• 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.

Core 9000 series

malachi said:
Ive seen on other sites the 2700x has started to go up, so its already happening on Ryzen CPU's.
Click to expand...

Not surprised, likely ryzen sales have gone up, so the gouging starts, in addition we seen here gibbo's reaction to the intel chips been double the price of amd was to rectify it by upping the price of amd's parts. Instead of reducing the price of intel parts.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
https://www.patreon.com/posts/21950120

Steve retested and confirmed the dodgy intel benches were running the 2700x as a quad core. Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

The thing is tho, AMD were stupid enough to call it gaming mode, intel will just say its logical if they testing AMD, they will use the gaming mode for testing games. AMD opened themselves up to that.

Gaming mode probably should have been labeled "low threaded optimised mode". As I expect it helps in single and dual threaded games.
 
I do not understand the second chip.
9900 8 thread 16 ht
9700 8 thread

Why is the second chip as stock actually slower than the first one?
Surely with no HT, they could manage heat more effectively, and clock it significantly higher?
 
Destination said:
I do not understand the second chip.
9900 8 thread 16 ht
9700 8 thread

Why is the second chip as stock actually slower than the first one?
Surely with no HT, they could manage heat more effectively, and clock it significantly higher?
Click to expand...

I expect 9900k's have better binned cores.
It also could be the cores are equally capable but the extra 100mhz is simply to differentiate the products, you dont want a cheaper product to be faster than the more expensive one.

Usually intel non HTT chips have at least 200mhz difference, and the 8600k I think is 300 or 400mhz slower than the 8700k at stock, so the 9700k is actually very close to the 9900k vs historical levels.
 
chrcoluk said:
There is no special factory for UK retailers, supply issues is the same globally.

Also are you trying to say that they dont even know what they buying the parts for yet?, That to me is not a way to do business, there would be some inclination from intel what purchase cost is else pre orders could not be taken without knowing your own costs.

Sorry its just gouging. There is a way to hide it more effectively which is to at least not gouge to the point that someone could buy from an american retailer and then undercut the UK market using american retailers as wholesalers. I could buy chips from america and sell them for £550 and be making a profit, whilst undercutting the retailers here by £50. Thats just embarrassing.
Click to expand...
I know some people who are doing just that......
 
Just read on overclock.net someone from the UK had their i9-9900k pre-order cancelled on the well known US version of the rain forest site. Not even showing up in search on their website now and says unavailable on the link lol.
 
Prices are a joke. Intel trying to pretend the Ryzen 2700 and 2700X don't exist. The 9900K is not going to be much faster than the 2700X but costs £300 MORE!! Pure madness.
 
What will Intel do...

Admit incompetence
Accuse the company they instructed of incompetence
Say nothing because it was orchestrated to spike AMD sales and create a false impression anyway
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom