I hope Intel and AMD can keep this going. I don't think i've ever seen good processors this cheap!

the price for the FX-74 pair from $700 to $599. The FX-72 remains at $599.
sounds weird

Marketplace Competition. This will be excellent for their price/performance ratios.

Wow, these prices are really attractive. Especially if you account that even X2 5200 is not a bottleneck for 8800 GTX, that will allow people have decent gaming machine for very small money (under $1000). Of course if you need only CPU power, then you will need to go for Intel, but I think 99% of the people game and use the comp for normal things, like Internet, movies, music, Office, etc :)

I except that the slower dual cores will soon be phased out, and I know for certain single cores have been. Except prices to continue to fall. AMD beats out Intel in pricing, while Intel continues to have a slight edge in performance. The best buying choice is still AMD, for a few months though the Core2Duo's were certainly the better buy. At this point it's a toss up between the two with my opinion leaning towards AMD because of their pricing.

AMD is making it hard for me to justify building an Intel system with the rock bottom prices.

AMd is really crashing against the rocks, from the hi flying days a few years ago...They had better get hot on catching up to Intel, or they will be back in the cheap seats in a few years.

Nice move AMD! Let's hope this creates a trend where we can expect good CPU's for cheap!

I hope they can hang on, competition is great for innovation.

This AMD price drop is not surprising considering Intel's July 22nd price drop of the E6x50 revisions and the Q6600 quad-core (to $266). Of course this competition is great for all of us.

They will be, July 22nd.

When is this price drop going to take place??

I love the war, but I hope this doesn't drive AMD to go broke. AMD has been good for the x86/x64 market.

If you look closely at the article, AMD's ENTIRE mainstream dual-core (i.e. non-FX) line falls within a $105 price range! The 4000 is now $73 and the 6000 is now $178. This is a BAD OMEN for AMD since that just killed off their entire lower-end line--while it's still being sold. So, "for only $105 more", you get a PC that's ~50% faster and just went from their weakest to their best offering...

I know that in this era of low-end PCs this is a good thing, but the spread is just too tiny to not be concerned about the future of AMD...

AMD needs to do something --NOW-- (i.e. put out a stopgap energy-hogging "X2 6400 ") before all that's left of their mainstream line are 3 chips with a $20 spread...

AMD and Intel sell their processor for extraordinary profits. None of the listed processors are cutting edge, they can afford to sell them for less because their yields are higher due to manufacturing improvements as they continue to produce the same silicon. The only sad thing to me is that regardless of how many cores or even the frequencies at this point, the improvements are marginal at best. Another hardware innovation is in line, and as much as I favor AMD, I doubt it will be its 'Quadfather' that breathes new fire into this IMO very uninteresting market.

"AMD and Intel sell their processor for extraordinary profits."

Last I checked AMD did not have extraordinary profits in Q4'06 & Q1'07...

Supporting 6 SKU's in a $105 price range is ridiculous - why not limit it to 3 or 4? Would you like our mainstream middle, middle-middle, middle to low middle, middle to high middle....

And identical prices for both the FX74 and FX72? AMD still has a bit to learn about sales and marketing. Truth be told they should offer a part at 500-600 in the single socket range because there is a market of enthusiats who will buy these just because it's AMD.

woo-hoo, too bad I'm still on 939. Waiting on AM3. Comon am3.

The tradedy of AMD was changing their socket type at exactly the same time the Intel Core Duo was lanched. Any upgrader would then switch to Intel. All those existing AMD 3000 chips could have lead to 6000 sales. I want an excuse to go back to AMD - we need them to provide competition in the market.

"I know that in this era of low-end PCs this is a good thing"

How can you consider an X2 4000 low end?
and now with Core-based Celeron they are not even to be considered low end processors any more.

Low end is gone bye bye, any chip out there on the market is enough to chew over any task you give at it. The only "contender" can be HD videos, but with a barely modern video card you offset that also.

They got fat and complacent and that's all there is to it. Hector Ruiz needs to have his brain removed, and AMD needs to do what Intel has just done to them: Create something twice as powerful as it's competition while it's getting ground into the pavement. I doubt Intel would have something to rival said chip for at least a year.

so now we have dual core cpu's in 100% of the market from budget to extreme, quad core in mainstreme to extreme, whats next?

no more single cores?

"AMD needs to do what Intel has just done to them: Create something twice as powerful as it's competition while it's getting ground into the pavement"

It is very easy to make such statements, but I'm afraid it's not that easy to develop efficient chips. Intel had lost it all with Netburst technology, and they knew ever since they were unable to scale Northwood beyond 3.2GHz, and since then Intel was trying hard to develop a chip that could be more efficient in terms of performance. Pentium 4 IPCs were dreadfull and so was it's performance, it took exactly four years for Intel to come back. Shall we give atleast two years for AMD to strike back again?

$169.99 At newegg! Oh, that's freaking HOT.

Rory wrote:

"Shall we give at least two years for AMD to strike back again?"

Nope because AMD does not have two years to burn like Intel could during the Pentium 4 days when it was raking in $$$$.

AMD is on their deathbed. Their new Barcellony processors are slow. Their "old" 6000 processors are like a Celeron compared to the Core 2's.

Haha AMD you suck! 6000 OF WHAT? Intel processors clean your clocks so you might want to stop comparing yourselves to a 6000Ghz Pentium 4.

Keep lowering prices because you have nothing else to compete on.

Well, you seem to hate AMD, I smells and Intel fanboy, and remember this, if AMD goes down the drain, your good friends Intel will not have to try and make their CPUs faster, How would you like for every CPU to be the same until another CPU maker comes into the game?

Well I think this is great for price per clock speed ratio. I just hope AMD can hang in there until they can compete or beat Intel again. The worst news would be news that AMD can't catch up and drops out of the rat race. I personally think the average user (very computer illiterate) isn't going to even know the difference between all the added mumbo jumbo slang on processors. So the end result is they get the benefit of having a faster PC for less money and stick with AMD for the cheap prices and semi good processors that do what they need it to do. Obviously gamers will know the difference as they typically stay on the bleeding edge of technology. Gamers however are a small percentage of PC users. I agree though dual core will be phasing out soon with quad core being the main stream item.

its a shame that idiots like "the voice" have to come and ruin these comments....
imo this is a good step and a bad step for AMD, good step because the great prices have made people switch (eg.me i just chose a 6000 over a e6600 cause there is now $100 AUD difference)
bad step, they will lose money of it, and i dearly hope that they can deliver barcelona :D (heres to hoping)
Who knows, AMD may have dressed up Athlons when they sent the "barcelonas" out to the partners, and the real ones are huge (just another conspiracy for ye)

The new core technology makes Intel cpus cheap and Fast. AMD cpus are cheaper and very fast too but there is a slightly difference that is dangerous for the AMD marketshare.

If AMD will take too much time to shorten cpu pipelines and add new shorter pipelines to cpus the only way to make their processors faster is to quickly start to sell 4 core cpus at lower prices than Intel and building them with more L1 and L2 cache... of course that will make them a little more expensive but it will be a fast way to have a faster processor line introducing 4 core cpus not only for high end level but for the mid level too and in some years for the entry level...

And all just needs a quick architectural development.

Anyways reducing pipelines lenght and adding new faster and parallel pipelens is a technology that has been used for years by Nvidia GPUs for example.

Then Intel did that with their core cpus and now everybody is waiting for AMD to do the very same thing.

All this price/speed war is very interesting !
I'm just hoping that AMD will introduce new technology as soon as possible.

Where is the pricing for the Athlon X2 BE-XXXX that they announced more than a month ago? I hope it was not canceled even before reaching the store shelves.

AMD knows what is right

I like to buy AMD processors so that Intel will continue to have a competitor. When one has competition, products are improved and prices go down. The consumer of these products benefits from the competition.

Wow this is awesome. AMD cpu's always have been what most of us gamers expected. Good gaming machine for good prices. I don't care about Intel's with their cpu's at almost 3 times to prices of an AMD. AMD cpu are good enough for gaming which 95% of us do. I don't care about getting better performance in photoshop or cpu benchs.

I think all of these price-cuts is an omen for the upcoming Phenom pricing... A processor which may be much lower than Core2 Quads... and slower? I hope not :P

Well done AMD. I build systems and this is where the action is as far as my clients are concerned..what I save in CPU prices I can pass onto other components like graphics, memory, cooling and PSU capability. I have to watch every cent and Intel is too expensive.

Benchmarks aside, I haven't seen a reason to buy Intel. They've always been pricey and I've always questioned why. AMD is better in terms of price/performance.

"Haha AMD you suck! 6000 OF WHAT? Intel processors clean your clocks so you might want to stop comparing yourselves to a 6000Ghz Pentium 4."

WHERE CAN I GET A 6000Ghz Pentium 4?!?!?

This is a simple price war, and like was said before, nothing breeds better products than competition.

I dont know how anyone can think it's not good to have amd around, my last three machines have had AMD processors and i have never had a problem and only until recently have the "core 2 duo " had a slight perfomance advantage over AMD's processors.And they have always been cheaper.Can you imagine what intel would be charging if there was no competition!!!!

Only problem is that I have a S939 mobo. At least my next computer is gonna be cheap with these prices!

For the enthusiast, wouldn't the 6420 be a far superior bargain over the AMD 6000 model? I am under the impression the 6420 could overclock to speeds exceeding the 6800 - which would clearly be faster than the 6000 at a comparable price. Just asking.

AMD has a long history of selling processors at prices Intel simply cannot touch. It is only in recent years, when they trounced Intel with the first 1GHz processor, killed them on performance for years and then smacked them hard with 64-bit x86. It took Intel almost five years to catch up. Now they finally did and AMD is suddenly "done". What a joke.

Who wrote:

"Nope because AMD does not have two years to burn like Intel could during the Pentium 4 days when it was raking in $$$$."

Here's the problem, what everyone believes and think AMD is out of business already and they do not have capital to develop processors anymore, and that is obviously wrong. AMD has enough capital to develop processors and ATI buyout shows that exactly. What I cannot believe is why people think (usually Intel fanboys) that AMD cannot strike back? Seriously I do not have any clue about it. AMD is still on old architecture and Barcelona is going to change that trend, it may or may not beat Core Architecture, but competition will be very stiff, and that's for sure.

If there was no AMD to start, we'd STILL all be bragging about how much faster your 733Mhz P3 is than your neighbor's Cyrix 5x86. Competition fuels this trend, and I remember just 18 months ago, a 4800 was $800. Now, that chip is a waste of silicon, and off the map. Even my FX-60 @ 3.04 is considered Dog-Ass-Slow compared to an e6600 with a 400Mhz overclock (which is impossibly easy to pull off!). A 400Mhz OC on an FX-60, is not. If there is another CPU monopoly like there was before the Athlon, your wallet will HURT, and your computer will NEVER get faster. All you can really do now, is HOPE for AMD, but PREPARE for Intel. I love AMD to death, but I'm afraid unless Phenom,(or whatever dumbass name they call it) truly annihilates the 45nm Core2 chips that are out by then, or AMD will be along the likes of Cyrix, 3dfx, Vesa local bus, AGP, Matrox, SDRAM, P-ATA, and CRT Monitors (and floppy drives!). F-O-R-G-O-T-T-E-N.

amd stepped on intel for the last 5 yrs. lowering their prices put a damper on intel. performance per dollar amd wins. and people will continue buying amd. intel has been overated and WAY overpriced throught their history.. id rather buy an amd for hundreds less then have intels lil 8% increase in performance.
intel you suck. amd forever.

BTW i work at the Circuit City and I see trend for example in HP laptops and desctops they 90% of computers we getting from them have AMD processors. This sunday we got bunch of new models and they all had AMD processors. So i belive that most common users will choose the AMD, because for most of them important to have 2gb of RAM ddr 4200 which is really expensive 100-120 for a 1gb and to install it. So they will choose cheaper AMD processors based computer with 2 ram then overpriced Intel processors based computer with 1 GB. Vista likes 2 gb. One will be too slow.

But it's kinda sucks that every chip that going down in price not 939 :( I have 4400 and I can upgrade only to 4800 :(( And i bought my processor for 460 USD year ago on july 2006. I probably will try to sell my rig as fast as I can and upgrade to core 2 duo, I dont think AMD phenon will be MUCH better than core 2 duo the max it will do it will match it. But it will give me more more time till next upgrade.

But on the other hand it will be never ending story and we will be the ones to pay for it.

They are often a better deal than Intel

All I can say is that the competition between AMD and Intel can only lead to something good, worst case only for the end-users. Each move made buy Intel or AMD can only make the other company try harder to make something better. I don't remember everybody beeing so scared that intel is going to go out of bussiness when it was lead by AMD for years in a row... Now it's AMD's term to keep the competition strong, and pricing policy is only one way to do it. And anyway, not everybody wants bleeding edge CPU's! Most need a decent CPU that can handle without any problems the daily tasks. Also, on think we have to keep in mind: if I'm noty mistaking, AMD has some desktop processor models with very low power consuptions (45W or so), and I haven't seen seen intel delivering desktop processors with this power envelope. Or am I wrong? Also, cheaper processors will make system integrators to turn more and more to AMD, since we must not forget: low end and main stream are the segments that generate most profit. These are the cash generators that keep the development for new processors on-going. Correct me if I'm wrong, but judging this throug the eyes of gamers or computer literates leads only to a subjective opinion. AMD is no way going to be out of bussiness, iven if intel is goind to ride the wave solo for the net 3 or four years! keep in mind that the development is not going to grind to a halt, and maybe in 2 years or so we'll see the weel turning again! We've seen this a dozen times. nVidia and Ati did this, we've all seen how the lead was shifting from one company to another, though the pase was more accelerate, driven by gamers demand, and so on. So, stay cool, nobody is going to be out of bussiness, it's just the way competition works. Either way, as loong there is a competition on the market, we can only benefit from it! God forbid that only one CPU remains in bussiness and them we're all at it's mercy.

Actually Amd may have the capitol they just don't have the much needed funding to continue these price wars. I believe the ati deal cost them 4 billion. they paid 2 billion cash and 2 billion in shares. At the time AMD had 5.5 billion meaning they dont have much after that deal went through but anyways they have made money by liquidating legacy processors and getting rid of overstock, but that only provided them with a quick cash infusion. If AMD's new chips cant be on par or under then they could face some serious financial issues and all that capitol will then be sold while they pull out of a hell hole. Also you may think the 2.5 billion they have left may last them, but that can also go quickly in this market. They just recently switched to fabbing 65nm silicons and changing all the hardware to fab 65nm is a expensive process especially on a tight budget, thats why they are not eager to start fabbing 45nm like intel will be doing because they just made the switch to 65nm and they are going to sit there until they can make some good positive cash flow.

I'm not a fan boy of any, I have a AMD duel core system and a intel system .. Ther're both great, can't really tell the difference in performance unless I use a benchmark, as for price and performance AMD is better, but if u take overclock into count I recon Intel is much better, you can practally take any Intel duel core that has the core architecture and overclock it to the x2 6000 specs ... so .. i think intel wins in that area. AMD's worth billions .. I don't think they'll go down just like that, its not like there not selling any at all, .. and yes .. there behind in the performance battle .. but so was intel for 5 years.

I like Intel for their performance...
But I love AMD for their price...
Competetion is realy GOOD!!!

All I hear about a CPU price cuts.. when are the VIDEO CARD makers (amd's ATI being ONE OF THEM!!) going to SLASH prices on the top end line of video cards.. there is absolutely NO WAY a video card should be above $350 without being 1gb of gddr 3 memory... stop ripping off the consumer and lower the prices.. so there will be an excuse to upgrade our machines.. and DRAM & m/b prices need to be kept in check as well.. and only until these three prices are reasonable will people get off the sidelines and upgrade their machines.
Cutting a cpu price is like lowering the gas prices to bring customers back into the store after you've been gouging them for the better part of the last 18 months!! We're going to start at a point of weariness to begin with!

