Intel slash prices

[Davedree]

I originally had a Gigabyte H67N which had more SATA3.0 ports and better onboard sound - it died just out of warranty,and unless I wanted to pay £150+ IIRC,I was only left with two B75 ones and a few H61 motherboards. I am looking at one of the R5 CPUs too and a mini-ITX motherboard at some point this year to replace it,and I do hope the AM4 socket CPUs have a longer socket lifespan than the Intel ones.

Yeah I only have 2x 3.0 ports
I'm sure the Am4 boards will have a long life time (3-4years) as they have the 3rd plane for the Igpu voltage for Bristol ridge/Raven Ridge Apu's.
So as the process gets more refined we could maybe fit in a r7 4ghz with 65w for example.

edit 4ghz base 4.2 turbo @65w or so

 

[Davedree]

The R9 290 was £300 and caned the 770/780 and Titan for not far off a third of the price. GTX 1080 performance for £300 is totally possible.

Amd were stronger back then though and Nvidia didn't have such a strong mid range chip that could provide parity between desktop or laptop and still excel over Amd's top end cards.
I hope so it's be nice to go back to AMD I've been holding out for a while now.

 

[chrcoluk]

for multithreaded stuff intel are now hurting which is good

However until AMD chips are shown to be able to clock to comparable speeds (5ghz for intel 7xxx series) then intel will still hold its market for single core performance.

 

[Davedree]

for multithreaded stuff intel are now hurting which is good

However until AMD chips are shown to be able to clock to comparable speeds (5ghz for intel 7xxx series) then intel will still hold its market for single core performance.

I think that's where the r5 comes in to attack 1151. But then how quickly will Intel react in getting 6core on mainstream ?

 

[=XDC=FluphyBunny]

I think you might have thought wrong.

My thoughts are based on what OC's have said on a number of occasions.

 

[jigger]

My thoughts are based on what OC's have said on a number of occasions.

Amd were stronger back then though and Nvidia didn't have such a strong mid range chip that could provide parity between desktop or laptop and still excel over Amd's top end cards.
I hope so it's be nice to go back to AMD I've been holding out for a while now.

Lets see what Vega offers for £300. I could do with a graphics card upgrade.

 

[Jono8]

Looks like the Core i7 6900K is dropping to $699:

https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/835585680554196992

This would make more sense. The 6900k would hardly sell at all at its current price.

 

[Andrei23]

Not in the market for building a pc right now but if I were I'd be buying AMD!

 

[Perfect_Chaos]

The 5820k was the smart buy..

 

[muon]

I think that's where the r5 comes in to attack 1151. But then how quickly will Intel react in getting 6core on mainstream ?

We don't know if 6C/12T is even possible on 1151.

 

[muon]

Wait I thought CPU prices left no margins for retailers? How can they be reducing them.

Well its still sensible to sell existing more expensive stock at a small loss now rather than a larger loss later on. Especially if an Intel price cut materialises.

 

[humbug]

Looks like the Core i7 6900K is dropping to $699:

https://twitter.com/BitsAndChipsEng/status/835585680554196992

Not anything like enough

The Ryzen 1700X is still $300 less expensive, more power efficient and faster, another $300 off it....

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Not anything like enough

The Ryzen 1700X is still $300 less expensive, more power efficient and faster, another $300 off it....

Don't worry Intel will have compiled a nice list why its worth more money.

 

[drunkenmaster]

for multithreaded stuff intel are now hurting which is good

However until AMD chips are shown to be able to clock to comparable speeds (5ghz for intel 7xxx series) then intel will still hold its market for single core performance.

The problem is, what market is there for single core now, really old games where 4ghz zen is more than enough anyway? Look up benchmarks of recent games, lower clocked Broadwell-e's are consistently beating 7700k. There are few games the 7700k wins despite a 1Ghz clock advantage and those it does it has a tiny advantage. The gap when the 6-8-10 core Broadwell-e beat 7700k is MUCH bigger than the gap when the 7700k wins, and the number of modern games in which the 7700k is now small.

So which market is where single core performance matters? Outside of a few people sticking to 5 year old games to prove a point, single thread performance, within reason, is no longer the key factor. More cores now wins much more often than single thread, be it games, rendering, encoding, just about everything.

Intel want to lose another anti-trust suit? It's not like emails and phone calls are going to stay secret for long.

If you can make 10billion more profit, and be fined 2billion or less, where is the incentive to not do naughty things? Intel had to pay AMD 1.25bil, they are still fighting a slightly bigger fine in the EU, they'll appeal it till the EU settles, by hurting AMD as hard as they did financially they made 10's of billions extra in sales by way of selling worse chips at the time via their dodgy deals with Dell and others, and then the years after when AMD didn't have enough cash to be truly competitive.

It's a legitimate business strategy to do something you will get fined for, if you believe the money to be made significantly outweighs the fine you will receive.

 

[humbug]

Don't worry Intel will have compiled a nice list why its worth more money.

Quad channel IMC.
















oh wait despite this RyZen is faster

 

[sam77]

=XDC=FluphyBunny said: ↑
Wait I thought CPU prices left no margins for retailers? How can they be reducing them.

I think you might have thought wrong.

hahaha yet another example of why you simply cannot trust anything anybody here says on this site I said retailers would have to accept less in the wake of Brexit if they wanted the same volume of sales, I got attacked with people saying retailers barely marked up at all. Well, now we can see they probably make at least £50-200 per cpu sale since I doubt retailers would be happy selling at a loss. It's just not in their vocabulary. Perhaps they would go that far after new competitive cpus have actually hit, but not before...

 

[vanillaface]

Mildly offensive, tbh.

Who cares if something is offensive.

The line about Jews is a joke. It's form 4chan.

 

[Armageus]

We don't know if 6C/12T is even possible on 1151.

Anything is possible if we see an EE (emergency edition) chip.

 

[Cooper]

Anything is possible if we see Intel CEO's bonus payments threatened.

Fixed

 

[h4rm0ny]

See a bit of competition is a good thing - the better Ryzen is, the better it is for people not only buying AMD CPUs but Intel CPUs as well.

Very true. But I hope people are smart enough to not just suddenly switch to Intel for short-term thinking. People need to actually buy AMD chips. And I really hope they do.

Intel want to lose another anti-trust suit? It's not like emails and phone calls are going to stay secret for long.

If anyone can get hold of that and leak it here, I'd love to see what was in it. I have read their "fact" sheet for retailers with its gems about "I've heard this chip has more cores, does that mean it's better? Reply - no, not all cores are equal..." and so forth.

Also, what will really be crucial is to see if AMD can rattle Intel as much in the server market. If they can beat Intel there, then it's going to be fantastic.