3 ms·

And to think that the Intel processor is over $1500 more expensive.

jotm 7y ago
Is it just me or is AMD seriously underpricing their processors? They could easily sell them for at least 20-30% more. Yeah, it might be that Intel is overcharging for theirs, but they already set the expected prices, and AMD needs the cash, so why not sell for slightly higher prices?
- rat9988 7y ago
  I guess they want to maximize market share, consumer trust and brand awareness for the best long term gains. Hard to tell from my non existing experience, if someone with real world experience could chime in and give an educated guess.
- mhh__ 7y ago
  AMD need to price competitively to gain market and thought share back e.g. (I'm guessing) Most data centres will be thinking of buying intel by default, then AMD just due to past experience.
- jsf01 7y ago
  The cost of switching is high for many companies. AMD has to price so competitively that they overcome that cost. But also, Intel’s costs are going to be far higher since they’re using larger dies and aggressively binning. In contrast, with AMD’s smaller “chiplets” even the lower quality silicon (which they’re probably using in all the non-Epyc chips) can be utilized.
- fabianhjr 7y ago
  When I bought my first CPU for a PC build (an i7 930), I remember that the top of the line model (an i7 975) was in the $1,000 USD range. According to an inflation calculator, there has been roughly a 20% inflation since 2009, so that price adjusted for inflation would be $1,200 USD for the top of the line processor. However, the i9 9980XE is priced at $1,800 USD, a 50% increase. I believe that rather than AMD underpricing, Intel has been marking up their prices since they have had a bigger market share and that $750 USD is a fair price for a top of the line AMD processor.
  - zamadatix 7y ago
    The 3900x is than half that adjusted price though and it's certainly not halfway in the product lineup. I mean yeah Intel has been steadily increasing the max price range for a while now but that doesn't change that this CPU is relatively cheap for where it is positioned (proud 3900X owner here). The real question here (which we won't get an answer to) is who's margins are better... somebody else's 7nm + chiplet design certainly make it easier to manufacture.
robocat 7y ago
I wonder whether it would be worth Intel lowering the price, while keeping the same production levels. Would the lost income cover the better marketing? Also why didn't the article show the price difference given it is one of the most significant pluses of the Ryzen?

jotm 7y ago

Is it just me or is AMD seriously underpricing their processors? They could easily sell them for at least 20-30% more. Yeah, it might be that Intel is overcharging for theirs, but they already set the expected prices, and AMD needs the cash, so why not sell for slightly higher prices?

rat9988 7y ago
I guess they want to maximize market share, consumer trust and brand awareness for the best long term gains. Hard to tell from my non existing experience, if someone with real world experience could chime in and give an educated guess.
mhh__ 7y ago
AMD need to price competitively to gain market and thought share back e.g. (I'm guessing) Most data centres will be thinking of buying intel by default, then AMD just due to past experience.
jsf01 7y ago
The cost of switching is high for many companies. AMD has to price so competitively that they overcome that cost. But also, Intel’s costs are going to be far higher since they’re using larger dies and aggressively binning. In contrast, with AMD’s smaller “chiplets” even the lower quality silicon (which they’re probably using in all the non-Epyc chips) can be utilized.
fabianhjr 7y ago
When I bought my first CPU for a PC build (an i7 930), I remember that the top of the line model (an i7 975) was in the $1,000 USD range. According to an inflation calculator, there has been roughly a 20% inflation since 2009, so that price adjusted for inflation would be $1,200 USD for the top of the line processor. However, the i9 9980XE is priced at $1,800 USD, a 50% increase. I believe that rather than AMD underpricing, Intel has been marking up their prices since they have had a bigger market share and that $750 USD is a fair price for a top of the line AMD processor.
- zamadatix 7y ago
  The 3900x is than half that adjusted price though and it's certainly not halfway in the product lineup. I mean yeah Intel has been steadily increasing the max price range for a while now but that doesn't change that this CPU is relatively cheap for where it is positioned (proud 3900X owner here). The real question here (which we won't get an answer to) is who's margins are better... somebody else's 7nm + chiplet design certainly make it easier to manufacture.

robocat 7y ago

I wonder whether it would be worth Intel lowering the price, while keeping the same production levels. Would the lost income cover the better marketing? Also why didn't the article show the price difference given it is one of the most significant pluses of the Ryzen?