Intel executives are idiots. All they need to do is nothing. Price fairly, still above AMD and take in the sales. No dirty tricks no bad PR and the CPU market would all theirs. There is obviously a very corrosive culture at the company. I can't see it ending well as we're living in a much more transparent, connected world now.
-
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.
PC Games Intel performance testing fake.
- Thread starter humbug
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
Problem is they have huge overheads to cover, they probably can't afford financially to lower prices mutch at the moment
I think there is probably some truth in this, they are a company whose investors expect to see Intel's balance books swelling relentlessly ever fatter and fatter, they are loosing oodles of retail sales to AMD at the moment and they can't have that show in those balance books, it makes investors wobble, plus with AMD selling healthy numbers of CPU's again they get stronger and stronger, Intel wont like that iether.
True. This could be a sign of things to come for large Western corporations. Many are huge now and very unwieldy and slow to react. Maybe not in Intel's case but I can see some more high profile casualties in the next decade.
I think the future of the PC platform is where AMD is headed, affordable, good enough performance with the emphasis on affordable!
+1 ^^^^
Soldato
+1
Compared to 9900K even the 2920X seems affordable. Tbh if there is no price gouging here, a 2920X would cost £600 when it comes out.
Alternative, consider that current 9900K in UK costs $784 and the 2920X MSRP is $649!!!!! Madness. Thats the cost of difference of buying quad channel ram over dual channel!!!!
And there is always the X399M Taichi for £276 (great board according to 8Pakc) or the MSI Plus SLI for £275.
And more than 16 PCI lanes the 9900K has!!!!!
Something overlooked when compared to Ryzen who has 24 pci-e lanes.
Exactly why I decided to go Threadripper. Initially a cheap £264 1900X then drop in a 7nm chip later. Motherboards no more and often less than high end Z390 with a lot more options including 3 X M.2 straight off the CPU and NVME raid. For high res gaming it's not a handicap either.
Without AMD in the game there's no way I could afford the Intel equivalent.
I could do it but it would be with a 1950x and im not sure I can turn enough cores off, I could however give a decent idea on cpu scaling as the cores drop off. If doing it on a 1950x at 4.1 is good enough ill run it a tad later
I think this might be further thrown off mind in that my machine is on quad channel so yea perhaps somebody with a 2700x can run it. I find it all very odd that you would put out results on pre order that can be so easily picked apart.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
I could do it but it would be with a 1950x and im not sure I can turn enough cores off, I could however give a decent idea on cpu scaling as the cores drop off. If doing it on a 1950x at 4.1 is good enough ill run it a tad later
I think this might be further thrown off mind in that my machine is on quad channel so yea perhaps somebody with a 2700x can run it. I find it all very odd that you would put out results on pre order that can be so easily picked apart.
Desperation, detachment from your target audience, arrogance, incompetence...
Pick one
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Nov 2017
- Posts
- 116
Greed
Soldato
Yep, you could well be right. In Intel's case on this occasion though, it was a deliberate act that had obviously been planned. As the company that ran the "tests" is a well known Intel partner. I really don't see how Intel thought they would get away with this without being called out on it and can only put it down to completely incompetent management. Corporations the size of Intel are slow to react and in Intel's case just lazy, which is the reason for the panic release of the 9900K in the first place because it is the only answer they have to the 2700X (lack of innovation themselves). After this complete corporate fiasco we have witnessed during the course of the last day or so, it has become even clearer to me that Intel is not in a good place to answer the release of Ryzen 2 next year and they know it.
Soldato
Then AMD will start over charging and stagnating. It's what happens when competition dries up.
Parts used to be lot more affordable five years ago before DRAM cartel and lack of GPU competition.
Intel would have to fall awfully lot for AMD to be able to afford stagnating tech development and decrease in performance per price.
Not to mention of needing to overcome mindshare issue even if surpassing Intel in most performance measures.
Anyway with modular design AMD is certainly going to have healthy profitability once server market share has moved to correspond technological situation.
Did you see the huge disclaimer mentioned on the GN video? Exactly the sort of thing your lawyers would advise if you're putting out really dodgy results hoping the low attention span gamer generation would lap it up. Unfortunately for them they forgot the kids can't afford £600 CPU's and this older more informed audience are going to see right through it.
They make some really good hardware, Intel don't need to stoop to this kind of nonsense to sell products. They need a new CEO and a clear out of their senior management.
Soldato
Yes, i did see the disclaimer. The very fact it is there proves 100% that Intel take ownership of the data they published, which of course is fatally flawed on all levels. Agree as well, the ENTIRE senior management at Intel needs to go and needs to go as fast as possible.
Don't see the problem too much, they tested games in game mode and results come out rubbish because that is meant for machines with more cores than the 2700x, that's AMDs fault for making things too complex, an average user can make the same mistake without knowledge of platform.
Why wouldn't you put a software configurable chip in game mode when testing games? I'm sure the TR results would also not be in local mode either as that is not the default which would lead to poorer TR results in games also.
Why wouldn't you put a software configurable chip in game mode when testing games? I'm sure the TR results would also not be in local mode either as that is not the default which would lead to poorer TR results in games also.
Last edited:
Soldato
If the 9900K was reasonably priced (~£400) a healthy +30% over competition prices, reflecting even the meager +2% at most better performance on gaming at 2560x1440 & 3440x1440, then true, it could have been selling like hotcakes and I would have bought even myself one for benchmarks, as I have board monoblock etc already.
But at $500 or even worse £600, is unreasonably priced, directly insulting everyone not only as consumers but intelligent human beings.
Soldato
Yeah sure is AMD's fault. Whole company earning millions from Intel to produce research results, are naive simpletons that they do not know what "game mode" does on Ryzen CPUs.
The warnings then you select the option, and the UI that notifies you that your CPU is castrated, don't exist either yes?