I hope the Coffee Lake 6-core CPU's are overpriced (read my post first)

[JoostinOnline]

That probably sounds strange to a lot of people, and I'd like to hear feedback, but let me explain first.  I like Intel products, I really do.  I've bought from them for a long time, and all I've recommended for CPU's.  What I don't like is how little competition they have.  Ryzen was a breath of fresh air, because it gave a real alternative.  It's slowly letting AMD get back on their feet.  A negative reputation, deserved or not, doesn't disappear in a few months of success.  I want them to have more time as top dog.  If Intel releases a competitively priced hexa-core CPU now, especially one that combats Ryzen 7 in content creation,  I feel like it will be bad for the market.  I've even seen sites that simply want to see Intel squash AMD.

 

What do you think?

[orangecat]

It might be a little bit but it's going to basically be 7700K performance with 2 extra cores and AMD won't be able to compete with that kind of speed so Intel can charge whatever they want. I think 400-450 would be a good price range for a intel 6 core consumer part. Personally I'd like lower but thats just cuz I'm broke lol.

[Max_Settings]

Why would you hope they are bad? That's a really fan boy thing to say. If they are good it means that Intel will have acknowledged AMD's competition. So AMD will have to work even harder to keep up and the race is back in business so we can get quicker advancements in speed.

[pyrojoe34]

I don't think that's the right attitude, the best thing that can happen to the market is Intel and AMD fighting for customers and constantly undermining each other on price/performance. If Intel competes in price then AMD will have to come back and do the same with better performance and vice versa. It's good for competition.

 

Sure I would like to see AMD on top for a little bit so they can build up market share and revenue which will allow them to put more into R&D and improve future products, but I don't think that hoping Intel doesn't compete is the right way to do so.

[JoostinOnline]

1 minute ago, Max_Settings said:

Why would you hope they are bad? That's a really fan boy thing to say. If they are good it means that Intel will have acknowledged AMD's competition. So AMD will have to work even harder to keep up and the race is back in business so we can get quicker advancements in speed.

Read my post.

Just now, pyrojoe34 said:

I don't think that's the right attitude, the best thing that can happen to the market is Intel and AMD fighting for customers and constantly undermining each other on price/performance. If Intel competes in price then AMD will have to come back and do the same with better performance and vice versa. It's good for competition.

 

Sure I would like to see AMD on top for a little bit so they can build up market share and revenue which will allow them to put more into R&D and improve future products, but I don't think that hoping Intel doesn't compete is the right way to do so.

I want that eventually.  I'd just like a few extra months before it happens.  It took them like 10 years to finally beat Intel at something.

[zzzzzzzhhh]

Most people don't really care, same with me, whichever has the best price to performance, I am a fanboy of.

[Max_Settings]

Just now, JoostinOnline said:

Read my post.

I did read it, no one who wants the market to move would want Intel to fail on this launch. If Intel responds now that means the race begins earlier and we get better stuff faster. Let Intel beat AMD, and see if they don't wait 5 years like last time to come out with new CPUs.

[vanished]

4 minutes ago, Max_Settings said:

Why would you hope they are bad? That's a really fan boy thing to say. If they are good it means that Intel will have acknowledged AMD's competition. So AMD will have to work even harder to keep up and the race is back in business so we can get quicker advancements in speed.

I think the idea is if Intel comes out with a really good part, it means good competition for now, but then how long do we sit under total Intel domination again?  If Intel can't compete, it will give AMD a chance to maybe get some money and market share before Intel comes back, thus leading to competition in the future and for the long term

[JoostinOnline]

Just now, Max_Settings said:

I did read it, no one who wants the market to move would want Intel to fail on this launch. If Intel responds now that means the race begins earlier and we get better stuff faster. Let Intel beat AMD, and see if they don't wait 5 years like last time to come out with new CPUs.

I explained that it had nothing to do with being a fanboy.  I want competition, but it will take a few years before AMD can develop something significantly better than Ryzen (at least two years).  Just a few more months of being top dog would be wonderful for the market.

[JoostinOnline]

Just now, Ryan_Vickers said:

I think the idea is if Intel comes out with a really good part, it means good competition for now, but then how long do we sit under total Intel domination again?  If Intel can't compete, it will give AMD a chance to maybe get some money and market share before Intel comes back, thus leading to competition in the future and for the long term

That's exactly what I'm saying, thank you.  I just feel like Intel beating AMD this soon is bad in the long run.  Just give it a few more months at least.

[porina]

I'd look at the i7-7800X as an upper limit to where 6 core coffee lake would be priced. I wouldn't like to guess if it would take over the i7-x700k price position or if it would go up.

[Max_Settings]

1 minute ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I think the idea is if Intel comes out with a really good part, it means good competition for now, but then how long do we sit under total Intel domination again?  If Intel can't compete, it will give AMD a chance to maybe get some money and market share before Intel comes back, thus leading to competition in the future and for the long term

 

2 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

I explained that it had nothing to do with being a fanboy.  I want competition, but it will take a few years before AMD can develop something significantly better than Ryzen (at least two years).  Just a few more months of being top dog would be wonderful for the market.

It will be hard for AMD to ever truly compete with Intel though, yes this competition is good, but Intel at this point has SO much more money than AMD that they can crush them at any point if they so choose. That's why I feel Intel will being trying to crush Ryzen at this point, simply because they can and want to stay on top and in their safe zone they've had for so long.

[JoostinOnline]

Just now, Max_Settings said:

 

It will be hard for AMD to ever truly compete with Intel though, yes this competition is good, but Intel at this point has SO much more money than AMD that they can crush them at any point if they so choose. That's why I feel Intel will being trying to crush Ryzen at this point, simply because they can and want to stay on top and in their safe zone they've had for so long.

Do you want them to crush AMD?

[vanished]

Just now, Max_Settings said:

 

It will be hard for AMD to ever truly compete with Intel though, yes this competition is good, but Intel at this point has SO much more money than AMD that they can crush them at any point if they so choose. That's why I feel Intel will being trying to crush Ryzen at this point, simply because they can and want to stay on top and in their safe zone they've had for so long.

I think you're right that Intel will come to the realization that it is in their best interest to try to beat AMD as fully and quickly as they possibly can, and so that's what they will try to do.  Where it gets interesting is if they manage to actually do this.  If we assume that they will finally try their hardest for the first time in years, whether or not they succeed will be enlightening as to just how hard they've been slacking off (if at all)

[Brooksie359]

5 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I think the idea is if Intel comes out with a really good part, it means good competition for now, but then how long do we sit under total Intel domination again?  If Intel can't compete, it will give AMD a chance to maybe get some money and market share before Intel comes back, thus leading to competition in the future and for the long term

I honestly think that intel won't compete with amd directly. I think they will have better performance but at a price premium and some will pay the price premium and some won't. I think that intel will price it that way because they can likely make more money that way.

[Max_Settings]

2 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

Do you want them to crush AMD?

No, but I'm saying that they can at any point, look up the net assets and net incomes of Intel vs AMD. Intel has a net revenue of around $10 Billion, AMD is only around $500 Million. It's hard to compete with a company that loves dominance and is SO much bigger than you. Intel will not want to fall out of their throne after being in it so long, and they will try everything they can to get back there.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, Brooksie359 said:

I honestly think that intel won't compete with amd directly. I think they will have better performance but at a price premium and some will pay the price premium and some won't. I think that intel will price it that way because they can likely make more money that way.

That only works on the top end though (7700k, 7600k, etc.).  Things like the 7400 just don't make sense then since that would be "AMD's space"

[Max_Settings]

In the words of Kevin O'Leary (from Shark Tank) "Intel is going to crush AMD like the cockroach it is"

[Max_Settings]

Like if we are comparing sizes between AMD and Intel, it would be like HTC trying to beat Apple and become the leader in smartphones. It will never happen because Apple has stupid amounts of money compared to HTC, and can crush them. Intel will never let AMD beat them, because of their massive amounts of money, AMD never can. Intel will always have far more money to get way farther ahead.

[JoostinOnline]

5 minutes ago, Max_Settings said:

In the words of Kevin O'Leary (from Shark Tank) "Intel is going to crush AMD like the cockroach it is"

Who's the fanboy now?

[Brooksie359]

3 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

That only works on the top end though (7700k, 7600k, etc.).  Things like the 7400 just don't make sense then since that would be "AMD's space"

Well wouldn't that end up being a 6c/6t with the new generation? I mean it may end up being a trade off of gaming vs multi-threaded performance.

[Max_Settings]

Just now, JoostinOnline said:

Who's the fanboy now?

I'm not a fanboy at all. I'm being realistic and stating facts.

[The Sloth]

7 minutes ago, Max_Settings said:

In the words of Kevin O'Leary (from Shark Tank) "Intel is going to crush AMD like the cockroach it is"

when did he say that? also quoting the Canadian Donald trump

1 minute ago, JoostinOnline said:

Who's the fanboy now?

you both are, i think we should let them fight it out instead of taking sides.

 

seriously this is really good to see them both come in the market with everything they got, instead of taking sides, wish them both luck. 

[JoostinOnline]

2 minutes ago, Max_Settings said:

I'm not a fanboy at all. I'm being realistic and stating facts.

You called them a cockroach, and you want Intel to continue having a near-monopoly.

 

I don't give a damn if Intel continues being more successful.  If AMD doesn't do better for awhile, we'll go back to the past several years of no progress in the CPU market.

 

Just now, nerdslayer1 said:

you both are, i think we should let them fight it out instead of taking sides.

If anything I'm an Intel fanboy.  This year is the first time I've recommended and AMD CPU in 10 years.

[Max_Settings]

Just now, nerdslayer1 said:

when did he say that?

That was hypothetical