-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD 8 core RYZEN price
- Thread starter cosmogenesis
- Start date
So still no reasoned argument? Your debating skill are the only things embarrassing around here still you have company......
Jigger thinks the top Ryzen chip it will cost around £300 'close to Skylake'!
Still no firm source for pricing yet.....
£500 for a 6900K comparable Ryzen is pretty optimistic as well inc VAT IMO.... will come back when its released to see how accurate we all were... or not re price/ performance
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 1,149
- Location
- United Kingdom
I think i'm correct in saying this...
But that $499.99 price for Ryzen came from some random guy on Reddit who was giving his opinion on what he thinks AMD should aim for in order to compete.
It gained a LOT of traction lots of people commented on it and WCCFTech saw it and ran with "AMD Zen prices revealed"
It's all ********.
It's an interesting debate but bear in mind that a lot of the pricing is down to segmentation. Manufacturers know we all have different buying power and create levels of products to fill each of them. The extra value at the higher tiers is not linear and they are marketed to the wealthy as premium or exclusive or the best you can get. CPU's are no different and in fact they have an added reason to hike the price, productivity, the manufacturers know a lot of the high end gear will be used to make money and they want their cut.
AMD will have to price a little lower to gain market share and attract former AMD users back. The die hard Intel fans will never buy so they aren't a target, however AMD users have come to expect more affordable prices from AMD and I think are more value conscious. A bit like Android users.
I'm thinking 8c16t will be £750 with a decent mainstream chip in the sub £200 bracket and something for the not as rich enthusiast at £350.
AMD will have to price a little lower to gain market share and attract former AMD users back. The die hard Intel fans will never buy so they aren't a target, however AMD users have come to expect more affordable prices from AMD and I think are more value conscious. A bit like Android users.
I'm thinking 8c16t will be £750 with a decent mainstream chip in the sub £200 bracket and something for the not as rich enthusiast at £350.
Hard to say, but at this point a very agressive AMD offering woud be preferable all round and may make good sense?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,336
- Location
- Planet Earth
Yet,despite all the excuse making people are spending £220 on a Core i5 and a £300+ on a 4C/8T Core i7 without any problems. So if AMD has something which is competitive only entitled people want AMD to sell a top tier 8C/16T with Broadwell level IPC(if that is the case) with a decent stock cooler for the same price as a LOCKED Core i7 6700
At that pricing they will be make more money selling it to OEMs. It just shows you how cheapskate people are when you think £190 to £200 for a 4C/8T chip with potentially Broadwell level IPC is not worth even £190 to £200 since it has an AMD badge - my viewpoint is AMD does not need cheapskate customers like you,and I am hardly the type of person who buys £500 CPUs either. If they have a decent product they need to be able to actually make some money too.
The rest of us will be quite happy if RyZen does hit half decent IPC to get a 4C/8T chip for Core i5 6600K money and remember it has no stock cooler,and its actually half decent.
No it doesn't,since the Intel 8 core chips are £1000:
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/inte...-processor-oem-cm8067102056010-cp-614-in.html
The top tier Intel desktop chips have been £600+ for years.
AMD can charge more than £400 if they get decent enough IPC(lets say Haswell to Broadwell level).
In fact if AMD gets decent enough IPC,they can match the price of the Core i7 6800K or price it slightly higher :
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/inte...v3-processor-retail-free-games-cp-611-in.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/inte...v3-processor-retail-free-games-cp-613-in.html
The Intel 6C/12T chips are £400 to £570.
If Intel can sell a 6C/12T chip for £400 to £450 with no problems,if AMD can get close in IPC,only entitled people would have an issue with them selling an 8C/16T Ryzen chip for similar money.
That is under HALF of what Intel charges.
If that is too much for you,but a £320 Core i7 6700K instead,since a £200 Ryzen 4C/8T CPU is overpriced it seems.
It annoys me how AMD is not allowed to make decent money if it has decent products but companies like Intel and Nvidia can,despite all the moaning about prices,they are just raking in the sales.
AMD is not a charity - people are buying £1000 8C/16T BW-E chips,so to expect AMD to sell something close to nearly one third the price is hilarious.
Cool,they can make even lower margins after R and D expenditures. They might as well not bother releasing any of these chips to enthusiasts.
They still need to have decent enough margins to continue CPU development and do you honestly think if they become too aggressive in pricing Intel has enough money to bankrupt them by short term price cuts - Intel at times does kind of give AMD some leeway from what I have heard.
A price war will screw AMD more longterm than Intel.
Plus Intel has so much more production capability they can still sell CPUs for more money to OEMs since AMD is far more supply constrained,as we saw during the Athlon and Athlon 64 days.
If they do it for half the price,that is not taking the mickey when Intel has never sold any of its 8 core socket 2011 chips for anywhere near that price.
I am a cheapskate too,but some of you need to be reasonable.
Intel is selling tiny cores upto £320. Ryzen is going to be probably close to 200MM2 to 250MM2,which is double the size.
AMD would be making HALF the margins of Intel selling a top tier 8C/16T Ryzen for £300(if costs per mm2 are similar).
Seriously:
1.)4C Ryzen(unlocked) for around £150 to £170,ie,£50 to £70 cheaper than Intel
2.)4C/8T Ryzen(unlocked) against 4C KL at £190 to £230,ie being £90 to £130 cheaper than Intel
3.)6C/12T Ryzen(unlocked) against 4C/8T KL at £290 to £320,ie,being £80 to £110 cheaper than Intel
4.)8C/12T Ryzen(unlocked) against 6C/12T KL at around £400 to £500,ie,being £500 to £600 cheaper than Intel
Then you add the fact that the Wraith cooler is actually included(K series CPUs have no cooler and not all people overclock),and the fact the motherboards will be cheaper,and the fact someone can upgrade from the lowest end chip to an 8C chip on the same platform,it would make AM4 and Ryzen look a pretty good deal overall at those prices.
AM4 only uses dual channel memory too - especially at the socket 2011 level,the platform costs will start to become far more noticeable.
X99 motherboards START at £190 on OcUK. Going from previous AMD motherboard pricing half decent AM4 motherboards will probably start at £80 to £100 anyway,just like socket 1151.
That would be enough to shake up the market ,and that is if they get Haswell to Broadwell IPC,and are trying to get more marketshare whilst getting decent margins,and that is me being somewhat entitled to expect that too.
Plus add the 20% drop in the pound,it looks even more reasonable.Part of the Intel price rise has been down to exchange rates too.
As long as Ryzen has Haswell to Broadwell level IPC,and decentish clockspeeds,expecting any more is really being entitled IMHO OFC.
The only way I would expect an 8C/16T Ryzen for 4C/8T KL pricing is if it is only SB or IB level IPC.
Now,that is quite possible,so AMD would have to price the range much lower. However if they hit Haswell to Broadwell levels of IPC and get the standard boost clockspeeds upto 4GHZ,then they don't need to go total cheapskate on pricing IMHO OFC.
Now I expect both of you won't agree with what I have said and to save us bickering,we can agree to disagree regarding pricing.
Last edited:
Yeah, and if you ignore electrocution there's little danger in urinating on an electric fence >.>
Q9650: $339.00
i7 980: $594
3930K: $594
4930K: $583.00 - $594.00
5930K: $583.00 - $594.00
6900K: $1089.00 - $1109.00
The 6900K is completely overpriced for were it lies in the lineup (by almost x2), the only reason it commands such a price is because firstly there's been no decent AMD chips in half a decade which means Intel have had free reign to extort the consumer, and secondly due to that they haven't retired obsolete designs like 2C2T processors which has thrown everything out of whack.
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 3,677
i3/i5/i7 in the 2c or 4c area*is the main battle ground for PC business. 8C/16T offerings are for specialist professions that warrant the*additional performance surely. The gamer would probably like 8C/16T for future proofing purposes but 6C/12T is the more affordable and likely place to buy into.
So performance wise AMD look ok, its just a matter of their pricing now
So performance wise AMD look ok, its just a matter of their pricing now
Sadly that's the drawback to being the budget/value brand, during the early 90's the car market was flooded with "cheap" Japanese cars with Ferrari killing performance because the manufacturers were smart enough to understand that just because they have a better product doesn't mean they can charge the same as a premium brand.
