US Prices of AMD Ryzen Processors Surface

[Mindweaver]

Call me crazy, but I don't see it being successful at those prices.. I can remember when AMD was on top and then Intel dropped NetBurst then released the C2D E6300 for $164 bucks, and it would overclock and pass the FX60 and FX62 and overclock to Intel's C2D Extreme chip. I think it was the x6800 (Not sure, I'm getting to old). Intel pretty much put the nail in the coffin with those prices and overclockability.. I was running all AMD at home until their prices were crazy high for a low end 2 core x64 cpu. AMD needs to come in under Intel to get a firm grip, and then raise prices (I can't believe I'm saying this out loud.. Raise prices.. lol).

If they don't then Intel will lower prices, and then they will be the clear winner for common PC users, that will stick to what they have always bought in the past. I don't know for sure, but we will see soon enough. I just hope it kicks ass. I want the 8c/16t cpu and I don't care who I get it from as long as the price is right... So, that means cheap.. lol

 

[bug]

the 1700 is pretty tempting for its price :O

Besides the core count and TDP, what do you know about it that makes it "tempting"? Right now we don't know the performance and we don't know the price of the motherboard that goes with it.
For me $300 CPUs are above "tempting" anyway, my "tempting" zone is in the $200-250 range.

 

[rtwjunkie]

mindshare

I LOL'd when I saw that. It's the favorite overused word of one of our members who has been absent recently (usually on one of many anti-Nvidia, Anti-Intel "AMD can do no wrong" rants).

 

[EarthDog]

I think I called it sub $500... or $450-500 for the flagship...

trying to find my post(s) where I said that, LOL!

 

[TheGuruStud]

Call me crazy, but I don't see it being successful at those prices.. I can remember when AMD was on top and then Intel dropped NetBurst then released the C2D E6300 for $164 bucks, and it would overclock and pass the FX60 and FX62 and overclock to Intel's C2D Extreme chip. I think it was the x6800 (Not sure, I'm getting to old). Intel pretty much put the nail in the coffin with those prices and overclockability.. I was running all AMD at home until their prices were crazy high for a low end 2 core x64 cpu. AMD needs to come in under Intel to get a firm grip, and then raise prices (I can't believe I'm saying this out loud.. Raise prices.. lol).

If they don't then Intel will lower prices, and then they will be the clear winner for common PC users, that will stick to what they have always bought in the past. I don't know for sure, but we will see soon enough. I just hope it kicks ass. I want the 8c/16t cpu and I don't care who I get it from as long as the price is right... So, that means cheap.. lol

Intel can't slash prices. They can cut them some, but investors will create a shit storm if they engage in a price war. No one cares about us, it's about OEM shipments (especially server). When the APUs come, Intel is screwed (unless they revert to their favorite tactics).

As long as AMD can ramp production, Intel is gonna take huge profit losses for the next three years.

 

[bug]

Intel can't slash prices.

If there ever was a company that could afford to enter a price war, it's Intel today.
In a way that what they did back in P4 days: they simply prevented AMD from cashing in on their innovation. Except that today AMD has been in the red for years and Intel has raked in cash almost completely unopposed.

 

[TheGuruStud]

If there ever was a company that could afford to enter a price war, it's Intel today.
In a way that what they did back in P4 days: they simply prevented AMD from cashing in on their innovation. Except that today AMD has been in the red for years and Intel has raked in cash almost completely unopposed.

Yep, and what happens when their stock falls 30% in a couple weeks? Lol. Someone gonna get fired or they just marginally cut prices.

If you're that dominate you just hold and see what happens. Price war is more of a last resort. Plus, you know Intel is banking on their fanboys.

 

[bug]

Yep, and what happens when their stock falls 30% in a couple weeks? Lol. Someone gonna get fired or they just marginally cut prices.

If you're that dominate you just hold and see what happens. Price war is more of a last resort. Plus, you know Intel is banking on their fanboys.

Ok, a little perspective here: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/technology/trump-intel-chip-factory-arizona.html?_r=0
That's one investment of $7bn. AMD's market cap is a little under $13bn. Intel will barely feel the effects of a price war, I'm not sure why you think that would cause a 30% stock drop.

What I'd like to see instead is fairly priced products from AMD that in turn force Intel to drop prices on their own CPUs. Better yet, fairly priced products from AMD that finally spur Intel to innovate in the IPC area, but that's just me dreaming.

 

[Mindweaver]

Intel can't slash prices. They can cut them some, but investors will create a shit storm if they engage in a price war. No one cares about us, it's about OEM shipments (especially server). When the APUs come, Intel is screwed (unless they revert to their favorite tactics).

As long as AMD can ramp production, Intel is gonna take huge profit losses for the next three years.

They don't, and yet I showed you when they did? They will if the tide changes.

 

[TheGuruStud]

They don't, and yet I showed you when they did? They will if the tide changes.

I think we're remembering the athlon xp and 64 days differently. There was no price war. Intel wasn't even pricing competitively relative to performance.

 

[dozenfury]

1700 looks right in that $300 sweet spot. But I'll need to see some real third-party benches first. The cherry-picked marketing slides or "leaked" benches don't get me overly excited. Also (and this goes for gpu's also imo with Nvidia/AMD) I personally need an advantage in going with AMD over Intel to put up with their quirks. At identical performance I'd just as soon keep it simple and go with Intel. I really need to see a good 10% performance advantage at the same price point, and/or a good 10-20% price advantage.

 

[R0H1T]

Ok, a little perspective here: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/technology/trump-intel-chip-factory-arizona.html?_r=0
That's one investment of $7bn. AMD's market cap is a little under $13bn. Intel will barely feel the effects of a price war, I'm not sure why you think that would cause a 30% stock drop.

What I'd like to see instead is fairly priced products from AMD that in turn force Intel to drop prices on their own CPUs. Better yet, fairly priced products from AMD that finally spur Intel to innovate in the IPC area, but that's just me dreaming.

Yeah because their transition to 10nm is going so well, or the 14nm shrink? There's also the possibility of ARM server chips & Apple going with Ax for their future Mac OS iterations, lest we forget the Atom screwup on the frontpage.

There's just too many headwinds Intel is facing atm, engaging with AMD in a price war might just be suicidal for them. It may not hit their bottom line too much in the short term, IMO it will though, but it'll certainly kick their stock price down a notch or two.

 

[Mindweaver]

I think we're remembering the athlon xp and 64 days differently. There was no price war. Intel wasn't even pricing competitively relative to performance.

You don't remember the low end x64 dual cores costing 380+? The FX chips were crazy high. I had a 3000xp at home. I pretty much had everyone on P4's from dell only because the company I worked for only bought Dells. I did have a few PIII 900's. The cheapest dual core was crazy high and when the C2D's came out I jumped on an E6400 for $220. Either way buddy lets both stay on topic.

 

[TheMailMan78]

I could be wrong but I think this is gonna be the 2900XT all over again.

 

[bug]

Yeah because their transition to 10nm is going so well, or the 14nm shrink? There's also the possibility of ARM server chips & Apple going with Ax for their future Mac OS iterations, lest we forget the Atom screwup on the frontpage.

There's just too many headwinds Intel is facing atm, engaging with AMD in a price war might just be suicidal for them. It may not hit their bottom line too much in the short term, IMO it will though, but it'll certainly kick their stock price down a notch or two.

Dude, AMD is worth just below $13bn, Intel is worth over $170bn. Intel can buy AMD 10x over and you think a price war can be suicidal for Intel? You must have taken some really funny courses of economy.

 

[R0H1T]

Dude, AMD is worth just below $13bn, Intel is worth over $170bn. Intel can buy AMD 10x over and you think a price war can be suicidal for Intel? You must have taken some really funny courses of economy.

And if Intel dared to do that the US anti trust authorities would probably break it up in more pieces than what they actually threatened MS with. Stock prices mean jack in the real world, if they did then MS could well have bought any major Oil & Gas giant, before May 2000 NASDAQ crash, & still be left with chump change to buy Apple 10x over

Also did you miss the 6x boom on AMD stock price, missed out on buying it at the right time? It'll likely hit another peak, multiple peaks this year should Ryzen & Vega be smash hits.

 

[GhostRyder]

Hmm, seems like we can put a check mark on the "Good Price" category for these chips. Now all that matters is the performance, if we can check that off its a win for consumers and AMD!

 

[phanbuey]

The prices could be lower, but then again - let's see the performance numbers.

 

[bug]

And if Intel dared to do that the US anti trust authorities would probably break it up in more pieces than what they actually threatened MS with. Stock prices mean jack in the real world, if they did then MS could well have bought any major Oil & Gas giant, before May 2000 NASDAQ crash, & still be left with chump change to buy Apple 10x over

Completely irrelevant, I was just talking about scale.

Also did you miss the 6x boom on AMD stock price, missed out on buying it at the right time? It'll likely hit another peak, multiple peaks this year should Ryzen & Vega be smash hits.

One phrase you tell me "stock prices mean jack in the real world", the next you ask me "did you miss the 6x boom on AMD stock price". I believe our conversation ends here.

 

[R0H1T]

Completely irrelevant, I was just talking about scale.

If you're talking about scale you should be counting the number of chips these firms sell in the consumer arena, marketshare & how Intel stands to lose a lot.
So yes stock prices don't matter for the actual business, as AMD have shown for the last so many years.

One phrase you tell me "stock prices mean jack in the real world", the next you ask me "did you miss the 6x boom on AMD stock price". I believe our conversation ends here.

Free advice take it or leave it, you can still make money off AMD stock personally. Of course whether you're interested in stocks is another matter & I'll leave it at that.

Another advice don't bring irrevelant points to a debate where they don't merit even a mention, if you do then then be ready to take the riposte that comes with it.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

What's not groundbreaking about a 8 core, 16 thread processor for $500 at 95w and 3.6 GHz base clock? If you want the same thing from Intel, prepare to hand over four digits worth of cash, 45 more watts of power, and several hundred fewer megahertz. Intel is rightly concerned about Ryzen. Global Foundries has caught up to Intel's fabs, AMD has an excellent CPU and GPU architecture, and they have a stock cooling solution that isn't shit. Over the past decade, Intel has done everything it can to make consumer processors cost less to make and put out about the same amount of performance for the price. This includes making the wafer thinner (caused problems with Skylake aftermark HSFs), to using fantastically shitty thermal material between the chip and the IHS (they practically admitted it was shit by announcing it won't be shit on i7-7740K), and now they cut their ties with NVIDIA because the licensing deal ended and are crawling to AMD to get GPUs (recent news). All combined, AMD is looking fantastic right now and Intel looks like they're flying on a wing and a prayer. This has happened before when AMD launched K5.

The only thing Intel has going for it is production capabilities, mindshare, and cash.

Global Foundaries catching up to Intel fabs? That made me chuckle a bit.

But regardless ill take a 1700x and clock that thing to the sky.

 

[Crap Daddy]

How come the top Ryzen CPU is at half the price of Intel 8c16t 6900K since AMD led us to believe it is better? Why is an eight core 16 thread AMD CPU cheaper than the 4c8t 7700k?

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

How come the top Ryzen CPU is at half the price of Intel 8c16t 6900K since AMD led us to believe it is better? Why is an eight core 16 thread AMD CPU cheaper than the 4c8t 7700k?

Really,, would you buy it at the same price.
They're clearly pushing for market share first and foremost.

 

[Fluffmeister]

How come the top Ryzen CPU is at half the price of Intel 8c16t 6900K since AMD led us to believe it is better? Why is an eight core 16 thread AMD CPU cheaper than the 4c8t 7700k?

It's clever marketing, the reality is very few buy something like a 6900K anyway, especially if all they do is game and watch porn. It's how it compares to chips like the currently $339.99 6700K that counts.

 

[rruff]

Intel can't slash prices. They can cut them some, but investors will create a shit storm if they engage in a price war. No one cares about us, it's about OEM shipments (especially server). When the APUs come, Intel is screwed (unless they revert to their favorite tactics). As long as AMD can ramp production, Intel is gonna take huge profit losses for the next three years.

Of course they can! The retail price of a chip has little to do with its incremental cost of production. The current Intel product stack and pricing has been designed to maximize profit with extremely weak competition. If the competition changes then Intel can easily modify their product stack and pricing to compensate.

For instance what is the incremental cost to produce one of the mid level i5 chips vs a Pentium? This is after the design and manufacturing investment has been made. What does it cost to produce 1,000,001 vs 1,000,000? Retail is around $80 vs $200, but the incremental production cost is probably more in the $10 vs $20 range (just pulled that out my ass). All Intel would need to do is ramp up i5 production, and make that the new entry level, make i7 the midrange, and the top end consumer chip would be a 6C12T.

The fact that Intel has real competition for a change, means they will lose some market share, but the actual hit to their profit will be small.