R-T-BI find that more improbable than people just acting like fanboys...

Vayra86I will address it. First off however, I never said that YOU were 'an entitled person'. Just a general remark on 'people' or 'your average consumer'. And then only the vocal ones, really.

Why are corporations able to make so much money > because different (tax) rules apply to them > and that happens because governments and countries want to attract those big corporations and companies because it also helps their economy. Its a catch 22. The same with the race to the top for CEO salary: its a hot topic in Netherlands, and one that will never really cease, but this is the sheer force of capitalism and always needing/wanting more at work right here. It has nothing to do with the price companies may or may not charge for a product and it has nothing to do with the margin on that price point. The real reason companies get rich, and more importantly, why the fat toads get even fatter, is because that is how money, power and influence simply works. It needs correcting, I agree, but that won't ever - EVER - happen through the price of a product for consumers.

As for punishing misleading results: yes, there should be more severe punishment of it, but the 3.5GB example was one of the few that wás actually punished and led to a sentence.

You seem to be mixing up several things here. Because even with misleading results, the reality is no different and even with the corrected results, there is a performance gap that Intel will, can and should be cashing in on. Its not like the Intel CPU is in fact slower than the cheaper alternative. The gap is just a bit less pronounced as it was made out to be.

As for 'entitled' to all the profits - that's a wrong use of the definition. They are not entitled to anything. They have created a (misleading) reality that some people will fall for, and many in fact do not. This goes back to the eternal argument that AMD can do whatever they won't be successful because Intel and Nvidia are evil and control the market. Its simply not true. The AMD offerings are often really, truly not that much of an advantage, OR they fail to sell them in the right way. History is filled to the brim with AMD PR and marketing fails. When something is going wrong, and you start pointing fingers at others to blame, you had best make sure you've got everything perfectly in order in your own house first... otherwise you're easy prey. Look at Intel, recently with their multitude of PR fails and security issues. Those have made AMD all the more interesting as an alternative.

Its that simple back and forth of mindshare that is of great influence to price. And in that tiny space, us, consumers, still have some real weight. Yes, it matters what an internet community says about a new release. Yes, it matters that we identify the 9900K as essentially overpriced. But its wrong to think that Intel 'should' price it lower. We do not know their strategy for the mid- or long term at all.

arterius2Are you an idiot? Do you have any idea of how the world works and basic economics?
Things are cheaper now because of supply and demand, streamlined supply and production lines and most importantly, automation.
Read a book.

StrayKATLooks like I touched a nerve.

Yes, I read. This doesn't change the fact that a huge part of the supply line are getting paid very little. Or did I wake up in a magical world where labor costs suddenly don't matter? Sounds cool. I come from a world where wars are fought over this.

Xx Tek Tip xXWrong. Ryzen is priced well - so is the 8700k - however the 9900k is too poor value for gamers, it makes more sense to put the difference into a better monitor or graphics card.



Why do we need 2? Well show me a z390 board with the support for devices my x299 gaming carbon has, 8 sata ports, 4 pci x16's, 8 ram slots, this list could go on - this is all high end stuff - not mainstream. If I didn't need all this I would still be using my z270x gaming 7 rig with a 6600k but I don't, It gathers dust now. Yeah and let's bring HCC cpus to the mainstream and ramp up the price in the process - 8700k goes for around £300 new and yet 2c4t adds on £300 - what happened there? And FYI most people still run 1060 6gb's and 1080p monitors - that's where the main market is.

Shatun_BearThose defending Intel's terrible pricing here make me laugh. Tell you what, you guys get together and organise a fundraiser for your favourite multi-billion dollar company Intel. They could do with a few more bob.

Xx Tek Tip xXMost likely - either way though it's funny how far people go to defend a company - I mean none of them actually care about us, they just want the money and that's how it works.

Vayra86There is no need to think. In single threaded scenario's you can see in the provided tests both Game and Creator Mode FPS remains the same on Ryzen. That is where you see the real absolute performance gap if you would all core OC the Intel 9900K. It starts at 20% and goes up to ~ 40% in a pure single threaded scenario such as CS:GO.

That is, of course, if you are not GPU limited in any way.

And that changes the perspective entirely, too - now consider the fact that a 9700K will perform 100% the same with 8 cores available and likely clock a tiny bit higher too, and the 66% price gap is what, 35-40% for a potential 20-40%+ performance advantage.

But, this title does generate more clicks. I get it :)

NeuralNexusThey are straight morons for justifying INTEL milking their bank accounts for minimum performance improvements.

Shatun_BearThose defending Intel's terrible pricing here make me laugh. Tell you what, you guys get together and organise a fundraiser for your favourite multi-billion dollar company Intel. They could do with a few more bob.

UpgrayeddThe way you were talking and comparimg old CPUs and prices to current ones just sounded silly. Yeah the best is expensive but it doesn't get exponentially expensive every generation. Just cause they squeezed over $1k out of you for a non HEDT doesn't mean they should be squeezing $5k now cause the new ones are soooo much faster than the past ones and faster than anyone truly needs them to be. Cmon m8 with that logic the corvette should be a million dollars by now. People improve upon designs to sell an improved product at a similar price not to make an entirely new price segment year after year, cause you know they found a way to improve it. I'm like you, all for getting what you pay, I usually feel like you get what you pay for and the more expensive the item USUALLY reflects quality though not always.

NeuralNexusI find the 9000 series to be pricey and pointless with AMD preparing Ryzen 3000 series just months away. CES 2019 should give consumers an idea of what Ryzen will be like given that Epyc is what Ryzen is based on. 7nm with 15-20% IPC gains, higher clock speeds, and refinements should be beastly. The wait and see approach should want many INTEL fanboys should be doing at this moment.



They are straight morons for justifying INTEL milking their bank accounts for minimum performance improvements.

vMax65You absolutely hit the nail on the head on generating more clicks and the real differential in performance game to game and GPU limits.. As importantly to those that seem to place Intel as the bad player in this marketing FUD world we live in, AMD also have a terrific track record in FUD, with the Vega debacle and some of the marketing FUD they released prior to release... And lets not forget the slew of promised great CPU's that failed to materialise prior to Ryzen...Most if not all company's will do whatever they can to get there products the maximum exposure including skewing results to suit there needs...both AMD and Intel have played this game...Intel with vastly greater resources obviously has done this to the max...

I take my hat of to AMD for coming back into the CPU and GPU business with a bang and finally bringing real competition to the table that has so sorely been missing and importantly, this was not Intel's fault that AMD could not compete for quiet some time. What I do find wrong is that Intel are not learning fast enough that they have real competition in AMD, especially in the Pricing area. Intel could and should have released the new 9th Gen CPU's at a lower price, still above AMD but not at the level we are currently seeing...$400 for the 9900K would have been acceptable and would have given AMD a real headache...But margins are what Intel are after, not market share like AMD.

Bottom line, I hate the fanboyism that permeates this enthusiast PC hardware sector, both AMD and Intel are making great products and personally we have such a great choice across all price points and seriously powerful CPU's to suit all...boy have things changed from my teens in the 80's. Buy AMD...great, your getting real value for your money, buy Intel great, your getting top end performance or your money.

NeuralNexusI find the 9000 series to be pricey and pointless with AMD preparing Ryzen 3000 series just months away. CES 2019 should give consumers an idea of what Ryzen will be like given that Epyc is what Ryzen is based on. 7nm with 15-20% IPC gains, higher clock speeds, and refinements should be beastly. The wait and see approach should want many INTEL fanboys should be doing at this moment.



They are straight morons for justifying INTEL milking their bank accounts for minimum performance improvements.

MetroidThe question is, when will they be released? If is August next year then i say is pointless to wait, now if is February / march then is worth the wait.

Showcase on "The AMD CES keynote will take place on January 9 at 9 AM PT. " and release on March seems an ideal thing to do.

Prima.VeraA different question:

How are the motherboards for AMD 2xxx vs Intel's 9xxx processors??

I'm talking about hardware and software features wise, nr of PCI-E lines, etc

Thank you.

GoldenXI can say that the Ryzen UEFI implementations are better on MSI compared to Gigabyte.

cadavecaGenerally speaking, it seems that anything is better on most brands compared to Gigabyte these days.

But what Gigabyte does do really well is make boards that work fantastically in Hackintoshes.

StrayKATJust to add to what I said earlier.. I dug up a video. It's looks like Intel's UEFI is no more stripped down than others. I like the clean look too. Intel needs to make motherboards again, imo.

Ugh, my SM bios is far behind this, in interface design. I mean, seriously.. it's horrible.

GoldenXNo thanks, the cheap ones were horrible, even PC-Chips and Biostar were better.