Skip to main content

Full 10th-Gen Comet Lake CPU Tray Pricing Listed

(Image credit: Shutterstock)

Several European retailers posted the prices for some of Intel's looming Comet Lake desktop processors a little over two weeks ago. However, the more succulent SKUs, including the Core i7 and Core i9 parts, were left out of the mix. As per a tip from hardware detective @momomo_us, Belgium retailer 2Compute has filled in the missing pieces for us.

First of all, it's important to differentiate between a boxed and a tray processor. The first is the kind that you would buy from your local hardware store while the latter is what Intel sells in high volume to big original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). You can tell the difference by the processor's part number. Boxed processors carry the BX prefix while OEM/tray processors begin with the CM prefix.

2Compute lists the tray pricing for the Comet Lake processors. Fortunately, the store's catalog contains a considerable number of models that we had previously covered, which allows us to compare the pricing between the boxed and tray version. The difference is only a few dollars. Although 2Compute's prices correspond to the tray version, we think they are a good indicator of the final price ranges that we can expect from the boxed versions.

Intel 10th Gen Comet Lake CPU Pricing

Intel 10th Gen Comet Lake CPU Pricing (Image credit: 2Compute)

To start with some general observations, the F-series variants are reportedly up to $30 cheaper than their non-F counterparts. For example, the Core i9-10900K seemingly costs $562 while the Core i9-10900KF is listed for $532. This was to be expected considering that the F-series is characterized for lacking integrated graphics.

Apparently, 65W and 35W Comet Lake chips presumably share identical pricing. Once again using the Core i9 parts as an example, the Core i9-10900 and Core i9-10900T allegedly command a $506 price tag. It's a no-brainer that the first is the stronger performer and a better choice since it costs the same as the 35W model. However, there is still some strong value with the T-series for system builders looking to put together a very compact and power efficient machine.

The prices in the table are before VAT (value-added tax) and apply to a single unit. We've converted the prices from euros over to dollars and rounded them to the nearest dollar.

Intel Comet Lake-S Alleged Pricing

ModelPart NumberBase Clock (GHz)Pricing
Core i9-10900KCM80701042828443.7$562
Core i9-10900KFCM80701042828463.7$532
Core i9-10900CM80701042826242.8$506
Core i9-10900TCM80701042826241.9$506
Core i9-10900FCM80701042826252.8$476
Core i7-10700KCM80701042824363.8$436
Core i7-10700KFCM80701042824373.8$405
Core i7-10700CM80701042823272.9$376
Core i7-10700TCM80701042822152.0$376
Core i7-10700FCM80701042823292.9$346
Core i5-10600KCM80701042821344.1$296
Core i5-10600KFCM80701042821364.1$266
Core i5-10600CM80701042903123.3$250
Core i5-10600TCM80701042904102.4$250
Core i5-10500CM80701042905113.1$226
Core i5-10500TCM80701042906062.3$226
Core i5-10400CM80701042907152.9$215
Core i5-10400TCM80701042908062.0$215
Core i5-10400FCM80701042907162.9$185
Core i3-10320CM80701042910093.8$184
Core i3-10300CM80701042911093.7$171
Core i3-10300TCM80701042912123.0$171
Core i3-10100CM80701042913173.6$147
Core i3-10100TCM80701042914123.0$147
Pentium G6600CM80701042915104.2$105
Pentium G6500CM80701042916104.1$93
Pentium G6500TCM80701042917073.5$93
Pentium G6400CM80701042918104.0$81
Pentium G6400TCM80701042919073.4$81
Celeron G5920CM80701042920103.5$68
Celeron G5900CM80701042921103.4$56
Celeron G5900TCM80701042922073.2$56

For the sake of comparison, let's assume that the pricing between the boxed and tray versions of a Comet Lake processor is similar.

The Core i9-10900K, which is the rumored 10-core flagship chip, appears at $562. Intel's recommended pricing for the Core i9-9900K is $488 to $499. That's a $63 increase for two additional cores and (comparatively) doesn't seem like a bad deal at all compared to other Intel chips. The big problem is that AMD's Ryzen 9 3900X 12-core processor also competes in the $500 category. What's even worse for Intel is that the Ryzen 9 3900X often dips as low as $420.

Working down the product stack, we find the Core i7-10700K, which is basically the Core i9-9900K of this generation. The Core i7-10700K could cost around $436, well below the Core i9-9900K's $499 RCP (Recommended Customer Pricing). The octa-core chip would have to face the Ryzen 7 3800X, which debuted at $399 but currently sells for around $340.

As for the mid-range game, 2Compute has the Core i5-10600K for $296. The chip would be equivalent to the Core i5-9600K but with HyperThreading. For context, the Core i5-9600K's recommended price tag is $263. If the Core i5-10600K's price is accurate, Intel is only charging $33 for enabling HyperThreading on the chip. Given the specifications, the Core i5-10600K will go head-to-head with the Ryzen 5 3600X, which has a recommended price of $249, but is currently going for $200.

Sadly, we might not get to see Comet Lake's arrival until June. According to a recent report, the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak likely affected the production of Comet Lake processors.

  • bigdragon
    We need more mainstream products with AMD CPUs installed. There is simply no reason to put up with Intel's high prices anymore. These prices make no sense given the competition.
    Reply
  • justin.m.beauvais
    It is vexing that even with competition Intel hasn't been pushed to drop prices. Seriously, an i5 for near as makes no difference $300? It is basically an i7 8086K with a slightly higher base clock. That CPU is 2 years old at this point. The same number of cores and threads for only a modest drop in price?... Which isn't even really applicable because the 8086K was just an 8700K (which is almost 3 years old) that was binned and factory overclocked! What are you doing Intel!? You've basically just changed the name and kept the price! Performance is supposed to become more affordable over time! Intel thinks that in 2 years almost nothing has changed in regards to performance per dollar! This i5 10600K should be $260 tops! I doubt the addition of the integrated graphics makes up for the price vs the KF version.
    Reply
  • cyrusfox
    justin.m.beauvais said:
    It is vexing that even with competition Intel hasn't been pushed to drop prices. Seriously, an i5 for near as makes no difference $300? It is basically an i7 8086K with a slightly higher base clock. That CPU is 2 years old at this point. The same number of cores and threads for only a modest drop in price?... Which isn't even really applicable because the 8086K was just an 8700K (which is almost 3 years old) that was binned and factory overclocked! What are you doing Intel!? You've basically just changed the name and kept the price! Performance is supposed to become more affordable over time! Intel thinks that in 2 years almost nothing has changed in regards to performance per dollar! This i5 10600K should be $260 tops! I doubt the addition of the integrated graphics makes up for the price vs the KF version.
    Price is inherrinetly linked to demand. Brand new expect these prices or higher, post Ryzen Gen 4 release, assuming there is enough supply of both AMD and Intel chips, this may drop. Otherwise, price is what the market will support. Without enough competition and enough supply these prices will hold up and maybe even increase.

    Time means little on price, for instance look at old 4th gen Devil Canyon CPU i7-4790k. Still sells brand new for $330 and it is 6 years old. You can find used, but still is north of $200 for a 6 year old quad Core CPU. With price stability like this, it makes little sense to upgrade an older platform (I have a Pentium g3258 on it). Might as well step up to Coffee or Comet lake or the comign rocket lake.

    Me personally, I hope there is a healthy stock of the top 10 core part. I have a i9-9900KF. and while i do not need to upgrade, I would love to play with the new part and check out the 5.3GHz boost (I am WC so no concerns on heat dissipation).
    Reply
  • joeblowsmynose
    justin.m.beauvais said:
    It is vexing that even with competition Intel hasn't been pushed to drop prices. Seriously, an i5 for near as makes no difference $300? It is basically an i7 8086K with a slightly higher base clock. That CPU is 2 years old at this point. The same number of cores and threads for only a modest drop in price?... Which isn't even really applicable because the 8086K was just an 8700K (which is almost 3 years old) that was binned and factory overclocked! What are you doing Intel!? You've basically just changed the name and kept the price! Performance is supposed to become more affordable over time! Intel thinks that in 2 years almost nothing has changed in regards to performance per dollar! This i5 10600K should be $260 tops! I doubt the addition of the integrated graphics makes up for the price vs the KF version.
    bigdragon said:
    We need more mainstream products with AMD CPUs installed. There is simply no reason to put up with Intel's high prices anymore. These prices make no sense given the competition.

    Business strategy. Gotta keep shareholders ignorantly happy.

    The tray pricing is per 1000. These prices are for OEM partners. When a person is choosing to buy a whole pre-built PC, no one asks how much the CPU adds to the cost - they just look at the cost of the unit and the specs, and choose from what is offered.

    Intel has lost a lot of the enthusiast market already, so this is how they are choosing retain their margins for their chips that are obviously more expensive to manufacture than AMDs.

    Maintaining their margines keeps shareholders happy. Losing happy enthusiasts seems to be a sacrifice they are willing to make to do just that ...

    That said, street pricing may end up lower depending on supply.
    Reply
  • Deicidium369
    OEMs will build whatever their customers want - and it seems their customers do not want AMD - why buy something "as good as Intel" in a world that has Intel.
    Reply
  • joeblowsmynose
    Deicidium369 said:
    OEMs will build whatever their customers want - and it seems their customers do not want AMD - why buy something "as good as Intel" in a world that has Intel.

    You are forgetting the part where most people buying OEMs wouldn't know a stick of ram from an M.2 drive ... That's why they get ripped off. intel is banking on that "ripped off" part to maintain their revenue, I was just too polite to say it candidly, but thanks for helping to add that clarity. :)
    Reply
  • derekullo
    Ryzen 3900X = 24 threads at $440 or $18.33 per thread

    Ryzen 3950X = 32 threads at $750 or $23.42 per thread

    Core i9-10900FK = 20 threads at $532 or $26.6 per thread (Best case scenario for dollar per thread)
    (I accidentally mixed up the F and the K but it just sounds like Intel's literal response to AMD. How did I not see this months ago lol)

    Core i9-9900K = 16 threads at $550 or $34.37 per thread

    Technically Intel isn't being as greedy as usual.
    Reply
  • mdd1963
    admin said:
    More cores come with steeper price tags.

    Full 10th-Gen Comet Lake CPU Tray Pricing Listed : Read more

    The 10900K had better make proverbial sammiches during a gaming session at that price....; wayyy too much
    Reply
  • bigdragon
    Deicidium369 said:
    OEMs will build whatever their customers want - and it seems their customers do not want AMD - why buy something "as good as Intel" in a world that has Intel.
    I think you have this backwards. The customers don't tell Intel what they want -- Intel tells the customers what they want. We've seen this in the past with Intel's requirements for Netbooks, Ultrabooks, tablets, small form factor desktops, and now Project Athena. Products that stick to Intel's requirements get significant price breaks on components.

    It's unclear to what extent Intel is putting requirements on OEMs today. There obviously is some sort of advertising agreement going on given that you always see or hear the Intel jingle on computer ads. A wide variety of CPUs are available, but many OEMs choose the exact same CPU...assuming you can get the actual part number out of the specs instead of just the generation number!

    AMD needs to crack into Intel's branding firewall. The enthusiast market is not enough. AMD needs a catchy jingle and some ads that are similar to Apple's Mac vs PC campaign (AMD vs Intel here obviously).
    Reply
  • spongiemaster
    joeblowsmynose said:
    You are forgetting the part where most people buying OEMs wouldn't know a stick of ram from an M.2 drive ... That's why they get ripped off. intel is banking on that "ripped off" part to maintain their revenue, I was just too polite to say it candidly, but thanks for helping to add that clarity. :)

    That is a REALLY poor take on who is buying OEM. The bulk of Dell's business doesn't come from individuals. It comes from companies buying 100's or 1000's of systems. When you're buying that many, you want something that will just work, while cost is secondary. We have 100's of desktops in my company, and every single one is a Dell. Why? Because they have a track record with us of just working.

    With Windows 7 reaching EOL earlier this year, we purged a slew of ancient systems going all the way back to probably a couple dozen Optiplex 360's. Those are Core 2 based systems from 2008. Only work done on them was replacing the HD with an SSD a few years back. Almost all the old systems were replaced with $700 6 core i5 systems. Dell doesn't even sell AMD based Optiplex's, so they were obviously never considered. When we went to the bean counters and told them we need to replace xx systems that are 8-10+ years old, saving a few bucks isn't the primary concern, replacing them with something we are familiar with and expect to be problem free for just as long is. There was no mass purging of corporate AMD desktops last year, because nobody has an 8+ year old AMD system at work. The computing word doesn't revolve around the tinkering enthusiast, it revolves around businesses who are willing to spend more to continue going with what has worked for them. That's why Intel continues to post record quarters despite legitimate competition from AMD.
    Reply