Intel manipulates stock levels to gouge Skylake

Orangey · 24 Sep 2015 at 21:12

http://fudzilla.net/news/processors/38852-intel-slowed-pc-sales-to-increase-skylake-s-price

A recent study shows that the slump in PC sales in the first half was deliberately made to help Skylake sell better since August. Initially analysts believed that sales of the Skylake are hindered by existing stocks of previous Haswells, but it turns out this was untrue.

Tech Trader Daily has found that Intel significantly reduced shipments of its central processing units in the first half of the year, to leave PC maker inventories drained and empty.

Intel is making piles from this. PC makers mainly build their systems on Skylakes and since the supply is low the price is high. Intel does not have to discount to shift the technology, the suppliers have to buy it at any price. Particularly as Intel's only real x86 market, AMD, is having a bit of a snooze.

Diabolical. :mad:

d_brennen · 24 Sep 2015 at 21:14

Shock as big business exorcises inventory control

e: They have to pay for all the chips they give away somehow...

Jumper118 · 24 Sep 2015 at 21:24

dont see the problem. you would have to be mad to buy the 6700K anyway. i will wait for all the locked cpu's and all the z170 motherboards to come out before deciding to buy them anyway. its like buying a game on day 1, you should expect it to be broken and buggy and be half price on steam two weeks after you bought it!

mmj_uk · 25 Sep 2015 at 08:52

Skylake stock has still been about 1000 times better than AMD Fury.

neiljwd · 25 Sep 2015 at 10:37

Availability of the i7 is pretty scant as well, so there tactic has worked as it must be selling like hot cakes.

Business is Business.

humbug · 25 Sep 2015 at 12:44

Orangey said:
http://fudzilla.net/news/processors/38852-intel-slowed-pc-sales-to-increase-skylake-s-price

Diabolical.

This is why we need a strong AMD in the market. £330 for a mainstream 8 thread i7 thats a fraction faster than the older and already over priced £290 i7

mmj_uk · 25 Sep 2015 at 16:10

Everyone should be buying a 5820K system now instead of mainstream anyway, I'd only entertain Skylake if I wanted SFF or to use the iGPU.

Dave2150 · 25 Sep 2015 at 16:27

mmj_uk said:
Everyone should be buying a 5820K system now instead of mainstream anyway, I'd only entertain Skylake if I wanted SFF or to use the iGPU.

That's like saying everyone should buy a 4 wheel drive.......

As always when it comes to PC components, it completely depends on what your going to use it for.

neiljwd · 25 Sep 2015 at 16:41

Yeah, I'm not convinced developers (gaming) will program for multicore any better with in the next few years. I prefer Skylake for stronger single core performance.

Slam62 · 25 Sep 2015 at 16:44

What, you expect them to produce millions of CPUs that they are going to market as last gen..?

RavenXXX2 · 25 Sep 2015 at 17:00

Hate Intel, shame there is no competition if there was I would drop them quicker than you can say overpriced.

bru · 27 Sep 2015 at 15:20

So a company reduces the number of shipments of a product it is about to replace with a newer product.

And this is news.

ukxenon · 27 Sep 2015 at 23:51

nearly all companies do this

Dave2150 · 28 Sep 2015 at 00:09

neiljwd said:
Yeah, I'm not convinced developers (gaming) will program for multicore any better with in the next few years. I prefer Skylake for stronger single core performance.

Yeap, no developer is going to spend time developing code for 6 core CPU's, when the mainstream have dual cores and quad cores at the maximum. It would be spending time for the 1% that own a 6 core.

Orangey · 28 Sep 2015 at 01:49

There's games out now that don't even run on dual cores. Like it or not we're now in a world where 4 is the minimum. Anyone teaching parallel programming is going to recognise that and it won't take long for the software world to baseline on it.

humbug · 28 Sep 2015 at 02:07

Dave2150 said:
Yeap, no developer is going to spend time developing code for 6 core CPU's, when the mainstream have dual cores and quad cores at the maximum. It would be spending time for the 1% that own a 6 core.

For what? pretty much anything AAA DX11 uses 6 cores and more.

If your talking about Draw Calls its because they have no choice, DX12 will use 6 and its pretty much native.

Dave2150 · 28 Sep 2015 at 04:45

humbug said:
For what? pretty much anything AAA DX11 uses 6 cores and more.

If your talking about Draw Calls its because they have no choice, DX12 will use 6 and its pretty much native.

No games provide any meaningful performance increase from using a hex or octa core at the moment.

A faster clocked/IPC quad core provides more FPS 9 times out of 10, for those using 1-2 GPU's.

Let's see what CPU's a DX12 game prefers, shall we?

I'll await your damage control rant about how this game doesn't count...

andybird123 · 28 Sep 2015 at 09:16

Dave2150 said:
No games provide any meaningful performance increase from using a hex or octa core at the moment.

A faster clocked/IPC quad core provides more FPS 9 times out of 10, for those using 1-2 GPU's.

Let's see what CPU's a DX12 game prefers, shall we?

I'll await your damage control rant about how this game doesn't count...

Do people buy K processors to run them at stock?
I remember people putting forward all the same arguments for dual core over getting a Q6600, but I also remember my Q lasting about 2 years longer than all the dual cores people had bought at the time

it does depend on whether you want dual card and how long you want to keep the system for... as a 6700k is the same price as a 5820k it makes the 6700k look like a poor choice, if you are doing it to save money over X99 then it needs to be at least a 6600k or below to save anything and then you are putting a time limit as well as foregoing the multi card option for later on down the line

if you're building to a budget then that is an entirely different conversation to "I have £300 to spend on a CPU what shall I get"

Dave2150 · 28 Sep 2015 at 16:13

andybird123 said:
Do people buy K processors to run them at stock?
I remember people putting forward all the same arguments for dual core over getting a Q6600, but I also remember my Q lasting about 2 years longer than all the dual cores people had bought at the time

it does depend on whether you want dual card and how long you want to keep the system for... as a 6700k is the same price as a 5820k it makes the 6700k look like a poor choice, if you are doing it to save money over X99 then it needs to be at least a 6600k or below to save anything and then you are putting a time limit as well as foregoing the multi card option for later on down the line

if you're building to a budget then that is an entirely different conversation to "I have £300 to spend on a CPU what shall I get"

The 6700k can support dual GPU just as well as the 5820k. Remember the 5820k cannot run two GPU's with x16 x16 bandwidth - neither can the 6700k - so they are BOTH in the same boat there. Both run X8 X8 lanes for two GPU's.

The 6700k is cheaper than the 5820k on average, of course not at every retailer.

And of course, some buy -K CPU's to run at stock, as they have the highest stock clockspeeds generally. Skylake overclocks quite well - most are able to get 4.6-4.7 on air - which cannot be said for the 5820k.

For someone who is just gaming on 1-2 GPU's, Skylake is superior IMO. For those using their pc for gaming as well as content creation, rendering video, streaming, then a 6 core becomes the best option.

linktoinsanity · 28 Sep 2015 at 16:21

andybird123 said:
Do people buy K processors to run them at stock?

I have an i7 3570K which I do run at stock, mainly because I'm too lazy to play around with the overclock settings...

dave said:
And of course, some buy -K CPU's to run at stock, as they have the highest stock clockspeeds generally.

Yep, this is what attracted me to the K of my CPU, that plus the higher resale value and the "option" to overclock should I want to.