Ryzen arrives this week, so Intel is cutting prices across the board

[Julio Franco]

That Intel has had little pressure from its most direct competitor to develop faster and more affordable processors in the past few years would be an understatement. AMD is making a comeback to the performance desktop market later this week with the highly awaited release of Ryzen. With full tests and reviews still pending, it's expected that Ryzen will be highly competitive against today's flagship Core processors while costing a fraction of them.

The top-end Ryzen 7 1800X will come with 8 cores and 16 threads for $499, and is expected to perform up to par with Intel's eight-core part, the Core i7-6900K that goes for twice that amount. The other two Ryzen CPUs that are part of this first release will also be 8 core parts, costing $399 and $329.

Naturally, Intel's immediate remedy to the situation is to cut prices to match Ryzen's performance output per dollar and steal some of AMD's thunder. As reported by Tweaktown and a few other sites this past weekend, price cuts are already becoming evident at online retailers such as Microcenter (anywhere from $30 to $100), while Amazon and Newegg are seeing less significant cuts as of writing.

On Amazon, Ryzen pre-orders have translated into AMD becoming the top selling CPUs in a matter of days.

As far as performance bragging rights are concerned, Intel will want to save face and keep the lead it's been holding for years.

However, in the overall scope of things, what the real meaning this has for Intel, maybe it's not as big of a deal as we enthusiasts would like to think. Last week we reported about Intel's future plans, including the company’s eighth-generation Core CPUs that will remain on a 14nm manufacturing node. They also said the firm was going “data center first” where there is larger room for growth and revenue moving forward.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/68310-ryzen-arrives-week-intel-cutting-prices-across-board.html

 

[Onygen]

Some tech sites said they have received an Email from Intel regarding guide to benchmark. Do you have any info about that

 

[oldikes]

Yasssss lets gimme that <$150 i5. Id rather go AMD but I dont wanna swap out my mobo.

 

[avioza]

We didn't want that revenue anyway.

Well this certainly lends some credence to those benchmarks.

It's ok AMD, go for server rooms next. Good on you for bringing the bacon.

 

[ET3D]

I imagine that Intel will be doing some price reductions, but these sales don't necessary reflect that. Looks to me more like the retailers themselves trying to get rid of some Intel stock before Ryzen hits.

 

[CobraA1]

Data center operators everywhere are gonna start mentioning Ryzen every time they negotiate anything with Intel. Don't fool yourself into thinking that data centers are gonna ignore AMD.

 

[theBest11778]

I don't think a $40 price reduction is going to cut it. If AMD can deliver 65-80% gains in multi threaded applications, lower TDP, and better future proofing over the 7700k it will have to be much lower than $299 to even be considered. Sorry Intel but the days of quad core CPUS over $200 are just about over.

 

[Uncle Al]

Oh yeah .... It's almost better than the legendary "gas wars" and the chips last a lot longer! LOL

 

[mbrowne5061]

I'm not sold yet - and won't be until the benchmarks are in - but I have my wallet at the ready.

 

[Yandex]

I've been a long time system builder, and for years my opinion of Intel has always been that they are a somewhat "slimy" company. We all come at things through the lens of our experiences.... and over the years I've have experienced enough "questionable" situations concerning Intel, to form/support that opinion.

That being said, I have little doubt that Intel will try any "backdoor" maneuver they can, in an attempt to keep themselves on top. It would be wise to keep that in mind when the reviews and official benchmarks start rolling out..... If you see significant differences versus what has been leaked, questioning it might be in your best self-interests.

 

[Darth Shiv]

I imagine that Intel will be doing some price reductions, but these sales don't necessary reflect that. Looks to me more like the retailers themselves trying to get rid of some Intel stock before Ryzen hits.

They'd be crazy not to properly respond.

 

[Rippleman]

I am not sure if people have thought of this angle, but to me this is the way this reads.

Intel: "Now that we have competition, we can no longer milk you for as much as we can so we will be now be making our prices be more reasonable and profits more inline with what's acceptable".

Sounds to me like they abused their position (as with any monopoly).

 

[Vrmithrax]

I am not sure if people have thought of this angle, but to me this is the way this reads.

Intel: "Now that we have competition, we can no longer milk you for as much as we can so we will be now be making our prices be more reasonable and profits more inline with what's acceptable".

Sounds to me like they abused their position (as with any monopoly).

Welcome to capitalism. Companies like Intel get as much as possible for their products, for as long as they can, to recoup R&D expenses, advertising, etc. They are a business, and only remain a business if they can continue to pull in enough revenue.

I drive by Intel's facilities in Oregon nearly every day. The size and scope of those operations make me appreciate just how much money a company like Intel has to spend to try to stay on top of the market. They don't have the luxury of just having a product and letting it sell, there is always a survival drive to be innovating and thinking years ahead in processor and electronics design.

 

[Rippleman]

Welcome to capitalism. Companies like Intel get as much as possible for their products, for as long as they can, to recoup R&D expenses, advertising, etc. They are a business, and only remain a business if they can continue to pull in enough revenue.

I drive by Intel's facilities in Oregon nearly every day. The size and scope of those operations make me appreciate just how much money a company like Intel has to spend to try to stay on top of the market. They don't have the luxury of just having a product and letting it sell, there is always a survival drive to be innovating and thinking years ahead in processor and electronics design.

Standard rule of thumb - the more you have, the more you waste.

AMD is a fraction of the size of intel, a fraction of the revenue, a fraction of R&D, and now, have a similar product for a fraction of the price (half is still a fraction).

Waste is waste.

 

[Jumper227]

It's not across the board, it's just Microcenter that is doing that...did you even do any research?

 

[howzz1854]

Some reports over the weekend started popping up that Intel has reached out reviewers through email asking them to check with Intel before publishing reviews. can you guys look into that?

looks like we're back to 10 years ago when Athlon XP came about and Intel strong armed their way out of the market. you just couldn't find a PC maker that sell Athlon chips unless you're building a machine on your own. some of those deep incentives and advertising rebates were enough to put those PC makers in the blake for many years. I remember those days.

 

[howzz1854]

I meant 10~15 years ago.

 

[Evernessince]

Yasssss lets gimme that <$150 i5. Id rather go AMD but I dont wanna swap out my mobo.

You're going to have to swap out your mobo regardless next upgrade. Might as well go AMD, where they won't force you to upgrade your mobo each gen if that really is your worry.

Some tech sites said they have received an Email from Intel regarding guide to benchmark. Do you have any info about that

According to what I heard, only a few news outlets actually received the email. I'm guessing Intel stopped once word got out.

I am not sure if people have thought of this angle, but to me this is the way this reads.

Intel: "Now that we have competition, we can no longer milk you for as much as we can so we will be now be making our prices be more reasonable and profits more inline with what's acceptable".

Sounds to me like they abused their position (as with any monopoly).

Welcome to capitalism. Companies like Intel get as much as possible for their products, for as long as they can, to recoup R&D expenses, advertising, etc. They are a business, and only remain a business if they can continue to pull in enough revenue.

I drive by Intel's facilities in Oregon nearly every day. The size and scope of those operations make me appreciate just how much money a company like Intel has to spend to try to stay on top of the market. They don't have the luxury of just having a product and letting it sell, there is always a survival drive to be innovating and thinking years ahead in processor and electronics design.

That's a naive point of view. Ryzen was produced at a fraction of the cost of Kabby Lake alone. Just because Intel flushes money down it's toilet of bureaucracy and flashy facilities doesn't justify their laziness. Intel has and does stifle market competition to continue it's couch potato lifestyle. In fact, even Intel employees reverberate this, a majority of them think the new CEO is incompetent.

"There is always a survival drive to be innovating and thinking years ahead in processor and electronics design."

Um, where is that for Intel? They totally missed mobile and haven't changed their CPU architecture since nehalem, which was made in 2007. Where have you been the last 10 years to even say intel has had to fight for survival.

 

[amstech]

People need to remember that you don't change the culture of thought in one day. AMD will do very well here and personally I am happy for them; but many will hold off and continue to go with Intel based on their reputation/performance even if the price is higher.
Intel's continuous quality (albeit pricey) have earned them a great reputation but its also corrupted them, and now, their arrogance has also earned them this slap in the face from AMD.

As far as internal architectural comparisons, they [Intel] have made impressive strides from Bloomfield to Kaby Lake and the many generations in between. I won't deny the increase in performance, efficiency and die size shrinks, but at the same time my old, rusted ancient i7 930 @ 4.0GHz still, when talking about gaming performance, is right there in the mix.
Intel should have made 6 core/12 thread and 8 core/16 thread chips more affordable by now without strangling the market. And now AMD is here to haunt their dreams with 8 core/ 16 thread chips that perform just as well, for much less.

 

[Julio Franco]

Some tech sites said they have received an Email from Intel regarding guide to benchmark. Do you have any info about that

We have not received any such emails from Intel.

It's not across the board, it's just Microcenter that is doing that...did you even do any research?

I used CamelCamelCamel to watch pricing trends of several Intel CPUs on Amazon, also compared those to Newegg and Microcenter. The result is that some CPUs are priced to Black Friday levels again, just this past week.

 

[Jad Chaar]

Can't wait for benchmarks. I am rooting for the red team!

 

[BadThad]

I also suspect it's just Microcenter clearing out inventory....not an Intel price cut.

Go AMD! It's about time they apply pressure to Intel again. It's a WIN for consumers.

 

[Reehahs]

Have not upgraded since Ivybridge due to slacking improvements in performance and having to throw a perfectly good motherboard. If I am going to upgrade now it will AMD.

 

[OcelotRex]

I also suspect it's just Microcenter clearing out inventory....not an Intel price cut.

Go AMD! It's about time they apply pressure to Intel again. It's a WIN for consumers.

Microcenter has the 7700k on sale for $80 off.

Intel has the 7700k released Q1 2017.

I don't think they're clearing inventory...

 

[simba tig]

I think it's about time AMD got it's thing together, tired of over priced hardware...