At that time, building a powerful PC was a really expensive task!

1998-2003 saw a massive decline in average PC prices, and even the high end CPU price spike in 2005 didn't change the slowing trend downwards. By 2008 the average PC price index was 1/7 of the 1998 price, and since then prices haven't dropped significantly at all. Something like this: http://wallstreetpit.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/image85.jpg It's a bit off-topic but interesting to see nonetheless.

Intel can ki$$ my fkn hairy hobo ring and not wash it off for a week.

Not surprised at the price. The last gen extreme edition CPU was this price as well.

no more built-in graphics?

no more built-in graphics?

Thank god no. What a waste of die space for every gamer. If my next cpu would have got an iGPU, I would have disabled it on the first visit of UEFI.

no more built-in graphics?

Not for the enthusiast series socket 2011 and 2011-3 . Only for consumers parts. Hard to put 6-8cores and add an gpu inside for waste place and power.

no more built-in graphics?

high end chips never had IGP on die aka X99 an X79 platform expect IGP on 5770k chips etc on the Z97 platform

oh wow they went cheaper this time! 5930k could well be £399.99!!! If it bloody well is I'm upgrading!

oh wow they went cheaper this time! 5930k could well be £399.99!!! If it bloody well is I'm upgrading!

It's currently offered to be ordered in Poland for 427 something pounds.

I believe the prices when I see them in the places where I buy hardware, it's still expensive but it's indeed slightly "cheaper" than last time.

Well, the turbo of the 8-core stops where the base clock of the 6-core sits. Will be very interesting how far those two can overclock. Personally I wouldn't want anything that doesn't at least reach 4 Ghz with ease, 4.5 Ghz even better yet. I doubt the 8-core can do that. The 6-core just might.

Well, the turbo of the 8-core stops where the base clock of the 6-core sits. Will be very interesting how far those two can overclock. Personally I wouldn't want anything that doesn't at least reach 4 Ghz with ease, 4.5 Ghz even better yet. I doubt the 8-core can do that. The 6-core just might.

The 8-core hits 4 GHz on all cores fairly easily. But I must be speculating, of course 😉

LOL Those stock clocks are set to a certain TDP, so aren't really indicative of what the silicon's capabilities are. The chip's so big the heatspreader hardly earns its name.

The 8-core hits 4 GHz on all cores fairly easily. But I must be speculating, of course 😉

This I am looking forward to. Leaks have suggested 4.5 GHz with decent cooling, though that may be lottery dependent.

The 8-core hits 4 GHz on all cores fairly easily. But I must be speculating, of course 😉

What you did there, I see it. 🙂 Can't wait for your review.

The 8-core hits 4 GHz on all cores fairly easily. But I must be speculating, of course 😉

Sexy post.

This I am looking forward to. Leaks have suggested 4.5 GHz with decent cooling, though that may be lottery dependent.

Yeah some guy over OCN got it to 4.5Ghz with H100 I think the temps where like 90c lol oh dear Regardless im still buying one even if i have to use 2 480 rads to cool it

Way too expensive...;) Likely a yield issue for Intel--doesn't expect to sell many because it can't make many, etc. Old story. Of course...but that's only because AMD has nothing immediately available to compete with it. Still, Intel raping the market over high-end pricing is truly excellent incentive for AMD to come in with both guns blazing and knock Intel right off its perch. This is what we saw routinely before A64, and this is what we'll see more of until AMD does it again....;/ With no competition, why shouldn't Intel charge what the suckers will pay? I would. However, as one poster pointed out early on, back in those days when all the gaming reviews featured AMD cpus because Intel's weren't in the running, hardware in general cost a lot more. Paying a $1k at today's prices for a cpu? Almost like paying $2k back then. Absolutely nutsola. But it is what happens in the absence of competition. An old joke I like is: Q: If AMD had never come up with the Athlon in 1999, then who would make the fastest cpu today in 2014, at what clock would it run, and how much would it cast? A: Intel of course...today's bam-fantastic-incredible Intel cpu would have four cores (actual two cores with two more hyper-whatevers tacked on that Intel would *call* cores, anyway), it would be running at 2GHz, and it would cost in lots of 1K or more only $1500...! What a *steal* right? Everyone would think it was such a great deal because they'd never known anything else. (scary, isn't it?) Advice: By a far less expensive cpu (I don't care who makes it but AMD will give you more bang for buck) and plow the rest of your considerable savings into building yourself a nice desktop rig..;) (Which would be pretty easy to do, imo!)

In NZ they'll be listed at ~$1500, to me this seems more than fair. /sarcasm off.

Intel's flagship CPU looks a lot better now against NZ's 0.83(USD) dollar than Intel's flagship CPU did in Jan/Feb 2009 against NZ's 0.52(USD) dollar when I paid $2240 for an i7-965.

Way too expensive...;) Likely a yield issue for Intel--doesn't expect to sell many because it can't make many, etc. Old story.

What WE see is A) Intel and B) HEXACORE and C) UNDER €400 = WIN!!!