AMD's biggest success has come at times when they have been pounding Intel on price/performance, I.E when you could get a 2GHz Pentium IV beating Athlon XP for the price of a 2GHz Celeron.
Luckily for AMD though due to Intel's quarter century long policy of "charge the moon, somebody will pay it" they have always been able to make a decent profit anyway (unless they are saddled with a turkey like faildozer) especially in situations where their production costs are lower.
Another consideration is supply - if it's constrained (likely, initially at least) selling it off cheap makes no sense. They'll price it just high enough to be attractive without being the full on budget barnstorming buy.
At the moment this thread is kinda pointless, we're just throwing numbers around and trying to justify them. Until we get some actual news regarding this we can't predict anything.
Sure it's fun to try and reason out a price range but in the end cost of production, profit margins, supply and demand will determine the cost as always.
All we know is that they tried to keep motherboard costs down by sticking with PGA and moving more stuff onto the CPU.
Sure it's fun to try and reason out a price range but in the end cost of production, profit margins, supply and demand will determine the cost as always.
All we know is that they tried to keep motherboard costs down by sticking with PGA and moving more stuff onto the CPU.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,336
- Location
- Planet Earth
I don't disagree but if Ryzen was Haswell to Broadwell level IPC something like £400 to £500 for an 8C/16T model is cheap compared to the £1000+ Core i7 6900K and Core i7 6950K - even £600 would be massively cheaper especially with the pound being worth less against the dollar now.
Expecting it to be closer to Core i7 6700K price if Ryzen is close to Core i7 6900K performance is asking a lot IMHO OFC especially when the motherboards probably will be much cheaper.
However if IPC is more SB or IB level then the 8C/16T version will be probably under £400.
If it has Haswell to Broadwell level IPC and is closer to Core i7 6700K pricing AMD is feeling very generous!!
Last edited:
It's not cheap, it's less expensive. There's a very distinct difference between them and this is part of why people are bickering so much.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,336
- Location
- Planet Earth
As a person who has never spent more than £200 on a CPU,£400 to £500 for a Haswell to Broadwell level IPC 8C/16T Ryzen cpu,which has an included stock cooler comparable to £25 to £30 212 EVO,and motherboards which are probably going to be £100 cheaper,is cheap.
Let say AMD Ryzen is Haswell to Broadwell level and is £499.
The Core i7 6900K is £999 on OcUK. The cheapest motherboard is £190. A Hyper 212 class CPU cooler is around £25 to £30. So that is over £1200 before RAM is included.
If the 8C/16T Ryzen is £499,a reasonable motherboard will probably start at £80 to £100,meaning the whole shebang is around £600 which is half the price.
If AMD matches Core i7 6900K level pricing at £400,it comes to around £500 which is 40% of the cost of the Intel setup.
If you want the 8C/16T Ryzen if it has decent IPC,to be £300,it means £400,which is 33% of the cost of the Intel setup,with a die size twice as large as a Core i7 6700K.
The only way an 8C/16T Ryzen is going to be under £400 is if the CPU has SB to IB level IPC or if AMD is really feeling generous.
Also the pound is nearly 20% weaker than it was a year ago,so for AMD to price it under £400 even if it has decent IPC means they would have to price it very cheaply in USD.
Going from prior AMD history I don't think the 8C/16T Ryzen will be very cheap if it is decent - neither does it need to be.
4C/8T Ryzen if it has decent IPC at Intel 4C pricing and 6C/12T Ryzen if it has decent IPC at 4C/8T pricing will shake the market up,since it will undercut the Intel CPUs by like around £100,plus the cost of the cooler too.
Last edited:
If Zen R7 performs the same as 6900K and is 50% cheaper then Intel will be forced to drop their prices, they'll likely just move 6950X to the £1000 mark and 6900K £500 or so. It's not like they don't have a lot of room for manouvre.
I think the trouble AMD will have is that if for whatever reason Intel are still better in some way (ie. faster clock for clock or simply overclock better) then most people at the high end will continue to purchase Intel, those who support AMD will talk about Zen R7 being the better value choice (cheaper motherboards etc) but won't put their money with their mouth is because they generally don't spend that much.
