IMO, AMD needs to rein in pricing even a bit more, and especially on the low end. 250 is the max I would pay for a 6c/12t CPU right now and this is because Intel is likely going to have 1X700k available for the same price or less. If the 9600x is not faster in at least gaming than the prior mentioned Intel CPUs, this will be considered a bad impression by AMD for me. the 9700x being at 400 instead of 450 is a nice reduction in MSRP, however, its the same story as the 9600x. It better at least match the 1X700k Intel CPUs in single AND multithreaded for 400 dollars, otherwise I think it should be much closer to 330-350 max. The 9900x IMO retaining its 500 dollar MSRP is a slap in the face most likely. 450 is the max I would pay for 12c/24t with aforementioned 1X700k and 1X900k CPUs being either price comparable or as little as 1/2 that cost. the 9950x is the only more reasonable MSRPed part here at 700. 650 would have been nice but there is less competition at this performance tier from Intel, not that it is not close though!
I hope that I am instead blow away at the benchmarks to come and that all the CPUs are worth it even considering their MSRPs. I also hope these AMD CPUs blow Intel's current offerings out of the water, because if they don't, a reckoning may be coming with the upcoming Intel CPUs. A strong showing from AMD means higher competition from Intel, which has been waning from AMD in the last few years in non-gaming performance.