• 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

Looking at these prices, I am considering going for the ryzen 3 series.
Its like intel are blind, they are being outsold and outperformed in almost everything but gaming yet the prices are showing that they either don't give a damn or the yields are very poor.
 
lol bios date is so easy to change, take out the battery or use the reset bios function and then you have another date.
 
If 5.3 is achievable on a D15/240 AIO then these are going to be beastly for gaming...
Could be the typical pre-launch fud, but they did apparently improve the process somehow since the rumoured turbo clocks are higher than on the 6 cores within the same TDP envelope.
 
gavinh87 said:
Looking at these prices, I am considering going for the ryzen 3 series.
Its like intel are blind, they are being outsold and outperformed in almost everything but gaming yet the prices are showing that they either don't give a damn or the yields are very poor.
Click to expand...
It really is worrying. After Nvidias pricing fiasco I kind of assumed this COULDNT happen with Intels CPUs because they have clear competition. In many cases outselling them and gaining huge mindshare back. But it's like they are in denial. I hope the prices are reasonable. or, at least, half decent.
 
beany_bot said:
It really is worrying. After Nvidias pricing fiasco I kind of assumed this COULDNT happen with Intels CPUs because they have clear competition. In many cases outselling them and gaining huge mindshare back. But it's like they are in denial. I hope the prices are reasonable. or, at least, half decent.
Click to expand...

Is like history repeating itself. Of course Intel know that most buyers look no further than the name Intel and a high price tag. They assume that guarantees them the best CPU. People still bought Intel back in the Athlon days even those who should have have known better!

It's almost like Intel want to give some space for AMD to operate in. Maybe they know if AMD go under they'll get broken up? Of course it could be greed, higher operating costs or just that they see themselves as the premium product and charge accordingly.

At least we have choice now and I like to see what Intel can bring to the table. If they just stick to competing with technology and not sharp/illegal business practices I think it will be fun to watch them compete. I hope they can bring some much needed competition to Nvidia.
 
smogsy said:
i really want to build a new PC, but its got to be 8 cores or more, part of me wants jump on a 7820x but worried if 9000 does come out...
Click to expand...

If you really want Intel and can afford it the 9900K is a no-brainer. It will be very fast, soldered and should last years. The software will takes ages to take advantage of this rapid core increase. It took forever for software to catch up with 64bit hardware.
 
I will be going from a Z68 board and 2600K to the 9700K.... It feels like the right change to make now and I'm glad I didn't pull the trigger on the 8700k.

From one soldered chip to another I say ;)
 
Troezar said:
Is like history repeating itself. Of course Intel know that most buyers look no further than the name Intel and a high price tag.
Click to expand...
Except 6 of the top 10 selling CPU's on the rainforest now are AMD CPU's. So even Intel know this isn't the case. Ryzen and TR have put frankly enormous dents in Intels actual share and mind share.
For some reason mindshare isn't nearly as strong in the CPU market as it is in the GPU market.
 
beany_bot said:
Except 6 of the top 10 selling CPU's on the rainforest now are AMD CPU's. So even Intel know this isn't the case. Ryzen and TR have put frankly enormous dents in Intels actual share and mind share.
For some reason mindshare isn't nearly as strong in the CPU market as it is in the GPU market.
Click to expand...

You are right I should really have qualified what I said by stating for buyers that have a choice i.e. who can afford either

I expect that most of the AMD buyers are like me and have to buy based on best performance for price. There are a lot more of us than the wealthier ones ;) I will of course be buying AMD next upgrade which is looking to be 7nm Ryzen 8/16 thread which I think will be the sweet spot for the next few years until software catches up.
 
beany_bot said:
Im torn between 9700k, 9900k and waiting for AMD's 7nm chips. Price will be the primary deciding factor as all of them will be excellent.
Click to expand...

I can see why you would be torn. My 2500k has been brilliant. I'd rather support AMD but Intel 9 series will be very good I think. I expect price will push me into the AMD camp as £300 is my max budget for a CPU.
 
If an Intel 9900K build costs £1700 but outperforms the AMD 2700x build at £1400 by a significant margin, which is the most cost effective? Use total system costs for comparison, not the cpu alone.

On the other hand, upgrade-ability is a big factor. The 9900K is end of line, while AM4 should top out with a 12c/24t part at similar single-core performance to the 9900K.
 
sadbuttrue said:
If an Intel 9900K build costs £1700 but outperforms the AMD 2700x build at £1400 by a significant margin, which is the most cost effective? Use total system costs for comparison, not the cpu alone.

On the other hand, upgrade-ability is a big factor. The 9900K is end of line, while AM4 should top out with a 12c/24t part at similar single-core performance to the 9900K.
Click to expand...

I usually take the (nominal) £300 saving over the extra performance if there's less than 10-15% in it. Upgrade path for us long time users is definitely a plus. That said I never went i7 add they held their price too well for an old CPU!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom