Prices for Intel's 9th Generation CPUs Surface Online

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Zhiye Liu
News Editor, RAM Reviewer & SSD Technician

Zhiye Liu is a news editor, memory reviewer, and SSD tester at Tom’s Hardware. Although he loves everything that’s hardware, he has a soft spot for CPUs, GPUs, and RAM.

  • ssdpro
    This is the AMD payoff: Intel releasing a product at $500 that is 8 cores 16 threads with a boost of 4.7 on all cores and 5.0 on two out of the box. Now AMD has competitive products, Intel has more competitive pricing.
    Reply
  • ubercake
    21269582 said:
    This is the AMD payoff: Intel releasing a product at $500 that is 8 cores 16 threads with a boost of 4.7 on all cores and 5.0 on two out of the box. Now AMD has competitive products, Intel has more competitive pricing.
    For sure! These would have easily been the next gen of $1000+ X-series processors.
    Reply
  • kinggremlin
    No doubt. Intel released an 8 core SkylakeX cpu last year for $600. So it goes without saying that without AMD, when Intel released the cheaper to make mainstream coffeelake 8 core, they would raise the price $400 to $1000. Totally logical assumption. How much does AMD pay you to post such garbage?
    Reply
  • techgeek
    This is always the case with any industry (particularly the tech industry), competition always results in lower pricing. Not to mention drives innovation. Thankfully AMD finally came to market with a compelling product, Intel has been sitting on their laurels since Nehelam. The last time this happened in the CPU arena was when Intel released the Core 2 Duo to compete against the Athlon 64's X2's etc. Let's just hope that AMD keeps firing on all cylinders for awhile. Maybe shift some of this newfound success over to their GPU product lines, so we can get graphics card pricing down.
    Reply
  • feelinfroggy777
    I think $399 makes sense for the 9900k. It is not easy to justify much more than that.
    Reply
  • stdragon
    Good or bad, I'm thinking the older lithography tech has something to do with the reduced price.
    Reply
  • coozie7
    Those numbers may make sense in the USA but over here in Europe, where we DO pay VAT they're looking expensive-at PC21.fr the R7 2700x is selling at 344 Euro while the i7 9700K is priced at 403 Euro, with what looks like a hefty discount from 489 Euro: https://www.pc21.fr/fiche/bx80684i79700k-intel-core-i9-9700k-3-60ghz-boxed-cpu-i2417728.html
    Add in the likelihood that the i7 won't ship with a cooler and it better be VERY fast compared to the 2700X if these prices stay as they are.
    Reply
  • nwrigley
    Will these have hardware fixes for the Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities?
    Reply
  • Sn34kyF0x
    Competition fuels innovation. Look at Mazda Wankel Engines, amazing little powerhouses that fizzled out because all technologies had to come from inhouse as no one else wanted to build their own versions.

    The same is similar with Intel in the late 80's/early 90's, you had AMD, Cyrix, VIA, and others making their own versions and tweaks. Hell, even AMD gave Intel the RISC based performance tweaks with their K6 line. Will all of this the lowly little consumer x86 beat out the newer stronger POWER series and them came up and started eatingninto the high-performance markets.

    All this stuff facinates me but I am just glad I can arbitrarily argue with my best friends about why I think Coke, Mazda, Android, and PS4 are better than Pepsi, Ford, iOS and Xbone as all of those things wouldnt exist without the other. ... (Maybe coke would, it's liquid crack to a lot of americans lol)
    Reply
  • Shumok
    21269743 said:
    No doubt. Intel released an 8 core SkylakeX cpu last year for $600. So it goes without saying that without AMD, when Intel released the cheaper to make mainstream coffeelake 8 core, they would raise the price $400 to $1000. Totally logical assumption. How much does AMD pay you to post such garbage?

    Of course, we never would have seen that $600 Skylake-X without Ryzen. He was accurate with the big picture.

    Reply