By: anon (spam.delete.delete@this.this.spam.com), August 10, 2019 10:38 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
anon.1 (abc.delete@this.def.com) on August 10, 2019 9:40 am wrote:
> anon (spam.delete.delete@this.this.spam.com) on August 10, 2019 8:20 am wrote:
> > me (me.delete@this.me.com) on August 10, 2019 7:36 am wrote:
> > > Intel's Xeon prices are so fake it hurts. Typical customers are paying at least half of list, and
> > > likely much more than that now. I wouldn't be surprised if Intel starts doing 2for1 deals too.
> >
> > Even half price is an insult when starting from quadruple the price per core. And that's assuming those
> > customer would pay 100% of the AMD list price. The really big customers get custom SKUs at reasonable
> > prices already, but for the rest not budging on the prices this year is basically a slap in the face,
> > especially if they're just doing it to wait out EPYC2 evaluations and drop the prices next year.
>
> Intel never drops list prices.
Yes, which is why Cascade Lake was the last opportunity for a year to drop the prices. That's the slap in the face for anyone without a special deal.
> They provide large rebates to the likes of HP, etc. STH
> had an article on this during the Naples era: https://www.servethehome.com/intel-is-serving-major-xeon-discounts-to-combat-amd-epyc/
> And so it goes... They can't do what they did during the K8 era, but rebates through
> backchannels are not illegal.
Yeah, but the biggest customers aren't the only ones. If they give huge rebates to everyone it just becomes a farce.
It's also a bit different now. With Naples they did custom SKUs, often with worse binning for the big guys and double-digit discounts for the small ones to stop everything at the evaluation phase. Note that double digit doesn't have to be close to what the huge customers get by default and that a lower clocked 24 core that otherwise would've been sold as 18 or 20 core SKU doesn't cost them that much. I don't think HP and the other OEMs got a whole lot. AMD couldn't supply all of the volume they need anyway and Naples did make it into the catalogue anyway.
With Rome it'd be basically over 50% across the board just to match plus whatever incentives AMD is willing to throw in. I don't think Intel will go that low. If I had to guess I'd say the OEMs won't get much again, because undercutting AMD and hoping they'll pass all savings onto the customers isn't worth it, the huge customers they'll give the usual and maybe a bit more, mostly relying on AMD not being able to satisfy all of the demand and for everything else they'll haggle knowing that their sales department is larger and AMD can't possibly contact as many people as often as they can.
tl;dr
They wouldn't have made the Cascade Lake price lists what they are if they were just going to effectively halve the prices anyway without playing any stupid games.
The only counterargument is that stupid games have already been played and the nominal prices exist only for the stock market to demonstrate that everything is fine.
> anon (spam.delete.delete@this.this.spam.com) on August 10, 2019 8:20 am wrote:
> > me (me.delete@this.me.com) on August 10, 2019 7:36 am wrote:
> > > Intel's Xeon prices are so fake it hurts. Typical customers are paying at least half of list, and
> > > likely much more than that now. I wouldn't be surprised if Intel starts doing 2for1 deals too.
> >
> > Even half price is an insult when starting from quadruple the price per core. And that's assuming those
> > customer would pay 100% of the AMD list price. The really big customers get custom SKUs at reasonable
> > prices already, but for the rest not budging on the prices this year is basically a slap in the face,
> > especially if they're just doing it to wait out EPYC2 evaluations and drop the prices next year.
>
> Intel never drops list prices.
Yes, which is why Cascade Lake was the last opportunity for a year to drop the prices. That's the slap in the face for anyone without a special deal.
> They provide large rebates to the likes of HP, etc. STH
> had an article on this during the Naples era: https://www.servethehome.com/intel-is-serving-major-xeon-discounts-to-combat-amd-epyc/
> And so it goes... They can't do what they did during the K8 era, but rebates through
> backchannels are not illegal.
Yeah, but the biggest customers aren't the only ones. If they give huge rebates to everyone it just becomes a farce.
It's also a bit different now. With Naples they did custom SKUs, often with worse binning for the big guys and double-digit discounts for the small ones to stop everything at the evaluation phase. Note that double digit doesn't have to be close to what the huge customers get by default and that a lower clocked 24 core that otherwise would've been sold as 18 or 20 core SKU doesn't cost them that much. I don't think HP and the other OEMs got a whole lot. AMD couldn't supply all of the volume they need anyway and Naples did make it into the catalogue anyway.
With Rome it'd be basically over 50% across the board just to match plus whatever incentives AMD is willing to throw in. I don't think Intel will go that low. If I had to guess I'd say the OEMs won't get much again, because undercutting AMD and hoping they'll pass all savings onto the customers isn't worth it, the huge customers they'll give the usual and maybe a bit more, mostly relying on AMD not being able to satisfy all of the demand and for everything else they'll haggle knowing that their sales department is larger and AMD can't possibly contact as many people as often as they can.
tl;dr
They wouldn't have made the Cascade Lake price lists what they are if they were just going to effectively halve the prices anyway without playing any stupid games.
The only counterargument is that stupid games have already been played and the nominal prices exist only for the stock market to demonstrate that everything is fine.
