What's up with CPU prices?

[Akagi]

Not every PC user is a gamer yknow. The FX-8 demolishes the 3570K for many multi-threaded applications.

If I were to build a video editing/encoding machine or a machine for some other kind of productivity, I would go straight for the FX-8 if the i7 was out of the question.

 

[humbug]

because its true

intel dont need to drop price of a i3570k because it beats what it needs to which is basically all amd cpus most of the time.

it wont drop much until the next revision is out haswell then it will be eol and probably go up.

i3570k is the gamers chip of now just like the i2500k was. so they aint going no where price wise.

Thats just it, its not true at all.
The 2500K was £170, the 3570K was £180, it is now £190.

You and those like you are exactly the reason they are so expensive, "intel dont need to drop price" here's the thing. I hope the new i5 K costs over £200 and the i7 over £300... or more.

The FX chips are more than good enougth, encoding, renduring... is at least as good.... sometimes better.
For normal GPU's like GTX 670/80 and HD 78-- / 79-- on mainstream games its also just as good. so those who are smart can save themselves a small fortune vs Intel rigs.

As for the rest, well, have fun paying through the nose for the same thing.

So you think they are well priced? Good luck to you....

 

[Akagi]

I paid £159 for my 2500K in 2011. I think that was rather fair back then. £190 for a CPU which is only marginally better at stock clocks two years later is ridiculous.

I say that, and yet I would pay it. Am I stupid? Probably. But I am willing to accept that

 

[ubersonic]

Not every PC user is a gamer yknow. The FX-8 demolishes the 3570K for many multi-threaded applications.

If I were to build a video editing/encoding machine or a machine for some other kind of productivity, I would go straight for the FX-8 if the i7 was out of the question.

He said the 3570K beats the FX-8 most of the time not all of the time, of course if your going specifically for a "video editing/encoding machine or a machine for some other kind of productivity" its better to get an FX if you can't afford an i7/Xeon, but for most of the people most of the time the 3570K is a better choice than the FX-8.

 

[Martini1991]

It's almost like we have choice of vendor when we want the best gaming performance, except we don't.

 

[humbug]

It's almost like we have choice of vendor when we want the best gaming performance, except we don't.

You only need Intel for gaming if your running the best and most expensive GPU's.

Upper and upper mid range GPU's don't get bottle necked by AMD GPU's unless you play nothing but Arma 2 and Planet side 2, i which case Intel also bottle neck, all be it by a few less FPS.

If you play Crysis 3, BF3, Tombraider..... and all those sort of games on a GTX 670 / 7950 the FX CPU's are just as good.
Spend the difference on an SSD.

Thats what almost all reviewers don't tell you.

 

[Martini1991]

I only run a single 7970, but I wouldn't want to run it on an FX8, but that's just me.
It's also more than just Arma 2 and planetside 2.
There's tons of situations I want more core for core performance than what I already have.

I mean Shogun 2, I can hammer my CPU easily, and tons of other games too.

End of the day, there's no alternative to wanting the best when it comes to CPU's, good enough isn't adequate in many peoples opinions. If I wanted good enough, I'd be running a 60HZ 1680x1050 monitor with onboard sound and crappy speakers.

But if I was a mid range kind of guy, I'd have no issues running an FX6300 (As I recommend it a lot over the i3 builds) etc, and a lot of the mid range builds I make are mainly AMD.

 

[gronf]

I hope the new i5 K costs over £200 and the i7 over £300... or more.

Ironically vindictive?

I'm an Intel buyer and know their CPUs currently are best for me, despite the prices residing next to the too high district and not being very fond of their business practices in general. And that's why I do want AMD to come storming back and start again a proper CPU war. Hell, I want AMD to come out with something so great that it forces Intel to embarrassingly cannibalise their own current lines such as putting out fastest hexacores at the lower end. Just don't see that happening tho...

 

[humbug]

Ironically vindictive?

I'm an Intel buyer and know their CPUs currently are best for me, despite the prices residing next to the too high district and not being very fond of their business practices in general. And that's why I do want AMD to come storming back and start again a proper CPU war. Hell, I want AMD to come out with something so great that it forces Intel to embarrassingly cannibalise their own current lines such as putting out fastest hexacores at the lower end. Just don't see that happening tho...

No one wants Intel or AMD to dominate the CPU market, apart from a few trolling fanboys with more money than sense.

The problem is to many people already argue that under no circumstance are AMD an option, which is blatantly wrong.

And with that Intel do dominate the market, for no reason other than so called hardware enthusiasts being seriously misinformed by reviewers dependent on revenue from hardware makers and people with an infant "my football team is better than your football team" mentality.

As a result Intel CPU's are way over priced and will be for as long as the above market their CPU's so effectively for them at those prices.

The 4570K will be more expensive, i would not be surprised to see it at £230 with the 4770K way over £300, because Intel know they have a free army selling their CPU's for them at that price.

 

[Martini1991]

Intels 2500K pricing was kosher till the FX8150 launched.
3570K pricing has been kosher till a few months, I mean it's been 150 pound only a few months ago.

I think Intel have some messed up pricing, not necessarily that the 3570k is overpriced (At least at normal pricing, not this inflated BS), more that their other i5's are, they need a 100 pound locked i5.
Although it's hard to gauge if it's overpriced, it's not as if there's another CPU that offers the exact same performance at a lower price.

I think the 3770K's overpriced.

4770K is pegged at about ~300 quid which is ridiculous.
The 3770K's 245 now.

 

[d_brennen]

Desktop CPU sales are dropping like a stone, it's not hard to imagine huge price rises before the last socketed CPU says farewell

I mean, someone has to pay for those fabs, fancy labs, offices, huge numbers of very clever people and an even bigger number of dogsbodys

 

[humbug]

Desktop CPU sales are dropping like a stone, it's not hard to imagine huge price rises before the last socketed CPU says farewell

I mean, someone has to pay for those fabs, fancy labs, offices, huge numbers of very clever people and an even bigger number of dogsbodys

If Intel want to keep their Investors bloated with that supply of new yachts then yes.

Not until they fail to keep up similar levels of revenue will they take the hit and restructure.

As for AMD, because of the problems they have in generating revenue from a market which Intel effectively own they are changing tact and working their way out of this market.
All their R&D is now going on GPU's and APU's for stream gaming and mobile devices.
AMD are dead in a dyeing market, they are re positioning themselves in whats competing with this market and winning, High cluster servers and Game Consoles.

As soon as they have extinguished any sort of dependence on mainstream Desktop CPU's i think they will pull out.
They will turn around to Intel and say "you win, its all yours, enjoy whats left of it"

AMD's first DDR4 Desktop CPU may well be the last we see.

 

[gronf]

No one wants Intel or AMD to dominate the CPU market, apart from a few trolling fanboys with more money than sense.

The problem is to many people already argue that under no circumstance are AMD an option, which is blatantly wrong.

Agreed.

And with that Intel do dominate the market, for no reason other than so called hardware enthusiasts being seriously misinformed by reviewers dependent on revenue from hardware makers and people with an infant "my football team is better than your football team" mentality.

Well, I'm reminded of people arguing the enthusiast market is so small and has only a trickle of influence in general. Maybe Joe is just as likely to buy a computer because the clerk is a fanboy or is pressured by (mis)management to shift certain stock...than Joe is to buy based on genuinely intelligent research. Anyone buying an Intel CPU would contribute to their dominance, but I am not part of that 'misinformed etc.' category and so the "for no other reason" makes as much sense as "everyone thinks that..", which I also don't fit despite otherwise.

As a result Intel CPU's are way over priced and will be for as long as the above market their CPU's so effectively for them at those prices.

The 4570K will be more expensive, i would not be surprised to see it at £230 with the 4770K way over £300, because Intel know they have a free army selling their CPU's for them at that price.

They are high, just not too much from last I bought, which could change of course, as I may be upgrading again relatively soon. As usual, I'll just have to wait and see about Haswell...may find myself switching back to AMD depending on many factors besides price.

 

[Martini1991]

The issue is, Intel are turning a profit and AMD aren't in the CPU desktop market.

 

[humbug]

AMD and Intel should have recognized that this market is going into perpetual decline 2 years ago, instead of fighting eachother they should have worked together to keep it alive.
To keep it relevant in a world that wants to go into cloud streaming, miniature mobile and gaming out of a TV plugin box.

As it is its to late now, they have all but already gone their separate ways, while one has stuck its fingers deep into some of that competing pie.

As a result this market as we know it today, will die.

 

[Martini1991]

The desktop isn't going to disappear over night

 

[humbug]

The desktop isn't going to disappear over night

No, of-course not. its not even going to disappear full stop.

But its not going to take to much longer before we see the level of support and development vanish while it continues to chug along in a very expensive niche thats advancing at a snails pace, if at all.

 

[riskyfrisky]

You only need Intel for gaming if your running the best and most expensive GPU's.

Upper and upper mid range GPU's don't get bottle necked by AMD GPU's unless you play nothing but Arma 2 and Planet side 2, i which case Intel also bottle neck, all be it by a few less FPS.

If you play Crysis 3, BF3, Tombraider..... and all those sort of games on a GTX 670 / 7950 the FX CPU's are just as good.
Spend the difference on an SSD.

Thats what almost all reviewers don't tell you.

You're forgetting the excessive heat that a lot of AMD's processors kick out though, or you don't think it's relevant. I recently built a new rig for a mate and it runs unbelievably cool with a 77w i5 -3330. Great performance and good efficiency at the same time.

I'm not knocking the performance of AMD because it is good, but when their CPUs are still running with a 125w TDP, that has to count against them.

I think another thing though is that people don't care about Intel's prices because it's Intel. They're willing to pay regardless of price. It's like Nvidia graphics cards, great performance but insane prices, and they know people will pay it.

 

[V F]

No, of-course not. its not even going to disappear full stop.

But its not going to take to much longer before we see the level of support and development vanish while it continues to chug along in a very expensive niche thats advancing at a snails pace, if at all.

It reminds me of how the PowerPC Mac's went.

 

[humbug]

You're forgetting the excessive heat that a lot of AMD's processors kick out though, or you don't think it's relevant. I recently built a new rig for a mate and it runs unbelievably cool with a 77w i5 -3330. Great performance and good efficiency at the same time.

I'm not knocking the performance of AMD because it is good, but when their CPUs are still running with a 125w TDP, that has to count against them.

I think another thing though is that people don't care about Intel's prices because it's Intel. They're willing to pay regardless of price. It's like Nvidia graphics cards, great performance but insane prices, and they know people will pay it.

Yes, its less about performance and more about a name, and / or what people tell people to buy.

Nvidia GPU's are a classic example, Excluding Titan's + 30% performance over the 7970 GE, AMD's GPU's are faster and cheaper than Nvidia equivalents, they also have far better game GPU compute, more vRAM and a faster memory bus.
The one place where Nvidia is faster, its also £600+ more expensive.

Yet despite all of this Nvidia continue to sell many more GPU's than AMD.

Competition has little to do with what your getting for your money, its all about brand image and appealing to our baser instinct to want to belong to something larger than ourselves and then fight for it.

Religion!