Raptor Lake Refresh non-K CPUs are seemingly more expensive than prior-gen models — overseas retailer lists non-K CPUs ahead of launch

Intel Core i7-13700K
(Image credit: Intel)

Spanish online retailer CoolMod has published many new non-K Raptor Lake Refresh listings, including pricing information, giving us a good idea of what pricing might look like in America. Being from a Spanish retailer, the pricing includes VAT. The new models CoolMod listed four i9 and i7 non-K SKUs, three new Core i5 non-K SKUs, and two i3 models.

Converted to USD, the i9 models listed include the i9-14900, priced at $664, and the i9-14900F (its IGPless twin), priced at $637. The i7 models include the i7-14700 and i7-14700F, priced at $454 and $426, respectively. The i5 models consist of three models: the i5-14500, priced at $27; the 14400, priced at the same value as the i5-14500; and the 14400F, priced at $243. The two i3 models listed include the i3-14100 and 14100F, priced at $166 and $138, respectively.

Aaron Klotz
Contributing Writer

Aaron Klotz is a contributing writer for Tom’s Hardware, covering news related to computer hardware such as CPUs, and graphics cards.

  • Roland Of Gilead
    I don't think this would be a shock to anyone. Increase in cost for nothing new or added. AMD have done it recently, now Intel.

    What seems odd to me though, is I have seen builds of current users which had 13900k, and then swapped up (or sideways) to 14900k. I just don't get why someone would fall for that. Same here, with the non k sku's. Nothing over the last gen, only an increase in CPU cost. DOH!
    Reply
  • cyrusfox
    Roland Of Gilead said:
    I don't think this would be a shock to anyone. Increase in cost for nothing new or added. AMD have done it recently, now Intel.

    What seems odd to me though, is I have seen builds of current users which had 13900k, and then swapped up (or sideways) to 14900k. I just don't get why someone would fall for that. Same here, with the non k sku's. Nothing over the last gen, only an increase in CPU cost. DOH!
    Sidegrades, I have a 13900 myself (non K). If I can sell and upgrade for nearly the same price, why not?

    Some people like to be on the modern highest end and have the money to burn. Also with Arrow Lake potentially being a year out and meteor lake currently showing a bit underwhelming at high power/high performance, we could be facing a gap year similar to what was experienced on 10900k, where the 11900k was not a true uplift (Many cases performance worst).

    New gen brings a little boost and APO, but you are right, very small gen on gen improvement... but at least its not a regression:sneaky:
    Reply
  • TerryLaze
    Roland Of Gilead said:
    I don't think this would be a shock to anyone. Increase in cost for nothing new or added. AMD have done it recently, now Intel.
    The retailers are marking them up because they aren't even out yet, it's the same that happened with amd and what happens with every single thing that comes out, someone always lists it first for higher than what it will cost when actually released.
    Reply
  • Flayed
    It wouldn't surprise me if the USD price matches the Euro price 1:1
    Reply
  • Kashmir74
    Roland Of Gilead said:
    I don't think this would be a shock to anyone. Increase in cost for nothing new or added. AMD have done it recently, now Intel.

    What seems odd to me though, is I have seen builds of current users which had 13900k, and then swapped up (or sideways) to 14900k. I just don't get why someone would fall for that. Same here, with the non k sku's. Nothing over the last gen, only an increase in CPU cost. DOH!
    Simply because 14900K is +1000 better than 13900K, it's simple math.
    Reply
  • TerryLaze
    Kashmir74 said:
    Simply because 14900K is +1000 better than 13900K, it's simple math.
    https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor-numbers.htmlIt's not one single number, it's one generation number and one sku number.
    So it's only 1 better.
    Reply
  • Kashmir74
    As shown, you can read it as processor number.
    Reply
  • Roland Of Gilead
    cyrusfox said:
    Sidegrades, I have a 13900 myself (non K). If I can sell and upgrade for nearly the same price, why not?
    True.
    Kashmir74 said:
    Simply because 14900K is +1000 better than 13900K, it's simple math.
    I presume you are being sarcastic there!?
    Reply
  • bit_user
    cyrusfox said:
    Some people like to be on the modern highest end and have the money to burn.
    I think the amount of people who do annual upgrades is quite a small, if vocal slice of the overall market.

    However, there is a certain upgrade path which I think is justifiable. Say have a 12th or 13th gen i5. Then, you want some more horsepower. Here's where picking up a 14th gen i7 or i9 could make sense.

    cyrusfox said:
    at least its not a regression:sneaky:
    Seriously? Since when are we handing out bonus points for not releasing a product that's just objectively bad??
    Reply
  • cyrusfox
    bit_user said:
    Seriously? Since when are we handing out bonus points for not releasing a product that's just objectively bad??
    Since the Nvidia 4000, have you met the 4060 ti? it loses to the 3060 ti a couple instances (Reddit post about it).
    For CPU's Earliest I remember was Bulldozer vs the 6 core Phenom (also performance regression) as well as Comet to Rocket Lake I spoke of. And from what meteor has shown thus far, there is likely a good reason we are not seeing it on the desktop to avoid repeating that embarrassment.
    Reply