• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Question Intel Limited/Special Edition CPU's and Pricing History

Dave3000

Senior member
Jan 10, 2011
969
13
81
I'm wondering if the i7-8086K CPU has ever been sold at MSRP or lower prices, not counting used? The reason I ask is because I want to purchase an i9-9900KS but the price is still above MSRP everywhere I checked and this is the CPU I want to upgrade to if it were priced at MSRP or lower. How likely will I be able to purchase a brand new 9900KS at MSRP or lower pricing if I keep waiting?
 

UsandThem

Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 4, 2000
13,315
3,962
146
I'm wondering if the i7-8086K CPU has ever been sold at MSRP or lower prices, not counting used? The reason I ask is because I want to purchase an i9-9900KS but the price is still above MSRP everywhere I checked and this is the CPU I want to upgrade to if it were priced at MSRP or lower. How likely will I be able to purchase a brand new 9900KS at MSRP or lower pricing if I keep waiting?
I saw them cheaper than MSRP on Newegg's Ebay storefront for a bit until they finally sold out.

However, I believe the demand (and price) for the 9900KS will stay higher than it did for the 8086k. Intel's production strain has only gone up since that time. If you want that particular CPU, you will likely end up paying over MSRP for it. These special edition CPUs rarely make sense when you break them down to $ / performance, so it would be up to you if it's worth it. For me, if I wanted to build using Intel, I would buy a 9900k or 9900kf and use the savings to buy a better monitor, GPU, SSD, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scannall

Dave3000

Senior member
Jan 10, 2011
969
13
81
I would just wait until Comet Lake-S is available if you really want what Intel has on offer. The 9900KS isn't worth it.
So is a 3800x priced at $330 worth it over a 9900k priced at $450? These are Micro Center's prices. Also is the stock cooler of the 3800x sufficient enough to prevent thermal throttling of the 3800x or should I buy a 280mm AiO?
 

UsandThem

Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 4, 2000
13,315
3,962
146
So is a 3800x priced at $330 worth it over a 9900k priced at $450? These are Micro Center's prices.
That's the way I would go.

Although I would personally go with the 3700X. There's not much performance difference compared to the 3800X, but the 3800X is a better binned CPU so I understand why some go that route.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1899-ryzen-3800x-vs-3700x-difference/
As it turns out, not a lot. During heavy workloads the 3800X clocks between 100 - 150 MHz higher, which amounts to a 2.5 - 4% frequency increase. This increased CPU power consumption by around 12%, which meant it ran a few degrees hotter, potentially making it a bit louder.

For this minor performance increase AMD has increased the MSRP by 21%, from $330 to $400, so the biggest percentage increase, if we ignore the TDP, comes from the price. And we believe that’s all you need to hear, you’ll get 3% more performance at best, by spending 21% more of your money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

Dave3000

Senior member
Jan 10, 2011
969
13
81
Is there going to be a situation where the 3700x will be throttling down to 3.6-3.7 GHz all-core but the 3800x will be running at 4.3-4.4GHz all core due to the 65W TDP spec of the 3700x on the same system doing the same activity? Is it more like at their fullest load, the 3700x will be running at around 4.2-4.3GHz all core and the 3800x will be running at running at 4.3-4.4GHz all core regardless of TDP spec?
 
Last edited:

UsandThem

Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 4, 2000
13,315
3,962
146
Is there going to be a situation where the 3700x will be throttling down to 3.6-3.7 GHz all-core but the 3800x will be running at 4.3-4.4GHz all core due to the 65W TDP spec of the 3700x on the same system doing the same activity? Is it more like at their fullest load, the 3700x will be running at around 4.2-4.3GHz all core and the 3800x will be running at running at 4.3-4.4GHz all core regardless of TDP spec?
As long as you keep it cool, like the review I linked to shows, it will boost just fine, and the difference in performance is around 3%.
The base clock is the biggest difference between the two, and you can always overclock it if you need that extra 100 Mhz. Otherwise, since the price difference is only $30 at Micro Center, you could always just get the 3800X so you don't have to worry about it.

For me, it's all about $ / performance, and the 3800X isn't a CPU I would personally go with. I'd go with the 3700X, and if I needed more performance for whatever reason (things that would benefit from more cores), I would go up to the 3900X.

