AMD Computex 2019 Lisa Su CEO Keynote: Live Blog

[TheGuruStud]

Remember that is amd is on the attack here, late in the game, not intel and its price, amd is trying to price its price based on the competition had for some months. Blame amd not intel.



As per my previous post, amd set that price now, intel had its price for a long time. Like I said before, Intel will set the 9700k much lower as amd launches the 3700x and then you trolls will say, intel was not fair hehe and amd will not move the price and you trolls will cry about it.

This is wccftech level shilling. Very poor quality. Try with a new account, please.

 

[Metroid]

Frankly it's the buyers that need to be blamed, many of them want AMD to lower prices just so they can get cheaper Intel or Nvidia products. We've seen it time & again, AMD is not a charity!

Oh yeah, I'm happy that you realize amd is not for charity work, as i said before intel will lower 9700k a lot to look much more attractive and amd will have nothing to compare the 3700x at $329 hehe

 

[ShurikN]

Like I said in the other thread, Intel doesn't lower prices. Call it ego or whatever but they won't do so & frankly don't need to, considering they still have the OC headroom.

Of course, it's their decision. But AMD was already taking away market share with Ryzen 2000 against a Intel 9000 and 8000 series. Do you think it will not happen with 3000 as well. Especially now that the margin has decreased. So they either lower prices or lose even more.

 

[Metroid]

This is wccftech level shilling. Very poor quality. Try with a new account, please.

I see a pretty good debate, sorry i disappointed you.

 

[R0H1T]

You wanna bet on Intel lowering their price? Be my guest, they'll just kill the 9700k instead & replace it with a higher tier/clocked SKU.

Of course, it's their decision. But AMD was already taking away market share with Ryzen 2000 against a Intel 9000 and 8000 series. Do you think it will not happen with 3000 as well. Especially now that the margin has decreased. So they either lower prices or lose even more.

DIY market doesn't even come close to the OEM+notebook sales Intel slurps. The thing is they make insane margins on many of these chips, so while they might lower the prices frankly IMO they'll continue with the higher margins instead.

 

[TheLostSwede]

What stands out to me is the wattage difference from 3700x to 3800x, 65W to 105W for only 300Mhz more base clock
Is this just where the power creep sets in (3.5GHz) and it becomes less cost effective to clock up, or is there something else behind the wattage increase? (better turbos, etc)

3700x looks like a low wattage power house for gamers

Or it's possible this is because they put in enough real TDP overclocking headroom?
I guess we'll see when the reviews are out.

 

[Metroid]

You wanna bet on Intel lowering their price? Be my guest, they'll just kill the 9700k instead & replace it with a higher tier/clocked SKU.

Intel is almost done with smt, too many flaws with it, mitigation after mitigation. 9700k might be the start of an only real core cpus but at same time amd is full force with smt. Intel can lower prices, their margins are much much higher than amd. 9900k is fail in my book.

 

[Wavetrex]

My guess is that anyone who wanted an 9700K or 9900K already got one.
Everyone else was just waiting to see what AMD has to offer, and it's pretty clear by now that in a month and a bit their offer will be better in all metrics - price, performance, power.

Zen+ is only 5-7% lower IPC than Coffee Lake, and with 15% improvement Zen 2 will be 8-10% faster.
4.6Ghz + 10% = "5.06" ... so Intel's "5 Ghz advantage" is basically nullified.

And I'm quite convinced it will be possible to squeeze 150 to 200 Mhz using High-end water cooling from these 7nm chips, putting them FIRMLY in the lead against Intel price equivalents.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Intel is almost done with smt, too many flaws with it, mitigation after mitigation. 9700k might be the start of an only real core cpus but at same time amd is full force with smt. Intel can lower prices, their margins are much much higher than amd.

Yeah right, now you're talking out of your donkey...
SMT is not going anywhere, regardless what you dream up...

 

[EatingDirt]

As per my previous post, amd set that price now, intel had its price for a long time. Like I said before, Intel will set the 9700k much lower as amd launches the 3700x and then you trolls will say, intel was not fair hehe and amd will not move the price and you trolls will cry about it.

How much do you really think they'll reduce the price of the 9700k? It's currently $70 higher than the 3700X. If they reduce it anywhere lower than the 3700X they'll have a gigantic pricing hole they'll need to fill with an entirely new 9800k 8/16 CPU. Not to mention by that logic they'll also be forced to reduce the price of the 9900k $100 to the 3800X's price point.

For some perspective on how much intel has 'reduced' their prices: the MSRP of the 8700k at launch was $359. You can currently get it for $349, $10 less than MSRP.

 

[Metroid]

Yeah right, now you're talking out of your donkey...
SMT is not going anywhere, regardless what you dream up...

It's where the market will be going weather you like or not.

 

[R0H1T]

Intel can lower prices, their margins are much much higher than amd.

Yes they can but will they? Their margins were already down last quarter & they're facing huge pressure in the server segment, they'll discount Xeons first because they need to. In consumer space I expect less than 1% chance of them doing so.

 

[Metroid]

How much do you really think they'll reduce the price of the 9700k? It's currently $70 higher than the 3700X. If they reduce it anywhere lower than the 3700X they'll have a gigantic pricing hole they'll need to fill with an entirely new 9800k 8/16 CPU. Not to mention by that logic they'll also be forced to reduce the price of the 9900k $100 to the 3800X's price point.

For some perspective on how much intel has 'reduced' their prices: the MSRP of the 8700k at launch was $359. You can currently get it for $349, $10 less than MSRP.

9700k for $400 makes no sense anymore after july, so they will drop it lower, i believe $260 if 3700x is faster in single thread which at this time we have no idea about it, if not then intel will match it, $329 and you will have the option to choose single thread or multithread.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

I see a pretty good debate, sorry i disappointed you.

intel fanboism is always disappointing to read. spin away.

 

[Metroid]

Yes they can but will they? Their margins were already down last quarter & they're facing huge pressure in the server segment, they'll discount Xeons first because they need to. In consumer space I expect less than 1% chance of them doing so.

Intel is known to be unfair x anything that stands their way. They only lower prices if they have to, past 13 years intel has been milking and in few cases lowered prices only when they had to.

intel fanboism is always disappointing to read. spin away.

I dont think you read the whole thread, i will buy the 3900x. What I was against amd did today was, they tested apples x oranges and that i hate the most, they wanted to show an advantage that they might not have been if it was 16 threads x 16 threads in multithread cinebench.

 

[R0H1T]

They only lower prices if they have to, past 13 years intel has been milking and in few cases lowered prices only when they had to.

And they still don't need to, they have the mind-share & the market-share although it's rapidly shrinking in the DIY space. You know what'll be a killer CPU ~ an 8 core APU with Navi graphics, that'll kill 90% of all their current SKU under 9900k if priced right!

 

[ShurikN]

Full stack for the 7.7. launch

Also:

 

[EatingDirt]

9700k for $400 makes no sense anymore after july, so they will drop it lower, i believe $260 if 3700x is faster in single thread which at this time we have no idea about it, if not then intel will match it, $329 and you will have the option to choose single thread or multithread.

You think they'll reduce the price of the 9700k by $140 and the 9900k by... $170? Did you not read what I said about the 8700k? Almost 2 years, $10 less than release MSRP.

Regardless of all that, at current intel prices, the original point stands, 3700x vs 9700k is a legitimate comparison because of the prices of both. Saying "but intel will drop prices" isn't relevant. You compare what things are like now, not what they may or may not be like in the future.

 

[Vycyous]

Here is the full lineup, as of now, posted on AMD's website. Did I miss the part about Ryzen 5?

https://www.amd.com/en/products/specifications/processors/11781,11756,11761,11766,11771

Continued...

 

[Xzibit]

Here is the full lineup, as of now, posted on AMD's website. Did I miss the part about Ryzen 5?

https://www.amd.com/en/products/specifications/processors/11781,11756,11761,11766,11771

View attachment 123821

3700X with a cooler and RGB for Just $329. OMG!!!

 

[Metroid]

You think they'll reduce the price of the 9700k by $140 and the 9900k by... $170? Did you not read what I said about the 8700k? Almost 2 years, $10 less than release MSRP.

Regardless of all that, at current intel prices, the original point stands, 3700x vs 9700k is a legitimate comparison because of the prices of both. Saying "but intel will drop prices" isn't relevant. You compare what things are like now, not what they may or may not be like in the future.

Intel is losing the game if all amd is showing and saying turns out to be right 7th july. Intel will eol many and price match the competition just like amd does.

3700x vs 9700k is a legitimate comparison

I disagree with that, like i said before price wise yes but not apples x apples comparison.

Full stack for the 7.7. launch
View attachment 123819


Also:
View attachment 123820

AMD's benchmark is like when intel does the benchmark, all flawed to begin with. I would wait reviews to determine if ryzen 3000 is indeed faster on single thread performance. I see only assumptions from amd at this time with these images. Regarding multithread yes I do believe ryzen will be faster because even ryzen 2000 was faster than intel on multithread, and why ryzen 3000 would not be? i really dont see why. I wanted to see single thread performance in the event, I guess amd left us in the dark on that. AMD published single thread performance but I cant really take those self made benchmark as real/true just yet.

 

[Vycyous]

Full stack for the 7.7. launch
View attachment 123819


Also:
View attachment 123820

Not sure how Anandtech doesn't know the supported memory specs; it's posted right on AMD's website.

 

[Metroid]

And they still don't need to, they have the mind-share & the market-share although it's rapidly shrinking in the DIY space. You know what'll be a killer CPU ~ an 8 core APU with Navi graphics, that'll kill 90% of all their current SKU under 9900k if priced right!

Well, I'm not into apu, I myself think that graphics on the top end cpus are a waste of space, they could add more cache or something more. Cache is expensive and it turns the cpu big but as top end amd cpus dont use igpus then i see no issue. The cost is justified, a behemot 70mb for the 3900x.

 

[ShurikN]

Not sure how Anandtech doesn't know the supported memory specs; it's posted right on AMD's website.

Maybe it wasnt up on AMD's site when Anandtech published the article.

 

[Vycyous]

Maybe it wasnt up on AMD's site when Anandtech published the article.

Most likely. I'm sure they'll update the chart before too long.