Fractal Design Torrent Black RGB TG review
Core i9 12900K DDR4 3600 vs DDR5 5200 performance review
Corsair H150i Elite LCD review
Seasonic Syncro Q704 chassis + Connect PSU review
Fractal Design Ion+ 2 Platinum 860W PSU Review
Crucial P5 Plus PCIe 4.0 M.2 NVMe review
Fractal Design Lumen S28 RGB review (LCS)
WD Red SN500 NVMe SSD review
Core i9 12900K processor review
Core i5 12600K processor review
Intel is Dropping Processor Prices in Wake of Ryzen Launch
It seems that Intel is getting nervous about the AMD Ryzen launch and has started to lower prices on their processors. The equivalent 6900K model however still is 999 USD, twice as much as the Ryzen flagship. Others like the quad-core processors do see a price cut.
Also we think with a tiny bit of tweaking that 6900K might even get beaten or normalized by even a 329 USD Ryzen 7 1700 processor. The new prices have not gone into effect everywhere, here in the EU they are still at the same old level. In the USA etailers like Newegg also is listing older prices.
However it is at Microcenter (USA) where you can see a shift in prices, one very obvious one would be the Intel Core i7-7700K which started selling at 299 US, that's roughly a $80 lower price over the original MSRP (regular etail recently already was in the 330 USD range though). I do want to emphasize strongly that the prices listed are only in effect at microcenter and will only be available with 'in store pickups' and with a limit of 1 per household. Remember though, this is just one (r)etailer showing these prices. We do not know if the rest will follow. It could very well be a little marketing stunt steered by either Microcenter and/or Intel to make the news.
- Intel Core i7-6950X is priced $1599 (USD)
- Intel Core i7-6900K is priced $999 (USD)
- Intel Core i7-6850K is priced $549 (USD)
- Intel Core i7-6800K is priced $359 (USD)
- Intel Core i7-5820K is priced $319 (USD)
- Intel Core i7-7700K is priced $299 (USD)
- Intel Core i7-6700K is priced $259 (USD)
- Intel Core i7-4790K is priced $279 (USD)
- Intel Core i7-7700 is priced $289 (USD)
- Intel Core i7-6700 is priced $259 (USD)
- Intel Core i5-7600K is priced $199 (USD)
- Intel Core i5-6600K is priced $179 (USD)
- Intel Core i5-4690K is priced $189 (USD)
- Intel Core i5-6500 is priced $179 (USD)
- Intel Core i5-4590 is priced $159 (USD)
- Intel Core i3-7350K is priced $159 (USD)
Depending on what state you reside in that price will get a 5 to 10% sales tax.
It will remain to be seen if the price drop is a temporary one to counter the Ryzen release ot that is will invoke a cut on a global scale. Maybe Intel will lower it's chipset prices as well, as the Z170/Z270 chipset is very expensive, and thus makes Intel chipset based motherboards more expensive as well.
PrMinisterGR
Senior Member
Posts: 7895
Joined: 2014-09-27
Senior Member
Posts: 7895
Joined: 2014-09-27
#5398569 Posted on: 02/27/2017 04:33 AM
According to steam survey less than 2% of people have more than 4 cpu cores, do you think that the marjority of developers will take the extra time to cater to those 2%, and also risk alienating the 98% anytime soon? I don't. Afaik only the top leading groundbreaking developers such as ID or the guys making Star Citizen, or Crytek, do stuff like that.
Anyway, i love guru3d reviews but these clickbait articles with bad information are really detrimental to its credit, be more professional guys.
That doesn't matter at all. What matters is that in order to make a console game, your engine needs to be able to scale well with a minimum of 7 cores. All the rest is just PC optimization, which is mostly taking advantage of the fact that PC CPUs are generally much faster per core than the console ones, and compensating this way. But since fast serial performance is never really equal to actual parallelism, you get phenomena like people with Skylake i5s getting stuttering in Battlefield 1.
There is no game written for less than eight threads, I assure you. Even the engine made by Obsidian for Pillars of Eternity, and used in the new Torment game, will have to scale properly so that it can be used in a console.
According to steam survey less than 2% of people have more than 4 cpu cores, do you think that the marjority of developers will take the extra time to cater to those 2%, and also risk alienating the 98% anytime soon? I don't. Afaik only the top leading groundbreaking developers such as ID or the guys making Star Citizen, or Crytek, do stuff like that.
Anyway, i love guru3d reviews but these clickbait articles with bad information are really detrimental to its credit, be more professional guys.
That doesn't matter at all. What matters is that in order to make a console game, your engine needs to be able to scale well with a minimum of 7 cores. All the rest is just PC optimization, which is mostly taking advantage of the fact that PC CPUs are generally much faster per core than the console ones, and compensating this way. But since fast serial performance is never really equal to actual parallelism, you get phenomena like people with Skylake i5s getting stuttering in Battlefield 1.
There is no game written for less than eight threads, I assure you. Even the engine made by Obsidian for Pillars of Eternity, and used in the new Torment game, will have to scale properly so that it can be used in a console.
sykozis
Senior Member
Posts: 22008
Joined: 2008-07-14
Senior Member
Posts: 22008
Joined: 2008-07-14
#5398575 Posted on: 02/27/2017 04:45 AM
Good point.
Geek sites like this one lose track of what users out there actually use. Same goes with the 4K adoption, etc.
Using Steam hardware survey doesn't provide accurate results. Not every gamer is using Steam. The only reason I have a Steam account, is because it was the only way to get TL2 on Linux. Most of my games are through Origin....
Good point.
Geek sites like this one lose track of what users out there actually use. Same goes with the 4K adoption, etc.
Using Steam hardware survey doesn't provide accurate results. Not every gamer is using Steam. The only reason I have a Steam account, is because it was the only way to get TL2 on Linux. Most of my games are through Origin....
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 13564
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 13564
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5398592 Posted on: 02/27/2017 06:18 AM
Zen's L3 is a dump cache - it's only used when stuff gets evicted from L2. With Intel the L3 cache always and only includes all the L2/L1 caches. Both methods have different advantages with different workloads - but either way it will lead to differences in benchmark results.
AMD Ryzen has some strange things on L2 L3 cache level. AMD benching better result than everybody else. Hilbert may interested to check these things. (use Aida64 Zip and similar programs). Even Aida64 author has confirmed these things. I got AMD so don't attack me.
Zen's L3 is a dump cache - it's only used when stuff gets evicted from L2. With Intel the L3 cache always and only includes all the L2/L1 caches. Both methods have different advantages with different workloads - but either way it will lead to differences in benchmark results.
PrMinisterGR
Senior Member
Posts: 7895
Joined: 2014-09-27
Senior Member
Posts: 7895
Joined: 2014-09-27
#5398593 Posted on: 02/27/2017 06:21 AM
I quite curious on how the core complexes are interconnected compared to Intel's.
Zen's L3 is a dump cache - it's only used when stuff gets evicted from L2. With Intel the L3 cache always and only includes all the L2/L1 caches. Both methods have different advantages with different workloads - but either way it will lead to differences in benchmark results.
I quite curious on how the core complexes are interconnected compared to Intel's.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1865
Joined: 2010-01-25
Getting anxious for the review! Really rooting for AMD.