30% price increase is an act of lunacy! 😡

barbacot:

30% price increase is an act of lunacy! 😡

Really? it make for a fun laughing out loud from every tech enthusiast 😀

I dont think Intel should have released this. It just make them look even worse.

barbacot:

30% price increase is an act of lunacy! 😡

For record breakers this price is nothing really. Best case scenario for Intel would be that someone breaks a record or 2 and that will build some hype for the 15th generation.

For benchmark nuts and people who just always have to have the best this will certainly deliver for the next six or so months. Not much longer than that, though.

Undying:

I dont think Intel should have released this. It just make them look even worse.

Nah they've been doing this forever now. It's a formula that's proven to be successful. That's why AMD and Intel always fight for the fastest CPU crown. If the 15th gen Intel turns out to be less productive than AMD's offerings with corporate and professional utilities, THAT will be a huge blow and bad for team blue. Intel will be fine. Don't be surprised if we hear an announcement of Intel making chips for AMD.

TLD LARS:

For record breakers this price is nothing really. Best case scenario for Intel would be that someone breaks a record or 2 and that will build some hype for the 15th generation.

That's definitely one of the reasons. Intel still has a very strong footing in the business sector. They're bread and butter comes from corporations worldwide. Enthusiast gamers are a small niche but we do deliver alot of hype for the next generation via YouTube creators. Before the 13900k was released, the hype and press was positive all over the net. I purchased it due to the reviews, benchmarks and hype. The results are fantastic. I've hit 6ghz during benchmarks which is why extremely nice scores were achieved. My gaming sessions and productivity are amazing with this chip.

mackintosh:

For benchmark nuts and people who just always have to have the best this will certainly deliver for the next six or so months. Not much longer than that, though.

In the gaming and benchmarking world absolutely. I must admit I'm always looking forward to seeing the results of newer processors. Chispy and Nizzen have a history of delivering top tier information right here in our community. And of course the details from Hilbert's reviews are uncanny and unmatched in my opinion. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hey Gurus, We can't forget about team Mac. I'm reading more articles about the Apple Team wanting to get a stronger footing in the gaming industry. Often times we only discuss Intel, Nvidia and AMD. Mac has a nice marketshare as well. I wouldn't be shocked to see a video card or gaming enhanced intergrated CPU that can compete from the I team.

TheDigitalJedi:

Nah they've been doing this forever now. It's a formula that's proven to be successful. That's why AMD and Intel always fight for the fastest CPU crown. If the 15th gen Intel turns out to be less productive than AMD's offerings with corporate and professional utilities, THAT will be a huge blow and bad for team blue. Intel will be fine. Don't be surprised if we hear an announcement of Intel making chips for AMD.

It's successful in the same way you watch a children's running race, where the kid who wins just happens to have the richest family in town with his own personal trainer and the fanciest gear - the average person isn't impressed by that. As for 15th gen, there is potential but Intel has done a lot to diminish the appeal of enthusiasts for the past several years, such as their late 10nm node, security vulnerabilities (and consequently, HT losing much of its value), the use of E-cores (which I don't hate but a lot of people do), the underwhelming result of Arc (though people's expectations were misplaced for such an undertaking), resorting to TSMC to make more chips, having no real response to Epyc, and then "gluing" dies together. 15th gen has a lot to make up for.

Before the 13900k was released, the hype and press was positive all over the net.

I don't recall the hype being all that positive. And no, I don't subscribe to nonsense like MLID or any of the other AMD simps. Intel is making good products but they're not making a whole lot that people are actually excited about. They have an interesting roadmap but it feels like every product release for the past few years has been lacking some of the things people expected to be there.

Chispy and Nizzen have a history of delivering top tier information right here in our community.

Chispy claimed this particular CPU wasn't going to exist and didn't handle it gracefully when it became clear that he was wrong. Perhaps he used to deliver top-tier info but I wouldn't say so anymore.

We can't forget about team Mac. I'm reading more articles about the Apple Team wanting to get a stronger footing in the gaming industry. Often times we only discuss Intel, Nvidia and AMD. Mac has a nice marketshare as well. I wouldn't be shocked to see a video card or gaming enhanced intergrated CPU that can compete from the I team.

There have been some benchmarks from Apple's M series (not here but elsewhere). So far it's rather underwhelming, but much like Arc, making a GPU gaming-ready is incredibly difficult. Apple is doing a good job considering how much of a disadvantage they're in. Granted, they put themselves there, so unlike Intel, I don't really sympathize for Apple's underwhelming gaming performance.

schmidtbag:

It's successful in the same way you watch a children's running race, where the kid who wins just happens to have the richest family in town with his own personal trainer and the fanciest gear - the average person isn't impressed by that. As for 15th gen, there is potential but Intel has done a lot to diminish the appeal of enthusiasts for the past several years, such as their late 10nm node, security vulnerabilities (and consequently, HT losing much of its value), the use of E-cores (which I don't hate but a lot of people do), the underwhelming result of Arc (though people's expectations were misplaced for such an undertaking), resorting to TSMC to make more chips, having no real response to Epyc, and then "gluing" dies together. 15th gen has a lot to make up for.

But the race is still extremely important to the tech world and tech geeks. This is why so many websites and Youtube channels complete tons of benchmarks and make their comparisons. Enthusiast like ourselves are a small contributor to the overall financial portfolio of Intel. Coffee, Comet and Rapture had similar performance and were very questionable in regards to bang for buck and the continuous use of the 14nm nodes, heat dissipation and power requirements. AM4 kicked @ss during that period and excelled the already impressive Ryzen brand. Especially the 5800x, 5900x, 5950x and the 5800X3D. Intel provided themselves a nice shot in the arm with the advancements of Alder Lake and the change to 10nm. Many enthusiast praised Alder Lake and the leap in performance it gave. The only folks I know that are complaining about E-Cores are gamers. For those of us that use our computers for creation and productivity, we like the E-Cores. 🙂 They can always be disabled if the need arises.

schmidtbag:

I don't recall the hype being all that positive. And no, I don't subscribe to nonsense like MLID or any of the other AMD simps. Intel is making good products but they're not making a whole lot that people are actually excited about. They have an interesting roadmap but it feels like every product release for the past few years has been lacking some of the things people expected to be there.

When the benchmark results were released early from China, that's the hype I'm speaking of. The tester hit 6ghz on the core. We all talked about the results in depth here and it was all over YouTube. Hilbert was the first to release the info if my memory is correct. It led the charts handedly in most benchmarks. The 13th gen was released in the same month as the 7950X and the 4090. That was October of 2022. A very exciting month for many and lines were out the door at Microcenter. The 13900k was released 2 weeks after the 4090 and it sold out. It wasn't a worthy upgrade for techs with 12th gen but I was coming from 10th gen. The 13900K is an amazing processor and handles everything I throw at it. It's currently my fastest processor. I was initially frustrated with the 7950X and the woes of AM5 upon release. I will always give a major shoutout to our brother Endbase for helping me find the proper BIOS which wasn't updated on the AMD U.S. page at the time. Now in 2024 my AM5 system is a workhorse. Everything works beautifully. It games wonderfully and is awesome for photography, video editing, print graphics and productivity. It has paid for itself and my Intel build probably 10x over. If I had to nitpick, it just has a longer boot up time when compared to my intel systems because it memory trains all the time. That's just a nitpick. A huge positive is that I can install the rumored ZEN 5 9000 series chip on my board.

schmidtbag:

Chispy claimed this particular CPU wasn't going to exist and didn't handle it gracefully when it became clear that he was wrong. Perhaps he used to deliver top-tier info but I wouldn't say so anymore.

C'mon Bro. Chispy is solidified, a made man and has always contributed great research for years. A disagreement or even if a person is considered wrong about a particular subject does not negate or tarnish years of positive contributions from a tech contributor. The dude has also helped so many people build top of line systems at very affordable prices. Chispy and his research is solid Bro.

schmidtbag:

There have been some benchmarks from Apple's M series (not here but elsewhere). So far it's rather underwhelming, but much like Arc, making a GPU gaming-ready is incredibly difficult. Apple is doing a good job considering how much of a disadvantage they're in. Granted, they put themselves there, so unlike Intel, I don't really sympathize for Apple's underwhelming gaming performance.

I don't disagree with anything here. But hey, there is nothing wrong if another competitor enters the fray. 😉

TheDigitalJedi:

But the race is still extremely important to the tech world and tech geeks. This is why so many websites and Youtube channels complete tons of benchmarks and make their comparisons. Enthusiast like ourselves are a small contributor to the overall financial portfolio of Intel.

The race is important, but the 14900KS is a race to the wrong goal. The power budget (and in turn, thermal budget) is not worth the extra couple hundred MHz just for a CPU that can be #1 in only some workloads. This kind of thing can make Intel look worse in the end. Since you brought up Apple: one of the things that made the M1 such a resounding technological success is the fact that it was very competitive with low end x86 chips in performance but with incredible performance-per-watt. This is also what has made AMD surge ahead of Intel, except for the high-end market. People are starting to realize that squeezing yourself in 1st place isn't always worth it depending on the sacrifices needed to achieve it. You're right that enthusiasts are a small contributor, but considering that, I would say Intel is in deep trouble. Currently, Intel is in last place when it comes to nearly every market. Apple makes better low-end chips. AMD is virtually a decade ahead in the server space, while also being found in most gaming consoles. Nvidia is absolutely crushing it in GPUs (server and desktop) and AI. Qualcomm and other ARM platforms are dominating the mobile space and smart TVs. RISC-V and MIPS are gaining a lot of momentum in the embedded space. So, where does that leave Intel? Pretty much just with heavy single-threaded workloads, which are rapidly becoming obsolete (single-threaded workloads will exist forever, but I'm referring to ones that crunch a lot of numbers).

The only folks I know that are complaining about E-Cores are gamers. For those of us that use our computers for creation and productivity, we like the E-Cores. 🙂 They can always be disabled if the need arises.

I thought productivity workloads often depended on instructions that E-cores lacked? In any case, many people grieve about the E-cores more than they deserve. I don't even see them as bad for gamers, it's really just the Windows scheduler that sucks. To me, the E-cores are great for the average person, but I think Intel leans on them a little too much.

C'mon Bro. Chispy is solidified, a made man and has always contributed great research for years. A disagreement or even if a person is considered wrong about a particular subject does not negate or tarnish years of positive contributions from a tech contributor. The dude has also helped so many people build top of line systems at very affordable prices. Chispy and his research is solid Bro.

Research, yes. Insider knowledge, not so much.

I don't disagree with anything here. But hey, there is nothing wrong if another competitor enters the fray. 😉

I agree, though, Apple is trying to play their own game. Going back to the analogy of children's foot races, Intel is the best sprinter but Apple is the best cyclist - Apple is still using their feet to move fast but in a way that's not really comparable. In business, what matters most is direct competitors. I would argue non-Apple ARM platforms are more competitive to x86, in that they're not as restricted in what you can run on them.

🙄

schmidtbag:

The race is important, but the 14900KS is a race to the wrong goal. The power budget (and in turn, thermal budget) is not worth the extra couple hundred MHz just for a CPU that can be #1 in only some workloads. This kind of thing can make Intel look worse in the end. Since you brought up Apple: one of the things that made the M1 such a resounding technological success is the fact that it was very competitive with low end x86 chips in performance but with incredible performance-per-watt. This is also what has made AMD surge ahead of Intel, except for the high-end market. People are starting to realize that squeezing yourself in 1st place isn't always worth it depending on the sacrifices needed to achieve it. You're right that enthusiasts are a small contributor, but considering that, I would say Intel is in deep trouble. Currently, Intel is in last place when it comes to nearly every market. Apple makes better low-end chips. AMD is virtually a decade ahead in the server space, while also being found in most gaming consoles. Nvidia is absolutely crushing it in GPUs (server and desktop) and AI. Qualcomm and other ARM platforms are dominating the mobile space and smart TVs. RISC-V and MIPS are gaining a lot of momentum in the embedded space. So, where does that leave Intel? Pretty much just with heavy single-threaded workloads, which are rapidly becoming obsolete (single-threaded workloads will exist forever, but I'm referring to ones that crunch a lot of numbers). I thought productivity workloads often depended on instructions that E-cores lacked? In any case, many people grieve about the E-cores more than they deserve. I don't even see them as bad for gamers, it's really just the Windows scheduler that sucks. To me, the E-cores are great for the average person, but I think Intel leans on them a little too much. Research, yes. Insider knowledge, not so much. I agree, though, Apple is trying to play their own game. Going back to the analogy of children's foot races, Intel is the best sprinter but Apple is the best cyclist - Apple is still using their feet to move fast but in a way that's not really comparable. In business, what matters most is direct competitors. I would argue non-Apple ARM platforms are more competitive to x86, in that they're not as restricted in what you can run on them.

The KS product line has been done for years now. The thermals and power requirements for the 14900KS is no surprise. If it was a bad investment or nonprofitable, Intel wouldn't make them. In regards to them being in trouble, only time will tell. The 15th gen Arrow Lake may propel them forward as Alder Lake did. I will say that we can see a clear path and goal for AMD. Their marketshare is constantly growing and their stock dollar has exploded. AMD wants to be a leader in the processor and AI market while maintaining a stable place in the GPU sector. I will admit that Intel's vision seems uncertain to me. I've read they want to eventually manufacture chips for everyone. On a side note, did you know that Jenson and Lisa are distant cousins? I just read an article on that. In regards to the E-Cores, they are fantastic for multitasking while keeping productivity nice and smooth. My games are also running flawlessly while they're enabled. I don't have any complaints. Again, I have to disagree with ya about Chispy. He's put in alot of work and his rep is platinum. Even if you disagree with him on a particular subject, what about all the others he's been very accurate about? I can only judge a man by his works and contributions. Dude is solid with many tech sites. I'm not going to count Intel out. I want them continuing to innovate. I want Intel and AMD to be successful. The last thing we need is one main CPU chipmaker. Our wallets would feel the negative outcome of that.

I am getting as little (actually very) tired to see the personal attacks about Chispy, Schmidtbag. I need you to drop it as I do not want to babysit people with personal grudges.

Hilbert Hagedoorn:

I am getting as little (actually very) tired to see the personal attacks about Chispy, Schmidtbag. I need you to drop it as I do not want to babysit people with personal grudges.

I propose a cage match between the two!:D More seriously, chill out guys! We all say stupid stuff once in an while, no point in being upset with it.