*** 48HR SPECIAL: AMD 3700X ONLY £259.99 !! ***

[Skynet5]

Part will be the initial hype has gone. So prices have to lower to keep sales traction.

Then new parts are due end of year. So another group of people with cash will hang on, and they need to be tempted to buy sooner (i. E. now).

Supply is plentiful, parts have been in stock now for a long time. I'm sure lots of the stock shortage helped inflate prices in the channels too.

Customer never wins. Although the salesman will tell ya its a great deal, they still drive nicer cars than you do, typically. Lol

 

[gupsterg]

@lnoton

That seems a plausible and spot on analysis .

 

[Scramz]

Part will be the initial hype has gone. So prices have to lower to keep sales traction.

Then new parts are due end of year. So another group of people with cash will hang on, and they need to be tempted to buy sooner (i. E. now).

Supply is plentiful, parts have been in stock now for a long time. I'm sure lots of the stock shortage helped inflate prices in the channels too.

Customer never wins. Although the salesman will tell ya its a great deal, they still drive nicer cars than you do, typically. Lol

Tbh I don't think you need a salesman to tell you that the 3700X at £259 is a good deal. Its great value for money considering the 9900k is still £499, almost double the cost! The wait for the 4000 series is still a long one.

 

[jigger]

TBH this brings the price in line with other non retail outlets.

 

[TNA]

Tbh I don't think you need a salesman to tell you that the 3700X at £259 is a good deal. Its great value for money considering the 9900k is still £499, almost double the cost! The wait for the 4000 series is still a long one.

It may feel long if you have an old CPU that needs upgrading, but when you have a 3600 you should have more than enough performance. End of the day the difference between now and release price is what £40? At least as remember it was £300 when I was getting my 3600. If it was such a big deal one would have surly stretched when getting the 3600 in the first place no? You will likely take a £40 hit when selling so in the end you will have paid near rrp anyway.

All that said, I do understand that it is fun to upgrade and it is not always about the money. But might as we’ll go 3900X at that point

 

[gupsterg]

....

All that said, I do understand that it is fun to upgrade and it is not always about the money. But might as we’ll go 3900X at that point

I'd concur. I've had R5 3600/R7 3700X/R9 3900X. If I set 105W limits to PBO and the R5 with +150MHz clock override, the R5 sustained better boost than the R7 as it had less cores eating into budget. The R9 was like the R5 when 6C/12T stressed, when 8C/16T stressed it nudged past the R7. As I believe the algorithm is aware it has 2 CCDs, thus power load is some what spread.

 

[jigger]

I think they cost £320 on release. £260 is a good deal, that was the price of a 7600 non K not that long ago.

 

[Scramz]

It may feel long if you have an old CPU that needs upgrading, but when you have a 3600 you should have more than enough performance. End of the day the difference between now and release price is what £40? At least as remember it was £300 when I was getting my 3600. If it was such a big deal one would have surly stretched when getting the 3600 in the first place no? You will likely take a £40 hit when selling so in the end you will have paid near rrp anyway.

All that said, I do understand that it is fun to upgrade and it is not always about the money. But might as we’ll go 3900X at that point

If you paid £300 and sold it for an upgrade with a £40 hit you end up paying £40 over RRP however I thought it was closer to £330 on release which would make it a £70 hit (£70 over RRP).

As you said upgrading is fun and part of the game. As much as I would love a 3900X it would be a complete waste for me.

 

[wellibob]

AMD like to toy with us. This is an excellent chip. Really is. But the 2700 is currently about £120/£130 someplaces. What do you do ? That's the real special.

 

[~>Dg<~]

3700X was merely 10% faster than the overclocked 2700 and 15% faster than the stock 2700 on average.

sell borderlands 3 and that 2700 is a real bargin. most games you wont notice the performance difference. 3700 seems a good price but really needs to be about £200 tbh

 

[gupsterg]

AMD like to toy with us. This is an excellent chip. Really is. But the 2700 is currently about £120/£130 someplaces. What do you do ? That's the real special.

Only the 3000 series have CPPC, ie the OS is aware what are best cores to load up. 3000 series also handles RAM better than 1000/2000 series, for density and MHz attained. There are other few things as well. So depends if you want the current best or past best.

Personally rather than buying a 2700 I'd opt for a R5 3600, seen those around ~150 recently. Even if you think ahh the extra 2C/4T on R7 2700 will come handy for productivity, see some of the reviews, due to the IPC gains in some things the 3000 series leads, matches the older 8C/16T well.

 

[Curlyriff]

3700X was merely 10% faster than the overclocked 2700 and 15% faster than the stock 2700 on average.

sell borderlands 3 and that 2700 is a real bargin. most games you wont notice the performance difference. 3700 seems a good price but really needs to be about £200 tbh

You think a chip that is 8 months old should release at almost £150 less than retailed for on release? Yeah okay :/ that would make the i5-9600k it's competition which is daft. The whole stack would have to move and be well below what they should be at relative to Intels competing products. The 3400G is already dead in water case the 3600 being only £10 more but you would have to shift them down a further £30 each or so again to make that viable suggesting that the R5 3600 should be about £120 then to really get enough differential in the stack to make the 3700 around £200. Not going to see those prices till the 4 series drops I feel.

