1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. 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.

    Dismiss Notice

Core 9000 series

Discussion in 'CPUs' started by orbitalwalsh, 3 Jul 2018.

  1. d1am0nd g33z3r


    Joined: 14 Jul 2006

    Posts: 93

    Location: Edinburgh

    Page 26 of the doc you link covers it. Turns off four cores on a 2700X and "constrains memory access". Easy to miss from Intel's doc, good spot from DM and makes the whole thing even shoddier than it was before, if that's even possible.


    Joined: 9 Nov 2009

    Posts: 21,780

    Location: Planet Earth

    TBH,even if the pound does get weaker next year and prices increase,if I was spending £600 now,and the computer was functional I would rather wait another year or two and get a 7NM Ryzen or 10NM Intel CPU.
  3. subbytna


    Joined: 22 Oct 2008

    Posts: 10,288

    Location: Belfast

    seconds please :D
  4. subbytna


    Joined: 22 Oct 2008

    Posts: 10,288

    Location: Belfast

    Good spot that squire.

    Intel nepotism
  5. Nickolp1974


    Joined: 15 May 2012

    Posts: 5,393

    Location: Louth, lincs

    So a 8700K can be had for £352 Inc taxes and delivery, nearly £120 cheaper than the main UK sites, WTF why is that??? Anyone here care to comment? @Gibbo
  6. Jim Jervis


    Joined: 23 Jun 2018

    Posts: 164

    Location: Leicester

    Fair enough, but top end PC components are getting silly priced now, just me having a rant because I can't afford the best of the best any more where as before I could choose whether to have it or not.
  7. Robert896r1

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 28 Sep 2018

    Posts: 1,170

    The 9900k pricing is a reflection of the 8700k pricing. No way are they going to reduce their ASP (Average Selling Price) and cannibalize into the margins. Not only would they have to reduce t he 9900k pricing but that also means resetting pricing all the way down the chain.

    Instead the handful of retailers are better off having a pricing truce.
  8. razorpakk

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 2 Feb 2014

    Posts: 1,374

    Location: London

    If only they had any hope to be readily available I might even think to save up for it - It's overpriced by a good 175£, but in the grand scheme of things, we're still talking about the top performance which will stay up there for at least 3 more years (talking about gaming).

    Still a smarter investment than a 2080, upcoming 7nm and all.
  9. SiDeards73


    Joined: 19 Feb 2011

    Posts: 5,844

    Woahh there mate, wait for proper benchmarks first before making that statement :)
  10. razorpakk

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 2 Feb 2014

    Posts: 1,374

    Location: London

    Well I'm assuming it's a 8700k with two extra cores and soldiered IHS, how bad could it be? :p

    But it doesn't matter, just like Ray Tracing, it doesn't really exist until is easily available.
  11. signal11th


    Joined: 13 Mar 2009

    Posts: 694

    just like to say on a certain tree laden website 8600k are now 242 and the 8086 is actually 393 cheaper than the 8700k..
  12. Journey


    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 10,330

    Location: West Midlands

    I sort of know where you are coming from, but the opposite end, having free access to most computery type things changes my value perspective, and I look on perplexed as people feel the need try and justify £250 for 16GB RAM when spending £130 will do the job to 97% of the same performance, or buying an 8700K for £400+, when getting an R5 2600 for £150 would net them a similar experience in most use cases. Also a lot of these folk simply buy to play games, they are not 'hobbyists' who mod cases, and overclock everything to within an inch of it's life, they just seem to get sucked along by the few hardware snobs, and pretty new shiny rather than sitting thinking about it. One of the biggest jokes has to be the stupid "Roll of Honour" threads in the GPU forums, I mean Jebus WHAT, WHAT WHAT!!! you bought a computer component big ******* whoop why do we need a photo of it? It just perpetuates the competitive nature that some forums bring out, and makes people waste money unnecessarily. That's my 2p on the matter, people can obviously do what they like and I don't expect most people to agree with me. :)
  13. Jamie Archer


    Joined: 29 Oct 2017

    Posts: 232

    Location: Lincolnshire

    Well I have to say, as much as I want one of these 9900ks, I felt 500 was the price it was going to be with all the leaks and rumours of it being well under 500 dollars. But 600!!! Just wow, I may really want one but there's a point where the prices here are so suspicious that you'd only feel like a mug to pay them (unless of course you ate loaded). I'm disgusted at the prices, how can a mainstream i5 now be more than what was last gens top of the range i7 was recently going for?

    I'm going to be waiting till new year and I'm not buying one until I see a retail sealed 9900k for 500 or less.

    This is an absolute joke, have they honestly forgotten there is some relevant competition of late? I mean come on, it may not be the best gamer or be the fastest per core or even have the best ipc but its small margins when you look at the price, I mean double the price of 2700x? !!!!....sure, pay a premium for the best, but double for this small percentage?

    500 and less dollars all over the world yet 600 GBP in UK?...looks like there needs to be a serious trading investigation before this gets out of hand.
  14. RavenXXX2


    Joined: 6 Oct 2007

    Posts: 19,120

    Location: North West

    AMD will be loving Intel's pricing.
  15. drunkenmaster


    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 33,188

    Yup gaming wise the difference between even a 5 year old cpu and current best of the best is exceptionally small when it comes to actual fps at gpu limited framerates. I'm still on my 5820k which I got for fairly cheap, £210 or something iirc a few years back. I also only upgraded from the 2500k because the motherboard was basically dying and spending £80+ on a new motherboard for a dead platform felt like a terrible investment.

    Despite really wanting to go back to Ryzen I put it off because I think it will have the best power/efficiency/performance/core count increase and value of likely all Zen chips and anything Intel will have any time soon. I'm hoping for maybe a 10-12 core not highest chip that can easily be overclocked to match the higher chips in clock speed and will last for multiple years with ease for gaming.

    You don't have to get the most expensive chip nor upgrade every year to have a great gaming computer. Upgrading gpu will gain you drastically more performance than upgrading the cpu and even then the speed with which gpus are being updated with significantly more performance has dropped massively. Midrange prices are still pretty decent. I've been using a rx480 at 1440p for a couple years and frankly as long as you're smart with settings I've had no problems getting 70+ fps in most games most of the time. That ultra high shadow that you actually can't notice at all while playing and only while standing still, drop it one setting and gain 5fps. Motion blur and DoF, awful effects that at best you only notice when you don't want to, remove them and usually gain 5-10%.

    I actually just splashed out for my birthday and got a Vega 64. Which for me is too expensive but I was going to get Assassin's creed anyway so effectively £410. I think it's overpriced still and usually without the mining crap I'd have got one for that kind of price 2-3 months after launch and got 2 years of heavy usage out of it. This time around a replacement is probably not that far away and reselling for decent value with mining cards flooding second hand will be worse value.

    Still, £400 every few years and £300 on a cpu and mobo every 4-5 years isn't expensive way to game.

    I had a PS4 bought for me by family, but after 2-3 years it became obnoxiously loud so I ended up buying a PS4 pro on a decent deal with a couple games I wanted. So even the console game in effect is costing £300 every few years anyway.

    Gaming on PC is cheap, becoming an enthusiast who focuses on non real world benchmarking and convinces themselves to spend 3 times as much for no real world gain is expensive.
  16. Emlyn_Dewar


    Joined: 15 Oct 2003

    Posts: 13,178

    Location: Chengdu

    I'm more excited by the Z390 boards, than the comically priced CPUs Intel are peddling just now.
    I guess their supply issues wont help with the price, but it's just insane.
  17. Panos


    Joined: 22 Nov 2009

    Posts: 13,252

    Location: Under the hot sun.

    Xbone X supports 2560x1440, 120hz with Freesync 2 also. And goes for 400 atm with 4 games.
  18. Sargatanas2511


    Joined: 26 Oct 2013

    Posts: 3,891

    Location: Scotland

    Supports sure, but how many games can it actually play at 1440p 120Hz? I mean technically the RX580 Supports 4k 144Hz.
  19. icehot666


    Joined: 12 Feb 2007

    Posts: 372

    Location: Bishops Waltham

    wow i'm even seeing Americans saying that the $488 MSRP price is too much, that's nothing compared to the price here haha
  20. ToonarmY87


    Joined: 26 Nov 2017

    Posts: 116

    2700x it is then with a potential new zen upgrade on the horizon. Intel have made this decision easy.