Why is AMD Cheaper?

[Sharif]

Why is AMD systems always cheaper to buy than Intel systems? I mean, I was checking out this Alienware system; the best one with Intel was around $4000 and the best one (with the same exact specs) with AMD was only around $2500... why?

[bailey]

maybe you get what you pay for.
for one thing they will not even have the same motherboard. and the set prices do not always reflect the cost of the parts that are inside the case.
there are too many variables that woud make a great differance in the overall price, more than just the cpu

[HAL9000]

You can save a lotta money in an AMD by using a VIA chipset board which many people do and they are cheaper than Intel chipsets... but friends don't let friends use VIA.

[lil Jimmie]

With AMD only having 17-20% of the market share they under cut the price of Intel to get their products to the public. A trend that will prolly fade if their market share increases.

[oddjob]

Originally posted by HAL9000
... but friends don't let friends use VIA. LMAO! :D

[cliffboy]

Intel spends a lot in advertising campaigns... and the manufacturing of the Pentium processor is much more complex considering they have more transistors.

[Propain]

People think that Intel is better and have doubts aboot trying the little guy. Therefore Intel jacks up their prices based on their reputation. Once people get more used to the fact that AMD is just as good as Intel and their seems to be a misconception about this Via thing :confused: then maybe they will go out and save bucks . But then again once AMD owns the market then maybe they will do like Intel and keep their prices ridiculously high. :(

[Sharif]

what is "via"

[cdnref]

You can get a AMD motherboard with nVidia chip. I have personal preferance. As of right now I still consider Intel to be a little better. The only reason I used AMD in my sig is because of cost was an issue.

LOL@HAL9000

Propaine AND cliffboy are both right aswell. It's just the name.

[TwoRails]

Originally posted by Sharif
what is "via" VIA is the chipset. The chipset, by many peoples opinion, is the actual brains of the computer as it's what lets the rest of the computer talk with the CPU, which then does most of the "work."

[cdnref]

Here is pic of a VIA chip out of someones system (nice may I add) I found while surfing the old files. It's to the right (http://www.hpphoto.com/servlet/LinkPhoto?GUID=6c3d4482-4f9a-7b18-64b2-644e249d2288&size=)

[Glaive]

Neither one is arbitrarily better. Also, the Athlon 64s, and the 64-FX in particular, are damn expensive.

All that matters is which one is better within your budget.

If I was going to build a good gaming machine and wanted to do it in the $800-900 range, I'd go AMD, because it's cheaper for the same performance in this price range.

If I was going for something close to $2000, I'd go Intel. Why? Because the higher-end Athlon XP's get outperformed by the P4s, and the Athlon 64's are two expensive (as well as forcing you to either use registered memory or give up Dual Channel DDR), Intel is the better deal in this price range.

If you're going for the best performance regardless of price, the Athlon 64-FX 51 is the way to go, but this may all change in a couple of months when Intel's Prescott comes out, or it may not. The Socket 939 Athlon 64's should be out then, and we'll see how much being on a 90nm process affects performance.

So, in short, AMD is not always better or cheaper.