Skip to main content

Intel Plans to Discontinue Multiple CPUs, Incl. Core i5-3450

Intel has announced the discontinuance of its highly popular Sandy Bridge processors. These processors are still among the best selling CPUs, even after the release of Ivy Bridge. They have been mainstays with overclockers and enthusiast builders since its initial release in January 2011. With Ivy Bridge in full swing and Haswell set for early 2013, Intel has started phasing out the Sandy Bridge processors. 

Intel has released the schedule for the following processors: Celeron G440, Core i5-2310, i5-2320, i5-2400, i5-2400S, i5-2405S, i5-2500, i5-2500K, i5-2500S, i5-2500T, i7-2600, i7-2600K, i7-2600S and i7-2700K. In addition, Intel has announced the discontinuance of a processor that was just recently released, the Ivy Bridge Core i5-3450 processor. 

Forecasted Key Milestones:TrayBoxed
Product Discontinuance Program Support Begins:09/24/201209/24/2012
Product Discontinuance Demand To Local Intel Rep.:12/28/2012Not Applicable
Finalize Discontinuance Assurance:01/25/2013Not Applicable
Last Corporate Assurance Product Critical Date:03/20/2013Not Applicable
Last Product Discontinuance Order Date:03/29/201303/29/2013
Orders are Non-Cancelable and Non-Returnable After:03/29/201303/29/2013
Last Product Discontinuance Shipment Date:09/27/2013While Supplies Last

All the CPUs listed are set to be available for orders through 03/29/2013, and will continue to ship while supplies last (boxed versions) or until 09/27/2013 (tray versions).

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

  • halcyon
    Ah...my beloved 2500K is on the list...at least they'll be around for another year.
    Reply
  • rjkucia
    Kind of surprising, as I didn't think they had too many Ivy Bridges for the low-end market yet.
    Reply
  • hero1
    This rig that I have now will be turned into HTPC once Haswell comes out. Can't wait!
    Reply
  • noblerabbit
    wayyyy too many choices of cpu's, MB chipsets, sockets, ram speed, and all that stuff from China that has flooded our dying PC market. I remember how gaming companies were at the forefront of pushing the innovation, the desire, the need to upgrade, but now these giant gaming companies are making bloated PC games, rehashing old sequels with corporatism incorporated into their games, that they are SINGLEHANDEDLY destroying all that they have brought to the table.

    Valve, save us!

    Blizzard, EA , Activision, needs to die a horrible death. UBIsoft is doing ok, don't shun them.
    Reply
  • dalethepcman
    No one can say they didn't see this coming. The 22nm chips are more profitable per unit than the 32nm chips. Because performance is stellar for either they have to be priced similar to each other, or who would buy the new one. Once the old chips are gone Intel can slowly start creeping up CPU prices again, until everyone is paying $400 for bottom end and $1000 for top end again.

    Thanks for the complete lack of competition in the CPU segment from AMD, Intel can now go back to milking its customers.
    Reply
  • noblerabbit
    ^ oh and Windows 8, talk about driving a nail into the coffin.
    Reply
  • halcyon
    dalethepcmanNo one can say they didn't see this coming. The 22nm chips are more profitable per unit than the 32nm chips. Because performance is stellar for either they have to be priced similar to each other, or who would buy the new one. Once the old chips are gone Intel can slowly start creeping up CPU prices again, until everyone is paying $400 for bottom end and $1000 for top end again.Thanks for the complete lack of competition in the CPU segment from AMD, Intel can now go back to milking its customers.Must you remind us how AMD let us down?
    Reply
  • luciferano
    I understand discontinuing the Sandy Bridge CPUs, but why are they dropping the i5-3450?

    dalethepcmanNo one can say they didn't see this coming. The 22nm chips are more profitable per unit than the 32nm chips. Because performance is stellar for either they have to be priced similar to each other, or who would buy the new one. Once the old chips are gone Intel can slowly start creeping up CPU prices again, until everyone is paying $400 for bottom end and $1000 for top end again.Thanks for the complete lack of competition in the CPU segment from AMD, Intel can now go back to milking its customers.
    An i5 at $400 with Ivy Bridge is a far inferior value to even AMD's CPUs without the core configuration and/or P state altering methods that with CPU/NB frequency overclocking, can bring any FX-81xx CPU up to par with the LGA 1155 i5s and i7s in single threaded performance. Intel isn't stupid and wouldn't do that, especially with CPU performance greater than current i5s making little impact on gaming. Even more so considering that even Phenom II and Bulldozer FX can get a steady ~60FPS in any game today even if they need overclocking to do it and they'll probably do the trick for years to come.

    AMD also has laid the plans for great performance jumps with each improvement on Bulldozer just as Intel has done with Core 2 (which is still nearly identical in CPU arch to even Ivy Bridge and probably Haswell, gains are mostly in die shrinks, cache improvements, and die integration) and how AMD did with Athlon 64 up until Bulldozer was launched.

    In fact, AMD has greater gains planned than Intel does and has made clear how they'll achieve them.
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/6201/amd-details-its-3rd-gen-steamroller-architecture

    Intel will not raise prices ridiculously. They undoubtedly will rise to the challenge of a revitalized AMD and will probably make improvements in their plans to ensure that they get and stay ahead of AMD should AMD take the lead.
    Reply
  • whiteodian
    If Intel chips started creeping to $400 for the low end, I think I would go with AMD. I know Intel chips are better, but that's too much damn money. Hopefully you are mistaken.
    Reply
  • luciferano
    9408062 said:
    If Intel chips started creeping to $400 for the low end, I think I would go with AMD. I know Intel chips are better, but that's too much damn money. Hopefully you are mistaken.

    Intel would need to be in an extremely monopolist situation in which anti-trust laws would hammer Intel as they did in the past, except probably even more fiercely because Intel would be a re-peat offender and governments would love to fine Intel to get some money to waste. Intel is still fighting the EU over past fines to this day, so I highly doubt that Intel would risk more such problems, especially if AMD sues them and Intel has to pay AMD as well as paying fines to governments. Intel can be greedy (hey, they're a company, any other company would be out to get as much money as they reasonably can get too), but they're not stupid.
    Reply