[1] Why do the fanboys get so hot about this, get a girlfriend or join a team voicegirl..

[2] When 10x larger intel restructures and sells of crappy netburst for 10&#xpr;ofit or less & FIRED MORE PEOPLE THAN WORK FOR AMD, amd knew intel was looking 2 do something, but HAD to wait and see what!!...now did found it & we all know...Core2Duo...Pentium M on steroids(which was what could originally tie AMD64 clock for clock...Check the reviews!! It was nothing unexpected by us top technicians..YEAH i think can call myself one! MCSE, CCNA ,SERVER ....so far.

[3] Why is C2D faster?...ONE(1) extra instruction pipe, some macro instructions for shortening execution time, 128bit vs. 64bit registers, smart shared cache gives a single core 2x cache(on OLDER software), very good 65nm process(45nm soon).....AMD IS SOOOOO....SCARED & BROKE...YEAH RIGHT!!

[4] This is how AMD funds the franchise...buying 3 XEON server racks = buying 5 AMD OPTERON server racks with same feature set(RAM, STORAGE, CONNECTIVITY,etc.).

[5] XEON prices are 1.5 to 2 times AMD OPTY....but performance boost is between 20-33%...NOT 2X...WE RACK DESIGNERS/BUILDERS are they're most important customers, and we're quite happy with our two(2) 8 core(4 chip 8216 HE )OPTY racks ON SUPER MICRO H8QM8-2 with all chips at 68 watts per CPU....(with HT BUS seeing MASSIVE cpu 2 cpu communication at almost 4 times 24 GB/s and 16 DIMM (4 DIMMS, 2 CHANNELS per OPTY) w/ 64GB REGISTERED ECC DDR2-667 scaling to 31.3GB/s...they're only one month old, i'm STILL OPTY-MISING(pun INTENDED), expecting MORE than that.

[6] QUAD-CORE OPTY WILL ALSO BE around 65 WATT and will improve on the best things for us...especially HYPERVISORS for our VM WARE, by simply updating rack board bios and switching CHIPS, not EVERYTHING...that's a VERY BIG DEAL.
[7] INTEL XEON is NOT ready for us..Quad core (125w) would be CRAZY ON COMPANY LIGHT BILL (would destroy my expected pay rise(can u say..new HDTV SET..with AMD i can..they (intel) need native 4 core at better perf per watt and that requires IMT (integr. mem. controller).

[8] AMD can easily MATCH CORE 2 DUO perf. by adding the extra stuff intel put into Pentium M which i listed above in [2].... when they hit high yield on 65nm which they will before moving to 45nm...BUT that's not the way to go about it.

[9] What they are doing is making sure to innovate for their BETTER-PAYING customers specific wants and needs(no offense...i built myself a "cheap" AMD GAMING desktop as well but i know my place in the CPU FOOD CHAIN) and that will enable them to continue R&D on a SUPERIOR (which never lasts long with COMPETITION) architecture to give THE BLUE CAMP something to be X-cited about beating with their next chip.

[10] FINALLY..yeah i know..whoopee, INTEL EMPLOYEES LOVE AMD...because Intel cannot afford to let go the best ones to give shareholders more money cause AMD is their to pick them up and brush them off, and sic(you know, dogs) them back at INTEL. It's the expendables like admin and ancilliary and customer service who always get the boot when things are tight, AMD has no need to pick up MORE of these people. EXTRA FAB clean room staff, PROCESS ENGINEERS, TECHNICAL EXECUTIVES and so on are better kept for no real reason other than to make sure AMD can't talk to them (INDUSTRIAL ESPIONAGE....ala F1 racing..is ILLEGAL, and AMD can't afford to give INTEL nuclear missile to drop on 'em.

SO WE THREE(INTEL, AMD & US) SOLDIER ON, if competition stays reasonable, who knows, maybe we'll be FLYING our own jet packs by 2050 with a choice of INTEL-BMW or AMD-FERRARI power ...i'll want be alive for that), instead of hailing a cab or driving a cheap-ass car like mine.

IF no one challenges Intel, i'll be DYING slowly thinking about how MY Core3Octo X-TREME(2xQUAD not native 8core) @5.3GHZ with FSB 2666 & SSE6 is so next gen, compared to my neighbours FRIDGE with its REGULAR core 3 QUAD chip and smaller game display.....and only because i'll be filthy rich enough to own one of these....HOW ABOUT 1 of these for the price of a CORVETTE or worse a ROLLS-ROYCE...sound about right for intel price-setters.

LONG LIVE AMD & INTEL & IBM & AND WHO-EVER WANTS TO JOIN THE PARTY. FORGET YOU FAN GIRLS!!!

[:)) HEY VOICE, GO BACK TO YOU MAMA'S SO SHE CAN SLAP YOU, 'MKAY. I'M DONE.

Why are the FX series so much higher? I know they are branded as the superior chip, but going by the chip comparison guide on this site, the 6000 bests the FX series that are available to be compared. I think only one test showed the 6000 behind the FX. Am I missing something? I own a 4000 939-socket and have had no complaints playing any games at near-top quality levels. (7800GT vid-card). I thought I'd upgrade in time to the highest FX that my board could handle (Abit AN8 Fata1ty SLI), but from what I'm seeing I'll just stick with the cheaper, non-FX brand.

For you Intel-less numbskulls, bear in mind that AMD strives for energy savings, idiots! Can you afford to drive a ferrari that drinks gas like it's coke soda per mile? A bunch of idiots like you only knows how to get those so called high speed CPUs and can't even make 100% full use of it. Shame on you if you're using your parents' money to buy them.

AMD can do things pretty well but with even more energy economy which means theoretically they can outdone Intel with the same amount of power.

So why the hell you need a quad-core for when you don't even need it? It's meant for heavy video editing or even Auto CAD for those people who can't afford a workstation.

For gaming? Get a PS3 or Wii for god's sake. Most important of all, get a life.

Uhh if you have autocad I'm more than sure you can afford a work station, it's not cheap software. Also, another useless rant by AgentVertigo quit copying and pasting things we all know. Isaax who are you to tell people what they need? If they want a quad core and they only surf the net then let them buy whatever the hell they want. it's a free market and it's open to every kids rich parents.

The power of the fresh bought computer is determined by 2 golden rules:
1) The wish to get it and be in place for a reasonable amount of time, not thinking about upgrading and stuff.
2) All computers wait the same speed.
Depending on computer literacy of users, a C2Q is not such a bad idea for somebody who is upgrading from a P4 Prescott who plays games at min to medium video quality but cannot save his old data onto the new computer. On the other hand, getting an AMD pretty 6000 thing that will just do for now (greatly and better) until the real need arises, and that will translate in 2 computers, one with the lower specs for internet browsing for less literate family members and one with higher specs (higher than the original C2Q intended) with the same amount of money (if you can resist and take your hands off them) you originally intended for the C2Q. Probably by then there would be a C3x8 or more, but a PhenomX8 could do...

I for one am very impressed by AMD, I initially thought they wouldn't survive the price war but right now they are lowering prices well beyond the pain margin.

That shows resolve!

It was hard to see at first but things have become a bit clearer in the last 2 or 3 months. It's quite obvious AMD isn't playing for the performance crown
anymore, they have changed priorities: leadership in the mainstream and low-end markets. And I think the Agena (for desktop market) and Barcelona (for server market) will do just that (but I doubt they will steal top spots on the performance charts).

I've also heard that AMD are also planning to become a "lite-fabed" company by striking deals with TSMC and IBM for fab technology. That would cut their costs by a lot, allowing them to invest more in R&D.

I have faith they will pull through this tough period, the market needs them.