Want to sell my Ryzen 1700 and get a 8700k. Is it stupid or greedy?

[Rifter]

Where do you get $1000.00?? 8700k is 350 to 400 dollars. I am not that familiar with what motherboards are good, but I should think you could get one for around 250. So more like 600 dollars, 700 tops, not a thousand.

I guess you missed the part where he bought a 9900k....... he even posted a damn ss of his amazon order....

 

[Heclone]

Where do you get $1000.00?? 8700k is 350 to 400 dollars. I am not that familiar with what motherboards are good, but I should think you could get one for around 250. So more like 600 dollars, 700 tops, not a thousand.

He/She picked the i9 9900k instead of the 8700k.

 

[Rakanoth]

So you're paying 900 Eur (~$1000) for CPU+Mobo on the mainstream platform, eh? I can see someone paying this amount for a HEDT combo, but for mainstream?

I use my machine as a gaming machine and workstation. Where did you get that it it's only for mainstream use? I know 9900k is on the mainstream platform but 9900k is where the line gets blurred.

That is just wrong. How did we get here?

ROFLMAO. If you think it is wrong, you don't do it. But I need 8 cores because I am running multiple virtual machines and I want my frames per second to be as high as it can be.

 

[Chicken76]

I use my machine as a gaming machine and workstation. Where did you get that it it's only for mainstream use? I know 9900k is on the mainstream platform but 9900k is where the line gets blurred.

ROFLMAO. If you think it is wrong, you don't do it. But I need 8 cores because I am running multiple virtual machines and I want my frames per second to be as high as it can be.

For your specific use case the 9900K might be your best option, I'm not denying that. Only you can draw that conclusion. I was just observing that the mainstream platform spans way higher price-wise than it used to, especially since there's the HEDT platform that covers that price range.

 

[epsilon84]

For your specific use case the 9900K might be your best option, I'm not denying that. Only you can draw that conclusion. I was just observing that the mainstream platform spans way higher price-wise than it used to, especially since there's the HEDT platform that covers that price range.

The 9900K is the same price as the Ryzen 1800X released a year earlier. It's not something new in the desktop market, a $500 high end CPU. Rumour has it AMD will have a Ryzen 9 series at this pricepoint also next year.

 

[Chicken76]

The 9900K is the same price as the Ryzen 1800X released a year earlier. It's not something new in the desktop market, a $500 high end CPU. Rumour has it AMD will have a Ryzen 9 series at this pricepoint also next year.

I'm not talking about the prices on paper, but what you actually need to cough up at the moment. He posted a screen capture of his Amazon order. It's 900 Eur.

 

[dlerious]

The 9900K is the same price as the Ryzen 1800X released a year earlier. It's not something new in the desktop market, a $500 high end CPU. Rumour has it AMD will have a Ryzen 9 series at this pricepoint also next year.

You could certainly make a case that the 1800X was overpriced, but when it came out the competition on desktop was a quad-core (7700K) released 2 months earlier at $340. You also had the 1700X at $400 and the 1700 at $330. When the 9900K launched, you had the 2700X launched 6 months earlier at $330. It was a big jump to HEDT when the 1800X was released with the 6900K over $1000 while the 2920X was $650 when the 9900K was released (and the 1920X selling for $420-$430).

 

[epsilon84]

You could certainly make a case that the 1800X was overpriced, but when it came out the competition on desktop was a quad-core (7700K) released 2 months earlier at $340. You also had the 1700X at $400 and the 1700 at $330. When the 9900K launched, you had the 2700X launched 6 months earlier at $330. It was a big jump to HEDT when the 1800X was released with the 6900K over $1000 while the 2920X was $650 when the 9900K was released (and the 1920X selling for $420-$430).

The 9900K keeps getting compared to the 2700X because they are both 8C/16T chips when in reality it is 20 - 30% faster overall and is a clear tier above in performance - the 9900K actually compares better to HEDT chips like the 7900X and 1920X than the 2700X (see the aggregate scores in 3 seperate reviews: TPU +20%, Computerbase +22%, PC Gamer +30% )

In reality the 2700X is a competitor to the 8700K/9700K as shown by the links above, and is priced accordingly. The 9900K is $500 because there is actually no competition from AMD in this price segment (apart from the HEDT chips).

Anyway, my point was that $500 in a desktop CPU is more common than people will care to admit, from both Intel and AMD. I used the 1800X because that was the most recent example before the 9900K, but going back there have been many chips at $500 or even $1000 in the desktop market. Do people remember the Athlon FX or Pentium Extreme Editions?

Back then there wasn't a 'HEDT' segment, so the $500 - $1000 CPUs were lumped into the same category. Nowadays, we have Skylake X and Threadripper for those pricepoints, but the 9900K somewhat blurs that line because it offers entry level HEDT performance on a desktop platform.

 

[Ranulf]

Back then there wasn't a 'HEDT' segment,

What? Define what you mean by HEDT segment. The $500 price point is nominally entry level HEDT now. The 5820k was entry level HEDT 4 years ago and released at $400.

 

[dlerious]

What? Define what you mean by HEDT segment. The $500 price point is nominally entry level HEDT now. The 5820k was entry level HEDT 4 years ago and released at $400.

You can go back to Sandy Bridge-E in 2011 and the 3930K at $555.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/5091...dy-bridge-e-review-keeping-the-high-end-alive