV later compresses these shows to the windows media format. For this compression I need a multi-core processor. I don't need the >>BEST<< multi-core processor, I just need a good one. Why wouldn't I spend my money on an AMD processor? Intel could do this 43 seconds faster. Ummmm.... awfully expensive 45 seconds!
  • RE: Quad-core price war breaks out

    I'm running the 3 core Phenom 1.6GHZ. It cost me about 75 dollars a couple weeks before Christmas Quite a boost from Dual core at the same speed. I'll wait for 6 months or so and pick up a quad core 3ghz for under a hundred bucks. Should be that price by then.
  • RE: Quad-core price war breaks out

    For the revision of my "HTPC" (which I mostly use for streaming video and video podcasts), I chose based on value and power savings.

    Can anyone point me to a dual core Intel chip that has a TDP of 45 watts or less, and can match the performance of the AMD X2 4850e? If you can find one, how does the price compare to the $60 price I paid for this 2.5GHz dual core AMD?

    Power consumption for the entire system with a 780G chipset motherboard currently stands at 58 watts at idle, and about 82 under load. This is actually less than the older Athlon XP 2800+ based system it replaced), and it is more than fast enough for what it does.

    AMD still has their niche and thank goodness for it. Competition is good.
  • RE: Quad-core price war breaks out

    The phantom 2 series is going to be just as good as intels best chip out right now.

    The phenom 2 940 overclocks to over 4 ghz on air and its only 1.5-1.6 volts at 4 ghz. The phenom works on older motherboards as well since its am2+ socket.

    the phenom 2 can compete with the i7 for sure and at lower power consumption.

    Intels still run pretty hot which is always a drawback and they always cost more than amds chips.

    the phenom2 can reach 4.5 ghz or higher if you have high quality ram and water cooling.
    • Quad-Core and overclocking

      You had mentioned you had overclocked the your AMD quad with stock air-cooling. Can you tell me how you did it? I want to do the same thing for a unit that has the 96xx with 8G of memory.
  • I love AMD - they make my Intel chips cheaper!

    All hail AMD - If it weren't for them my qx9770's would still be selling for $1,500.00

    Heck if the 940's get any cheaper I just might build me a new htpc.

    Oh, what am I thinking, I forgot, Intel has a cpu with 8 physical cores and Hyperthreading in their back pocket, just waiting to sell.

    Imagine a Skulltrail type board with dual 8 core chips. Except this time with DDR3 support.

    That's 16 cores with hyperthreading.

    And by the way, the average Joe does not have the technical skill to get 4ghz on air with the 940. But I love the AMD users who do, because they just might force Intel into releasing their 8 core so I can build a real computer.