News Intel Launches Core i7-13790F, Core i5-13490F Raptor Lake CPUs

[Admin]

Intel has extended its 13th Generation Raptor Lake family with two new F-series processors.

Intel Launches Core i7-13790F, Core i5-13490F Raptor Lake CPUs : Read more

 

[bolweval]

A $72 price bump for 90mhz and a little L3 bump?

 

[helper800]

A $72 price bump for 90mhz and a little L3 bump?

Classic Intel product segmentation... Remember when hyperthreading cost and extra 150-200 dollars?

 

[Loadedaxe]

Remember when hyperthreading cost and extra 150-200 dollars?

And when was this?
when HT was in its infancy cpus were barely selling for $200 (unless you wanted a EE), and yes that is with HT.

Hyperbole

 

[evdjj3j]

And when was this?
when HT was in its infancy cpus were barely selling for $200 (unless you wanted a EE), and yes that is with HT.

Hyperbole

Take your lies somewhere else. The 3.06 P4 w/HT was $631 when it debuted as the first CPU with hyper threading. The next processor down on the list was the 2.8 Ghz P4 wo/HT for $401.

 

[chickenballs]

guess despite the name its nothing like the performance gain we got from the i7 4790K over the 4770K

 

[Loadedaxe]

Take your lies somewhere else. The 3.06 P4 w/HT was $631 when it debuted as the first CPU with hyper threading. The next processor down on the list was the 2.8 Ghz P4 wo/HT for $401.

The P4 mainstream cpus with HT sold between $178-278, no lies here. If anything Intels P4 HT line dropped in pricing. Do some research.
Your trying to argue with one cpu, the most expensive of the lot, I never said there weren't more expensive options. Now you could correct me in saying "There were some high end cpus that sold for more"

But just like the 7950X and the 13900k, there are more people on $200-300 cpus than there are on $600 ones. Point is, HT did not cost $150-200 more.

 

[TerryLaze]

A $72 price bump for 90mhz and a little L3 bump?

China market so any comparing of prices is futile unless you know how much the other CPUs go for in China.

which are likely exclusive to the Chinese market

 

[evdjj3j]

The P4 mainstream cpus with HT sold between $178-278, no lies here. If anything Intels P4 HT line dropped in pricing. Do some research.
Your trying to argue with one cpu, the most expensive of the lot, I never said there weren't more expensive options. Now you could correct me in saying "There were some high end cpus that sold for more"

But just like the 7950X and the 13900k, there are more people on $200-300 cpus than there are on $600 ones. Point is, HT did not cost $150-200 more.

The prices I quoted were MSRP when they were released, you're full of <Mod Edit>. The 3.06 GHz was the first hyperthreaded CPU released. You used the word infancy so the first hyperthreaded CPU would be the one to use the price from. It's not an EE processor either, it was a mainstream offering. I remember, I was there, I sold tons of them. Lying liar lies.

 

[Loadedaxe]

lol
Infancy:
the early stage in the development or growth of something:

You can try and split hairs all you want. It did not cost 150-200 more for HT
List of Intel Pentium 4 processors - Wikipedia

 

[helper800]

lol
Infancy:
the early stage in the development or growth of something:

You can try and split hairs all you want. It did not cost 150-200 more for HT
List of Intel Pentium 4 processors - Wikipedia

Since the beginning of hyperthreading until 9th gen Intel CPUs had segmented their CPUs by price for hyperthreading. Not even accounting for inflation, almost every single generation had at least a 115 dollar MSRP premium for the feature. That is a fact nobody can dispute without being contrarian for the purposes of being contrarian. Early on, as mentioned by others that premium was significantly higher and in the range of my original post. Towards Sandy bridge and Ivy bridge this premium dropped below 150, but still cost over 100 dollars, when that was actually a decent chunk of money.

 

[TerryLaze]

Since the beginning of hyperthreading until 9th gen Intel CPUs had segmented their CPUs by price for hyperthreading. Not even accounting for inflation, almost every single generation had at least a 115 dollar MSRP premium for the feature. That is a fact nobody can dispute without being contrarian for the purposes of being contrarian. Early on, as mentioned by others that premium was significantly higher and in the range of my original post. Towards Sandy bridge and Ivy bridge this premium dropped below 150, but still cost over 100 dollars, when that was actually a decent chunk of money.

Sandybridge g870 $82 i3-2100 $120 that's barely $40
Those are CPUs at the same clock speed.
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...pentium-processor-g870-3m-cache-3-10-ghz.html

Intel® Core™ i3-2100 Processor (3M Cache, 3.10 GHz) Product Specifications

Intel® Core™ i3-2100 Processor (3M Cache, 3.10 GHz) quick reference guide including specifications, features, pricing, compatibility, design documentation, ordering codes, spec codes and more.

ark.intel.com

 

[helper800]

Sandybridge g870 $82 i3-2100 $120 that's barely $40
Those are CPUs at the same clock speed.
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...pentium-processor-g870-3m-cache-3-10-ghz.html

Intel® Core™ i3-2100 Processor (3M Cache, 3.10 GHz) Product Specifications

Intel® Core™ i3-2100 Processor (3M Cache, 3.10 GHz) quick reference guide including specifications, features, pricing, compatibility, design documentation, ordering codes, spec codes and more.

ark.intel.com

There are a few exceptions for sure, that why I used the caveat "almost." There are many more examples of 100+ dollar premiums. We are talking about hundreds of CPUs over nearly 20 years.

 

[TerryLaze]

There are a few exceptions for sure, that why I used the caveat "almost." There are many more examples of 100+ dollar premiums. We are talking about hundreds of CPUs over nearly 20 years.

Not if you are talking about the same CPU otherwise, if it has lower clocks and less cache and less other features, then yes, it can be 100+ cheaper.

 

[helper800]

Not if you are talking about the same CPU otherwise, if it has lower clocks and less cache and less other features, then yes, it can be 100+ cheaper.

Almost all the CPUs with different names of the same generation are the same CPU. I do not want to go down that rabbit hole. We can agree to disagree.

 

[TerryLaze]

Almost all the CPUs with different names of the same generation are the same CPU.

What does that have to do with anything?!
Each different CPU still has different clocks and different amounts of cache and so on, either because they fused stuff off or because of faults during production, and the slower it is and the fewer features it has the cheaper they sell them for.

 

[helper800]

What does that have to do with anything?!
Each different CPU still has different clocks and different amounts of cache and so on, either because they fused stuff off or because of faults during production, and the slower it is and the fewer features it has the cheaper they sell them for.

Which means they are all the same CPU but were arbitrarily, or purposefully segmented to get some use out of the chip.

 

[TerryLaze]

Which means they are all the same CPU but were arbitrarily, or purposefully segmented to get some use out of the chip.

Which is a completely different thing/topic from the price of HT by itself.

 

[helper800]

Which is a completely different thing/topic from the price of HT by itself.

Not when we are talking about price segmentation between similar products. If the only thing that separates one product from the other is HT and X00mghz clock speed you have what I originally posted, classic arbitrary and overly segmented product stacks that we all had to deal with for a decade before AMD brought some competition.

 

[TerryLaze]

Not when we are talking about price segmentation between similar products. If the only thing that separates one product from the other is HT and X00mghz clock speed you have what I originally posted, classic arbitrary and overly segmented product stacks that we all had to deal with for a decade before AMD brought some competition.

Yes, with evil intel we had " HT and X00mghz clock speed" for more money now with blessed AMD we have only X00mghz clock speed for more money, have you seen the x vs non-x CPUs from AMD?!
The 7600 was $230 the 7600x was $300

 

[helper800]

Yes, with evil intel we had " HT and X00mghz clock speed" for more money now with blessed AMD we have only X00mghz clock speed for more money, have you seen the x vs non-x CPUs from AMD?!
The 7600 was $230 the 7600x was $300

I never said or implied Intel was evil or AMD was our perfect savior. The x and non-x CPUs from AMD had according price drops on the x CPUs.

 

[TerryLaze]

I never said or implied Intel was evil or AMD was our perfect savior.

Yes you did.

classic arbitrary and overly segmented product stacks that we all had to deal with for a decade before AMD brought some competition.

During all of that decade AMD was also chargin super high prices for just a few HZ more. Remember the FX-9590?

 

[helper800]

Yes you did.

Please quote me in this thread saying as such.

During all of that decade AMD was also chargin super high prices for just a few HZ more. Remember the FX-9590?

I never said AMD did not do this. I said Intel was known for doing such things to a degree or extent that it was arbitrary. Please stop stuffing my mouth with your own words please.