m_a_x,
<<So the kind of buyers you describe don't care about "k6", "celeron", "PII", "Athlon", "Duron", "P4"?
I don't think so. The kind of dumb customers that only look to MHz will rush on the Duron, which will be between 900 and 1GHz by the end of Q1.>>
If I understand your point correctly, I agree that there are a range of buyers from very uninformed to extremely informed. And sure, those who are best informed will likely make a rational price/performance decision. But I disagree that most 'average' buyers will make such a decision based solely, or even mostly, on price/performance. I think that to most folks, AMD still has a strange 'inferior' odor to it, and that Intel wins the PR/branding contest hands down - how else to explain that, at least in the US, it appears that a lot of folks are often willing to pay more for the Intel name, despite inferior performance? (I guess that could apply both to CPU and stock prices ;-)I think this is slowly changing, but IMO AMD has an unusually large amount of obstacles in achieving parity with Intel that unfortunately go well beyond the traditional criteria of price/performance, and more rightly fall into the catagory of marketing/perception. It's hard enough to win the first battle - the additional burdens AMD has may be overbearing - I hope not, but we'll see. |
