Wednesday, May 20th 2020

AMD Repositions Ryzen 9 3900X at $410 Threatening both i9-10900K and i7-10700K

AMD marshaled its retailer ecosystem to cut the pricing of its 12-core/24-thread Ryzen 9 3900X processor down to USD $410. At this price, the 3900X is poised to threaten both the 10-core/20-thread Core i9-10900K and the 8-core/16-thread Core i7-10700K. Although bearing a $489 MSRP, the i9-10900K is seen going for upwards of $510. The i7-10700K, on the other hand, is being priced around the $410 mark. The iGPU-devoid i9-10900KF is expected to be around $20 cheaper, which should put its retail pricing around $480, while the i7-10700KF could go for around $380.

Pricing of both chips are along expected lines, as retail pre-tax prices typically end up 5% above the 1,000-unit tray pricing Intel announces for its processors. The Hardware Unboxed review of the i9-10900K shows it taking a roughly 7% lead in gaming performance over the 3900X (averaged), while falling 12% behind in multi-threaded compute performance. The i7-10700K is expected to be slightly faster than the i9-9900K. Adding value to the AMD chip is the fact that it includes a cooling solution in the retail package, which Intel doesn't, for the i9-10900K/KF and the i7-10700K/KF. A February 2020 report postulated that AMD has significant headroom to cut prices of its 3rd generation Ryzen processors to maintain competitiveness against Intel, until they are relieved by the "Zen 3" based 4th gen Ryzen "Vermeer" processors in September 2020.
Add your own comment

40 Comments on AMD Repositions Ryzen 9 3900X at $410 Threatening both i9-10900K and i7-10700K

#1
harm9963
$389.99 at Microcenter, instore only!
Posted on Reply
#2
Decryptor009
AMD were never threatened by the new lineup from Intel anyway.
Posted on Reply
#3
GoldenX
Decryptor009
AMD were never threatened by the new lineup from Intel anyway.
This, no amount of + can save 14nm. Intel needed something new 3 years ago, and we are still waiting.
At least port Ice Lake to 14nm, offer something.
Posted on Reply
#4
Crackong
Threaten ?

I 'd call it "demolished"
Posted on Reply
#5
windwhirl
btarunr
AMD includes a cooling solution in the retail package
And a rather decent one, all things considered.
Posted on Reply
#6
Flanker
FFS stop tickling my upgrade itch
Posted on Reply
#7
ShurikN
Amd lowered the price on the 3900X a while ago, the article makes it sound like it was done yesterday
Posted on Reply
#8
watzupken
Considering Ryzen 9 3900X have been around for sometime, and with the imminent release of the Ryzen 4xxx, I am not surprise that AMD is starting to reduce prices. The cut for 3900X is likely to trigger cuts for the 8 core chips as well since it will make the 3800X less meaningful being caught between the 3900X and 3700X. The cut will make the Intel flagships less attractive if you consider the price of the chip and you need a new motherboard, and a very good cooler even at stock clockspeed.
ShurikN
Amd lowered the price on the 3900X a while ago, the article makes it sound like it was done yesterday
They just made it public. Haha.
Posted on Reply
#9
windwhirl
Flanker
FFS stop tickling my upgrade itch
AMD: "NEVER!" *slashes prices again and shoves a boxed CPU in your face*
Posted on Reply
#10
thesmokingman
harm9963
$389.99 at Microcenter, instore only!
That's such a good price. Hell MC's price on the 3990x is ridiculous too, 350 off.
Posted on Reply
#11
Metroid
The deed has been done!
Decryptor009
AMD were never threatened by the new lineup from Intel anyway.
That is how intel used to feel when AMD released new cpu's, now intel is feeling what AMD used to feel when released their cpus hehe
Posted on Reply
#13
Tsukiyomi91
AMD has never seen Intel as their competitor... but only to themselves.
Posted on Reply
#14
Prima.Vera
Am I the only one being excited for the upcoming 4900X release?
Posted on Reply
#15
Nater
Wut? It actually went UP in price. It was $409 at Amazon this morning. Now it's $419. It was under $420 almost all of March at multiple retailers.
Posted on Reply
#16
Jism
12 cores / 24 threads, 3.8GHz base and 4.6Ghz boost. Compelling. Knowing that i paid pretty much the same for my 2700x back then that might be a ideal upgrade.
Posted on Reply
#17
SIGSEGV
wrong title i guess?
vermeer is on the horizon..
Posted on Reply
#18
harm9963
Jism
12 cores / 24 threads, 3.8GHz base and 4.6Ghz boost. Compelling. Knowing that i paid pretty much the same for my 2700x back then that might be a ideal upgrade.
Got my 2700X for $129.99, but waiting for 4800x or 4700x.
Posted on Reply
#19
siuol11
GoldenX
This, no amount of + can save 14nm. Intel needed something new 3 years ago, and we are still waiting.
At least port Ice Lake to 14nm, offer something.
They are. That's what Rocket Lake is, coming later in 2020 with the 500 series Intel chipsets. It's a backport of their 10nm design with Willow Cove cores.
Posted on Reply
#20
las
Decryptor009
AMD were never threatened by the new lineup from Intel anyway.
Keep telling yourself that haha. 10th gen is the biggest answer yet and Ryzen 4000 is going to fight Rocket Lake later. HT on all chips and pricedrops across the board. You didnt see that on 8th and 9th gen. This is because 3000 series are much better than 1000 and 2000 series overall. 1000/2000 were mostly about price/perf instead of actually being able to deliver decent perf, like 3000 series has.

Why don't you just enjoy that AMD CPU's are not completely BS anymore? I am. If you think Intel is out of business, maybe you should look at financials. Intel stocks went up Q after Q and YoY since 2017. Jim Keller is working with Intel as we speak. You know, the man that made Apple SoCs the best in business, and the man behind Zen architecture. If you think Intel is "dead", think otherwise.

The biggest reason for Zen being a succes, is because Intel has been stuck on 14nm since 2015. If Intel had been able to move to 10nm back in 2017-2018 the picture would look very different. So, good for everyone.

Ryzen 1000 and 2000 series were nothing special. The 12nm GloFo node for 2000 series are worse than Intel 14m. Without question. I never seem to understand why people with 12nm GloFo chips make fun of Intel 14nm. You might as well shoot yourself in the foot while you're at it. Intel 14nm >>> GloFo 12nm.

3000 series are the first release that I'd actually buy personally, and I did, my homeserver now has B450 + 3600.

For my desktop, I'm not replacing my 9900K @ 5.2 GHz anytime soon. Thats for sure. This golden 9900K is going to last me years with top-end gaming (high fps and cpu bound gaming that is, for 144-240 Hz and emulation with some adobe now and then, which is the only thing that matters to me in this rig. No AMD chip is able to deliver the same perf here. No chip in 4000 series won't either. Next buy is 3080 or 3080 Ti.
Posted on Reply
#22
Mastakony
Prima.Vera
Am I the only one being excited for the upcoming 4900X release?
If you already have at least a 3700X, yeah you're the only one LOL
Considering we won't see any "daily difference" between R3K and R4K
The exitement should be "Only" for those who only install windows without nothing except Cinebench and use their computer only to make a bench contest :)

Come back to the light side, ,dude!!!!
las
Keep telling yourself that haha. 10th gen is the biggest answer yet and Ryzen 4000 is going to fight Rocket Lake later. HT on all chips and pricedrops across the board. You didnt see that on 8th and 9th gen. This is because 3000 series are much better than 1000 and 2000 series overall. 1000/2000 were mostly about price/perf instead of actually being able to deliver decent perf, like 3000 series has.

Why don't you just enjoy that AMD CPU's are not completely BS anymore? I am. If you think Intel is out of business, maybe you should look at financials. Intel stocks went up Q after Q and YoY since 2017. Jim Keller is working with Intel as we speak. You know, the man that made Apple SoCs the best in business, and the man behind Zen architecture. If you think Intel is "dead", think otherwise.

The biggest reason for Zen being a succes, is because Intel has been stuck on 14nm since 2015. If Intel had been able to move to 10nm back in 2017-2018 the picture would look very different. So, good for everyone.

Ryzen 1000 and 2000 series were nothing special. The 12nm GloFo node for 2000 series are worse than Intel 14m. Without question. I never seem to understand why people with 12nm GloFo chips make fun of Intel 14nm. You might as well shoot yourself in the foot while you're at it. Intel 14nm >>> GloFo 12nm.

3000 series are the first release that I'd actually buy personally, and I did, my homeserver now has B450 + 3600.

For my desktop, I'm not replacing my 9900K @ 5.2 GHz anytime soon. Thats for sure. This golden 9900K is going to last me years with top-end gaming (high fps and cpu bound gaming that is, for 144-240 Hz and emulation with some adobe now and then, which is the only thing that matters to me in this rig. No AMD chip is able to deliver the same perf here. No chip in 4000 series won't either. Next buy is 3080 or 3080 Ti.
Even with a decent 14nm, AMD new architecture would be just a flawless victory for performance, and way cheaper than the monolithic architecture from Intel...
Intel was and "is still" arrogant so they won't make it before years....
Posted on Reply
#23
ppn
10700F at $298 so it doesn't, the only cpus we should be looking at are 10400F 10700F and 10900F, everything else is pointless
Posted on Reply
#24
Decryptor009
las
Keep telling yourself that haha. 10th gen is the biggest answer yet and Ryzen 4000 is going to fight Rocket Lake later. HT on all chips and pricedrops across the board. You didnt see that on 8th and 9th gen. This is because 3000 series are much better than 1000 and 2000 series overall. 1000/2000 were mostly about price/perf instead of actually being able to deliver decent perf, like 3000 series has.

Why don't you just enjoy that AMD CPU's are not completely BS anymore? I am. If you think Intel is out of business, maybe you should look at financials. Intel stocks went up Q after Q and YoY since 2017. Jim Keller is working with Intel as we speak. You know, the man that made Apple SoCs the best in business, and the man behind Zen architecture. If you think Intel is "dead", think otherwise.

The biggest reason for Zen being a succes, is because Intel has been stuck on 14nm since 2015. If Intel had been able to move to 10nm back in 2017-2018 the picture would look very different. So, good for everyone.

Ryzen 1000 and 2000 series were nothing special. The 12nm GloFo node for 2000 series are worse than Intel 14m. Without question. I never seem to understand why people with 12nm GloFo chips make fun of Intel 14nm. You might as well shoot yourself in the foot while you're at it. Intel 14nm >>> GloFo 12nm.

3000 series are the first release that I'd actually buy personally, and I did, my homeserver now has B450 + 3600.

For my desktop, I'm not replacing my 9900K @ 5.2 GHz anytime soon. Thats for sure. This golden 9900K is going to last me years with top-end gaming (high fps and cpu bound gaming that is, for 144-240 Hz and emulation with some adobe now and then, which is the only thing that matters to me in this rig. No AMD chip is able to deliver the same perf here. No chip in 4000 series won't either. Next buy is 3080 or 3080 Ti.
Intel CPU's have their merits, but only for niche things which is the base you are covering here.

Security flaws, power hungry node...
Cost for the CPU's vs the competition, it adds up.

And even then the competition out performs for a lower cost.

I never said Intel was dead, that is projection from yourself, i simply stated that AMD never had any threat from this lineup from intel.
Posted on Reply
#25
Arjai
Crackong
Threaten ?

I 'd call it "demolished"
ppn
10700F at $298 so it doesn't, the only cpus we should be looking at are 10400F 10700F and 10900F, everything else is pointless
I wish there was a a way to make people actually make sense. Emotion is nice but, not uncontrolled emotion. Facts are Facts, Intel still pulls about 10 to 15% better frame rates on games, avg. Everything else? AMD wins, and often times by more than 25%. So, for anyone that is not a profession gamer, it makes no sense to buy Intel, when RyZen is so good, right now.

Don't kid yourself, for the money, AMD is the best buy, Right now, and has been for a couple of years.

For my use, and my Money, Intel has a ways to go.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment