Intel makes half-hearted price cuts
Summary: Intel has just made a few half-hearted price cuts to their CPU range. Mostly these cuts affect the Celeron D lines. Why are the cuts half-hearted? Because Intel doesn't really have much in the way of serious competition from AMD right now.
Intel has just made a few half-hearted price cuts to their CPU range. Mostly these cuts affect the Celeron D lines. Why are the cuts half-hearted? Because Intel doesn't really have much in the way of serious competition from AMD right now.
So, what do we have?
- Celeron D down by between 8% and 22% (the cheapest of the Celeron Ds, the 326 (2.53GHz, 256k L2) and the 315 (2.26GHz, 256k L2) cost $34/1000 while the most expensive, the 360 (3.46GHz, 512k L2) now costs $69/1000)
- The Intel Celeron M 420 (1.6GHz, 1M L2) is down by 20% to $86/1000 while the 430 (1.73GHz, 1M L2) is down 36%, also priced at $86
- The Intel Pentium D 820 (2.8GHz, 2x1M L2) is down 18% to $93/1000 while the price of the 915 (2.8 GHz, 2 x 2M L2) is cut by 15%, down to $113/1000
- The Core Duo L2400 (1,66GHz, 2M L2) down by 10%, down to $284/1000
Some notable new entries to the price list include:
- The 65nm Celeron M 440 and 450 - clocked at 1.86GHz and 2.0GHz respectively (and priced at $107/1000 and $134/1000 respectively)
- The Intel Core 2 Duo Mobile processors - T5500, T5600, T7200, T7400, and the T7600, ranging from 1.66GHz, 2M L2 to 2.33GHz, 4M L2. Prices range from $209/1000 to a whopping $637/1000
Expect the next price cuts in November when the quad-core Core 2 Extreme QX6700 "Kentsfield" is released and then in January when Intel launches the Core 2 Quad Q6600.
[poll id=3]Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Poor analysis
Improving revenue
If that was the case, why drop the Celeron prices at all? They didn't need to to that. This is about market share.
Two, two benefits in one.
Exactly....
"AMD is certainly shifting gears to high volume, low markup sales in order to compete with Intel, and so far the strategy seems to be paying off."
So is it or isn't it? The numbers show that Intel is getting squeezed at the bottom end. The only conclusion is that they're ceding some portion of market share in the low end to maintain a certain margin there, and ceding margin room in the higher end (where they can better afford to) in order to attempt to grab the market share. They have decided to not go to negative margins over market share because it has become obvious that it is now a two horse race for good. And the analysts will no longer tolerate inprofitability for the sake of market share. They'd rather see a slightly smaller but more consistently profitable Intel.
oh Gee
lol
Stay tuned ... another post tomorrow!
Or you can try this one - no comments there yet!
naming conventions
if its really a (2 duel core and not 4 single cores) then why dont they call it;
- duel 2 core Pair -
because when AMD comes out with a 4 core, then amd should call it the - true quad-core.
well, you know what i am saying anyway.
Explanation
Ans: Because nobody cares how the 4 core sausage is made as long as it delivers results. Dual 2 core pair is the most rediculous a naming convention yet - congrats!
"..because when AMD comes out with a 4 core, then amd should call it the - true quad-core.."
Would that make their 4x4 the "no so true quad-core" ?
Don't you mean...
It's starting to look like that!
Any day now they'll come out with an Intel-killer ...
Hope so, but doubtful.
Took Intel 8 years of playing catch up too
Just watch what happens though if AMD fails and gets crushed. I'd bet the price of processors would go up 10 times. Like before 1998.
Nothing to do but wait and see.
I chose AMD in the poll.
I'd never buy another Intel product - ever
If you want to use lessor tech, good on ya.
Or good enough tech
From my experience with building PCs Intel hasn't been a very good choice. A pre-built throw away system, Intel is fine for.
You nailed it...