Intel Coffee Lake etail Processor Prices Appear in EU webshop

#5475675 Posted on: 09/26/2017 10:47 AM

---

417 Euro's is around £365 right now (although prices could change) Considering the 7700k retailed around £340-£350 paying an extra £15/25 for two extra cores seems fine. wouldn't mind if it dropped another £50, but it's very unlikely that would happen from the get go anyway

#5475690 Posted on: 09/26/2017 11:24 AM

---

Basically just swap the Euro sign for the Pound. If you're lucky you might get an 8700K for just under £400 but I wouldn't hold my breath, not yet anyway. IMO,for a 6c/12t processor, it's way to expensive

#5475719 Posted on: 09/26/2017 12:59 PM

---

my i5 4690k was £190 :/

#5475737 Posted on: 09/26/2017 01:30 PM

---

The 7700k is $459au and the 1800x is $659....

There is no way in hell it will cost more than the 1800x so I'm sure the price will be fine my me if I decide to dive in.

My 6700k cost me just over $500au I think so even if the 8700k costs a bit more than the 7700k it will still be great value for anyone.

#5475742 Posted on: 09/26/2017 01:54 PM

---

Prices are spot on with what we usually have in Portugal.

Every K version is terribly overpriced. The i5 8400 is actually at a good price point and will be the go to for gamers. Will be interesting to see how it compares to R5 1600. i7 8700 price is laughable with R7 1700 coming cheaper, unless it matches AMD in productivity.
I don't know, i5 8400 really sounds tempting for someone like me with a i5 2500k. I'll definitely be waiting for Zen+, for Intel to get their head out of their arses, and prices to stabilize before making the call.

#5475743 Posted on: 09/26/2017 01:54 PM

---

417 euros is about $608 Canadian. By comparison, the 1800X currently sells for $599 on Newegg.ca. That's a hard sell.

#5475746 Posted on: 09/26/2017 02:03 PM

---

$9 difference for a cpu with the ipc and clock speeds that give the 7700k such an advantage in many games with 50% more cores which will eliminate any lead ryzen had in many games and you think it's a bad deal....for a chipset that supports ram speeds over 4ghz easily out of the box unlike the issues that have plagued ryzen....and you think it is a bad deal...

#5475768 Posted on: 09/26/2017 03:00 PM

---

It's a tough sell, since it seems to be priced the same as the unreasonably overpriced 1800X; note that very few people buy the 1800X - most buy the 1700 ($379 CAD) or 1700X ($449 CAD) and overclock. The 8700 is better but it's a non-K processor, and still kind of pricey - 349.69 Euros is $509 Canadian.

In all likelihood, the 8700K will compete against the 1700X, but there seems to be a large price gap between them. It'll be up to consumers to decide if it's worth it.

#5475772 Posted on: 09/26/2017 03:12 PM

---

It's a tough sell, since it seems to be priced the same as the unreasonably overpriced 1800X; note that very few people buy the 1800X - most buy the 1700 ($379 CAD) or 1700X ($449 CAD) and overclock. The 8700 is better but it's a non-K processor, and still kind of pricey - 349.69 Euros is $509 Canadian.

In all likelihood, the 8700K will compete against the 1700X, but there seems to be a large price gap between them. It'll be up to consumers to decide if it's worth it.

Why would it compete against the 1700x when there is already a large performance discrepancy between it and the 7700k in favour of the 7700k in gaming.

If a 4 core cpu in the 7700k at 4.6ghz can have a sizeable lead in gaming performance over ryzen 7, what do you think a 6 core part will do?

#5475821 Posted on: 09/26/2017 04:47 PM

---

@Emille
First about your previous statement "have plagued", so they don't now, so it's irrelevant for a new build, which an 8700k would be, so your comment there is irrelevant.
Second, almost no games utilize more than 4 cores, that's why ryzen is slower, so 6 cores won't benefit gaming again, rendering your second comment irrelevant, again.

#5475824 Posted on: 09/26/2017 04:52 PM

---

First about your previous statement "have plagued", so they don't now, so it's irrelevant for a new build, which an 8700k would be, so your comment there is irrelevant.
Second, almost no games utilize more than 4 cores, that's why ryzen is slower, so 6 cores won't benefit gaming again, rendering your second comment irrelevant, again.

The 8700k would be faster becauae it has the same ipc and the same high clocks and max overclocks...AND it has 6 cores.

Ryzer has 6/8 cores at the expense of clock speed which is why it can be bad in many games, the 6 core 8700k doesn't have the clock speed and ipc deficit of ryzen, so in cases where extra cores are not utilised it will be equal to a 7700k and better than ryzen, and in games where more cores are used it won't have the deficit of the 7700k which is far less the case than the clock speed deficiany is a factor. So across the board it will be equal or better than a 7700k and ryzen.

Not that hard to understand.

#5475837 Posted on: 09/26/2017 05:17 PM

---

Why would it compete against the 1700x when there is already a large performance discrepancy between it and the 7700k in favour of the 7700k in gaming.

If a 4 core cpu in the 7700k at 4.6ghz can have a sizeable lead in gaming performance over ryzen 7, what do you think a 6 core part will do?
According to recent sales figures, the R5 1600 is the closest competitor to the 7700K (the former outsold the latter on Mindfactory.de in August). With two more cores, I'd imagine that the R7 1700 or 1700X would be the closest competitor to the 8700K. If the Euro prices are accurate though, there is a price gap of $150 CAD between the 1700X and the 8700K. The question is, would consumers be willing to stomach that price premium to have the best gaming processor?

#5475869 Posted on: 09/26/2017 05:51 PM

---

Saying that one thing is a competetor to another because of sales volume is besides the point. The 8700k will have performance far above any r5 cpu. Even though it will cost more will will sell extremely well despite it's additional cost.

Do we then say 'the 8700k is a competitor to an r5 1600' even though they are leagues apart in performance?

We are talking about performance, given that the 7700k beats all r7 xpus in gaming the 8700k certainly won't be a 'competitor' to an r5 1600 with performance above a 7700k.

I'm sure there are garbage budget phones being sold in extremelt high numbers, does that make them competitors to a samsung note 8 because the sales volume is similar, even though performance is not?

#5475882 Posted on: 09/26/2017 06:03 PM

---

Saying that one thing is a competetor to another because of sales volume is besides the point. The 8700k will have performance far above any r5 cpu. Even though it will cost more will will sell extremely well despite it's additional cost.

Do we then say 'the 8700k is a competitor to an r5 1600' even though they are leagues apart in performance?

We are talking about performance, given that the 7700k beats all r7 xpus in gaming the 8700k certainly won't be a 'competitor' to an r5 1600 with performance above a 7700k.

I'm sure there are garbage budget phones being sold in extremelt high numbers, does that make them competitors to a samsung note 8 because the sales volume is similar, even though performance is not?

No but if a phone company launched a phone with 90% of the features/performance of the Note 8 for two thirds the cost - does it really matter if the performance isn't entirely there? Because that's what the point is here. I don't really think anyone is arguing that the R7 is a better performing processor than what Intel offers - the point is that it does 90% of what Intel offers for a significantly cheaper price. Couple that with multiple people who purchase it not running 60hz+ monitors, or running GPU bottlenecked resolutions, or planning on dropping a new Ryzen CPU in the future without having to upgrade/change motherboard, or perhaps doing video encode/gaming unrelated tasks, or perhaps think that games will better utilize more threads to a degree higher than Intel's clock speed advantage and suddenly it's not hard to see why people value the Ryzen processors.

#5475887 Posted on: 09/26/2017 06:13 PM

---

If you think ryzen 7 will perform at 90% of ther performance of an 8700k when it probably performs at 75% of what a 7700k does in gaming, you will be very surprised next week.