Sci/Tech Intel cuts quad-core price by 50 percent

[The Helper]

Intel posted price cuts on Sunday that included reductions of 50 percent on select quad-core processors. The chipmaker also introduced new Celeron and Core 2 Duo processor models.

The price of the Core 2 Quad Q6700 (2.66GHz) fell 50 percent from $530 to $266, while the quad-core Xeon X3230 (2.66GHz) saw an identical cut: from $530 to $266.

Celeron price-cut highlights include the Celeron 430 (1.8GHz), reduced 23 percent from $44 to $34 and the dual-core Celeron E1200 (1.6GHz), falling 19 percent from $53 to $43.

The dual-core Xeon 3085 (3GHz) was reduced 29 percent from $266 to $188, and the Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 (3GHz), from $266 to $183, or 31 percent.

Read the news here.

 

[Lord Kass]

grrr :banghead: just upgraded my computer last weekend

 

[Bluewind]

The price went down because nobody would buy Kentsfield now. It's still better to buy a Yorkfield.

 

[enouwee]

It's still better to buy a Yorkfield.

Whose price of course remained exactly the same... I'm wondering how one shop can sell a Q9450 for 260€ and another one for 350€ (German resellers).

I guess, I'll order every part at a different shop and still end up paying less (shipping included) than choosing one of the few shops that have everything on sale.

 

[Prometheus]

Celeron sucks, it shouldn't even be marketed.
Though this is good, AMD's going to have to drop to complete, hell yes!

 

[dunpealx4]

grrr :banghead: just upgraded my computer last weekend

me 2, i just got the intel duo 2 E6600 2 weeks ago. it cost me $150. :banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[cleeezzz]

grrr just upgraded my computer last weekend

should be 30 day return policy, better pull it out fast.

 

[DuckieKing]

1) Why could they lower the price by half? Did they find a way to make quad cores more cheaply? Was the mark-up so dramatic that they still make profits at half the price?

2) What about those three-core processors that were supposed to fill in the price/performance gap between two-core and four-core processors?

...This doesn't really affect me, anyway. I use a dual-core, and it can be overclocked faster than a quad core, and I very rarely have more than two memory-intensive processes open at a time.

 

[Prometheus]

1. You'd be suprised at how cheap processors are to make.

2. Tri-Cores are horrible, and they're AMD only.

 

[The Helper]

1. You'd be suprised at how cheap processors are to make.

2. Tri-Cores are horrible, and they're AMD only.

Tri-cores are not horrible. They are just crippled quad cores. They are what they are advertised. 3 X a single core so what if they are defective, we have been buying those kinds of chips for years (486 SX/DX, Celeron, etc).

 

[Prometheus]

Horrible as in price, plus I've been told never to get one.
They should be less then $200.