Pentium Class Ivy Bridge Chip to Sell for $86



+ Add a Comment


Man, Intel is really eating into the budget market now... as it is, I like the AMD APUs for lower-end machines (ex. I have an E350 netbook and might use an A4 or A6 for an internet browsing machine), but now, I'm not so sure. Still, if AMD goes under, Intel will be able to price gouge more and really screw us over. UGHHH... (let's hope Trinity isn't a complete flop like bulldozer)


Keith E. Whisman

I love that price point. LOL... Thank god there ins't an $8,086.00 dollar Intel processor. I would love to see a super high end processor priced at $486 dollars instead of the $999 they are currently fetching.



I'm currently using a Pentium G620 Sandy Bridge CPU in my HTPC and it can play games like the free-to-play Microsoft Flight, Age of Empires Online, Sim City 4, and MW2 at lower or medium settings at 1080p resolution very well. Not to mention streaming media and DVD playback quite well. Windows 7 of course.

There is definitely a market for these CPUs in the low-energy consumption, low-heat output department.



AMD is soooo screwed. If intel takes away the budget market they have nothing left. Tom's Hardware today posted the "Best Gaming CPUs for the Money" and Intel won every price point WITHOUT ivy bridge. AMD only managed to eek out a tie in one category.



these are amazing cpus if all you want to do is game at 1080p or lower.



low budget Ivy-Bridge gaming rig, does this make?



I wish I could follow the nomenclature better. When someone says pentium, I think year=2001 quality



I treat them the same way as "Power Stroke" Diesel engines, those badges are just flare. the power stroke is not an advanced technology that makes that engine better its one of the strokes of a four stroke engine. Its just marketing flare.

I go by the acctual details, is it ivey bridge? Sandy Bridge? HT? How many cores? Cache? Integrated graphics? Is it unlocked? Core is usefull to tell what type of processor you are looking at in most cases but it is really only a way of distinguishing which market segment the processor is aimed at, the model # is what distinguishes what its made of, and where it is at.



Inching in a bit on AMD's budget market? Let the Rivalry continue.

I will I admit I'm more of an Intel fan, mostly because my father works there, but also because I prefer to have less cores with more horsepower than more cores with less umph.

But then again I'm not a heavily threaded user.

AMD has a great place, its just not a place I am at all interested in.

I am an Intel Fanboy, always have been, but I don't want to see AMD go under. Compitition leads to innovation and competitive pricing.

Hang in there AMD.



It's getting a little hinky over at AMD lately. Abu Daubi's GloFo (Global Foundries) just took over the last of AMD's share of the company and AMD broke their contract with them. Cost to AMD? $700 million dollars. AMD also purchased a low power networking company called SeaMicro that touts on their webpage about using Intel CPUs. Cost to AMD? $300 million dollars. So AMD has spent a cool $1 BILLION dollars in the past week. Quarterly results for the last quarter of 2011? A loss of $177 million dollars.
Stock price isn't doing much better. When AMD purchased ATI for $5.4 Billion dollars in 2006, AMD's stock price was $40/share. Today's price is around $7/share, a drop for those lucky enough to own it of 85% of their investment.
Intel really does not have much to do with AMD's waning ability to compete. AMD is taking care of that all by themselves.



To say that Intel has little to do with AMD's ability to compete is disingenuous at best. There are reasons why Intel had to settle all those anti-competitive lawsuits with not only AMD, but nVidia as well amongst others. This information is in the public domain. Moreover, it's very difficult to compete with a company that has 10x the workforce and 22x the operating income. The bottom line is we the consumer need AMD. Without competition innovation is stifled and the consumer gouged. Regardless of your personal views towards AMD, the company has sparked creative innovative ideas and executed them. While it's true that their CPUs don't currently have the same IPC output as Intel's, it doesn't mean no one should ever purchase them. After all, does everyone (other than MPC readers) need a 3960X? No, of course not. Take Anand's review on the Ivy bridge CPU. Even Anand contends that Intel's yet to be released Ivy bridge's GPU is no match for AMD's A8-series Llano APU. Yes, we now the CPU is better, but the point is that AMD can still compete in some areas and discounting the company as whole because it cannot compete against Intel's flagship CPUs is unfair.




While I agree the new integrated GPU isn't up to AMD, your talking about an extremeley small niche market that the integrated GPU would even play a part to. Anyone who has one doesn't know or care about it usually, and anyone who cares about GPU performance is buying discrete cards for gaming or multimedia creation/editing/ect.

That isn't going to help them at all.

But I do agree that I hope AMD can pick itself back up because I would hate to see Intel rule all the market. Think it hurts to buy a new HDD? Try buying a Processor without AMD in the picture.




I have been a firm believer in the thought that AMD is killing themselves just as much as the compitition with Intel over the past years.

But it is pretty clear this super cheap, and from what has been released impressive, CPU seems to be directly aimed at the low to mid range market AMD has been claiming to now focus on since, while they won't say this, they simply can't beat Intel's performance.

But I do hope that AMD can pull themselves out of the gutter soon, Intel needs compitition. And if Keplar is as awesome as Nvidia claims, AMD may be in for a very rough ride.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.