The 955 released at $245, I think its fair to compare it to a $220 CPU. Its also not my fault AMD brought out Phenom II and priced it at $245 when it was clear it wasn't even close to the performance level of the core i series processors that had already been out since 2008. I'd like to know how you came to the conclusion Phenom II was meant to compete with C2Qs when Phenom IIs came out after even the core I series came out, which was after yorkfield, which is more to the point of why is AMD so slow to develop new chips that can actually compete but feels the need to release new chips at prices they don't warrant?
Intel doesn't reduce their pricing because by the time their chips become outdated its because they've already released a new design to replace the old one at the same price points.
The point of this thread is why does AMD release chips at over-priced levels because they're new, then quickly drop the pricing on them as they fail to match up with the competition.
Why would I use the same core speeds for comparing two different architectures when one clearly has a clock speed advantage? That makes absolutely no sense. When I compare my SB chip to a Pent 3 do I do it at 800Mhz with 3 cores disabled? lol.
My comparison was spot on.
Those don't look like wheels for turnin.
Your i5 is the reason Phenom II x4 was so cheap, after they priced their new chips at outrageous pricing, Intel came out with 1156 (i5 at $200~) which sent AMD down below the $200 mark since their quad couldn't compete with the 1156 platform that came out after 1366. They then released the 1090T and the X6 lineup with outrageous pricing once again, hitting the $300 price point and by the time SB came out (yet another new design) the 1090T had dropped 30% off its release price.
Intel sets the market, AMD tries to fill in where it can.Edited by BallaTheFeared - 5/22/11 at 9:44am