Originally Posted by Alatar
Rumored price (taken from pulled articles) is at $800 for the higher end chip....
Bringing that tired tactic of arguing an unconfirmed MSRP again!? Are you all (Intel and AMD fans alike in this issue) that stupid to not get how marketing works? When do you ever pay what the MSRP on a product is? Almost frickin never. Even if the now pulled articles you keep bringing up are right do you really except AMD to be so suicidal and stupid to think companies like CyberPowerPC, Sony, Dell, etc are going to pay $800 per unit for a processor? Try more like 25-35% of that "quoted MSRP." Should they also release them to mainstream consumers, I would be surprised to see them ask more than about $300-350... after all... the most expensive the AMD FXs have been (8150 and 8350) were about $230 at launch. They can't really expect too many people to pay much more than 50-70% above the cost of the 8350, so it would be unlikely to see them set the price much higher than that. $400 is the absolute tops I think you would see them set the bill, and that's pretty unlikely unless these turn out to be monsters in disguise. Until we get the rest of the technical details though, No one knows exactly what these are... my guess is that they aren't just highly binned 8350s, not with the close proximity of their release to the Richland and Haswell releases... I think these could be a desktop piledriver with the updated Vishera cores from the Richlands... it would make sense given the fact that they are able to boost the stock clock 1200 MHz and the boost clocks a full GHz. There are plenty of examples of the surprisingly good overclock results people are getting with the Richland APUs, thanks to the improvements on Vishera 2.0 core design.
And further more.... AMD isn't stupid, suicidal, or insane. They may have dropped the ball a lot over the last decade, but I have my doubts they'd be stupid/psychotic enough to actually expect to get more than half of an $800 price tag for these..
There's a reason why Bill Hicks thought of business/marketing personnel as the lowest form of human life on Earth. They can squeeze $3 profit from the quarter they'll dupe out of your pocket.
In regards to the 220W TDP rating... come on people, we're on OCN... Let's put our brand allegiances aside and think logically for a second. If the 8350, stock 3.5 and boosts to 4.0 with a TDP of 125 W, yet can be pretty easily be overclocked to 30-45% beyond stock clocks (with proper cooling of course), do you really think the 9590's TDP is not overshot as well to allow for head space at stock clocks to not push the CPU within 15-20 C of it's max safe operating temps as well as maybe leaving some overclocking head space there?