My 7820x is 8 core.
Intel is DEAD. 16cores/32threads at $1000, vs intels 18cores/36threads at $2000.
Exactly. Threadripper is a great CPU at a great price. But, Threadripper is a niche product where its target market is generally not price sensitive. When I did that type of work, my license cost was $20k per year for one computer. The difference between $999 and $1999 is nothing and my company wouldn't blink an eye when I would recommend $5k to $10k computers. The memory, storage, and often video cards cost more than the CPUs.In instances where your software licensing is (say) $5k per year for another 4 or 8 threads, then it'd be mad to get Threadripper ahead of the Core i9s. [Numerous engineering codes for example could be expected to be ran on either of these platforms.]
AMD shouldn't be shooting themselves in the foot with such low prices. They should raise prices and spend the money convincing users that AMD has great features, reliability, etc. This is for the long-term viability of AMD.
If Intel dropped the 7900x to 699 it would be a clear winner and would take some potential TR buyers. At 999 it makes no sense to me.
Its a lot more likely now then it was 5 years ago. But I have always done that. Back when I ripped movies (that's a bad Topweasel), I would take my Phenom X4, start the ripping tool, set it to use 2 cores and then start a game. I had been using Netflix on my A64x2 4400+ while gaming.My recollection about at least one of the claims for more cores on the desktop was that we could all have some task going on in the background and still game decently, since we had lots of cores to handle lots of threads. In fact, I recall one poster in particular who liked to post about how 8 core Piledriver was supposedly so good with something significant running as a background task.
So it that going to work with all these cores now?
Are we going to be running a demanding game and a demanding work app at the same time? Somehow I think we still won't be trying that very often.
Win10 says my poor little i5-3330 is dealing with 1,600 threads at the moment.
Intel is DEAD. 16cores/32threads at $1000, vs intels 18cores/36threads at $2000.
LOL, that's a ridiculous notion. Intel is getting kicked hard for sure, but they could drop prices significantly tomorrow and the i9s will suddenly become more attractive. In fact, I can't believe they're not already considering it - the $400 gap between the 7820 and 7900 was absurd to begin with and gives them plenty of maneuvering room.
Honestly it's great our perspective has changed where we feel a 10c is overpriced at 999. A year ago, it was the norm to pay $1700 for it. So I guess pricing is moving in the right direction due to competition.I agree the 7900X should be priced closer to the 12 core AMD chip. The 1950X outclasses it by a large margin most of the time, so yeah. But hey, it wouldn't be Intel if they charged fair pricing. That's not a troll, just a simple fact.
Intel never drops prices.
More specifically even at the hype of competition they would only adjust prices somewhat competitively when they had to realign for a new product.Intel never drops prices.
Exactly. Threadripper is a great CPU at a great price. But, Threadripper is a niche product where its target market is generally not price sensitive. When I did that type of work, my license cost was $20k per year for one computer. The difference between $999 and $1999 is nothing and my company wouldn't blink an eye when I would recommend $5k to $10k computers. The memory, storage, and often video cards cost more than the CPUs.
AMD shouldn't be shooting themselves in the foot with such low prices. They should raise prices and spend the money convincing users that AMD has great features, reliability, etc. This is for the long-term viability of AMD.
Not at all.
In instances where your software licensing is (say) $5k per year for another 4 or 8 threads, then it'd be mad to get Threadripper ahead of the Core i9s. [Numerous engineering codes for example could be expected to be ran on either of these platforms.]
Intel is DEAD. 16cores/32threads at $1000, vs intels 18cores/36threads at $2000.
X399 threadripper supports ecc which is pretty important for sensitive engineering calculations. X99 supports it too but X299 doesn't seem to support it which is a bummer.Exactly. Threadripper is a great CPU at a great price. But, Threadripper is a niche product where its target market is generally not price sensitive. When I did that type of work, my license cost was $20k per year for one computer. The difference between $999 and $1999 is nothing and my company wouldn't blink an eye when I would recommend $5k to $10k computers. The memory, storage, and often video cards cost more than the CPUs.
AMD shouldn't be shooting themselves in the foot with such low prices. They should raise prices and spend the money convincing users that AMD has great features, reliability, etc. This is for the long-term viability of AMD.
Sounds to me like Intel should raise their prices ASAP. They should raise MSRP for 7980X to $2999 at the very least.The difference between $999 and $1999 is nothing and my company wouldn't blink an eye when I would recommend $5k to $10k computers. The memory, storage, and often video cards cost more than the CPUs.
AMD shouldn't be shooting themselves in the foot with such low prices.
Numerous engineering software applications will be run on systems with vendor supported ECC DRAM. AKA, Xeon & EPYC.
I said it was a large component, not the only one. The difference between a 7900 and 7700 at the same clock is what, 5-7% max in gaming? I already have a Ryzen 5 and a Ryzen 7 box and now it is time for my big upgrade.
They have dropped prices, and will probably be forced to drop prices if AMD gains marketshare.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/intel-cpu-prices-drop-ryzen-launch/
And before you say it, MC isn't cutting prices and taking a loss out of love for Intel - Intel is behind it. Here's an example from back in the day:
https://www.cnet.com/news/intel-cuts-prices-for-wide-range-of-chips/
They have dropped prices, and will probably be forced to drop prices if AMD gains marketshare.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/intel-cpu-prices-drop-ryzen-launch/
And before you say it, MC isn't cutting prices and taking a loss out of love for Intel - Intel is behind it. Here's an example from back in the day:
https://www.cnet.com/news/intel-cuts-prices-for-wide-range-of-chips/
Intel never drops prices.
AMD is losing money. AMD has a great product. AMD should charge like it is a great product. "Budget" doesn't sell well in this space. Are you going to propose for your company's mission critical work that they buy the "second tier budget option"? AMD needs a premium image to do well in this segment. And often times people associate price with quality, which is wrong, but it is the world we live in.Sounds to me like Intel should raise their prices ASAP. They should raise MSRP for 7980X to $2999 at the very least.
Intel reduces prices when they have a reason to. The last few years they have had no reason to.
Intel almost never reduces prices, unless they have a whole new core design. Instead, Intel gives you more features for the same prices.Intel reduces prices when they have a reason to. The last few years they have had no reason to.