tehdigit said:
it comes down to looking at price.
we will see how much conroes are gonna come for (idk if they have released a price as of now)
See? For anyone reading this that patronizes me for continuing to say the same thing over and over again; THIS is why I have to say the same **** thing over and over again. I've posted the Conroe pricing maybe 5 times in the last 3 days, and yet there are still people that refuse to read the **** posts.
Here are the Conroe prices, so [snipped] read them;
The four dual-core Conroes are clocked at 1.86, 2.13, 2.40 and 2.67GHz. The CPUs will be priced at $209, $244, $316 and $530, respectively, at launch.
wtk pro l said:
Ummmm....yea Conroe chips do start at $300 but so do AM2 chips.
And dont think AMD is just gonna slouch back and let Intel take the field, im sure they are well aware that Conroe is beating their chip and I bet they are working on something right now.
Read above, Conroe starts at $200. The cheapest Dual Core from AMD is $300. Not only that, but the $200 Conroe performs like a X2 4800+ processor at stock speeds. And said Conroe also overclocks like crazy to high-2Ghz speeds.
As for AMD coming back with something, you neither have any proof of it, nor does AMD have anything planned. Here's a quote from Anandtech;
"When Intel first started talking about its new Core architecture, we turned to AMD for a response that it surely must have had in the works for years, but as you all know we came up empty handed."
Its like comparing apple and oranges. You cant compare a $1000 chip to a $300 chip.
Why the heck not? You can easily compare their performance. If the $300 chip beats the $1000 chip, then whats there to argue about? Its hardly apples and oranges.
