AMD announces 2nd Gen Ryzen Threadripper CPUs

[MrJim]

Speaking of which, do we know when the review embargo lifts?

I think it's 13th of August...

[nobodyspecial]

IF you're really winning by that much, why the discount? Say goodbye to margin/profit again...At WORST, you should price 1999 when they other guy loses everything to your 1799 chip. Again, fire management for not knowing how to price products. If you're winning, PRICE IT LIKE YOU'RE WINNING! Every part I beat handily would NEVER be less than a price match, and I'd likely charge MORE if other things are in my favor too (watts, heat, games etc). Match price if they win some, you win some, but basically matching chips, but you charge MORE if you're handily winning most stuff. Doing anything else is just slow suicide in business. Many just assume cheaper is worse. AGain, bad. You don't need share as bad as you need NET INCOME. AMD's best Q in 8yrs in 100mil...LOL. It should be 10x that. See NV/INTC pricing. AMD's margins are 1/2 other tech companies due to stupid pricing even when basically winning hands down (can't say ignorant, they don't see to be able to LEARN).

[peterb]

Is that the 5th cat?

[peterb]

IF you're really winning by that much, why the discount? Say goodbye to margin/profit again...At WORST, you should price 1999 when they other guy loses everything to your 1799 chip. Again, fire management for not knowing how to price products. If you're winning, PRICE IT LIKE YOU'RE WINNING! Every part I beat handily would NEVER be less than a price match, and I'd likely charge MORE if other things are in my favor too (watts, heat, games etc). Match price if they win some, you win some, but basically matching chips, but you charge MORE if you're handily winning most stuff. Doing anything else is just slow suicide in business. Many just assume cheaper is worse. AGain, bad. You don't need share as bad as you need NET INCOME. AMD's best Q in 8yrs in 100mil...LOL. It should be 10x that. See NV/INTC pricing. AMD's margins are 1/2 other tech companies due to stupid pricing even when basically winning hands down (can't say ignorant, they don't see to be able to LEARN).

Er - bit random! Did you get the right thread/forum/website?

[Tabbykatze]

IF you're really winning by that much, why the discount? Say goodbye to margin/profit again...At WORST, you should price 1999 when they other guy loses everything to your 1799 chip. Again, fire management for not knowing how to price products. If you're winning, PRICE IT LIKE YOU'RE WINNING! Every part I beat handily would NEVER be less than a price match, and I'd likely charge MORE if other things are in my favor too (watts, heat, games etc). Match price if they win some, you win some, but basically matching chips, but you charge MORE if you're handily winning most stuff. Doing anything else is just slow suicide in business. Many just assume cheaper is worse. AGain, bad. You don't need share as bad as you need NET INCOME. AMD's best Q in 8yrs in 100mil...LOL. It should be 10x that. See NV/INTC pricing. AMD's margins are 1/2 other tech companies due to stupid pricing even when basically winning hands down (can't say ignorant, they don't see to be able to LEARN).

I think what you're missing is that AMD is not in the winning slice of the market share. So AMD are going to completely undercut the competition so people will come because of both a great price and because it highlights that the compeition has been gouging for a while. Because it will make people ask questions like "AMD has managed to do double yet be that much cheaper *squint*".

AMD are playing a long game here that they don't want to compromise by overpricing so are sacrificing a bit of margin to reap the reward of a larger marketshare and trust balance in the future.

They are pricing it like they're winning, winning at showing up the competition.

[Corky34]

It's not to do with winning or showing up the competition, it's simple economics, the demand curve to be precise.

Consumers are only going to pay so much for a product and like it or not their more likely to buy from the same guy they've been buying from for the last decade or more despite him being more expensive, trust isn't something that's just given it has to be earned.

[Tabbykatze]

It's not to do with winning or showing up the competition, it's simple economics, the demand curve to be precise.

Consumers are only going to pay so much for a product and like it or not their more likely to buy from the same guy they've been buying from for the last decade or more despite him being more expensive, trust isn't something that's just given it has to be earned.

How can AMD calculate a demand curve if they have no data on what peoples demand for their products are in the first place. So instead they are going on pricing for embattling the market share. Aggressive sales tactics not demand curve.

"Simple Economics" is a complete fallacy, it is never simple.

[Corky34]

So you don't think AMD has a fairly good idea of how much demand there is for their products?

And yes it is simple economics, if it wasn't then people wouldn't be aware of supply and demand versus "the markets" ability to afford their products.

[Tabbykatze]

So you don't think AMD has a fairly good idea of how much demand there is for their products?

And yes it is simple economics, if it wasn't then people wouldn't be aware of supply and demand versus "the markets" ability to afford their products.

I think they have an idea of an empty market segment that they can put a foothold in and that they are playing safe with their pricing so that more people will look at their products in the same price range to have the opportunity to purchase them. Once purchased, they talk about their positive and negative experiences which help quantify the effort they have put into their product range. From that, more people whom used to only eye up one company may start looking at both because a larger percentage are. Once they have that foothold and AMD becomes an option to be first choice in peoples mindsets, that's when they strike with better products at higher prices. Right now, they have very little market share so there will be no demand for their product against a well established competition.

This isn't simple economics or simple supply and demand, to me this is an attempt to reshape the market perspective so that their products will have a greater demand.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The fact is AMD is using price/performance since Intel is the incumbant and people will stick with them,especially when the previous AMD CPUs were the FX series,which were a joke to many. Sure,some of us older lot remember AMD in its heyday,but it was so long ago,so they need to work extra hard to get people to "take a chance" on an AMD CPU,hence aggressive pricing will get people to buy them.

Once AMD actually gets more of the market they will probably try increasing the upper end pricing - it happened with the Athlon 64 after all.

[Tabbykatze]

It could be said because of low demand that they are doing lower pricing but I think there is a demand for it now. Content creation and big tasks are in the easy reach of many people now, and small businesses, so it is a growing market sector.

But Cat has hit the nail on the head, the people buying the kind of processor that the Threadripper are sat in are highly likely to ignore AMD in the past may look at them now. Making sure that as the demand grows that AMD gets a larger mindspace.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Its also the reason why they have the fancy box for it too. They want to look "premium" unlike their previous CPUs and get people who wouldn't get their CPUs to buy them. So better value,and fancy packaging to hint at a "quality" product.

[Tabbykatze]

The boxes present it fantastically, the more level headed know it's just for marketing and I will never buy a product because of how it is packaged but they have definitely gone the extra mile to make it look like it is cutting the mustard.

One thing that I've noticed that a lot of news companies aren't covering is that AMD have released a blog stating they managed to push an all core clock of 5.1GHz on the 2990WX with LN2 and take the Cinebench crown from Intels 28 core 5GHz custom chiller config. It is a pinch of salt as it will have to be independently verified first but still, if it's true, that's amazing. Some people have said LN2 is completely unreasonable to which I reply "...and a custom mobo with a 1HP chiller is any more reasonable?"

Sauce: https://wccftech.com/amd-threadrippe...-world-record/

[Corky34]

I think they have an idea of an empty market segment that they can put a foothold in and that they are playing safe with their pricing so that more people will look at their products in the same price range to have the opportunity to purchase them. Once purchased, they talk about their positive and negative experiences which help quantify the effort they have put into their product range. From that, more people whom used to only eye up one company may start looking at both because a larger percentage are. Once they have that foothold and AMD becomes an option to be first choice in peoples mindsets, that's when they strike with better products at higher prices. Right now, they have very little market share so there will be no demand for their product against a well established competition.

This isn't simple economics or simple supply and demand, to me this is an attempt to reshape the market perspective so that their products will have a greater demand.

Only thing is it's not an empty market segment, the market for central processing units has been around for quiet a while.

Sure we could say more cores are filling a gap in the market but that's not a new or empty market, it's a gap, even if we stretched what's considered a market segment to say that they're indeed addressing a market that didn't exist before then the same theoretical demand curve would apply, as the price increases the demanded decreases and vice versa (all else being equal), that is IMO simple economics and simple supply and demand.

The reason Intel has something like 60% margins on what they sell is because demand is high and the reason AMD has something like 30% margins is because the demand for their products is not the same as Intel's, that's not to say one product is better or worse, just that for various reasons the demand, currently, is different.

[Tabbykatze]

Only thing is it's not an empty market segment, the market for central processing units has been around for quiet a while.

Your patronising attitude towards me on this thread doth not go unnoticed.

Sure we could say more cores are filling a gap in the market but that's not a new or empty market, it's a gap, even if we stretched what's considered a market segment to say that they're indeed addressing a market that didn't exist before then the same theoretical demand curve would apply, as the price increases the demanded decreases and vice versa (all else being equal), that is IMO simple economics and simple supply and demand.

Core count is not a gap in the market, HEDT is. Xeon Workstations just aren't something people generally consider unless you really have a technical demand for them and even then it's a bean counters nightmare. HEDT with high capability of multi threading on a desktop is something which has a gap in the market.

The reason Intel has something like 60% margins on what they sell is because demand is high and the reason AMD has something like 30% margins is because the demand for their products is not the same as Intel's, that's not to say one product is better or worse, just that for various reasons the demand, currently, is different.

I see your point about this being "simple" but my retort to the above is that low demand and low supply generally equate to higher prices for higher margin return because you are making low volume sales so you have to make more margin. AMD has a reasonable supply but the demand was low but they kept prices low so they could continue to shift stock. Intel charges 60% margins because for 5 years, who tf else were you going to buy from? When you control the market, you can do whatever you please and charge however much you want.

You see this as "simple economics", i don't. I guess we will find out in the months/years to come whom was correct at this juncture as I get fed up of how you write your responses.

[Corky34]

Your patronising attitude towards me on this thread doth not go unnoticed.

Apologises if you think I'm being patronising, i assure you I'm not, i was simply trying to point out that there is no empty market segment that they can put a foothold in, perhaps your seeing something that isn't there.

Core count is not a gap in the market, HEDT is. Xeon Workstations just aren't something people generally consider unless you really have a technical demand for them and even then it's a bean counters nightmare. HEDT with high capability of multi threading on a desktop is something which has a gap in the market.

And what would you say defines a HEDT? Would it happen to be core count because that's the main thing Xeon have over other processors.

Either way that example of HEDT being a gap in the market you've just used as an example is not the empty market segment you initially claimed that AMD are addressing.

I see your point about this being "simple" but my retort to the above is that low demand and low supply generally equate to higher prices for higher margin return because you are making low volume sales so you have to make more margin. AMD has a reasonable supply but the demand was low but they kept prices low so they could continue to shift stock. Intel charges 60% margins because for 5 years, who tf else were you going to buy from? When you control the market, you can do whatever you please and charge however much you want.

You see this as "simple economics", i don't. I guess we will find out in the months/years to come whom was correct at this juncture as I get fed up of how you write your responses.

The way i write my responses? Perhaps you'd like to read back over how you responded as its been fairly obvious from your initial reply to me that you've been spoiling for an argument.