Intel's strategy and marketing departments dropped the ball. If I was an Intel shareholder, I'd be pissed. This could go down as one of the biggest business fumbles of 2017. The big dog fell asleep and the fox got the chickens.
Lets review:
1) Intel has been more than capable of making 6 & 8 core processors for a long time now.
2) Intel knew Ryzen was coming out. Official Ryzen benchmarks looked good. AMD showed Ryzen beating the 6900K. Early leaked benchmarks were available and consistently showed good Ryzen performance. Prices were also leaked...even the average Joe could find them. All of the leaks showed significantly lower prices.
So, why didn't Intel think to release a well priced consumer grade 6 & 8 core Kaby Lake processors yearly this year, and stop Ryzen from ever gaining traction? Intel was capable. They had the tech. They knew Ryzen was coming. They have huge profit margins - which now is more evident by the price of Ryzen.
I think the answer, in a nutshell, is greed, possibly stupidity, or both. In more detail:
A) Intel underestimated AMD or over estimated their own chips.
B) Intel failed to see that the consumer market had reached a critical mass for the need (real or psychological) for 6 & 8 core consumer processors. Intel was greedy and starved the consumer market with expensive 4 core processors and motherboards for years.
C) Intel failed to act strategically. Even if B is true, Intel should have released a well priced 8 core Kaby Lake processor(s). If Intel had an 8-core processor they could always adjust the price up if Ryzen was a flop or lower the price if Ryzen was a success. I'm not counting Intel's enthusiast lineup here. It's expensive, and so are the motherboards.
In this scenario Intel's profit margins *might* have been lower. But if Ryzen was a success, Intel's profits would be lower anyway. At least in this case, Intel gives the customer quality & value before AMD forces them to - which makes AMD the hero, and Intel the price gouging villain. It looks better if Intel did good for the customer of their own volition.
If Intel beat AMD to a well priced 8 core consumer processor, then:
1) People would not be flocking to Ryzen like it was the 1849 gold rush.
2) There would have been minimum or no Ryzen hype. Ryzen would be the "alternative" not Intel.
3) Intel would have a better public image. Intel's customers would have been happy, rather than resentful for being price gouged for the last 5 years and getting expensive 4-core CPU's with cheap thermal compounds.
4) It would have kept loyal Intel customers loyal.
5) Intel would have been acting/leading, rather than reacting/following.
I like Intel processors. I don't like Intel's prices or constantly changing CPU sockets. Intel has to come back to the consumer market humble and offer customers better value and performance than Ryzen. Maybe even make up for the years of gouging us. Here is what I suggest:
6-core @ 4.5Ghz for $199
8-core @ 4.2Ghz for $299
12-core @ 4.0Ghz for $399
... along with a more stable socket/platform.
This will give AMD a real challenge. However, timing is critical. Once people switch to Ryzen, they won't be buying Intel (or any other processors) for at least 2-3 years, if not more...even if Intel offers better price & performance.