 

[~>Dg<~]

You think a chip that is 8 months old should release at almost £150 less than retailed for on release? Yeah okay :/ that would make the i5-9600k it's competition which is daft. The whole stack would have to move and be well below what they should be at relative to Intels competing products. The 3400G is already dead in water case the 3600 being only £10 more but you would have to shift them down a further £30 each or so again to make that viable suggesting that the R5 3600 should be about £120 then to really get enough differential in the stack to make the 3700 around £200. Not going to see those prices till the 4 series drops I feel.

the 3600 will drop to the 2600 prices we have now and the 3700 to the 2700 prices with the release or just after of the new 4000 series. the 3700 is too much. its about 10 percent faster than a stock overclocked 2700 yet it costs x2 more. its pretty easy to see its over priced for what it is. its a great cpu but like the 3600 too dear. 3600 is basically a 8700 that does about 4ghz. for £160. thats okay i supposed. the low all core genuine speed is not great . i dont get how amd can get away with it really.

advertise a chip that is 4.2 yet in real use its lucky to get 4ghz stock. surely thats false advertising.

so the real start at the moment is actually the 2700 cheap cpus for £120. 3700s will drop down to 200 in 3-4 months. which they realistically should be at.

 

[Troezar]

Just turns the screw on Intel a little more. Great value now. I remember the 2600K was £230 way back. £259 for the 3700X nearly 10 years on is a bargain.

Thanks to AMD good performance is a lot more affordable for the masses. That can only benefit is all with software that can take advantage of the extra resources.

 

[Overlag]

...3700 seems a good price but really needs to be about £200 tbh

im loving that people think AMD should sell its chips for peanuts, but are fine with Intel selling its chips for massive amounts...

 

[Orange Nexus]

the 3600 will drop to the 2600 prices we have now and the 3700 to the 2700 prices with the release or just after of the new 4000 series. the 3700 is too much. its about 10 percent faster than a stock overclocked 2700 yet it costs x2 more. its pretty easy to see its over priced for what it is. its a great cpu but like the 3600 too dear. 3600 is basically a 8700 that does about 4ghz. for £160. thats okay i supposed. the low all core genuine speed is not great . i dont get how amd can get away with it really.

advertise a chip that is 4.2 yet in real use its lucky to get 4ghz stock. surely thats false advertising.

so the real start at the moment is actually the 2700 cheap cpus for £120. 3700s will drop down to 200 in 3-4 months. which they realistically should be at.

You know what should be 200£? The 9700K cos it chokes in Battlefield with just a 2080.

https://i.imgur.com/rnLwwRj.png

 

[~>Dg<~]

im loving that people think AMD should sell its chips for peanuts, but are fine with Intel selling its chips for massive amounts...

i would say amd have the cpu front literally sown up at the moment great prices value on most things but i dont think the 3700x and 3800x are basically because of the all core speeds they actually are. instead of the advertised single core speed they use to sell em.

as for the 9700k thats nothing to do with what im talking about . so mention that where its in relation .

 

[Tetras]

3700X was merely 10% faster than the overclocked 2700 and 15% faster than the stock 2700 on average.

sell borderlands 3 and that 2700 is a real bargin. most games you wont notice the performance difference. 3700 seems a good price but really needs to be about £200 tbh

I agree with you, quad core CPUs for £100 are a joke really, should be £50 like the Ryzen 1200 is. The 2700 is a good price, but even the single core performance is not great as an upgrade to Intel CPUs from Sandy to Coffee. I think the 3600 is so popular partly because it's finally a decent upgrade to Intel's stagnant quad cores at an 'okay' price, but the launch price of £170ish is too much. I know there's the 1600 AF which is decently priced, but it has the same problem as the 2700, single core performance is not good enough. Yeah, I know I get 2 more cores, but I want better performance in old stuff too and I'm not happy paying a huge premium for the 3600/3700 to achieve this.

 

[Orange Nexus]

i would say amd have the cpu front literally sown up at the moment great prices value on most things but i dont think the 3700x and 3800x are basically because of the all core speeds they actually are. instead of the advertised single core speed they use to sell em.

as for the 9700k thats nothing to do with what im talking about . so mention that where its in relation .

https://i.imgur.com/L7khT2n.jpg

Which cpus need their prices slashed?

 

[G J]

Up to £109 for 2 extra cores and threads with 200mhz speed bump over a 3600 not that impressed tbh.

If I didn't have a 8700k I would've put my money down for a 3600, I may even side grade and wait for a Ryzen 4xxx.

Edit: I have to really commend AMD on their pricing and CPU deals have been really great.