 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,371
5,282
136
So is a 3800x priced at $330 worth it over a 9900k priced at $450? These are Micro Center's prices. Also is the stock cooler of the 3800x sufficient enough to prevent thermal throttling of the 3800x or should I buy a 280mm AiO?
If you're considering an AMD chip, I would say just get the 3800x at that price and be done with it. $330 is a nice discount on the 3800x. Are you sure that isn't the 3700x you're talking about? That being said, I normally do not make a habit of going into threads where people are making inquiries about Intel chips and recommend AMD ones instead (or vice versa). Think carefully about what you're getting before you decide to throw in the towel on the Intel chips.

Eventually Intel will have a 10c Comet Lake-S chip for the desktop, and it should outperform the 3800x in most things, just from having the extra two cores. Cooling it will likely be very difficult, and if Intel prices it badly, it won't stack up well against the 3900x or 3950x.
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
469
126
I'm wondering if the i7-8086K CPU has ever been sold at MSRP or lower prices, not counting used? The reason I ask is because I want to purchase an i9-9900KS but the price is still above MSRP everywhere I checked and this is the CPU I want to upgrade to if it were priced at MSRP or lower. How likely will I be able to purchase a brand new 9900KS at MSRP or lower pricing if I keep waiting?
Is this mostly for gaming?
Is there something your doing that needs more than 6 superfast cores at the current time?
Your cpu is very fast, for reference here is a link.
If you really want one I found one for 535$ shipped to my door. I only searched for 3 minutes.
 
Last edited:

Dave3000

Senior member
Jan 10, 2011
969
13
81
Is this mostly for gaming?
Is there something your doing that needs more than 6 superfast cores at the current time?
Your cpu is very fast, for reference here is a link.
My CPU is an i7-4930k. I bought it back in early 2014 and it was considered very fast for it's time but now even a Ryzen 2600 beats it in all tasks and there are people that want to upgrade from Ryzen 2000 series to Ryzen 3000 series. Yes, it's mostly for gaming.
 

Thunder 57

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2007
1,512
1,374
136
Is this mostly for gaming?
Is there something your doing that needs more than 6 superfast cores at the current time?
Your cpu is very fast, for reference here is a link.
If you really want one I found one for 535$ shipped to my door. I only searched for 3 minutes.
Uhh, OP never mentioned what CPU they have as far as I can see. Who would go from a 9900KS to a 3800X? It's also funny how since Ryzen came about, suddenly certain people have to bring up gaming all the time. If it's mentioned that's one thing. If not, well some people use their computers for work. Also, who out there is running a 2080 Ti with a 9900K and also 1080p?
 

Thunder 57

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2007
1,512
1,374
136
My CPU is an i7-4930k. I bought it back in early 2014 and it was considered very fast for it's time but now even a Ryzen 2600 beats it in all tasks and there are people that want to upgrade from Ryzen 2000 series to Ryzen 3000 series. Yes, it's mostly for gaming.
Didn't see this before I posted. You may want to consider a 9700k. It's within spitting distance of the 9900K in gaming but cheaper. If you want to go the AMD route, a 3700X/3800X will be rather close as well. However, you get twice the threads of a 9700k which will help if you do any other CPU intensive tasks. It may age better as well. I had a 3570k, and with BF1 for example a 3770k aged much better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

Dave3000

Senior member
Jan 10, 2011
969
13
81
9700k would be an easy decision for me if I was sure that the upcoming PS5 does not use an 8-core/16-thread Ryzen CPU but based from what I read online, it's going to use a Ryzen 3.2 GHz 8-core CPU, but nowhere online does it mention if it will have SMT or not, but then again all 8-core desktop Ryzen CPU's have SMT. I don't want to upgrade my CPU again by the time PS5 comes out. Not to mention Vulkan coming out for X-Plane 11.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

Thunder 57

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2007
1,512
1,374
136
9700k would be an easy decision for me if I was sure that the upcoming PS5 does not use an 8-core/16-thread Ryzen CPU but based from what I read online, it's going to use a Ryzen 3.2 GHz 8-core CPU, but nowhere online does it mention if it will have SMT or not, but then again all 8-core desktop Ryzen CPU's have SMT. I don't want to upgrade my CPU again by the time PS5 comes out. Not to mention Vulkan coming out for X-Plane 11.
Well, FWIW, Anandtech just put out a piece about gaming and basically said the same thing. At the top end they recommended the 9900KS. Everywhere else was AMD. They recommended the 3800X over the 9700k because of the extra threads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,371
5,282
136
9700k would be an easy decision for me if I was sure that the upcoming PS5 does not use an 8-core/16-thread Ryzen CPU but based from what I read online, it's going to use a Ryzen 3.2 GHz 8-core CPU, but nowhere online does it mention if it will have SMT or not, but then again all 8-core desktop Ryzen CPU's have SMT. I don't want to upgrade my CPU again by the time PS5 comes out. Not to mention Vulkan coming out for X-Plane 11.
That's basically why I recommended you just wait a bit. Comet Lake-S should be available soon . . . I think? Once it's out and benchmarked, you will have more information available to help you make a decision. You've made it this far on Ivy Bridge and you can wait a few months longer. Hopefully.

Personally, I love the entire Matisse lineup, and I have no problems recommending a 3800x or what have you to someone who wants a PC for anything and everything you could throw at it. If your primary use is gaming, you might wind up with a 10%-better chip getting something from Intel, or you might not. It has a lot to do with what titles you'll be playing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spursindonesia

tamz_msc

Platinum Member
Jan 5, 2017
2,627
2,296
106
Just wait a while longer and hope that the i7 8c/16t Comet Lake is priced at $350. If you're not interested in waiting then grab a 9900KF for $420.
 

Arkaign

Lifer
Oct 27, 2006
20,562
1,031
126
Your old stuff will command a pretty penny on the used market as far as putting a dent in the cost of a new platform.

Basically for new builds : Ryzen 3000 series for 60fps gaming, all-around mixed use PCs or productivity, Intel 9th gen K series for (high-end) gaming.
 

Dave3000

Senior member
Jan 10, 2011
969
13
81
As long as you keep it cool, like the review I linked to shows, it will boost just fine, and the difference in performance is around 3%.
The base clock is the biggest difference between the two, and you can always overclock it if you need that extra 100 Mhz. Otherwise, since the price difference is only $30 at Micro Center, you could always just get the 3800X so you don't have to worry about it.

For me, it's all about $ / performance, and the 3800X isn't a CPU I would personally go with. I'd go with the 3700X, and if I needed more performance for whatever reason (things that would benefit from more cores), I would go up to the 3900X.

I read that overclocking Ryzen 3000 series CPU's actually lowers performance than not overclocking them and that Ryzen 3000 series CPU's are already pushed to their limits without overclocking anyways, so no point in overclocking them.
 

Thunder 57

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2007
1,512
1,374
136
I read that overclocking Ryzen 3000 series CPU's actually lowers performance than not overclocking them and that Ryzen 3000 series CPU's are already pushed to their limits without overclocking anyways, so no point in overclocking them.
Most people should probably leave it at stock or use PBO. You still get the higher clocks with low core counts that way. If you are doing something that can stress all cores to the max, say rendering/encoding (not gaming), then you can see some benefit with a manual overclock. IMO, it might be more trouble than it's worth unless you need absolute performance.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
20,605
8,463
136
I read that overclocking Ryzen 3000 series CPU's actually lowers performance than not overclocking them and that Ryzen 3000 series CPU's are already pushed to their limits without overclocking anyways, so no point in overclocking them.
I think I have a golden sample. I overclocked (50 mhz) to 4100 all core @ 1.1 vcore. So a slight overclock but at about 0.2-0.3 less vcore.

But, yes, for most people, the cips are smart enough to overclock themselves (essentially) at stock.
 

CHADBOGA

Platinum Member
Mar 31, 2009
2,018
599
136
Well, FWIW, Anandtech just put out a piece about gaming and basically said the same thing. At the top end they recommended the 9900KS. Everywhere else was AMD. They recommended the 3800X over the 9700k because of the extra threads.
Terrible recommendations.

