AMD FX 9590 Price Drop on Aria.co.uk

[Durvelle27]

AMD FX Unlocked Black Edition, 8-Core Technology, 4.70GHz Clock Speed, 5.00GHz Turbo Frequency, 16MB Cache, DDR3-2133 Support, 220W TDP, 2 Year Warranty.

£699.99 to £299.99


http://www.aria.co.uk/SuperSpecials...+AM3++8-Core+Processor+-+OEM+?productId=56227



Wonder if the US/Newegg will get a price drop also

 

[Jaydip]

That is pretty significant price drop.

edit:
Can't it be run using a very good air cooler?

 

[AtenRa]

That is pretty significant price drop.

edit:
Can't it be run using a very good air cooler?

Yes you can, every high-end cooler like Noctua NH-U12P SE or NH-D14 will be fine if you have a good air flow.

 

[Idontcare]

That is pretty significant price drop.

edit:
Can't it be run using a very good air cooler?

Agreed, and yes.

A high-end air-cooler like the NH-D14 or equivalent will have no problems dissipating 250W if needed (or more).

 

[T_Yamamoto]

That's one hell of a drop.

 

[Chiropteran]

I'll buy one when the price reaches about 2 BTC.

 

[SlowSpyder]

And I just paid for a 9370 and opened the box yesterday. I'll see how the overclocking goes, but an FX 9590 is so much sexier.

 

[Arkaign]

And I just paid for a 9370 and opened the box yesterday. I'll see how the overclocking goes, but an FX 9590 is so much sexier.

You are a crazy person, but we love you anyway.

 

[SlowSpyder]

You are a crazy person, but we love you anyway.

I have plans for this system. And an FX 9590 fits this build's personality better, but the FX 9370 fits my budget better.

 

[Durp]

So reality finally smacked them in the face, just like it did when they were trying to sell the 8150 for $300.

AMD thoroughly screwed early adopters though..... wow.

 

[SlowSpyder]

So reality finally smacked them in the face, just like it did when they were trying to sell the 8150 for $300.

AMD thoroughly screwed early adopters though..... wow.

Anyone who spent $800 for an FX 9590 is probably an AMD fanboy to the point that it won't bother them... all 19 of them are ok.

 

[JimmiG]

That's very similar to what the 4770K costs in Europe.

The 4770K is a faster, better chip overall, but had this price drop come before I built my current system, it would have been very tempting because:
-I'm an AMD fanboy
-8 cores sounds cooler than 4 cores
-5 GHz! Sounds like something out of a sci-fi movie

 

[fixbsod]

At 299 pounds ($450 us?) it becomes a much more realistic consideration. As noted ^^

 

[MisterMac]

Isn't this extremely sad and desperate?


They launch a novelty collectors toy - for the extreme...even the extreme reject it?


I can't help but feel empathy for AMD - will anything work for them?

 

[zir_blazer]

Haswell is still a better choice. You have around twice performance/watt, and possible overclocking margin that would put the performance back on Haswell side, while a factory overclocked Piledriver hasn't any.

 

[Idontcare]

So reality finally smacked them in the face, just like it did when they were trying to sell the 8150 for $300.

AMD thoroughly screwed early adopters though..... wow.

Isn't this extremely sad and desperate?


They launch a novelty collectors toy - for the extreme...even the extreme reject it?


I can't help but feel empathy for AMD - will anything work for them?

Was it any different with Intel's skulltrail? Or their QX6700 (first quad-core) that launched for $1k, and then a year later you could buy Q6600's that OC'ed better for only $260?

There has always been a price-premium for absolute leading edge stuff, and people who have money are actually thankful for the opportunity to buy the hardware even with its inflated price-premium.

I like everything about how AMD has gone about exploring this market niche opportunity. Intel certainly wasn't going to do it.

At least AMD was willing to try and see what kind of market demand there would be for such a product.

Price drops alone are not indicative of a rejected product, it is a natural progression of finding a balance on the supply/demand curve.

AMD is essentially doing a reverse-auction with the market here. Rather savvy.

 

[Durp]

Was it any different with Intel's skulltrail? Or their QX6700 (first quad-core) that launched for $1k, and then a year later you could buy Q6600's that OC'ed better for only $260?

Yes it's very VERY different. First of all it's a different processor model a whole year later. You can't compare that to the same exact processor after only one month.

There has always been a price-premium for absolute leading edge stuff, and people who have money are actually thankful for the opportunity to buy the hardware even with its inflated price-premium.

I like everything about how AMD has gone about exploring this market niche opportunity. Intel certainly wasn't going to do it.

At least AMD was willing to try and see what kind of market demand there would be for such a product.

Price drops alone are not indicative of a rejected product, it is a natural progression of finding a balance on the supply/demand curve.

AMD is essentially doing a reverse-auction with the market here. Rather savvy.

You like the way AMD released these processors but I don't agree. It looks like a clear plan to prey on ignorant buyers and fanboys.

AMD knows how to price their products based on performance, they have been doing so for a long time now, this is why the FX8350 is usually $200 or under.

However they seem to like repeating the steps of initially releasing their processors with prices way out of their performance range and then proceed with significant price drops after the fools that could be taken advantage of have been preyed upon. This has been happening since Phenom II first released.

 

[toyota]

still why would anyone consider this crap? Haswell will perform better while using 100-150 watts less which is massive a for a cpu. I swear some of you will buy anything.

 

[bononos]

......
You like the way AMD released these processors but I don't agree. It looks like a clear plan to prey on ignorant buyers and fanboys.

AMD knows how to price their products based on performance, they have been doing so for a long time now, this is why the FX8350 is usually $200 or under.
.......

I don't know about preying on hardcore fanboys since they aren't looking to for a bargain (or an Intel with comparable performance) in the first place and they want something unique and cutting edge from AMD. Dropping prices by that much after only 1 month might be saying something though.

 

[SPBHM]

still why would anyone consider this crap? Haswell will perform better while using 100-150 watts less which is massive a for a cpu. I swear some of you will buy anything.

looking at the website it costs £50 more than a 4770K, so yes, people who read reviews and such probably wouldn't really feel it's a great CPU even with the price drop...

but I don't know... for AMD fans, of if you already have some high end AM3+ board + slower CPU (like a 8150 or something), and you re not willing to do the OC/testing yourself, I guess... this is probably as fast as you can go with AMD and as fast as AM3+ will ever get!?
and It's a rare CPU, there's always a cool factor with that..

 

[Idontcare]

Yes it's very VERY different. First of all it's a different processor model a whole year later. You can't compare that to the same exact processor after only one month.

You are of course entitled to say it is different, but your logic makes absolutely no sense to me.

As for myself, I bought a QX6700 for $1500 when it first came out, paid to have the opportunity knowing full well the price would precipitously drop after the first month as supplies became more plentiful.

In my case I had a windfall of bonus monies that year, and I did not want to lose any time from my precious few days off over Thanksgiving and Christmas to get my new rig setup and running.

The price did fall, dramatically, in the coming month...and then Intel released the G0 stepping that just put my B3 stepping to shame.

That is how this industry operates. This is nothing new, and AMD is doing nothing new in that regard.

You like the way AMD released these processors but I don't agree. It looks like a clear plan to prey on ignorant buyers and fanboys.

AMD knows how to price their products based on performance, they have been doing so for a long time now, this is why the FX8350 is usually $200 or under.

I see.

And how is that any different than the price/performance decision that goes into Intel's flagship extreme processors like the 3970X ($1020 at newegg) which sports a 150W TDP (well above TDP for their $200 mainstream processors)?

These products, from both Intel and AMD, are not priced on the basis of stand-alone benchmarking performance results or performance/watt results alone.

If you have a problem with AMD in this regard then you must admit you have an issue with Intel in the same vein.

Personally I don't hold it against either company, I wish they would make available more extreme stuff for those of us who have the first-world problem of having more money than free-time and the desire to indulge our hobby desires with expensive rigs.

 

[ViRGE]

Was it any different with Intel's skulltrail? Or their QX6700 (first quad-core) that launched for $1k, and then a year later you could buy Q6600's that OC'ed better for only $260?

Sure, it was supplanted with a better, cheaper product a year later. But even you have to admit that a 60% price drop 1 month after the launch of a product is a bit sketchy.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I don't recall, but wasn't the Q6750 one of the first quad cores? That seems to me to be the difference. It wasn't just a higher binning of a chip that had been on the market for a long time, right?

In any case, I don't blame amd for trying to get as much as possible, and someone who pays that much for a chip should research it thoroughly to know what they are getting.

 

[Idontcare]

Sure, it was supplanted with a better, cheaper product a year later. But even you have to admit that a 60% price drop 1 month after the launch of a product is a bit sketchy.

If the price drop is real and not some one-off fluke, then yes I would agree it is poor treatment of the customer base to have such a steep price decline so soon after taking their money.

But is the price-drop wide-spread? Is it real or is it something odd in an of itself?

It is still showing as $880 on newegg.

I don't recall, but wasn't the Q6750 one of the first quad cores? That seems to me to be the difference. It wasn't just a higher binning of a chip that had been on the market for a long time, right?

In any case, I don't blame amd for trying to get as much as possible, and someone who pays that much for a chip should research it thoroughly to know what they are getting.

The first quad was the QX6700 (Nov 2, 2006). And it was the only quad available for 2 months before Intel released the Q6600 for $851.

That was it until another 3 months passed and Intel released the QX6800 for $1200.

Until today, if you needed a quad-core desktop CPU from Intel you had to sacrifice a little clock speed. The Core 2 Extreme QX6700 ran at 2.66GHz while the fastest dual core Conroe ran at 2.93GHz; today, thanks to continuing improvements in yields Intel is unveiling the Core 2 Extreme QX6800 running at an equivalent 2.93GHz, priced at $1,199.

 

[Torn Mind]

Well, the stores paid a pretty penny to acquire the chip, but they have to move the inventory somehow.