Intel 11400 - a gem for gamers?

[humbug]

They will have to react with something, let's just hope it's not a £200 quad core.

Why do they have to? they are selling every £400 CPU they make, if to make £200 CPU's is to take away capacity from £400 CPU's to do so would be idiotic.

They are not going to sell more CPU's until they have access to more capacity.

Let Intel have the budget segment, its fine, they probably ain't going to anyway, the best selling CPU is still the 3600, its a slower CPU and more expensive but AMD will continue to sell more of them than Intel sell everything, not that this matters, i don't care if the 11400 takes the 3600's spot and i don't think AMD do either, it will just drag down Intel's margins and premium image. The idea that Intel are the budget brand just gets more and more set in concrete.

 

[Minstadave]

AMDs multi-chiplet architecture doesn't suit the value end particularly well. Their monolithic APU may be better suited to that market.

 

[humbug]

AMDs multi-chiplet architecture doesn't suit the value end particularly well. Their monolithic APU may be better suited to that market.

The IO die is on GloFo 14nm and costs pennies, the wafers are very cheap, the TSMC 7nm CPU chiplets are so small they are getting a lot more out of the wafer.

A quick calculation suggests Intel are getting 250 10900K's (206mm2) out of a typical 300mm Wafer, lets say that wafer is $12,000. That's $48 per chip.

Zen 3 CCD is 80mm2, let say TSMC is more expensive, $17,000, AMD are getting 750 CCD's out of each wafer, so 750 5800X out of the $17,000 Wafer = $23, add $10 for the IO die and each 5800X costs $33 to Intel's $48 10900K, and the 11900K is larger than the 10900K. I think the 11900K is twice the cost of the 5800X.

 

[humbug]

I'll add to that.

After cutting the chip out of the wafer there is assembly, $30 per chip?, packaging, $10? To make a 5800X sales ready probably costs very roughly $80 per chip, they would sell that into a channel suppler at $250 a pop, the channel sells to retailers and they put their slice on top by the time it gets to you at $450.

$170 Profit

For Intel its not all that different, they may make $30 per chip less.

The problem comes when you take that 8 core $450 chip and turn it into a $200 6 core CPU, after paying $80 to get it to that stage you might sell it into the channel at $120.

Now you're only making $40 on those CPU's, and its the same for Intel, you might be selling a lot of $200 CPU's, but you're making very little on them.

 

[g67575]

If you buy a F + K edition, in the UK, I feel a branding opportunity is being missed

 

[Joxeon]

Why do they have to? they are selling every £400 CPU they make, if to make £200 CPU's is to take away capacity from £400 CPU's to do so would be idiotic.

They are not going to sell more CPU's until they have access to more capacity.

Let Intel have the budget segment, its fine, they probably ain't going to anyway, the best selling CPU is still the 3600, its a slower CPU and more expensive but AMD will continue to sell more of them than Intel sell everything, not that this matters, i don't care if the 11400 takes the 3600's spot and i don't think AMD do either, it will just drag down Intel's margins and premium image. The idea that Intel are the budget brand just gets more and more set in concrete.

I doubt many people will pay more for a worse performing CPU in the 3600 as opposed to the 11400F once the word gets out and I'm sure many already felt burned by the large price rises on AMDs new stuff especially budget conscious buyers which make up the majority of CPU purchases. It's not just CPUs sales you have to factor the motherboards too which all adds to margins.

 

[SKILL]

I'll add to that.

After cutting the chip out of the wafer there is assembly, $30 per chip?, packaging, $10? To make a 5800X sales ready probably costs very roughly $80 per chip, they would sell that into a channel suppler at $250 a pop, the channel sells to retailers and they put their slice on top by the time it gets to you at $450.

$170 Profit

For Intel its not all that different, they may make $30 per chip less.

The problem comes when you take that 8 core $450 chip and turn it into a $200 6 core CPU, after paying $80 to get it to that stage you might sell it into the channel at $120.

Now you're only making $40 on those CPU's, and its the same for Intel, you might be selling a lot of $200 CPU's, but you're making very little on them.

Isn't that basically reinforcing what he said though?

Intel by using monolithic dies means the low end is cheaper/easier, a pure 6-core + IMC die, whilst AMDs approach of chiplets means to generate a 6 core chip costs no less than an 8 core... Of course they save elsewhere/overall by having one chiplet cover 4 SKUs but in terms of ability to hit the low end with maximum profit it's not an ideal setup...

 

[humbug]

Isn't that basically reinforcing what he said though?

Intel by using monolithic dies means the low end is cheaper/easier, a pure 6-core + IMC die, whilst AMDs approach of chiplets means to generate a 6 core chip costs no less than an 8 core... Of course they save elsewhere/overall by having one chiplet cover 4 SKUs but in terms of ability to hit the low end with maximum profit it's not an ideal setup...

They are not pure 6 core dies, they are all the same 8 core dies with 2 disabled.

 

[PhoenixUK]

No reson to go anywhere near a 3600, it's slower and more expensive. AMD need a 5600 non x at £200 or lower, drop the 5600x price as well if sales dry up.

Better upgrade path rather than buying into a dead socket with overpriced and worse high end if you ever wanted to snap 2nd hand 5800x/5900x in 2 years or something for peanuts?

But yeh 5600x is overpriced right now. At £200 it would be much better value.

Prices might go up though on intel stuff I guess considering how 3600/3600x increased in prices. Last year you could get a 3600x brand new on sale for £120 with games bundled to it and now you're lucky to get a 2nd hand 3600 for that.

 

[humbug]

Intel will do what they always do with their low priced CPU's that sell well, stop supply of them.

 

[pieman109]

Don't forget though that unless you buy a high end intel mobo, you're gonna be stuck at 2666mhz ram speed as the B460 (I think) cripples the ram speed, which means the cost is also going to increase thanks to Intel's castration policy. I built a 10400F/B460/16gb system for someone very recently and it performed really well.

 

[SKILL]

They are not pure 6 core dies, they are all the same 8 core dies with 2 disabled.

The 11400/600? I'd be kinda surprised, Intels 14nm yields should be damn near perfect by this point and it would make more sense financially to have 2 tapeouts I think.

 

[Tetras]

Don't forget though that unless you buy a high end intel mobo, you're gonna be stuck at 2666mhz ram speed as the B460 (I think) cripples the ram speed, which means the cost is also going to increase thanks to Intel's castration policy. I built a 10400F/B460/16gb system for someone very recently and it performed really well.

From what I've seen, B560 boards (unlocked mem) are not badly priced, so shouldn't be an issue.

 

[humbug]

The 11400/600? I'd be kinda surprised, Intels 14nm yields should be damn near perfect by this point and it would make more sense financially to have 2 tapeouts I think.

Only way to know for sure is to take the lid off one.

11900K is roughly 28% larger than the 10900K. Its huge. Roughly 200 Chips per 300mm wafer.

https://wccftech.com/intel-rocket-lake-core-i7-11700k-desktop-cpu-die-shot-delidded/

 

[Joxeon]

Better upgrade path rather than buying into a dead socket with overpriced and worse high end if you ever wanted to snap 2nd hand 5800x/5900x in 2 years or something for peanuts?

But yeh 5600x is overpriced right now. At £200 it would be much better value.

Prices might go up though on intel stuff I guess considering how 3600/3600x increased in prices. Last year you could get a 3600x brand new on sale for £120 with games bundled to it and now you're lucky to get a 2nd hand 3600 for that.

You would have worse performance though for 2 years before upgrading meanwhile the guy who saved with the cheap 11400F+B560 could just jump to whatever the new platforms budget offering was and would still end up with better gaming performance.

 

[PhoenixUK]

You would have worse performance though for 2 years before upgrading meanwhile the guy who saved with the cheap 11400F+B560 could just jump to whatever the new platforms budget offering was and would still end up with better gaming performance.

It's not worse though is it, the 5600x is better. The 3600 is a bit slower yes, 5-10%. Motherboards are subjective, you can get a decent 470 mobo for £100ish brand new or b450 even cheaper. If anything the ryzen motherboards are cheaper, especially 2nd hand. The intel cpu also needs a cooler where the ryzen will boost to max just fine on the included cooler.

Yep the 11400f will save you around £80-100 now over a 5600x at a minimal performance cost but later it will be much more hassle for entire new setup.

I surely have appreciated my x370 motherboard where I've used a ryzen 1600, then 3600x and later had a 3900 and kept same 8pack memory I bought like 4-5yrs ago now.

A dead socket probably won't hold much resell value either.

I feel like it's just not quick enough. It feels like the same mistake people made when buying i5 6400 skylakes when the ryzen came out. Yes, it was bit quicker but now your only choice is to buy an entire new setup and your performance is dead due to core limitations.

I'm sure it will sell well though especially for people that aren't bothered with custom machines. I'd definitely recommend it in a prebuilt to those who iust buy a complete pc and forget about for 5-7 years.

For us who bare the curse of upgraditus, I feel like it will last about a year or so until you decide you want more cores and the new shiny .

Either way good to have at least some competition from intel - maybe they at least drop prices of 3xxx series again to what it was last year pre 5xxx launch.

 

[bru]

Surely both platforms are effectively on dead end sockets, so that argument is flawed. Both have existing chips upgrade path, although unless you pick a fairly high end board you wont want to be running a top end high core count chip in either.

 

[Journey]

Surely both platforms are effectively on dead end sockets, so that argument is flawed. Both have existing chips upgrade path, although unless you pick a fairly high end board you wont want to be running a top end high core count chip in either.

Your can happily run a 3950x or 5950x on a few of the ~£100 B550 boards and even a couple of the B450's.

However yes, both sockets are at a dead end, one just had a much greater set of options for the future if you aren't a serial upgrader.

 

[Joxeon]

It's not worse though is it, the 5600x is better. The 3600 is a bit slower yes, 5-10%. Motherboards are subjective, you can get a decent 470 mobo for £100ish brand new or b450 even cheaper. If anything the ryzen motherboards are cheaper, especially 2nd hand. The intel cpu also needs a cooler where the ryzen will boost to max just fine on the included cooler

I think the argument was going for a 3600 now then upgrading in 2 years to a 5000 series CPU vs an 11400F now then jumping on whatever new budget gaming CPU is out in 2 years time. Sure you could go for a 5600X but then your paying double the price for 10% extra gaming performance even less if you game with anything under a 3090 or play at above 1080p.

 

[Quartz]

Don't forget though that unless you buy a high end intel mobo, you're gonna be stuck at 2666mhz ram speed as the B460 (I think) cripples the ram speed,

This is unlocked on the B560