Literally every review on the internet shows it is a complete waste of money to get the 3600X over the 3600 and same again, it is a waste to get 3800X over the 3700X.

Despite the 3800X having a 300mhz higher base clock over the 3700X, I can't find benchmarks where this advantage ever shows up to the extent one would expect.

So it isn't enough for Anandtech to have the worst GPU setup for games testing, they now want to go to the next step and make ridiculous CPU recommendations.
 

CHADBOGA

Platinum Member
Mar 31, 2009
2,018
599
136
9700k would be an easy decision for me if I was sure that the upcoming PS5 does not use an 8-core/16-thread Ryzen CPU but based from what I read online, it's going to use a Ryzen 3.2 GHz 8-core CPU, but nowhere online does it mention if it will have SMT or not, but then again all 8-core desktop Ryzen CPU's have SMT. I don't want to upgrade my CPU again by the time PS5 comes out. Not to mention Vulkan coming out for X-Plane 11.
If you are only interested in gaming and care about budget, I don't see how one can go past the 3600 and MSI's Tomahawk Max motherboard..

Not only is it good enough for all games right now, but you will be able to upgrade to a Zen 3/Ryzen 4000 processor, with the 3600 and Zen 3 replacement, likely to be both cheaper together and faster than anything Intel will have between now and late 2021.

I keep trying to find the justification to buy something more powerful than the 3600, but the benchmarks don't show anywhere close to enough of a benefit, especially with the extra costs involved.
 

Thunder 57

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2007
1,512
1,374
136
Terrible recommendations.

Literally every review on the internet shows it is a complete waste of money to get the 3600X over the 3600 and same again, it is a waste to get 3800X over the 3700X.

Despite the 3800X having a 300mhz higher base clock over the 3700X, I can't find benchmarks where this advantage ever shows up to the extent one would expect.

So it isn't enough for Anandtech to have the worst GPU setup for games testing, they now want to go to the next step and make ridiculous CPU recommendations.
I would agree for the most part regarding the 3700X vs 3800X. The 3600 though only comes with a Wraith Stealth, while the 3600X comes with a Spire. I may be wrong, but pretty sure that's how they do it. IMO it would depend on if you need a cooler or already have a decent aftermarket one.

And where did they make the worst GPU setup for games? Link please? I mean, Toms just did a gaming article using two 2080 Supers to compare it to a 2080 Ti. So there's that...
 

Thunder 57

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2007
1,512
1,374
136
If you are only interested in gaming and care about budget, I don't see how one can go past the 3600 and MSI's Tomahawk Max motherboard..

Not only is it good enough for all games right now, but you will be able to upgrade to a Zen 3/Ryzen 4000 processor, with the 3600 and Zen 3 replacement, likely to be both cheaper together and faster than anything Intel will have between now and late 2021.

I keep trying to find the justification to buy something more powerful than the 3600, but the benchmarks don't show anywhere close to enough of a benefit, especially with the extra costs involved.
I agree with you regarding only gaming. Anything more CPU intensive and a 3700X deserves a look. Also, you will likely be able to hold on to it longer. All depends on your budget, use cases, and expectations I suppose.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,371
5,282
136
they now want to go to the next step and make ridiculous CPU recommendations.
Running stock, I might agree with you. But if you look at the max boost for a 3700x (4.4 GHz), a 3800x is perfectly positioned to annihilate it in gaming if you go for static OC. Most 3800x chips are binned really well and will do 4.4-4.5 GHz static OC in anything but very heavy AVX2 loads. I would not expect more than 4.2-4.3 GHz all-core static OC from the 3700x in anything. You might even be able to pull that off in a game using the stock cooler.

Regardless, being able to run all your cores at 4.4 GHz or higher automatically makes the 3800x the superior gaming CPU compared to a 3700x which will be lucky to run one core @ 4.4 GHz. In terms of what it will do at stock, it isn't that special, though it would be interesting to fiddle with power/voltage settings to see what a 3800x could be made to do with default boost behavior (no PBO, no static OC).

To bring it back to the OP, I'm not sure that a 3800x clocked thusly would be a better chip than a 10c Comet Lake-S in games. Seeing a head-to-head comparison of the two would be interesting.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY