• 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.

i9 9900k pricing

Drollic said:
The AMD lot just don't seem to grasp things, needlesly ranting about how ryzen offers better value for similar performance. The problem is, that everyone already knows this so there's little need to keep mentioning it. People also know the Intel prices are sky high offering poor value for money in some cases. The issue with a lot of posts aimed at those buying 9 series is that it's not your (the posters) money and you don't know what is/isn't affordable to others.

Just as an example given it's clearly so difficult to grasp, who's getting better deal - the guy who's spent 25% of his monthly wage on Ryzen 2700x, or the guy who's spent 20% of his monthly wage on a 9900k? The point being, nobody knows the finances of anyone else unless they state otherwise so the constant argument of value gets silly.

Like I've already said out of curiosity, I wonder how they apply this logic to other products and wonder what they think. Have they seen the value for money you get with high end limited run Porsches that get flipped compared to one model below that offers 95% the same drive on the road legally I wonder. It's huge money for small gains... and on and on with just about every top end product that's ever existed providing the company selling it has the brand to sell it high. Intel have the brand to do this.
Click to expand...

There's a certain element of Intel "doing a Nvidia" here. Nvidia pushed the price up to stupid amounts (see original first Titan) and people bought it. Nvidia then started rubbing their hands in glee thinking, this lot will buy any card we put out no matter the price. Now look at the prices of the 20** series. It costs that because people bought the original titan "because it was the fastest, best, etc" This has the effect a few generations down the line, of making the 20** series cards stupidly expensive for EVERYONE, not just the upper tier 2080Ti owners, for EVERYONE.

Intel are now doing the same as Nvidia, pushing up the cost of the upper tier CPU's to stupid amounts, to see who will bite, causing other levels of CPU to increase in price. Why? Due to people running off and buying 9900, no matter the cost. This then pushes ALL other CPU's up in cost which affects everyone. Just wait and see what happens to the price of CPU's another few generations ahead....

People can shout all they want about needing it for their own scenario (not aimed at you btw squire, just an observation from someone in their 40's that's been around a long time) but the fact is if people DIDN'T buy these daft priced products as a protest (and bought slightly lesser INTEL (or AMD) cards), then INTEL (and Nvidia) would drop their prices and as a result, lower tier cards and CPU's would drop in price, conversely, that is then beneficial to everyone.
 
Last edited:
Hmm Intel aint pushing the prices up it's the distributors and retailers, yeah it's Intel's fault due to lack of supply but they aint the ones gouging.
 
B1gbeard said:
It should also be pointed out that the 9900k wins by quite a bit at 1440p in some games and in productivity tasks too right?
Click to expand...
At 1440p the gains are minimal when averaged across a number of titles ~5%. There are odd titles, e.g. Civilization VI, which show a difference of around 20 FPS, but then this is at already high rates.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_9700K/14.html

For productivity tasks which are multi-threaded there isn't much in it. Although some encoding and compression tasks favour Intel. Intel does however pull ahead in productivity tasks which are more single-threaded; office apps, web, image editing.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
Hmm Intel aint pushing the prices up it's the distributors and retailers, yeah it's Intel's fault due to lack of supply but they aint the ones gouging.
Click to expand...

Well Intel have created an entirely new upper bracket for no reason other than to charge more for it. The top-tier i7 K always had the top core count and Hyperthreading, and was about £20 more expensive than the previous generation's i7. The i7 8700K was a slightly bigger bump up because of the move to 6 cores, but it was still a logical and "acceptable" price bump for the top i7 for the new generation. Plus there was no changes to the 7/5/3 tier structure just because 6 cores was now a thing for Intel.

Then suddenly, the 9000 series bins off Hyperthreading for an i7, creates a whole new bracket for i9, jumps the cost for the top-end chip by over £100 the previous generation's top chip and shifts the entire pricing structure up a tier accordingly; i5s suddenly cost the same as the previous i7s, i3s are underpowered for i5 money. There is no need for the 9700K to exist, there is no need for "i9" to exist in this market sector. i3 can be quad core with HT, i5 can be hex core without HT, i7 can be octo core with HT, just like it's always been. But no, it's milking the product stack and the customer base even before distribution and retail gouge the hell out of prices.
 
Well happily we have great competition now, come 2019 that competition will really put the hurt on Intel on all fronts. Don't be surprised to see Intel prices drop when their server and oem cow starts dropping sales to AMD with Zen 2 and Epyc. No one needs to buy Intel these days.
 
The price of the 9900k might well be the price the market can bare right now, but that doesnt mean it's the right price, it means enough people are prepared to pay that price to support the level of sales required. Whether that's the right price or not depends on your point of view and whether you think market-baring pricing is correct. I know, that's all pretty obvious, but it needs saying people you guys are arguing different points.


RavenXXX2 said:
Well happily we have great competition now, come 2019 that competition will really put the hurt on Intel on all fronts. Don't be surprised to see Intel prices drop when their server and oem cow starts dropping sales to AMD with Zen 2 and Epyc. No one needs to buy Intel these days.
Click to expand...
I would be equally unsurprised if AMD increased theirs!
 
subbytna said:
People can shout all they want about needing it for their own scenario (not aimed at you btw squire, just an observation from someone in their 40's that's been around a long time) but the fact is if people DIDN'T buy these daft priced products as a protest (and bought slightly lesser INTEL (or AMD) cards), then INTEL (and Nvidia) would drop their prices and as a result, lower tier cards and CPU's would drop in price, conversely, that is then beneficial to everyone.
Click to expand...

Well yes but this particular pastime has the drawback of being attractive to the 18-30yr old demographic with access to credit cards & big credit limits plus a large dose of no self control.

..ergo, ridiculous prices are paid.
 
B1gbeard said:
I'm still boggled by the fact that people can't see why someone would buy the 9900k regardless of the price of it's competitor. It's not like it's any different to other markets. If in any consumer market we all bought the same thing, well, there wouldn't be much of a market. Why are cars that offer the same general performance priced differently, or TV's, washing machines? It's how consumer products have been since the dawn of time and some people seemed to have only just noticed. I wonder how they react to other consumer market pricing as unless you are bang on the money in everything you buy, it's pretty hypocritical.

It should also be pointed out that the 9900k wins by quite a bit at 1440p in some games and in productivity tasks too right?

It's also easy for even a novice to get the right information. Searching Youtube for Intel 9900k you get the reviews giving you the lowdown at the top. If you can find a video telling you the 9900k is the bee's knees at everything then you can also find the sensible reviews.
Click to expand...

It doesn't help to generalise though... when it comes to pricing, you obviously can't compare a CPU to a car or washing machine, but you can compare it to the competition and its predecessors. When you do this, it's clear the pricing is ridiculous. I'm sure more examples of this can be found in other market sectors, but that's besides the point. What are we to do, just shrug our shoulders and say "oh well"?

As pointed out above, there is no significant lead for the 9900K at 1440p, only in a few outlying titles where frame rates are already very high, so those gains wouldn't be noticeable.

You'd be surprised how few people do research properly, despite how easy it is. It's also easy to forget how strong Intel are as a brand. Even my mum knows who they are, and she has to phone me up everytime she wants to attach something to an email because she's forgotten how. AMD can only dream of that kind of recognition. I had to explain to my friend the other day, who was considering a 9900K purchase, that as he games at 4K he won't see any difference over a FAR cheaper CPU. He was sucked in the by the "fastest gaming CPU ever" line, and had come across a few YouTubers raving about it. No he didn't research properly, but he felt he knew enough... and that aforementioned brand power goes a looooong way in that respect. I've also lost count of the number of people I've come across online who seem to think AMD are for poor people... even if many are just trolling, it's clear this attitude does exist out there.
 
Any debate about value should take into account that I've just got TWO free packets of Haribo.

(no idea how many a Ryzen gets you, mind. Probably three)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom