Intel almost never reduces prices, unless they have a whole new core design. Instead, Intel gives you more features for the same prices.
Really. Odd, since AMD already started one. I think your are in for a surprise - let's see who's right.I expect minimal real world changes on mainstream Intel pricing. There will be NO price war.
Really. Odd, since AMD already started one. I think your are in for a surprise - let's see who's right.
500$ is mainstream? Really?Really, because it looks like AMD increased their prices a massive amount with Ryzen.
Before Ryzen, the top mainstream AMD CPU was what? $150? Now a Ryzen 1800X is $499.
Arguably this is more expensive than Intel's top mainstream part the (7700K).
AMD is not interested in a price war, they are interested in making Intel like margins.
In Servers/HEDT AMD has offers some compelling prices lower than Intels, but they are still massively higher than AMDs previous efforts, and not really price war indicators IMO.
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.
Intel cannot cut prices - that is the real problem for them - AMD "glued" together two 8 core chips and boom you have threadripper at super high yields and probably cost them $400 to make. meanwhile Intel's Monolythic 18core chip will cost substantially more to make as their yeilds can't be close to what AMD is getting. So in reality AMD broke Intel's cost structure with the Infinity Fabric and that is why NVDA is scrambling around talking about MCM GPU designs. Threadripper and EPYC are proving that the future is smaller dies being connected to act like a large die.
Intel cannot cut prices - that is the real problem for them - AMD "glued" together two 8 core chips and boom you have threadripper at super high yields and probably cost them $400 to make. meanwhile Intel's Monolythic 18core chip will cost substantially more to make as their yeilds can't be close to what AMD is getting. So in reality AMD broke Intel's cost structure with the Infinity Fabric and that is why NVDA is scrambling around talking about MCM GPU designs. Threadripper and EPYC are proving that the future is smaller dies being connected to act like a large die.
It is interesting to see AMD and Intel swap positions here.
Really, because it looks like AMD increased their prices a massive amount with Ryzen.
Before Ryzen, the top mainstream AMD CPU was what? $150? Now a Ryzen 1800X is $499.
Arguably this is more expensive than Intel's top mainstream part the (7700K).
AMD is not interested in a price war, they are interested in making Intel like margins.
In Servers/HEDT AMD has offers some compelling prices lower than Intels, but they are still massively higher than AMDs previous efforts, and not really price war indicators IMO.
Right now AMD is interested in market penetration. They need to rebuild their ecosystem, fan base, etc...
So, technically, it's not a price war, but, effectively they are putting noticeable pressure on pricing.
AMD arguably hasn't rolled out their mainstream chips yet (ie. mobile chips and APUs).Yes, somewhat, for Threadripper and Epyc.
But in mainstream, I am not seeing this pressure.
AMD arguably hasn't rolled out their mainstream chips yet (ie. mobile chips and APUs).
They will be using the Ryzen model numbering scheme so there's no way an e.g. 1500U will be cheaper than the 1500X. Unlike with the higher core models I expect AMD to try to push the "better than expected" performance (thanks to using only one CCX) and energy efficiency (thanks to 14LPP).Definitely a big part of mainstream missing. Raven Ridge may be AMDs most important part. Though AMD won't have the extra core advantage over Intel with these.
I have seen many people thinking this be priced similar to previous AMD APU's ($150 or less) but I think AMD will be looking to move these up market as much as they can. So expect top model will be at least $200.
The situation with Threadripper compatible coolers is extremely pathetic at the moment. There is a single cooling solution (20+ variants, all made by Asetek) available for it.
Air coolers exist from Arctic, Noctua and Coolermaster but most of them are insufficient (Arctic, Coolermaster and the smaller Noctuas) and none of them are actually available..
Around 40W on average it seems (two separate VRMs combined) in this load, which is obviously the worst-case scenario.
3200MHz MEMCLK, which results in high SoC power draw due to the automatic VDDCR_SoC control present in Threadripper. The SMU adjust the SoC voltage automatically (unlike on AM4 parts), based on the set MEMCLK. 2133MHz = 0.850V, 2400MHz = 0.900V, 2666MHz = 0.950V, >= 2800MHz = 1.10625V.
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.
Intel is raking in the dough. Intel doesn't have an image problem.
This is not your game of monopoly, childrens card game. This is real life and Intel's cost of developing, manufacturing and shipping the CPU is significantly higher than AMD's, so even dropping the cost to say $1000 would probably have them sell it at a loss.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.
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.]
AMD needs some way to into that market. Yes, that is the key to their success. But price is not the way to compete there. Features, stability, reputation, quality, etc. That is how you get into that market. ECC memory is one massive feature to tout. They don't also need price.I am guessing one thing AMD will be aiming to do is get into the enterprise space with high end OEM workstations. It's probably why they designed TR with ECC. The high end engineering workstations from Dell or whomever have been equipped with Xeons for years but there wasn't any other option. There was intel and that was it. When a company buys say 20,000 of these workstations they don't give a shit whats in it only that it meets their requirements. Now AMD also has the high end vega radeon pro SSG cards. It's going to be interesting to see what happens.
AMD needs some way to into that market. Yes, that is the key to their success. But price is not the way to compete there. Features, stability, reputation, quality, etc. That is how you get into that market. ECC memory is one massive feature to tout. They don't also need price.
What AMD needs is to have more money to get it into Dell's hands, validate the crap out of it, and bring those results to potential customers. That costs money that AMD doesn't have and will not have unless they start charging for it.
The phrase "no one has been fired for buying IBM" has been applied many times to Intel as well. If you are the one recommending, approving, or buying 20,000 computers, then you better believe that you will double think what will happen if something goes wrong and the CEO asks why you didn't buy the name brand. Remember, the CEO (or similar person of power) probably rates wine taste by the price that they were told that the wine cost (regardless of the actual quality of the wine). http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sho...-better-if-they-are-told-it-is-expensive.html, and for similar reasons thinks that Apple makes the best everything, Dyson makes the best vacuums, Starbucks has the best coffee, etc.
On the low end, low price is killing AMD. For decades, AMD had the cheap chips and OEMs put them into cheap computers with cheap motherboards and cheap components. Guess who gets blamed if something is slow, bad, or malfunctions? AMD is the only sticker easy to see from the outside of the box.
Price = quality in many decision maker's minds. Are you willing to put your job and reputation on the line for it to buy 20,000 computers? This has nothing to do with the quality of AMD's chips. It has all to do with the psychology of people. This isn't even limited to AMD. It is running a business 101.
http://www.marketingdonut.co.uk/sales/sales-techniques-and-negotiations/don-t-compete-on-price
https://creativepro.com/three-big-reasons-never-compete-price/
http://www.nextmarketing.com.au/201...-3-reasons-you-should-never-compete-on-price/
http://consultantjournal.com/blog/why-you-never-want-to-compete-on-price
This is not your game of monopoly, childrens card game. This is real life and Intel's cost of developing, manufacturing and shipping the CPU is significantly higher than AMD's, so even dropping the cost to say $1000 would probably have them sell it at a loss.
Sorry to cut you long post short, but I'd like to note that AMD is still in the progress of rolling out all their new platforms and ecosystems. All we got so far is a couple of months of high end AM4 and a couple of days of HEDT TR4, mostly in retail. Epyc is technically launched, but that already showcases well how long the lead times into OEM availability are. Mobile chips and mainstream APUs are still to come with Raven Ridge. Features, stability, reputation, quality are all attributes AMD still need to build and grow as part of their new ecosystems, plenty of which was and partly still is in a half-baked state. Price is the one leverage they have to ensure they already accumulate exposure, impact and mindshare at this early point. And imo so far they are doing this excellently, especially compared to their last couple endeavors. Their approach already amassed that much goodwill that plenty developers don't mind optimizing for AMD's platforms. Notice for example how Ryzen 7 was blasted for its bad gaming performance, how this turned into something well received with Ryzen 5, and with Threadripper it's mostly considered a non-issue. And developments like those will count more in the end than already competing for maximal profit at this early point already.AMD needs some way to into that market. Yes, that is the key to their success. But price is not the way to compete there. Features, stability, reputation, quality, etc. That is how you get into that market.
Having actually worked in places and know people who work in places which have large numbers of HEDT workstations deployed none of these systems will be overclocked or be used for gaming - that is where most of these are sold,and its even funnier when you are silent about the Core i7 7700K/7740K which ended up beating most of the more expensive Intel CPUs in gaming.
Intel cares so little for gaming performance on their high core count X299 CPUs,they changed the cache organisation,and spent more effort on improving non-gaming performance and introduced a line of rebadged consumer chips for gamers.
All enthusiasts do is moan on forums about CPUs meant for work not running some game "well" and even "well" is them being in a bubble when almost all gamers are still using 60HZ monitors.
If people are paying a £1000 CPU to run a lightly threaded game at a million FPS,I am honestly going to question their sanity,when a Core i3 7350K can be had for £100 and probably will run them as well.
I will also question their sanity when Coffee Lake is only mere months away.
Intel is certainly pushing the new Core-X chips as gaming chips. That seems odd if they didn't care.
If they don't care about gaming, then why do we have an 8700K listed here
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/12312851
http://www.3dmark.com/compare/3dm11...3dm11/12313063/3dm11/12311222/3dm11/12311234#