Thursday, September 22nd 2011

Intel to Reorganize its LGA1155 Core i7 Unlocked Processor Market Placement

In a possible bid to counter the upcoming AMD FX eight-core processors, Intel is reportedly reorganizing its Unlocked Core i7 processor series in the LGA1155 package. Currently there's only one Unlocked Core i7 LGA1155 processor model, the Core i7-2600K, and that is holding on to a US $320 price-point. It will be joined by the Core i7-2700K in the near future.

According to sources, this won't quite be a case of i7-2700K displacing the i7-2600K from its $320 price point, but that the new chip will occupy a slightly higher price point than the $320 the i7-2600K commands. According to the sources VR-Zone spoke with, the new i7-2700K could "end up somewhere close to US$340-350." It would then give Intel the flexibility to play with the price of the i7-2600K as the situation demands (letting the i7-2600K keep its $310~$320 price, or send it down below $300). Intel's Core i7-2700K is expected to launch on October 24, close to two weeks after AMD launches its first AMD FX processors.Source: VR-Zone
Add your own comment

37 Comments on Intel to Reorganize its LGA1155 Core i7 Unlocked Processor Market Placement

#1
techtard
Yes, now we will have some ultra powerful processors from both camps to run 32 bit single threaded console games!
Posted on Reply
#2
ensabrenoir
de.das.dude said:
i dont understand. AMD is making cheaper models, while intel is raising pricier models?

~:LOL:~
.
Yes....and strangely enough.... this tatic works. BECAUSE YOUR BUYING RAW UNNECESSARY POWER!!!!! Now with even more POWER:rockout:
Posted on Reply
#3
MxPhenom 216
Corsair Fanboy
i think it would make more sense if they drop the 2600k price to like $280 and then priced the 2700k at $320
Posted on Reply
#4
de.das.dude
Pro Indian Modder
nvidiaintelftw said:
i think it would make more sense if they drop the 2600k price to like $280 and then priced the 2700k at $320
its intel, their prices never make sense.

for people like me, paying almost half to get upto 80% of their performance is a good deal.
Posted on Reply
#5
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
de.das.dude said:
its intel, their prices never make sense.

for people like me, paying almost half to get upto 80% of their performance is a good deal.
The problem is that Intel's products do compete with AMDs price wise, you just like comparing models that you shouldn't be comparing.

If you look at the models that give you 80% of the 2600K performance on Intel's side they are priced pretty damn close to the AMD models that give 80% performance.

If AMD could compete with the 2600/2700K, then their prices would be lower. But right now, Intel has no reason to lower the price on the 2600K.

Your argument can almost be turned around and applied to AMD too. Compare the $45 cheaper i3-2100 to the 980BE and you get the i3 giving about 80% of the performance of the 980BE, and really in the most common tasks the i3 is just as fast or faster. I don't know where people get the idea that AMD is some saint that just loves giving us more for our money, the fact is they really don't give us more for our money, and the only reason they don't overcharge for their high end offerings is because they aren't beating Intel. When AMD was beating Intel, they were charging $1000 for processors just like Intel does when they are ahead.
Posted on Reply
#6
LordJummy
newtekie1 said:
The problem is that Intel's products do compete with AMDs price wise, you just like comparing models that you shouldn't be comparing.

If you look at the models that give you 80% of the 2600K performance on Intel's side they are priced pretty damn close to the AMD models that give 80% performance.

If AMD could compete with the 2600/2700K, then their prices would be lower. But right now, Intel has no reason to lower the price on the 2600K.

Your argument can almost be turned around and applied to AMD too. Compare the $45 cheaper i3-2100 to the 980BE and you get the i3 giving about 80% of the performance of the 980BE, and really in the most common tasks the i3 is just as fast or faster. I don't know where people get the idea that AMD is some saint that just loves giving us more for our money, the fact is they really don't give us more for our money, and the only reason they don't overcharge for their high end offerings is because they aren't beating Intel. When AMD was beating Intel, they were charging $1000 for processors just like Intel does when they are ahead.
Well said, sir.
Posted on Reply
#7
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
de.das.dude said:
trust me im an (almost) engineer.
DDD should put this in all his posts. ^^
Posted on Reply
#8
[H]@RD5TUFF
Hope it means a price drop to say $290 or so for the 2600K.
Posted on Reply
#9
Assimilator
btarunr said:
Currently there's only one Unlocked Core i7 LGA1155 processor model, the Core i7-2600K...
Erm, no, what about the 2500K?
Posted on Reply
#10
TRWOV
Assimilator said:
Erm, no, what about the 2500K?
That's an i5
Posted on Reply
#11
eidairaman1
de.das.dude said:
i dont understand. AMD is making cheaper models, while intel is raising pricier models?

~:LOL:~
intel has always done that even when they were getting their asses kicked, aka K7-K8
Posted on Reply
#12
Melvis
newtekie1 said:
The problem is that Intel's products do compete with AMDs price wise, you just like comparing models that you shouldn't be comparing.

If you look at the models that give you 80% of the 2600K performance on Intel's side they are priced pretty damn close to the AMD models that give 80% performance.

If AMD could compete with the 2600/2700K, then their prices would be lower. But right now, Intel has no reason to lower the price on the 2600K.

Your argument can almost be turned around and applied to AMD too. Compare the $45 cheaper i3-2100 to the 980BE and you get the i3 giving about 80% of the performance of the 980BE, and really in the most common tasks the i3 is just as fast or faster. I don't know where people get the idea that AMD is some saint that just loves giving us more for our money, the fact is they really don't give us more for our money, and the only reason they don't overcharge for their high end offerings is because they aren't beating Intel. When AMD was beating Intel, they were charging $1000 for processors just like Intel does when they are ahead.
I think he meant more before Sandybridge came along, as most intel CPU's was well over $300-400 and heading up to that $1000 price tag, where your high end Phenom II was about $300-350 at most. So his point is correct just back then, not now Sandybridge is out, it just blows that out of the water.

Sandybridge is the first i have ever seen a top performing CPU (2600k) from intel that is priced so low. Try to find another CPU from intel that has such high performance (in its socket of course, and time) that was priced at such a low price? You wont find one.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment