Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by bit-tech, 17 Nov 2017.
99% certain to be coming in 2018 along with the Z390 chipset.
Unfortunately the cancellation of the low end chips for X299 is significantly less likely.
I get the feeling they are panicking due to AMD making fairly large leaps in catching up.
The panicked 'get it released, get it released now!' probably didn't help, but X299 in particular was shaping up to be a mess regardless of what RyZen did or didn't deliver.
I have this feeling that their next step after z390 is going to deliver all sorts of awesome to flatten AMD, it's what they do.
The low-mid range is also as mess as an unlocked i3 makes not sense over a locked i5 when MB prices are factored in.
Isn't that always the way, though?? I'm looking at the 7350K as an example...
Although that is an issue they've been moving away from solder for other reasons also, there's the "green" credential of not using Pb based solder, there's also the "conflict free" credential of not using materials from conflict zones that line the pockets of warlords, and before anyone says one of the reasons was costs they probably spent way more in R&D than any savings recouped from moving to a silicon based TIM.
IMO Intel's line-up is so confusing ATM because i reckon they released coffee lake earlier than originally planned, Ryzen basically prompted them to release CL at least six months before schedule as they probably intended to release it around the same time as they intend to release the Z390 chipset and that wasn't meant to be released until Q2 2018.
To be fair, once you factor in the cost of DDR4 and motherboards any Intel CPU option is proportionally astronomically expensive in comparison to an AMD equivalent - furthermore the Intel kit is still immature in terms of BIOS’s drivers etc much the same as Ryzen and Threadripper were on release.
The biggest stumbling block for any PC upgrade just now remains the cost of DDR4, you’re paying through the nose for it in the here and now.
I'm not sure why you'd mention the cost of DDR4 in terms of whether Intel's offering is proportionally more expensive than AMD - both Intel and Ryzen builds will need DDR4 so it doesn't impact on the relative difference between the builds, and the high price of DDR4 actually reduces the proportional difference.
But yeah, Intel boards tend to be more expensive so it's entirely valid to factor that into the relative and proportional build costs, and the high costs of DDR4 make either Intel or AMD upgrades an expensive business.
Their consumer line-up maybe confusing but is it as confusing as their Xeon "scalable processor" range, isn't there something like 120 different processors across the platinum, gold, silver, and bronze ranges.
I have found Intel's actions over the past few months to be a little overwhelming. Almost like they had all of this stuff hidden away and then just released it all at once. The messing around with model numbers (I3 etc) has not helped this. Whenever I saw an I3 I always thought "junk" but now I have to pay very close attention and do a lot of reading.
Certainly very panicked, that is for sure. It's also a little angering, because I now know what they have been sitting on for so long whilst charging £185 for a unlocked I3.
Pretty much this.
None of what Intel have done in reaction to Ryzen has surprised me - they were able to react fairly quickly because they had all these things in the pipeline and were seemingly content to meter it out in dribs and drabs to keep the prices high and continue to gouge the consumer. Ryzen just forced them to open the flood gates, which is probably why so many CPUs in their line up are tripping over each other - they were never meant to occupy the market at the same time. In my opinion, Intel had a choice: release the lot, conflicts and all, or bin/shelve some lines and not realise the return on that investment.
Basically, whether your next upgrade is AMD or Intel, you can thank AMD for making it more affordable.
Yeah. It's a win-win.
If only AMD could get NAND and DRAM prices down a bit.
Ok then, factor in the cost of Intel CPU's, Intel Motherboards AND current DDR4 prices...
And then any Intel CPU option is proportionally astronomically expensive in comparison to any AMD equivalent - sound better??
Oh and their CPU lineup is FUBAR to
I've been mad for years.
Most of their stuff with a lot of overclocking headroom was blatant evidence of that.
That they charge more for multiplier-unlocked parts, a move that serves no purpose but to extract more money from enthusiasts, was more evidence.
I mean, look at the old E2140(my first Intel part since the 486 days). When you can consistently get >50% clock increases trivially, no questions asked, touching nothing but the frontside bus speed, across the entire product run, it is patently obvious that they are intentionally withholding performance for the sake of profit.
Intel always hated overclocking. I worked at a PC shop for a number of years in the late 90s and they basically ruled with an iron fist. They said if we overclocked CPUs (at the time Pentiums) or they heard we had given advice on it they would stop selling to us outright. No messing around, no second chance.
They also said the same about buying in the Athlon when it first came out. I believe they have just settled over that but it may have been something else. But yeah, they have always been terribly hypocritical over it. One minute they are condemning it and then when it suits them they are all for it (like the £1100 Pentium 4 EE and Extreme Duos and Quads). IMO the K series was a product designed to railroad you to one or maybe two CPUs. IE make your other options so narrow that your only path is K. For the first couple of non K you could overclock by X4 but they soon put a stop to that, too.
Problem is till it affects the bottom line and Intels latest figures suggest it’s not as they have reported year on year growth. They will not give a toss what anyone thinks. ( there expected earnings where much higher than most people assumed)
And they are surely buying the old ATI off AMD at some point as well.
I would still like to see AMD sold to someone with the capital to really push Intel into a proper war on cpus.
As it stands Ryzen is great and all but it’s still a expensive build from scratch. As is a PC in general.
DDR4 prices are what make PCs expensive to build right now - it has nothing to do with Ryzen, which still offers much better value than the Intel alternative.
Separate names with a comma.