Possible AMD Ryzen 7000 Series Launch SEP Prices Leaked

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
First in line always pay more
Wait 6-10 months and enjoy the savings.

The argument mostly from intel fanboys is the 5600 launched much later which I semi agree with and that the 5600X launched at near and sometimes exceeded the 3700X in pricing. They also ignore that intel only had 10 series to compete with it and rocket lake came later and was pretty abysmal other than the low end parts.

I personally tend to agree with both sides though the 5600 came later than it should have and the 5600X really should have been 250 ish max.

ATM 5600x is less that 200.us on amazon

 

[1d10t]

A bit high for 7600X but then again I remember how bad XT was

 

[HenrySomeone]

And why are we comparing a non-x to an x version of the CPU? There is a 5600 non-x too and its price is low. It is exactly $200 which is what the price of a non-x 3600 was (MSRP).
Relative performance between 3600x vs 5600 non-x In that comparison, 5600 non-x is cheaper mind you.
View attachment 259872

Why?!? Maybe because for a year and a half, 5600x was the lowest zen3 you could buy. Come on, give it your best shot to defend it, I'm sure you'll "find" some angle...

Wait, so AMD is confident that their 7600x is going to be better than intel's core i5 ? and the 7700x seems to be madly expensive when the leaks suggest that it's still a bit slower than a 12700k. Unless it ends up being much better than the leaks, I don't see why AMD is going for such a premium pricing on this gen

They seem to be confident in market grooming, i.e. they believe they now have enough die hard fans to buy up the initial (and probably not very large anyhow) batches of chips at whatever prices they set, then if need be, they will lower them.

 

[iO]

Bit too much if true but RPL launch should fix the pricing pretty fast.

 

[JustBenching]

And why are we comparing a non-x to an x version of the CPU? There is a 5600 non-x too and its price is low. It is exactly $200 which is what the price of a non-x 3600 was (MSRP).
Relative performance between 3600x vs 5600 non-x In that comparison, 5600 non-x is cheaper mind you.
View attachment 259872

Because there was no non x for 2 years...?

 

[john_]

7700X looks somewhat expensive based of the name of the model and the fact that 7900X is too close in pricing. $349 would have been expected considering it's name is not 7800X. Except if they are absolutely sure this is a model that, based on it's performance, would become a best buy. Still, that model name....

The thing is that AMD either doesn't have enough capacity for 7000 series and knows it can't fulfill a massive demand, so it puts high SEP prices, or it wants to capitalize at least one more time on the good reputation of Ryzen.

That being said, prices are not great. Even if we consider Intel's dead end socket and incoming price hikes.

This 299$ crap along with absurd motherboard pricing most likely means that AM5 will get very low sales, unless people are still influenced by marketing too much.

Intel's and AMD's majority of sales go to OEMs and OEMs would NOT pay those prices. They'll get (huge) discounts.

 

[Easo]

As expected, sadly. Yet... I cannot shake the feeling AMD is reaping the benefits of our goodwill a bit too much, regardless of war, microchip shortages and the rest of factors which would increase prices.

 

[TheDeeGee]

Pretty steep, especially considering you will be Beta testing bios releases for 3 years.

 

[GFitzpatrick47]

A tad? The cheapest zen 3 was 50% more expensive than the equivalent zen 2. (r5 3600 to r5 5600x)

The performance difference between the two was 17% as per the tpu review

People seem to forget that a person who invested in a B350 or X370 board could, with BIOS updates, get into most of the Ryzen 5*** series, whereas that same period with Intel required three different board upgrades to even get to Alder Lake.

So, looking at the upgrade path as 50% higher cost than 17% uplift in performance is a bit silly, since there was also a great many people who were still using Ryzen 1*** and Ryzen 2***-series CPUs, since they still provided a really good price/performance ratio, especially when compared to Intel and the requisite board upgrades.

Sure, people who upgraded every single Ryzen CPU as soon as a new one came out paid those increased prices, but you'd be doing damn near the same for Intel (if not more, considering the platform/board upgrade), but if you're uprading your CPU with every new release, either your needs necessitate the increased performance (and thus you'd pay whatever is necessary to either company for said performance), or you simply want to be the first adopter (in which case, it's not a need, it's a want, and there's nothing that preventing you from simply...waiting).

Also, it stands to say that it's rather odd that a person would continuously upgrade to a new Ryzen 5 series with every new release, rather than saving up the $75-150 dollars or so that it would take to get to the Ryzen 7 series. There's 1 1/2-2 year gap between the releases, and yet staying with the same CPU series seems silly given the fact that the Ryzen 7 series provided higher performance in almost every workload (and the difference in performance has gotten greater over time). So, again, if the increase in price is such a pain point, I question the necessity of upgrading in the first place, especially since you'd apparently be staying with the Ryzen 5 series, even though the Ryzen 7 series isn't that much more expensive when the cost is spread over years and months (and also considering your motherboard can utilize the Ryzen 7 series just fine).

 

[oxrufiioxo]

The 7950X at $800 is whatever flagships are always priced somewhat stupidly, and the 7900X as $550 is also likely fine most users will not need either cpu. The 7700X and 7600X even if we add 5-10% to their leaked benchmarks are stupidly priced especially considering the platform is also likely to be expensive....

AMD must really want intel to sell some 12600k/12700k lol.

The 7950X and 13900k will likely trade blows or at least be close together same with the 7900X and 13700k..... But everything under 450 will likely get embarrassed by intel if these prices are true. I really hope AMD isn't just banking on being more energy efficient to justify these prices....

 

[JustBenching]

People seem to forget that a person who invested in a B350 or X370 board could, with BIOS updates, get into most of the Ryzen 5*** series, whereas that same period with Intel required three different board upgrades to even get to Alder Lake.

I was one of those people with the b350. Ended up selling it cause people keep forgetting that you didn't know IF and WHEN youll get support for zen 3. You act like you knew from the start - and that the support was on time. It wasn't. Id much rather pay for a new motherboard than having to wait 2 freaking years to get support for my now 5 year old motherboard for now outdated CPU's. What kind of support is that?

My z690 will get support for raptorlake day one. My b350 got support for zen 3 700 days AFTER launch. That's...only 70.000% slower. Yay, great support, kudos to amd

 

[oxrufiioxo]

My z690 will get support for raptorlake day one. My b350 got support for zen 3 700 days AFTER launch. That's...only 70.000% slower. Yay, great support, kudos to amd

And soon you'll be on a dead end socket while whoever buys into AM5 will get 2-3 generations of cpus that likely will obliterate the 13900k at much lower power while you'll be forced to upgade to a new socket to get more performance while your motherboard will likely still be more than adequate assuming you didn't cheap out and then in 3-4 years it'll reverse back to AM5. Honestly who cares you went Z690 when it was the best fit for you. I ditched intel becuase of rocketlake you ditched amd becuase of them flip flopping on support for B350 neither of us is wrong.

Really though the amount of people trying to justify their cpu choice and bragging about how even though their choice was a year late or came much after the other persons but man it's faster so get good is pathetic.

Both intel and amd don't give a shit about you and you shouldn't give a shit about them.
People should be buying whatever is the best that fits into their budget bottom line.

But here we are and we will hear/see it till one of these companies dies even though us as consumers need both of them to do well.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

Hi,
First in line always pay more
Wait 6-10 months and enjoy the savings.

This is the way to go for sure, but I speculate sale prices will start after 3 months, instead of 6.

 

[JustBenching]

And soon you'll be on a dead end socket while whoever buys into AM5 will get 2-3 generations of cpus that likely will obliterate the 13900k

And by the time you can put these AM5 cpus into your AM5 motherboard it will be 2028. Not even joking, by the time I could put a CPU on my b350 that obliterated the 8700k in gaming (that's a 2017 cpu btw) we already had 2022

So yeah, amd gives you support, it just gives it 2 years later. If you are okay with that, more power to you, I prefer having support day one instead of day seven hundred and twenty, that's why I now buy Intel. Cause imo Intel support >>>> AMD support. I know when and when (and it's usually day one) ill get support. I don't have to go on a crusade on forums to force AMD to support my motherboard

 

[FeelinFroggy]

People seem to forget that a person who invested in a B350

Is a B350 board really an "investment"? Most of those boards are in the sub 100 range. If I am gonna buy a new processor for every release, I think I would get a better board.

While there are a lot x370 boards that cost more and it is easy to complain about Intel's platform changes, most people dont upgrade their CPU with each release because the performance increase is minimal between generations.

I'm not a particular fan of Intel or AMD. Both companies make great CPUs and have machines running both chips very well. But I never really understood why complain about a mobo upgrade on budget boards. I have more understanding for those who invest in an expensive board, but again, they should know what they are getting into because advanced motherboards features are really for the advanced user and not just a gamer.

 

[HD64G]

Disappointing that the 7700X is supposed to be the same launch price the 5800X was.

Guess the 7800X will be even more expensive whenever that launches.

7800X should be a 10-core CPU and thus the 7700X is the successor of the 5800X. And I think those prices are fake and in 3/4 of those CPUs they will be lower.

 

[RedelZaVedno]

"Ryzen 5 7600X at $299"... 6 cores 300 bucks in 2023, when I can get 12400F for 180 bucks? Thanks, but no thanks AMD. You just lost me.

 

[HenrySomeone]

"Ryzen 5 7600X at $299"... 6 cores 300 bucks in 2023, when I can get 12400F for 180 bucks? Thanks, but no thanks AMD. You just lost me.

Better brace yourself ... for the red fury!

 

[AM4isGOD]

I don't think i would keep any board for 2-3 generations of CPU's. You would be missing a ton of new features and chipset updates. If you can afford it, imo you should always have a new board per new generation if you can afford it. If not stick to your ancient board and new CPU.

 

[Lesha]

So it is time to replace my 3800X with a 5800X then.

 

[ModEl4]

I don't buy it.
If it was as follows:
$799 7950X
$549 7900X
$449 7800X
$399 7700X
$299 7600X
I'll be willing to check the validity of such scenario but with that 7700X price i think something doesn't add up.
5800X had 105W TDP and 5600X 65W while 7600X and 7700X they share the same TDP.
This will lead to smaller ST and gaming difference between 7700X/7600X than what was for 5800X/5600X and especially MT difference will be go from up to +40-41% (5800X/5600X) to up to +30-31% (7700X/7600X).
Also there is the lower model name change to 7700X, leaving space between 7900X/7700X so it doesn't make sense 7700X to be 1.5X in pricing vs 7600X like 5800X was to 5600X.
5800X3D was 1.5X 5700X price(+$150), are they gonna charge for an 8core (7800X3D) $599-$649 if 7700X is $449?

 

[HenrySomeone]

5800X3D was 1.5X 5700X price(+$150), are they gonna charge for an 8core (7800X3D) $599-$649 if 7700X is $449?

I do believe they will, at least initially if gaming performance comes anywhere close to Raptor Lake.

 

[AM4isGOD]

The thing that makes me laugh, is someone with a high end GPU like a 3090 will whine because they have to buy a new board to go with a new gen CPU. How many AM% adopters are going to be using their first gen AM5 board when gen 3 AM5 comes out and whining because it doesn't work quite right.

New gen CPU means new board. Intel do it and get demonised for it, yet it's ok to use a board you bought for first gen Ryzen with a 5 gen Ryzen and whine if it does not work perfectly.

 

[ModEl4]

I do believe they will, at least initially if gaming performance comes anywhere close to Raptor Lake.

If gaming performance comes anywhere close to Raptor Lake?
So according to you 7800X3D will have close to Raptor Lake performance at best and still AMD will charge $599-$649 for this 8core V-cache model?
Sorry now i get it, probably you meant plain Zen4 models close to Raptor Lake performance so consequently Zen4X3D will be much faster than Raptor, so in turn you find it possible that AMD will attempt such a price hike in this scenario, correct? is that what you're saying?

 

[gffermari]