this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2024
27 points (78.7% liked)

PC Gaming

8502 readers
358 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Steve@communick.news 44 points 3 months ago

All 4 of them are cheaper than the launch price of their 7000 series counterparts. That's quite good really!

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 36 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700X price is $359, which is a good $40 cheaper than the Ryzen 7 7700X

Sounds good to me

[–] 30p87@feddit.org 13 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Disappointing for share stock holders.

[–] doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think they're just counting their blessings they aren't holding Intel stock rn

[–] rbesfe@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

AMD is still down about 22% over the last month, better than intel but still pretty bad

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

More people may buy them at lower prices, so it doesn't translate to worse sales...

Amd is quite expensive, that's what it's down so much. Their stocks are more expensive than Nvidia which is why it's falling behind so much.

[–] 30p87@feddit.org 1 points 3 months ago

Yes. But do you really expect those monkeys to think that far? /s

[–] Dumbkid@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 3 months ago

These are cheaper than the last two generations were, seems good

[–] Exulion@lemmy.world 19 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I mean 5600x was like $300 when it came out.

[–] sunzu@kbin.run 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Good cpu for most gaming that can be had for 200 bucks. That 3d version is prolly still gaming value sweet spot.

[–] Exulion@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

I mean sure, and their lineup has changed with the x3d chips, but I just mean $279 for the x600x line isn't the most expensive they have launched at. I don't see how it is a 'dissappointing' announcement, especially when the prices are naturally going to settle at a lower price most likely after launch anyhow.

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Why is that disappointing?

[–] BrightCandle@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

They just don't outperform the 7000 series and they are kind of more expensive. I guess you can PBO them and get 15% out of them at similar power consumption but that isn't great for the price difference.