The article's subtitle ("They are still more expensive than AMD's competing EPYC, though.") seems to directly contradict the article. Perhaps I missed something

The article's subtitle ("They are still more expensive than AMD's competing EPYC, though.") seems to directly contradict the article. Perhaps I missed something in it, but a few times the article discusses how "Intel's Xeon 6 CPUs are now cheaper than AMD's latest EPYC 'Genoa' processors both in absolute numbers and in terms of per-core pricing" and "Intel's Xeon 6900P-series processors are now cheaper than AMD's EPYC 9600-series CPUs in per-core pricing." Is the subtitle simply wrong? The only way I can make sense of it is to suppose it refers to the price if you actually attempt to acquire a Xeon as opposed to the MSRP (if that is even the right term in this space).