Intel's Rocket Lake prices fall, pre-binned chips available; Comet Lake gets even cheaper

[midian182]

What just happened? Intel’s Rocket Lake processors only arrived a few weeks ago, but many of the 11th-gen CPUs are seeing price reductions—a stark contrast to virtually every other tech product right now that’s feeling the global chip shortage’s effects.

Earlier this month, Intel’s Core i7-11700K, along with several 10th-gen CPUs, all saw price drops. That chip is currently only sold by third parties on Amazon at a price higher ($454) than the usual $420, though some Micro Center stores have a few left at $399.99. Note that the latter is in-store pickup only.

The non-K variant of the Core i7-11700 is available on Amazon, and at $339—down from its usual $370—as is the Intel Core i5-11600K, which is now $264.99 ($295 Amazon list price).

As noted by Tom’s Hardware, those who want a guaranteed overclock on their Rocket Lake chips should check out Silicon Lottery’s pre-binned CPUs. It’s selling a Core i9-11900K that comes with a 5.1 GHz boost clock across all eight of its cores for $879.99. That’s $340 more than the MSRP for a 6.2% higher all-core boost clock.

Silicon Lottery's offerings

Silicon Lottery also has a couple of Core i5-11600K CPUs selling under the $262 MSRP. One with a 4.9 GHz binned all-core boost is $259, while a 4.8 GHz variant is $249. Intel’s default boost for the chip is 4.6 GHz.

The pre-binned chips come with a one-year warranty that includes a one-time replacement for any defects or malfunctions that may develop over time.

Intel fans looking for what arguably are better bargains should check out the 10th-gen Comet Lake sales. The Core i7-10700KF (disabled integrated graphics), a joint ‘Best Gaming CPU’ winner in our Best CPUs feature, is just $294.49, while Micro Centre has the 'K' variant for $270. Elsewhere, the Core i5-10600K is $218 ($199 Micro Center).

Having its own fabs, which will soon be producing vehicle chips alongside CPUs, has helped Intel mitigate the global component shortage issues, though the mixed reception to Rocket Lake means demand isn’t exactly through the roof.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/89351-intel-rocket-lake-prices-fall-pre-binned-chips.html

 

[R00sT3R]

"It’s selling a Core i9-11900K that comes with a 5.1 GHz boost clock across all eight of its cores for $879.99"

I find it utterly bizarre that there could be literally anyone out there, who would want an 11900K costing $880.

 

[Nobina]

Intels high end is terrible. They should focus on CPUs such as 10600, 11600 and 11400 which are actually competitive if not better than what AMD currently offers.

 

[Achaios]

I used to think that the 10600K is a good bargain at $200 and then I had a look at the chip's TDP and my freaking jaw dropped.

Intel's declared TDP for the 10600K is 125W, that is 37W more than my Haswell 4770K, but b/c of Intel shenaningans, the 125W TDP is only for stock operation. Mild overclocks of the 10600K cause the TDP to rise to well over 200W.

Given that my 88W TDP 4770K Haswell requires no less than a Noctua NH-D15 for adequate cooling at a mild overclock of 4.4 GHz to keep temps manageable, Intel is sorely mistaken to think that I, an enthusiast, is gonna spend money to buy a 200W TDP+ 6 Core/Thread CPU in 2021.

 

[Adi6293]

I used to think that the 10600K is a good bargain at $200 and then I had a look at the chip's TDP and my freaking jaw dropped.

Intel's declared TDP for the 10600K is 125W, that is 37W more than my Haswell 4770K, but b/c of Intel shenaningans, the 125W TDP is only for stock operation. Mild overclocks of the 10600K cause the TDP to rise to well over 200W.

Given that my 88W TDP 4770K Haswell requires no less than a Noctua NH-D15 for adequate cooling at a mild overclock of 4.4 GHz to keep temps manageable, Intel is sorely mistaken to think that I, an enthusiast, is gonna spend money to buy a 200W TDP+ 6 Core/Thread CPU in 2021.

You are right to some extent, 10th gen was soldered so that 10600K is probably easier to cool than your 4770K and much faster even at stock speeds

 

[BadThad]

The HOT buy is the 10850K for about $350. Get 'em before they're gone!

 

[Strawman]

I used to think that the 10600K is a good bargain at $200 and then I had a look at the chip's TDP and my freaking jaw dropped.

Intel's declared TDP for the 10600K is 125W, that is 37W more than my Haswell 4770K, but b/c of Intel shenaningans, the 125W TDP is only for stock operation. Mild overclocks of the 10600K cause the TDP to rise to well over 200W.

Given that my 88W TDP 4770K Haswell requires no less than a Noctua NH-D15 for adequate cooling at a mild overclock of 4.4 GHz to keep temps manageable, Intel is sorely mistaken to think that I, an enthusiast, is gonna spend money to buy a 200W TDP+ 6 Core/Thread CPU in 2021.

It certainly does not hit over 200 watts. I had an 8700k, which is basically the same cpu with worse silicon and I could do 5.1 ghz @130 to 140watts in all core stresses.

 

[Achaios]

It certainly does not hit over 200 watts. I had an 8700k, which is basically the same cpu with worse silicon and I could do 5.1 ghz @130 to 140watts in all core stresses.

I've never met any1 on the internet who didn't own a Golden Sample. I wonder why.

 

[neeyik]

Intel's declared TDP for the 10600K is 125W...Mild overclocks of the 10600K cause the TDP to rise to well over 200W.

Anandtech's testing of the 10600K hit 130W in Linpack, on standard clocks; Gamer's Nexus testing at 5.1 GHz in Cinebench saw 213 W on the 12V EPS (stock was 103 W).

The latter also tested a stock 8700K in the same test and it peaked at 86W, so given that the 10600K has slightly higher boost clocks and a noticeably higher base clock than the 8700K, a 14W increase shouldn't be all that of a surprise.

However it wasn't clear as to whether or not the motherboard used by GN, for the 8700K, disregarded Intel's power levels and went hell for leather; it may well have used standard PL1/PL2 settings, with fairly narrow tau values. It might not seem to be a great sign for 10600K, but my 9700K can easily hit 150W+ at stock clocks, if I remove any power limits in the BIOS.

It certainly does not hit over 200 watts.

He's referring to the 10600K hitting 200W, not the 8700K.

 

[Crinkles]

I've never met any1 on the internet who didn't own a Golden Sample. I wonder why.

Well "hi" bud. My 8700k does exactly 4.7Ghz, and only 4.7Ghz, my 9900k is not an overclockers dream either. I keep buying and trying, but never even have quite the good luck of a 15th generation youtuber. No fatuousity or sarcasm intended.

 

[MaxSmarties]

"It’s selling a Core i9-11900K that comes with a 5.1 GHz boost clock across all eight of its cores for $879.99"

I find it utterly bizarre that there could be literally anyone out there, who would want an 11900K costing $880.

... plus the energy costs to keep it at that clock

 

[Strawman]

I've never met any1 on the internet who didn't own a Golden Sample. I wonder why.

Ιt definitely was not a golden sample. 5.1 for an 8700k is kind of the normal

 

[Strawman]

Anandtech's testing of the 10600K hit 130W in Linpack, on standard clocks; Gamer's Nexus testing at 5.1 GHz in Cinebench saw 213 W on the 12V EPS (stock was 103 W).

The latter also tested a stock 8700K in the same test and it peaked at 86W, so given that the 10600K has slightly higher boost clocks and a noticeably higher base clock than the 8700K, a 14W increase shouldn't be all that of a surprise.

However it wasn't clear as to whether or not the motherboard used by GN, for the 8700K, disregarded Intel's power levels and went hell for leather; it may well have used standard PL1/PL2 settings, with fairly narrow tau values. It might not seem to be a great sign for 10600K, but my 9700K can easily hit 150W+ at stock clocks, if I remove any power limits in the BIOS.


He's referring to the 10600K hitting 200W, not the 8700K.

Well of course you can hit 200 watts with any cpu, that's not the point. The point is that with less than 1.3 volts (which is kind of what you should be doing for 24/7) you cant make the 8700 or the 10600 consume 200 or more watts. And that's on stress tests. On normal usage it should hover around the 70 to 90 watts

 

[Strawman]

Well "hi" bud. My 8700k does exactly 4.7Ghz, and only 4.7Ghz, my 9900k is not an overclockers dream either. I keep buying and trying, but never even have quite the good luck of a 15th generation youtuber. No fatuousity or sarcasm intended.

Maybe its your mobo or you got the worst bin. Happens. My 10900k is average, does around 5.1 on 1.28. Ive seen some crazy 5.3 on 1.25 in ocnet

 

[Geralt]

I am on 7 nm. I could never get back to 14 nm. Old thing.

 

[Loadedaxe]

There is literally no sense in building a new PC without a video card, and they are hard to come by. Might as well wait until the VC shortage is gone if ever. Alder Lake and Ryzen 4 will be out by then. RL is trash and not worth the cost.

 

[Markoni35]

I am on 7 nm. I could never get back to 14 nm. Old thing.

"Once you try 7nm you can never go back to 14nm."

That's totally opposite from the general opinion about size...

 

[Geralt]

"Once you try 7nm you can never go back to 14nm."

That's totally opposite from the general opinion about size...

Separation between transistors, obviously. But if you want to troll, do it elsewhere, please.

 

[Markoni35]

Separation between transistors, obviously. But if you want to troll, do it elsewhere, please.

It was just a joke.

 

[Markoni35]

So, Intel's CPUs can't be called Racket Lake anymore...

 

[captaincranky]

Separation between transistors, obviously. But if you want to troll, do it elsewhere, please.

Hi! My screen name is captaincranky. I've been here for a few years, so I thought I'd take a moment to introduce myself to our newest moderator.