Discussion in 'CPUs' started by The Old School Gamer, May 23, 2020.
No problem I was sceptical you hadn't heard of Jeff's Company's behaviour tbh
Used to shop exclusivly for everything here , spent thousands upon thousands over the years. but for the last couple its been exclusivly the rainforest. my forum membership no longer contributes free shipping due to location , ( still mainland ) but postcode doesnt help. so on top of the price hikes they seem to do on everything these days OCUK is no longer viable for me. the return policy and refunds on the RF are litrally unbeatable. They might treat there workers like crap but the customer is always there priority and that for me is just what i want.
Yep, their customer service and refunds policy is outstanding and if they couple that with pricing that's typically £20-50 less it's hard to say no. No one has to work there and I've sent back stuff way out of warranty (because I've barely used it) and they've been happy to honour the spirit rather than the letter of their policy. I also used to buy almost exclusively from OCUK and they aren't struggling (certainly not as much as I have at times) so my money goes where it goes furthest. Lidl have done the same for me several times when I've not had the receipt and it breeds a passionate loyalty and has given me the zealotry of a convert.
A company is only as good as there return policy, and OCuk's has got worse, a lot worse, I see people having problems with it all the time on these forums, one guy sent an MSI X570 ace back to them, couldnt find the thread again on here, where they said they tested it and sent it back to him with no problems, turned out it was the board lol, I brought an ASUS monitor off them years ago, got it home, set it up, it had a thick red line right down the middle of the screen, rang them up, they said id have to RMA it direct with ASUS, thankfully back then ASUS were in Milton Keynes down the road from Gigabyte and they sent a rep over the same day with a replacement for me.
I dont use OCuk for expensive PC parts anymore, just because I know if it turns out to be faulty, im going to have a nightmare of a returns procedure. id rather pay the cost of Prime per month and know im going to get a no questions asks return and refund, hell they even refund me for goods now as soon as I print the label off and drop it at the post office.
I totally get it, it's the way of the future and retailers that don't get with the program are destined to fail. I had a similar problem with an EVGA 1100W G2 PSU which incidentally had a known fault acknowledged by the manufacturer. Had a less than ideal experience as I did with 'bent pins' on a mobo I returned. If it's a choice between a 'no questions asked' situation vs a struggle I know what I want. We can all shop around these days and as you say the Prime costs are minimal and you get to watch quite a bit of extra stuff for free. OCUK have often been good but occasionally not and I've spent at least 10K with them so when one retailer is consistently 110% vs one that's not so much and you're paying a premium for the latter it's a no brainer. I'd prefer not to have to say these things because the forums are fab as is the community.
These get released tomorrow
Thanks for the update .
Hoping these cause the further reduction of the non-XT variants.
I'd be fine with being wrong, but I don't see the prices taking a further drop due to the XT launch. Don't forget there was an immediate drop following the announce, and these are not old silicon they are the same 3000 series. The big price drops will happen as 4000 is put onto shelves - I also expect that to arrive at the top first as there has been no 3950x refresh. 16 core 4000 Series by Black Friday with 12 and 8 to follow, thats when I would guess you will see the cheapest 3000 series discounts. AMD have no need to rush out a cpu launch now, they can take their time and slow launch.
What really interests me is that this is a price parity launch from AMD. The 3800XT costs the same as the 10700k (which is basically a 9900K). The 3900XT is about the same as the rrp for the 10900k. Historically AMD have never tried this before unless they had a comfortable lead, so this would seem premature to me unless the silicon can get up to and maintain the printed on the box boost clocks at least as well as Intels cpus do in terms of duration and cores boosted. Even then, does a 4.7ghz on Ryzen match 5.3ghz on Intel? They'd need what a 15% IPC lead for that? The pricing, branding and timing of this launch is giving people expectations, and I hope AMD can deliver but I really don't see where all that IPC comes from to take it to Intel. The 3800XT could maybe match the 10700k, 4.7ghz vs 5.1ghz is a less than 10% IPC advantage required to overtake it, but if you push that up to 5.3ghz its a bit more of a stretch. It's got me interested enough that I'm pretty much in for a 3900XT but am still battling a couple of last minute doubts.
We’ll find out tomorrow.
@MrPils all good reasoning, however don't forget that AMD's GPU division has been quite happy to overprice things irrespective of performance.
Okay, we sort of all suspect that the GPUs with HBM (Fury and Vega) cost a lot do make but they were not launched at competitive price.
Yeah like I said Im skeptical that 4.7ghz of Ryzen cpu power matches 5.3ghz of Intel cpu power. It needs to be really close otherwise those extra two cores won't offer enough to sway most users, especially given the pushback against switching because Intel platforms have been ingrained so deeply over the years as the go to choice for performance computing. If they are overcharging then its the worst possible time to do it - just when they are gaining momentum a bad value entry that gets outperformed will kill that momentum dead. I'm surprised by the whole XT launch as I expected price reductions instead of a refresh, but am sorely tempted by the possibility of well binned chiplets on a 12 core despite my skepticism over the price point. If these turn out to be a fanboy purchase like those stupid anniversary editions ill be ****** at myself for not listening to my own common sense arguments I guess
5.3Ghz across 10 Intel cores is going to be very challenging in a desktop. If its even possible or beneficial is another question.
The biggest drawback of the Intel choice is the lack of upgrade options. Go 3800xt now on pcie4 and drop in an even faster 12/24 in a few years with just a bios update. I'd take a fractionally weaker cpu now that likely runs cooler just for the upgrade path and pcie4 even if it cost the same. Factoring in just the cost of the CPU ignores this advantage.
You're very much right AMD need to keep the pressure on Intel, AMD have gained a lot of mindshare and kudos but that will quickly evaporate if they start nudging the cost of thier products too close to Intel.
AMD keep talking to investors about getting thier margins up to and past 50%, currently at 46% which is very healthy, Intel are at 58%, Nvidia at 65%.
AMD's mission to catch those guys up to look artificially safe is IMO the wrong agenda right now, it's too soon.
The only thing that should be on AMD's mind for the time being is "crush Intel" Intel depend on thier high margins to buy thier way out of being frankly miles behind AMD in performance and tech where it matters, AMD need to keep forcing how much what costs the end user down down down because like that AMD will earn more by selling more while simultaneously taking sales away from Intel while thier margins on those reducing sales fall. That is how you gradually chop a giant down to size, because of their size and the way they operate Intel needs to be hoovering up everything in sight , like a spermwale, AMD have survived on almost nothing for a decade, they don't need a lot to do well.
Absolutely my way of thinking. Intel's only advantages right now are single core speed and widespread adoption. They're pushing that single core advantage as hard as they can with the new Turbo algorithms - with a 10900K for example at out the box settings you get 1 core at 5.1ghz, up to two cores at 5.2ghz in light loads only and all cores at 4.8ghz provided you're within power limits, additionally a single core can go to 5.3ghz and all cores can go to 4.9ghz when temps are below 70c. I mean that's complicated right? Intel's 4.9ghz all core speed can be matched by Zen 2 @ 4.4 to 4.5ghz when the IPC difference is taken into account, but how do you combat those two cores at 5.2ghz and the temp limited 5.3ghz single core? Games still love that. If they're price matching its got to get close to or match Intel's single core performance (and I don't think 4.7ghz will be quite enough) or totally blow them away in multicore. With only a 2 core advantage to the 3900XT they must think they're close to single core to risk a price match. Or like my skeptical side says, Im about to be played for £500 for nothing but a fanboy cash grab.
The 3800XT has more of a chance against the 10700k in my opinion. It has the same power envelope as the 3900XT but 4 cores less. My own 3800x from last year does 4.4ghz all core @ 1.287v, another 200mhz from binning and silicon improvements and you're at 4.6ghz all core. The 10700k also doesnt get TVB, so its limited to 5ghz single core, 5.1ghz dual core in light load and 4.7ghz all core - Im confident AMD can get really close there.
Honestly the 3600XT should've been a 3700(non-x) @ $249.99. That would punt the i5 once and for all, just sneak the improved silicon into the 3600x that wouldve gone into the 3600xt and hold its price and you have all bases covered. I mean obviously they have reasons, probably stock related as much as performance and marketing but it still seems odd to me as I cant find the value in the 3600xt spec.
£279 for a 3800X sounds reasonable.
Yeah but that's only £50 more than the 3600XT and leaves no room for the 3700X. That's what I mean by no room for price drops, surely they wont savage their own newly launched cpu by price dropping higher core count cpus so close to it that are on the same architecture? I could see that price (£279) becoming official for the 3700x with sales and discounts dipping to £250 at times but I can't see how they could pitch the 3800x there (and by proxy the 3700x lower) and still sell any quantity of 3600XT's?
Why do they need to sell the 3600XT in quantities though? Making a 3600XT costs the same as making a 3700X or a 3800X, so if people opt for the 3700X or 3800X over the 3600XT AMD have made more margin on the same part, and keep selling lots of 3600(X's) as well. Also 3800X is already at that price hence the
There's definitely been some great sales prices in the last few weeks, but then I picked up my 3800X for £289.99 last year from OCUK so its not like that's anything new for AMD. Could just end up with some more free games and some good retailer sales but rrp pretty much staying put until Zen 3 is imminent.
£27.90 sounds better though
Separate names with a comma.