I think the 4-6 core Zen will be what decides if it is a success or not, they'll be more affordable to the masses and probably overclock better than the 8 core.
It's all specualtion at this point though because Zen performance, price, overclocking is all still up in the air.
I think the trouble AMD will have is that if for whatever reason Intel are still better in some way (ie. faster clock for clock or simply overclock better) then most people at the high end will continue to purchase Intel, those who support AMD will talk about Zen R7 being the better value choice (cheaper motherboards etc) but won't put their money with their mouth is because they generally don't spend that much.
I think the 4-6 core Zen will be what decides if it is a success or not, they'll be more affordable to the masses and probably overclock better than the 8 core.
It's all specualtion at this point though because Zen performance, price, overclocking is all still up in the air.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,336
- Location
- Planet Earth
It is cheap - you are the one with the entitlement complex. Its like your mate who thinks a 4C/8T Ryzen with Broadwell level IPC(or close) is too "expensive" at £190,which is a blooming joke.
£499 for an 8C/16T CPU is cheap since there has never been a retail 8C/16T CPU at that price ever.
Basically you,your mate and another bloke here,have proven exactly what I said before:
My viewpoint is AMD is better served not bothering with enthusiasts who are more worried about E-PEEN and branding,so in the end I think they should price the chips reasonably highish if they are decent since none of you will ever put your money where your mouth is and buy any of these AMD chips.
OTH,OEMs will be quite happy to get a decent performing AMD chip for less than an Intel one.
AMD should just concentrate on the Zen APUs instead and push those to desktop instead,and only undercut Intel a small amount for enthusiasts if they have competitive IPC and overall CPU performance.
I would rather they secure more commercial and OEM contracts since it will actually improve the mindshare of the company.
Last edited:
Cheap isn't relative, it's absolute. Why are you making things up as well? Entitlement complex? What the hell are you even talking about?
Just because you don't know the meaning of words doesn't mean I have an entitlement complex. I've got a load of top end Intel CPUs, you're completely and utterly missing the point.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,336
- Location
- Planet Earth
Apparently you don't either and proved it:
So with no moaning you will pay like £1000 for an Intel CPU,but if AMD has something similar it needs to be under £400,ie, Core i7 6700K pricing.
It is an entitlement complex you have there - YOU want it to be under £400 yet at the same time quite happily pay much more for an Intel CPU.
Its the same entitlement as your mate - I said £190 to £230 for a Haswell to Broadwell level IPC 4C/8T Ryzen is acceptable in light of 4C/8T K series pricing of £300 to £320 and that was "too expensive".
Personally I don't need a 8C/16T Ryzen,as 4C/8T is plenty for what I do,but I don't think it will be cheaper than a Core i5 6600K/7600K unless it is meh CPU in single core performance,especially when it will be a salvage part of a chip double the size.
You are quite happily paying "Intel broken prices" yet even if AMD undercuts the equivalent Intel CPU by 50% its not enough for you.
If you hate Intel broken prices then why did you bother buying "top end" Intel CPUs at"broken prices" - you should have put your money where your mouth is and not bothered buying a new CPU since SB.
Its no point complaining about "broken Intel prices" then pay them and magically expect AMD to charge a pittance if they have a comparable CPU in many metrics.
Even my view that a Haswell/Broadwell level IPC 8C/16T Ryzen being £400 to £500 is a bit of that entitlement complex by myself too,but I am basing it on AMD trying to gain marketshare by offering a better value comparison to what Intel has.
Also,unless you are on some other planet,BOTH companies have priced relative to each other for nearly 20 years.
So,at this point AMD might as well not bother if "enthusiasts" think this way - it will a race to the bottom for them.
The only way you are going to get a sub £400 8C/16T Ryzen is if it has SB/IB IPC or AMD is feeling generous. Going from the last 10 years of AMD CPU pricing,I think some of you are going to not like the pricing and are going to still buy Intel at every pricing level anyway.
I am bored arguing with you now.
Last edited: