Friday, June 21st 2019
Intel to Cut Prices of its Desktop Processors by 15% in Response to Ryzen 3000
Intel is embattled in the client-segment desktop processor business, with AMD's imminent launch of its 3rd generation Ryzen desktop processors. Intel's 9th generation Core processors may lose their competitiveness to AMD's offerings, and are expected to get relieved by the company's "Ice Lake" desktop processors only in 2020. Until then, Intel will market its processors through price-cuts, promotions, bundles, and focusing on their gaming prowess. The company will refresh its HEDT (high-end desktop) processor lineup some time in Q3-2019. According to Taiwan-based industry observer DigiTimes citing sources in the motherboard industry, Intel's immediate response to 3rd generation Ryzen will be a series of price-cuts to products in its client-segment DIY retail channel.
According to these sources, prices of 9th generation Core processors could be cut by a minimum of 10 percent, and a maximum of 15 percent, varying by SKUs. This could see prices of popular gaming/enthusiast SKUs such as the Core i9-9900K, the i7-9700K, and the i5-9600K, drop by anywhere between $25 to $75. AMD is launching the Ryzen 9 3900X to compete with the i9-9900K, the Ryzen 7 3800X to compete with the i7-9700K, and the Ryzen 5 3600X to take on the i5-9600K. The three SKUs, according to AMD's internal testing, match the Intel chips at gaming, and beat them at content-creation tasks. At the heart of 3rd generation Ryzen processors is AMD's new Zen 2 microarchitecture, which brings significant IPC gains. AMD is also increasing core-counts on its mainstream desktop platform with the introduction of the Ryzen 9 family of 12-core and 16-core processors in the AM4 package.
Source:
DigiTimes
According to these sources, prices of 9th generation Core processors could be cut by a minimum of 10 percent, and a maximum of 15 percent, varying by SKUs. This could see prices of popular gaming/enthusiast SKUs such as the Core i9-9900K, the i7-9700K, and the i5-9600K, drop by anywhere between $25 to $75. AMD is launching the Ryzen 9 3900X to compete with the i9-9900K, the Ryzen 7 3800X to compete with the i7-9700K, and the Ryzen 5 3600X to take on the i5-9600K. The three SKUs, according to AMD's internal testing, match the Intel chips at gaming, and beat them at content-creation tasks. At the heart of 3rd generation Ryzen processors is AMD's new Zen 2 microarchitecture, which brings significant IPC gains. AMD is also increasing core-counts on its mainstream desktop platform with the introduction of the Ryzen 9 family of 12-core and 16-core processors in the AM4 package.
176 Comments on Intel to Cut Prices of its Desktop Processors by 15% in Response to Ryzen 3000
in general this is true,in gaming 8700k beats 2700x consistently,just look at those differences in minimums in 1080p testing.
2700x isn't that great ecept for rendering
pclab.pl/zdjecia/artykuly/mbrzostek/2018/cfl_r/vs/9600k_2700x_oc.svg
So what you're saying is, you're allergic to yourself then?Yuppers.
You seem to have missed the context on this one. Manu's point was well within the realm of reality and possibility. Your misunderstanding and overreaction was the problem not his statement.
By the way, you're on the shortlist for ignore pretty quickly this way. YOU, speaking of context... you drunk?
Good entertainment nonetheless. But it has gone on far too long already now.
Understand the context yet? Manu's statement was valid and you two are over-reacting.Agreed on both points. Let's let it go.
The fact that you started rambling about stock is completely out of context here. But in your tiny mind, anything YOU say is somehow relevant, regardless of the discussion you're getting into. And then you act all arrogant about it as if the rest was talking out of their ass.
Horrible, horrible behavior.You had that chance a page ago but decided to start 'moderating' - and not even just me, but other posts too. Disgusting.
What's next, you're going to tell us you were joking and that this was super obvious 'how could we miss that'? You've done it before. Blegh.
Here's what you should do: reflect on this conversation and indeed: do not try to get the last word. The only apt response here is mea culpa.
I don't know why you're trying to be deliberately vague.
I'm out as the two of you seem to be letting your pride react instead of using critical, rational thinking.
if SL can't get their 9700k's to run 4.9 at 1.20-1.26v.,or those that do are later what becomes their top 10% 5.2ghz bins,then the majority won't.You get it now?
But i want to see real Benchmark results. With all the surrounding facts listed. Especially how the 9900k does compared to the 8 core Zen 2. But with the power draw shown over time.
The 9900k i run draws roughly 180W with my computational load and all settings at Standard in the Bios.
I want to know what the official intel spec is, on how long the CPU is allowed to run at a specific power draw. Same from AMD and then compare them under the specified conditions. It should be done on at least 10 CPUs of each model. More would be even better. Then we have a good average. After that you can go with overclocking and power draw shown.
You have to get the right settings in the Bios for each Board you use, since the standard settings ignore the intel specs regarding power draw.
All this seems to be an awful lot of work. I really hope someone or even a group has the resources for that.
After such a broad benchmark run we should have some idea what variances are there at the silicon quality regarding stock performance within the specs, and what to expect from overclocking.
At 1080p 144hz ONLY then intel is king lower Hz it doesn't matter for 98% If people.
At 1440p it hardly matters.
At 4k60hz an Fx8350 will keep up with a 9900K never mind ryzen, CPU matters little Atm.
The cuts are a start.
in the video at 1440p you can already see ryzen is a few fps slower consistently,and that's stock 1080Ti with ultra preset.For a person who runs 1440p with an oc'd 1080ti and performance optimized settings the 1080p result is much more relevant.
please accept that your subjective opinion is not equal to peformance numbers.
the bigger question that "what game" is what testing place in that game.
frankly I found my 4790k inadequate for gtx 1080 at 1440p in some scenarios.
Even tho the 4790k is limited in some cases, it still hold up pretty well for gaming.
You can also take a look at my i9 9900k thread, i would be happy about any ideas.
I am all for AMD hitting back and hitting back hard, but I'll believe the "RIP Intel" sentiment when I see it.