Intel Core i9-7900 Series CPU Core Count and Prices

Bandalo said:
I wonder what they sacrificed to make the space. m.2 slots? USB headers? VRM phases?
Click to expand...
USB and fan headers are usually the first to go. Most ITX boards I see only have 1 or 2 USB 3.1 headers and just the CPU fan headers. M.2 slots can be put on the back of the board. VRM isn't compromised if you know where to look and you're willing to spend the coin, but it is going to be a tight fit for everything with quad channel memory.
 
Armenius said:
USB and fan headers are usually the first to go. Most ITX boards I see only have 1 or 2 USB 3.1 headers and just the CPU fan headers. M.2 slots can be put on the back of the board. VRM isn't compromised if you know where to look and you're willing to spend the coin, but it is going to be a tight fit for everything with quad channel memory.
Click to expand...
The irony here is that AMD competing format, mini DTX, had a bit more space which would allow more features in. But I dont think that AMD ever released one of those mobos.
 
-PK- said:
It looks like some of the highest-end motherboards will include a third party 10Gb ethernet controller.
Click to expand...
It would be nice but 10Gb switches are so expensive.

I'm a cheapskate so have 2 storage servers and my main rig connected via Intel X520DA2 and 5m cables (total cost from China via Ebay under $450, about half the cost of a small 10Gb switch). It comes in handy for moving large video projects but is really not necessary, just fun epeen. :LOL:
 
Armenius said:
USB and fan headers are usually the first to go. Most ITX boards I see only have 1 or 2 USB 3.1 headers and just the CPU fan headers. M.2 slots can be put on the back of the board. VRM isn't compromised if you know where to look and you're willing to spend the coin, but it is going to be a tight fit for everything with quad channel memory.
Click to expand...

Agreed. You start running out of more than just physical space too in that form factor. You start running out of room for the actual traces to the memory slots and the PCIe / M.2 slots. There's a lot of separation and room needed to meet all the timing requirements for all those devices in a very small space, and you can only make so many layers.
 
Archaea said:
If you are interested in used processors down the road it makes a heck of a lot of sense if you are on a budget now.

Say you buy into the 7740x now for $300. There isn't much in the way of applications that use more than that currently, outside of video editing. In 5 years when applications do make use of more cores and threads - you have a HUGE upgrade opportunity without changing motherboard and RAM. It gives a legitmate reason to pay the extra to upgrade into the 299 chipset. Because in five years you can buy a Intel I9-9840x or whatever for $400 and upgrade your whole system!!!

LOTS of future options open up for us bargain shoppers.

I recently upgraded a 3xxx series to a 4960x at work for the same reason on an older X79 motherboard that had 64GB of DDR3. The 4960x CPU six core upgrade was comparably cheaper than buying new 64GB of DDR4 RAM on a current platform for minimal speed loss and the loss of a couple of cores. We bought the 3xxx CPU when it was like 3-400 bucks, and then the 4960x was the same price used a few years later. But in this new world you'd be jumping from 4 core to 12 or 14 core! WIN!
Click to expand...

Currently it makes no sense what so ever to buy a 4C part with an X299 board. Like literally none, since in this instance you are not saving any money on RAM cause would have to invest into DDR4 anyway.

Why would you buy a brand new 300USD+ motherboard, buy at bare minimum a 16GB QC DDR4-3200 memory kit around 170USD (to be QC MC ready in case of the supposed CPU upgrade) only to slap in a 4C/4T part in it now?
You could buy a better graphics card, more memory or a bigger / faster SSD for the extra cash you would be dumping into the platform now.

5 years down the line people that were purchasing these motherboards and processors (hopefully i7-7800X and up) will be already selling these and moving onto the next HDET platform. So why not buy it used then for the fraction of the money?
Considering the X99 only lived 3 years... you might be already in luck around mid 2020 for a "bargain" X299 system.

i5-7640X and i7-7740X give you diddly squat over a i5-7600K or i7-7700K. No quad-channel memory controller, no extra PCIe lanes, only an extra 100MHz on stock frequencies... on witch it these processors will boot up once(?) to load the BIOS and while you navigate to the CPU mulit. Whoopty doo I guess?

So why not just buy a Z270 board for half the price and get a 7700K right now? Better yet Coffee Lake supposedly will slip into LGA1151 boards with a simple BIOS update up to 6C/12T parts.
 
Sounds like they are paper launching their 12, 14, 16, and 18 core CPUs in knee-jerk reaction to Threadripper. AMD can easily just throw out a 20 and 24 core Ryzen 9 due to the scalability of their CCX structure with Infinity Fabric. It isn't like the 4,094 pins of the SP3r2 can't handle it. Pretty sure the 16 core Ryzen 9 is going to be under $1,000 ... I don't see Intel winning the thread wars with their current legacy infrastructure. This is what Ryzen was built to do and Intel is trying to play their game.
 
So do I sell my 6850K @ 4400 Mhz and go for a 12 core? I do a lot of encoding and medium gaming @ 3440X1440 with SLi 1080 Tis. Something tells me to sit this round out but that's just no fun.
 
sutyi

1st question - how many PCI-E Lanes are available on a z270 board compatible processor. Answer 24.
2nd question - what's my upgrade path in 3-4 years for a z270 board? Answer = null
3rd point - If you bought that z270 board you are already buying DDR4 RAM, so why not wait a month for the newest tech in this x299 -- frankly if I had a 7700k I'd be reselling it RIGHT NOW, and replacing it with a equivalent x299 based system. Even if the processor was a lateral change.

There seems to be a lot of life and future potential in this particular x299 chipset.
 
Even if I can afford it and willing to pay for it, the 140w tdp would be a deal breaker. This comes just when we were talking about electricity use being down last week. Granted this is the 8 cores or higher and being the X series lineup but hopefully Intel will be able to bring down power consumption down in the near future.
 
Last edited:
Even if I can afford it and willing to pay for it, the 140w tdp would be a deal breaker. This come just when we were talking about electricity use being down last week.
Click to expand...

You do realize the idle will be no more than a 4C/8T?

Intel will be able to bring down power consumption down in the near future.
Click to expand...

AMD and Intel will both do that by reducing the frequency..
 
Archaea said:
sutyi

1st question - how many PCI-E Lanes are available on a z270 board compatible processor. Answer 24.
2nd question - what's my upgrade path in 3-4 years for a z270 board? Answer = null
3rd point - If you bought that z270 board you are already buying DDR4 RAM, so why not wait a month for the newest tech in this x299 -- frankly if I had a 7700k I'd be reselling it RIGHT NOW, and replacing it with a equivalent x299 based system. Even if the processor was a lateral change.

There seems to be a lot of life and future potential in this particular x299 chipset.
Click to expand...

1. Thats right 24. Exactly 8 more compared to the 16 you would get with an i7-7740X + X299 combo.
2. 14nm Coffee Lake unless Intel goes to another LGA115x socket cause "reasons". But if that happens go and buy a i7-7800X + X299 combo that hopefully will be at a lower MSRP in 3 years time or used ones even cheaper.
3. X299 eats the same DDR4 memories that are available now.

So you would be willing to do a zero performance increase sidegrade moving from a 7700K to a 7740X for about 400-500USD? At this point you might as well just set fire to a couple of Benjamins with a lighter if you want to burn cash so bad...
 
DrLobotomy said:
Here is a tiny X299 board that looks nifty...

View attachment 26192
Click to expand...


Oh shit , I've been waiting to build some sort of m-itx thing to goof around with on the Ryzen side just for the heck of it as have seen some interesting mini-tix builds and cases and think it would be fun. But I've stuck with one option (Biotstar) that in no way will run 32+ GB of RAM at 3000+ yet anyway.

If mitx x299's are available readily end of this month or July , and most importantly I can just buy some RAM without crosschecking 15 charts and forums and sacrificing chicken blood to ensure I can get 32+ GB running at high speed , I don't know see any reason not to go this route instead.
 
Dahkoht said:
Oh shit , I've been waiting to build some sort of m-itx thing to goof around with on the Ryzen side just for the heck of it as have seen some interesting mini-tix builds and cases and think it would be fun. But I've stuck with one option (Biotstar) that in no way will run 32+ GB of RAM at 3000+ yet anyway.

If mitx x299's are available readily end of this month or July , and most importantly I can just buy some RAM without crosschecking 15 charts and forums and sacrificing chicken blood to ensure I can get 32+ GB running at high speed , I don't know see any reason not to go this route instead.
Click to expand...
I think you can go with 256 GB with the larger core count CPU's.
 
Intel 6 core is still over priced, people will see it and then see the AMD 8 core for less and buy it. Of course that is assuming AMD starts selling ZEN to the OEM's have not really seen that much out there.
 
Intel 6 core is still over priced, people will see it and then see the AMD 8 core for less and buy it.
Click to expand...

The AMD 8 core is slower per core which for most should matter more than having 2 extra cores.
 
Too rich for my blood. Do any mainstream OS really even use all these cores efficiently for normal computing? Not enterprise stuff. Just your regular Joe/Jane 9-5 closet gamer.
 
About what I expected. I've been camping on a i7-3930k the week it showed up at Microcenter for $600. Been a rock solid 6 core CPU. My days of SLI are over (done a pair of 9800gx2, 285 series, 480 series, and 580 series) so I'm not sure I care about the lack of lanes - it is better to just have a faster single card and get rid of it, then try to boost performance with a second card later from what I've seen. I will wait to see what the single card / reasonable fast storage benchmarks looks like first, however, for the new 8 core CPU. Been a long wait - hope it is a significant jump in performance.
 
I wonder if all these many core CPU releases will force Microsoft to improve core/thread management in Windows? I guess the answer will be if Intel has problems with it or not. But will still be interesting, and may benefit AMD users.
 
Semantics said:
High end video cards don't saturate 16x lanes of pcie 3.0 hell I don't think a 1080 will saturate 8x. For crypto mining you don't need much. Yeah running a server you could saturating that many lanes but will your workload typically, if you're running a server you're running you're video using the least amount of pcie lanes as possible to fit more cards at typically 4x even then it be hard to fill all those lanes, ofc at that point why are you not getting the higher end cpu? Or do you not need the extra cores, at which point maybe then you want to switch to amd or buy older xeons. If people wanted more lanes maybe PLX chips might have amounted to something.
Click to expand...
These chips aren't cheap. If you want the full PCI bandwidth (it's still short 4) you need to spend $1000. We aren't talking about consumer parts here. These are enthusiast parts. The problem shouldn't even be there considering the market for these class of chips. Second, every card has overhead. There is a difference between 1 card run at 16x or 8x vs two cards at 8x vs 3 or more in a system. Remember I'm not just talking about video. We are talking about a artificial limit on total system bandwidth. I'll see if I can find the posts from people who ran into this problem. Trust me they are there.
 
BlueFireIce said:
And AMD fanbois will only buy AMD, what is your point? Every camp has fanbois. Believe it or not, everyone has different work loads and budgets, and no single CPU or brand will fill all of those.

What US case? The only US case was not won, but settled. Intel spent hundreds of millions in court on the case, so they cut losses and offered to settle, which was the right business choice, the fact AMD settled says a lot in that if they thought they would actually win, settling for the pennies they did would have been stupid. Also worth noting that nothing Intel did was illegal, offering bulk discounts and rebates is the industry norm,
Click to expand...

They were offering bulk discounts and rebates IFFF THE OEMS WOULDN'T SELL AMD SYSTEMS AT ALL. This is clearly against antitrust law in multiple countries.

The assumption made here is a bad one, it's that when one OEM can offer things for cheaper than the competition it is bad, where this idea comes from I have no idea, that is the very grounds of competition.
Click to expand...

You are wrong. Just stop.

AMD has won judgments against intel in court multiple times in multiple venues. Just stop it.
 
Archaea said:
sutyi

1st question - how many PCI-E Lanes are available on a z270 board compatible processor. Answer 24.
2nd question - what's my upgrade path in 3-4 years for a z270 board? Answer = null
3rd point - If you bought that z270 board you are already buying DDR4 RAM, so why not wait a month for the newest tech in this x299 -- frankly if I had a 7700k I'd be reselling it RIGHT NOW, and replacing it with a equivalent x299 based system. Even if the processor was a lateral change.

There seems to be a lot of life and future potential in this particular x299 chipset.
Click to expand...

I think you've got that backwards, x299 doesn't offer much and is likely to be replaced even faster than x99, unless you need those extra cores there's no reason to upgrade now.

1st question - other than an extra 4 PCI-E lanes, what do you get from x299? Answer: additional expense.
2nd question - What is the primary market for Z270 and socket 1151? Answer: Gamers and general computing.
3rd question - What new tech are you expecting to drop with x299 that you can't already get with z270? Answer: More cores.
Bonus round - Other than m.2 what new tech are you expecting on x299 that you can't get on the 3 year old x99 chipset? Answer: Not much. Maybe usb 3.1 front panel headers are worth it?

My main point - x299 doesn't have much to offer other than support for Intel's new cpus. If content creation were still my primary focus I'd be pissed, the ONLY reason to upgrade to x299 is to get moar cores. If I were forced to upgrade to a more expensive platform to get those cores I'd expect it to have a far more robust feature set than the mid-tier z270 chipset... but it doesn't. I hope the new cpus will outlive x299, the feature set sure feels a bit lackluster for a flagship platform.
 
dook43 said:
They were offering bulk discounts and rebates IFFF THE OEMS WOULDN'T SELL AMD SYSTEMS AT ALL. This is clearly against antitrust law in multiple countries.



You are wrong. Just stop.

AMD has won judgments against intel in court multiple times in multiple venues. Just stop it.
Click to expand...
Fanbois, err, blind fanatics cant help themselves;)
 
dook43 said:
They were offering bulk discounts and rebates IFFF THE OEMS WOULDN'T SELL AMD SYSTEMS AT ALL. This is clearly against antitrust law in multiple countries.



You are wrong. Just stop.

AMD has won judgments against intel in court multiple times in multiple venues. Just stop it.
Click to expand...

No they did not, they offered discounts for a given volume of sales. The EC and US cases also showed that companies that sold AMD systems had no change in rebates or discounts from Intel. The EC was found at fault by their ombudsman (equivalent of the Inspector general in the US), the ombudsman even rebuked the EC for it's actions in the case as it violated all sorts of rules and rights of Intel. The reason for this? The EC failed to record interviews with Dell and others on testimony that they were NOT told to not sell AMD, and refused to hand over any documentation. You see the EC case is not a court or legal case and is NOT held to those standards for proof, the EC just has to assume something was wrong. The information that was used for the case? A low level employee who no longer worked for Dell, said he ASSUMED Intel would pull discounts if they sold more AMD chips. The EC's own investigation team found this to be FALSE, and provided proof of increased AMD sells during the time all of all this supposed Intel blocking, which is something else Intel requested the EC get from AMD on increasing sales, the EC refused to request these documents from AMD. The EC then went on to rule against its own investigation team!

As for your second point, Intel and AMD are in lawsuits all the time, they both sue each other and both have won lawsuits on the other. What is your point?
 
BlueFireIce said:
No they did not, they offered discounts for a given volume of sales. The EC and US cases also showed that companies that sold AMD systems had no change in rebates or discounts from Intel. The EC was found at fault by their ombudsman (equivalent of the Inspector general in the US), the ombudsman even rebuked the EC for it's actions in the case as it violated all sorts of rules and rights of Intel. The reason for this? The EC failed to record interviews with Dell and others on testimony that they were NOT told to not sell AMD, and refused to hand over any documentation. You see the EC case is not a court or legal case and is NOT held to those standards for proof, the EC just has to assume something was wrong. The information that was used for the case? A low level employee who no longer worked for Dell, said he ASSUMED Intel would pull discounts if they sold more AMD chips. The EC's own investigation team found this to be FALSE, and provided proof of increased AMD sells during the time all of all this supposed Intel blocking, which is something else Intel requested the EC get from AMD on increasing sales, the EC refused to request these documents from AMD. The EC then went on to rule against its own investigation team!

As for your second point, Intel and AMD are in lawsuits all the time, they both sue each other and both have won lawsuits on the other. What is your point?
Click to expand...

They were caught giving rebates to OEM's if they refused to sell AMD or limited AMD numbers, simple fact in USA. They were also found guilty in Britain, Japan the EU was its own investigation. Simple fact they were losing everywhere so the settled and let AMD get rid of their foundries and gave them a billion in cash. Your just being a blind fanboy and ignoring the other cases to site one by the EU. Also dont worry about replying to me cause from all your other posts its obvious your a blind Intel fanboy and rail against anyone that says anything else so I wont be bothering anymore with your posts. The sad part is the company you love has been screwing you for years by damaging the competition and not allowing them to push Intel and Intel has just been milking the market and now suddenly remembered they can make higher core counts for consumers now that AMD has returned.
 
capt_cope said:
I think you've got that backwards, x299 doesn't offer much and is likely to be replaced even faster than x99, unless you need those extra cores there's no reason to upgrade now.

1st question - other than an extra 4 PCI-E lanes, what do you get from x299? Answer: additional expense.
2nd question - What is the primary market for Z270 and socket 1151? Answer: Gamers and general computing.
3rd question - What new tech are you expecting to drop with x299 that you can't already get with z270? Answer: More cores.
Bonus round - Other than m.2 what new tech are you expecting on x299 that you can't get on the 3 year old x99 chipset? Answer: Not much. Maybe usb 3.1 front panel headers are worth it?

My main point - x299 doesn't have much to offer other than support for Intel's new cpus. If content creation were still my primary focus I'd be pissed, the ONLY reason to upgrade to x299 is to get moar cores. If I were forced to upgrade to a more expensive platform to get those cores I'd expect it to have a far more robust feature set than the mid-tier z270 chipset... but it doesn't. I hope the new cpus will outlive x299, the feature set sure feels a bit lackluster for a flagship platform.
Click to expand...

Ironic, that you say I've got it backwards and then say the "ONLY reason to upgrade to x299 is to get moar cores"

Which is the very same reason I said this platform was lucrative to upgrade -- it adds a LOT of longevity possiblities. The benefit of more PCI-E Lanes down the line when you upgrade your CPU, and an actual VERY significant CPU upgrade path - make the x299 platform of benefit to purchase now over x270 or x99 - which have very limited CPU upgrade paths in comparison.

The extra PCI-E lanes that come with the higher class processors will be of benefit when future GPU's can use them more effectively (I'm a satisfied Crossfire user with triple screen 1440p monitor eyefinity and have a more legitimate use case for extra PCI-E lanes than many who use a single card on a single monitor - as the only time a significant PCI-E 8x bottleneck is encountered on current cards is in SLI or Crossfire with multiple monitors and Low Graphics settings (where the bottleneck is taken off the video card))


Post 64
https://hardforum.com/threads/intel...unt-and-prices.1935668/page-2#post-1043028114

and

Post 68
https://hardforum.com/threads/intel...unt-and-prices.1935668/page-2#post-1043028195


If you are buying new there is a LOT of incentive to buy a 4 core 8 thread processor on the x299 board, rather than the previous offerings. (even if current performance delta is null). The extra $150 you pay towards the newest motherboard will be well worth it if you plan to do a standing CPU upgrade in the future. Ebay is rife with old CPUs on the cheap. So in 4 years pick up one of those 12-18 core CPUs for $300 - $400 used and you've got a powerhouse machine again.
 
dook43 said:
Wrong.

https://www.cnet.com/news/intel-to-abide-by-japan-ftc-recommendations/
Click to expand...

So you say I am wrong by linking to a recommendation by a totally different country with totally different laws? Ok. Lets start.

No ruling or case ever happened, when the Japan FTC gave the recommendations it was basing it off of the EC, they had no proof, it was more of a "just in case". The Japan FTC then conducted raids on Intel locations to take and review documents, and performed interviews with Intel employees, they also questioned vendors about agreements etc with Intel, guess what? The Japan FTC chose NOT TO PURSUE any legal or court action against Intel after this review.

From your own link, Reynolds stated that in Japan: "the market share between Intel and AMD remains relatively constant and is largely related to manufacturing capacity,"

Gideon said:
They were caught giving rebates to OEM's if they refused to sell AMD or limited AMD numbers, simple fact in USA. They were also found guilty in Britain, Japan the EU was its own investigation. Simple fact they were losing everywhere so the settled and let AMD get rid of their foundries and gave them a billion in cash. Your just being a blind fanboy and ignoring the other cases to site one by the EU. Also dont worry about replying to me cause from all your other posts its obvious your a blind Intel fanboy and rail against anyone that says anything else so I wont be bothering anymore with your posts. The sad part is the company you love has been screwing you for years by damaging the competition and not allowing them to push Intel and Intel has just been milking the market and now suddenly remembered they can make higher core counts for consumers now that AMD has returned.
Click to expand...

Show me, you and others keep claiming this, but never have proof other than some random website claiming as such. Not even the EC claimed to have such proof, it was assumed that was the case. Funny enough, the whole case file from the EC, they have refused to make public. They were not found guilty, they were fined, different requirements than a normal court of law.

I am no fanboy, because I have kept up with and read the actual cases that are available and understand what happened and don't agree with you does not make me a fanboy. I also stated that Intel is no perfect love child, but nor is AMD, however any time this comes up, people point to the EC ruling they don't understand or have ever read and just brush off all the actions of AMD. If looking at both sides and understanding the whole history and reading the rulings makes me a fanboy in your eyes, so be it.

I have no love for Intel, not sure where you get that from, and I have zero brand loyalty. I go for what fits my needs or budget. I guess your idea of not being screwed over by Intel would have been to buy a much lower performing AMD system for my gaming rigs? Ok....
 
BlueFireIce said:
So you say I am wrong by linking to a recommendation by a totally different country with totally different laws? Ok. Lets start.
Click to expand...

Yes. The article reads very clearly that Intel agreed to stop the unfair trade practices despite disagreeing with the "findings of fact". "Intel respectfully disagrees with the allegations contained in the recommendation, but in order to continue to focus on the needs of customers and consumers, and continue to provide them with the best products and service, we have decided to accept the recommendation," Bruce Sewell, Intel general counsel, said in a statement."

CNET is not a random website.

You are arguing semantics at this point.

Intel 100% gave rebates to customers, effectively paying them, to not use competitor products.

If this had not happened, there would have been no settlement, no acceptance of recommendation, no agreement to pay fines, nothing, nada, zero.

I really don't know why I'm wasting my time replying to this.
 
RealBeast said:
It would be nice but 10Gb switches are so expensive.

I'm a cheapskate so have 2 storage servers and my main rig connected via Intel X520DA2 and 5m cables (total cost from China via Ebay under $450, about half the cost of a small 10Gb switch). It comes in handy for moving large video projects but is really not necessary, just fun epeen. :LOL:
Click to expand...
That's honestly more future proof. I would be tempted to turn my old i7 into a SFP+ pfsense router if I did that. It's massive overkill for a home network, but if 10Gb fiber becomes available where I want to live, that could be interesting.
 
Archaea said:
Ironic, that you say I've got it backwards and then say the "ONLY reason to upgrade to x299 is to get moar cores"

Which is the very same reason I said this platform was lucrative to upgrade -- it adds a LOT of longevity possiblities. The benefit of more PCI-E Lanes down the line when you upgrade your CPU, and an actual VERY significant CPU upgrade path - make the x299 platform of benefit to purchase now over x270 or x99 - which have very limited CPU upgrade paths in comparison.

The extra PCI-E lanes that come with the higher class processors will be of benefit when future GPU's can use them more effectively (I'm a satisfied Crossfire user with triple screen 1440p monitor eyefinity and have a more legitimate use case for extra PCI-E lanes than many who use a single card on a single monitor - as the only time a significant PCI-E 8x bottleneck is encountered on current cards is in SLI or Crossfire with multiple monitors and Low Graphics settings (where the bottleneck is taken off the video card))


Post 64
https://hardforum.com/threads/intel...unt-and-prices.1935668/page-2#post-1043028114

and

Post 68
https://hardforum.com/threads/intel...unt-and-prices.1935668/page-2#post-1043028195


If you are buying new there is a LOT of incentive to buy a 4 core 8 thread processor on the x299 board, rather than the previous offerings. (even if current performance delta is null). The extra $150 you pay towards the newest motherboard will be well worth it if you plan to do a standing CPU upgrade in the future. Ebay is rife with old CPUs on the cheap. So in 4 years pick up one of those 12-18 core CPUs for $300 - $400 used and you've got a powerhouse machine again.
Click to expand...

How does it make sense to pay more money now (for similar performance and features) just to have the ability to dump more money into an aging platform later? Hindsight being what it is, take a look at x99. Lets say you chose an x99 board with a 5820 instead of a Z97 board with a 4770k... after all, you'll be able to upgrade to a 6 core chip in 3-4 years. It's been about 3 years now, you can snag a 5930k for $300 - $400, but are you really any better off than someone with a 4770k? Sure your upgrade cost is only $300 - $400 now, but you paid an extra ~$150 - $200 (and that's not counting the pricing of DDR4 compared to DDR3 when x99 launched), and you can buy a new z270 board, i7 7700k, and ddr4 for less than $600 today.
And what's sad (to me at least) is that unlike comparing x299 to z270, x99 had more features than Z97 and was clearly a "flagship" chipset. When the 12-18 core cpus start selling for $300 - $400 they will be WORTH $300 - $400, and probably won't be any better than the upper-end i5 / i7 processors available. If you don't need at least 8 cores *NOW* I see no reason to move to x299 *NOW*
 
capt_cope said:
How does it make sense to pay more money now (for similar performance and features) just to have the ability to dump more money into an aging platform later? Hindsight being what it is, take a look at x99. Lets say you chose an x99 board with a 5820 instead of a Z97 board with a 4770k... after all, you'll be able to upgrade to a 6 core chip in 3-4 years. It's been about 3 years now, you can snag a 5930k for $300 - $400, but are you really any better off than someone with a 4770k? Sure your upgrade cost is only $300 - $400 now, but you paid an extra ~$150 - $200 (and that's not counting the pricing of DDR4 compared to DDR3 when x99 launched), and you can buy a new z270 board, i7 7700k, and ddr4 for less than $600 today.
And what's sad (to me at least) is that unlike comparing x299 to z270, x99 had more features than Z97 and was clearly a "flagship" chipset. When the 12-18 core cpus start selling for $300 - $400 they will be WORTH $300 - $400, and probably won't be any better than the upper-end i5 / i7 processors available. If you don't need at least 8 cores *NOW* I see no reason to move to x299 *NOW*
Click to expand...

well then we just don't see eye to eye. Clearly - to me - the x299 is a better option now than any motherboard option previously available to consumers. 4 core to 18 core options on one series (at a time when generation CPU changes have yielded less than 10% IPC for the last 6 years - nearly down to 2-3% in the last generation --- meaning we've hit a bit of ceiling on clock speed and IPC improvements until some major overhaul -- so now failing Mhz improvements and IPC improvements we must go wide and 18 cores is very very wide.

so yeah --- looking back through history --- in previous generations you could consider an upgrade from a 4 core to a six core on the same board. (MANY were limited to ONLY 4 core variants) So yeah --- this x299 has future legs!

You've got lots of flexibility with PCI-E lanes when they are needed, you've got the newest tech currently available with no outstandingly obvious bottlenecks for the future (m2 2280 PCI-E variants like the 960 EVO are both stupid fast and stupid cheap (IE $160 for an OS drive that reads at 3,200 MB/s -- that won't seem slow for a LONG time to come) -- you've got USB 3.1 and even when new tech comes out you've got the bandwidth via both CPU cores and PCI-E LANs to handle new tech upgrades into the forseeable future. You've got plenty of memory bandwidth with four channel memory support. It's a very versatile time to upgrade or buy new!

BTW -- While I don't have a problem with a used CPU from the likes of ebay -- I do have a greater fear of a used motherboard from the likes of ebay. Too many things can go wrong or become intermittent problems with a motherboard that you don't know how it was handled or why they are truly selling the part.

So yeah --- I just straight up disagree with you. I'd gladly speed $150-$200 extra on the x299 motherboard and CPU over an older --- (currently) similar performing part. --- in simple anticipation of all these things we've discussed. Personally I would probably buy the 6 core at $389, with the plan to upgrade to a 10+ core when/if the need arises. Put a filter search on ebay and BIN when the opportunity arises.
 
Last edited:
dook43 said:
Yes. The article reads very clearly that Intel agreed to stop the unfair trade practices despite disagreeing with the "findings of fact". "Intel respectfully disagrees with the allegations contained in the recommendation, but in order to continue to focus on the needs of customers and consumers, and continue to provide them with the best products and service, we have decided to accept the recommendation," Bruce Sewell, Intel general counsel, said in a statement."

CNET is not a random website.

You are arguing semantics at this point.

Intel 100% gave rebates to customers, effectively paying them, to not use competitor products.

If this had not happened, there would have been no settlement, no acceptance of recommendation, no agreement to pay fines, nothing, nada, zero.

I really don't know why I'm wasting my time replying to this.
Click to expand...

Of course they are going to go with the recommendation, to state other wise would to say we are going to not follow them.

If you tell an innocent man, not to murder someone, and he says he agrees to follow that recommendation and then you say "see! He was guilty of murder!". Not very logical is it? There was no settlement in that, and no fines paid, where you get this from I don't know.

Yes, Intel gave rebates/discounts for buying at given bulk volumes, SO DOES AMD. Samsung, Micron, Foxconn, just about any manufacture of scale does bulk discounts or rebates, this is how business works. What you are saying is that by offering a lower bulk prices to vendors, the same that AMD and everyone else does, that makes Intel evil.....Ok....

One of the biggest complaints Intel has lodged in both of these was a clarification on what rebates and discounts are allowed, as other manufactures do it and there are no laws against it, but both Japan and the EC refused to give this clarification, because if they did it would mean EVERY SINGLE manufacture of scale would fall under it. Bulk discounts happen at almost every level outside of direct retail and even then, some places do.
 
Emission said:
Until AMD drops ThreadRipper for $999 and makes Intel's 10-core look like shit value wise.
Click to expand...

Would be an amazing value if they did, assuming performance keeps up. Outside of a few uses, the AMD chip would rule almost everything, however we will have to wait and see where prices land and performance ends up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top