Retailers quietly slash prices of AMD's and Intel's latest EPYC and Xeon CPUs by up to 50% — inexplicable price drops left unexplained
Posted by Emerson_Wallace_9272@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 150 comments
Pillokun@reddit
simply means that they have super duper mega margins on their stuff from the getgo.
Remember that every sale u see they still make a profit. Very seldom any company sells a product below their profit margin. If they do it is an old product that sat there on the shelves for ages they they want to replace with something that actually sells.
Tuna-Fish2@reddit
The actual sale prices of server hardware has typically been closer to these discounted prices instead of the list prices. Server CPUs are sold to system integrators, who then build servers and sell them to the final customers. They like having official list prices that are much higher than the actual contract prices that the CPU makers sell them chips at.
viperabyss@reddit
Exactly this. No server customers actually purchase these CPUs at anywhere close to list price. 50% off is quite normal starting point before the "sharpening the pencil" negotiations.
chmilz@reddit
Not uncommon to see DOL (discount off list) agreements in the 60-70% range.
viperabyss@reddit
Yep, and some OEMs (cough cough Cisco cough cough) are worse than others in artificially inflate the list price to show a bigger "discount".
DwarfPaladin84@reddit
As a Optical Network Architect designing L1-L3 for core networks, I HATE Cisco and their damn pricing. Juniper and Nokia are so much more easier to work with, along with Ciena,
Stinkor1987@reddit
Curious, I thought Eriksson still did business within communications-networks? Especially in the wireless area. Are they entirely irrelevant in the wired networks-sector these days? *looks at eriksson web-page* Huh... I think that might be the case. I see nothing for wired broadband, only wireless.
WolfishDJ@reddit
Can't wait to get a Xeon from one of the more recent generations to screw around with.
nonaveris@reddit
ES/QS for Sapphire and Emerald Rapids processors are out there.
meltbox@reddit
Do you know if the hbm has ecc? I assume so, but just wondering.
Tempting…
nonaveris@reddit
Not likely to be ECC, but very much like the HBM you would encounter on a graphics/compute card.
996forever@reddit
I want a cheap Ponte Vecchio to play with
Zerasad@reddit
Ehh, there are a bunch of times when items are sold at a loss. There are times when they expect to make their money back in other ways. Like Playstations and Xboxes where they expected to make the money back selling games. Or super cheap TVs where they expect to make the money back in ads.
There are also loss leaders where you sell one item at a loss to get more customers in the door and hope they buy other items as well.
shugthedug3@reddit
Apparently this practice is very over now and has been for a couple of generations.
No clue if that is true but people have said it to me, it does feel that way given how much both companies charge for console hardware.
Zerasad@reddit
I linked an article in an answer below where an Xbox VP said under oath that Xboxes have never sold for a profit in 2021. Can't imagine that changed since then.
braiam@reddit
You are using the exception to prove the rule. Most companies don't sell at a loss a product. (also, this is probably just recency bias speaking, MS had a very popular console in the Halo generation)
Zerasad@reddit
All three consoles were sold at a loss at one point. The PS4 eventually became profitable, the Switch became profitable quickly. Xbox is only the odd one out inso far as it never became profitable. Also Xbox is not really an exception if it's 20-30% of the market.
braiam@reddit
With the notable exception of the Wii, Nintendo doesn't sell any console at a loss. All their consoles have been sold above costs.
RinTohsaka64@reddit
Actually the Wii U: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/nintendo-still-selling-wii-u-at-a-loss
I mean, considering the Wii uses 50% higher-clocked die-shrink GameCube processors＊, I'd be very surprised at the Wii being sold at a loss.
＊while architecturally very different, it's the exact same idea as between an earlier 2.0GHz 90nm Athlon 64 X2 3800+ from 2005 and a later 3.0GHz 65nm Athlon 64 X2 5800+ from 2008 (the Athlon 64 being the last consumer desktop CPU I know of that had a true die-shrink only with no architectural and/or IPC changes like Intel did with their tick-tock)
RinTohsaka64@reddit
Actually the Wii U: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/nintendo-still-selling-wii-u-at-a-loss
(I mean, considering the Wii uses 50% higher-clocked die-shrink GameCube processors, i.e. the difference between an earlier 2005-SKU 2.0GHz 90nm Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and a later 2008-SKU 3.0GHz 65nm Athlon 64 X2 5800+, I'd be very surprised at the Wii being sold at a loss)
RinTohsaka64@reddit
Actually the Wii U: https://www.cnet.com/tech/gaming/nintendo-we-still-sell-the-wii-u-at-a-loss/
(I mean, considering the Wii uses 50% higher-clocked die-shrink GameCube processors with faster RAM, i.e. the difference between a launch 2.0GHz 90nm Athlon 64 X2 3800+ with DDR1 and the later 65nm 3.0GHz Athlon 64 X2 5800+ with DDR2, I'd be very surprised at the Wii being sold at a loss)
sylfy@reddit
If you compare the prices to what it costs for the PC equivalent, it most definitely is either a loss or barely break even. There’s a reason why the Air Force built a supercomputer cluster out of PS3s.
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
The PC equivalent is a consumer laptop minus the screen and battery, pretty much.
Remember the slots and sockets and ATX you get in a DIY PC don't come for free.
fricy81@reddit
I don't know. What's the current market price of a zen2 cpu on 12 nm process node that's running in the ps5? Kind of obsolete tech of you ask me.
Morningst4r@reddit
The PS5 APU is 6nm, 7 for older ones. The APU is also much more than some Zen 2 cores.
Exist50@reddit
That was like 20 years ago.
Pillokun@reddit
nah, they are actually lying to us be it willingly or not. no way consoles that often are discussed are sold at a loss, because Sony, MS and Nintendo dont get the prices as we get offered from the "supply companies". When u see some media outlet trying to dig into the cost they dont get to see the deals that say sony, ms or Nintendo lock in with their "suppliers" for them because they are so large and sell in such huge volumes the prices are totally different. That is why Sw2 is so much cheaper than other pc handhelds, even though the hw is old an obsolete as it should have come out years ago as a sw pro :P
I have worked in product development, and every cost was hiked up and then we could say, this and that was such and such when in fact the parts we bought for our product and the end result was much cheaper than was officially displayed. Not only that but the price for a product that we bought in differed so much depending on the company we represented.
But sure, officially some components are sold at a loss because u get the return in game-sells.
Usually u sell something at a loss when u just could not get rid of it, or u give it away in some kind of pr campaign and then it turns to the thing u mentioned like consoles get the return via games.
Zerasad@reddit
Xbox's VP said under oath that Xboxes were always sold at a loss: https://www.pcmag.com/news/microsoft-says-xbox-consoles-have-always-been-sold-at-a-loss there is not much more proof you can get than that.
Also loss leaders are very real and very prevalent. I worked at a big cash and carry store as a teenager and saw how much profit we were making on things. We had the most volume in paper towels in my segment and we always had a huge loss on them. So much so that if we somehow weren't making a loss my boss got concerned and told me to look at the numbers again, because that can't be right. I never understood why we wanted to make a loss that just didn't make sense to me. But it was certainly a thing.
0742118583063@reddit
Microsoft sells them at a loss to retailers, not retailers to consumers. That's simply illegal in a lot of places.
MdxBhmt@reddit
/u/Pillokun was saying MS and Sony were lying about selling at a loss, not retailers. He wasn't talking about retailers.
Misrepresent the topic, blames on Reddit. Never change reddit.
Pillokun@reddit
it is always a play with numbers, and where the loss occurs. For instance one can develop a product and u have healthy margins, but then the parasites up top will suck up so much of the money given to the project that it will look like the project is at a loss. That is how it works, why do u think so many games cost so much to develop? there are managers/ceos and other people that just suck the project dry before it is even launched.
CheesyCaption@reddit
It's hilarious that you think those people do nothing but remove value. That kind of behavior is what happens when you have monopolies. With any sort of competition, the parasitic entities will be quickly removed to drive down costs or reduce prices to drive out the competitors. There's a lot more that goes into a product than the parts it's made of and the people who put those parts together. Frankly, that's the easiest part. The hard part is deciding which product people will buy and figuring out how to put it together cheap enough to make a profit.
0742118583063@reddit
It can make sense for Microsoft because they make the real money on games being sold (platform royalties + dev tools etc.), accessories (again royalties or just profitable OEM stuff), XBL subscriptions and so on. Sony famously burned a whole lot of money on the first generations of PS3s.
It would make zero sense for retailers because they have no reasonable expectation of seeing those sales reliably come back to them.
zakats@reddit
And yet you'll see people in the comments lining up to defend those poor, poor dears with their meager billions of quarterly profit.
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
Better than the pinkos who've been marinating in unexploded commie propaganda so long that they think profit is a measure of how immoral a business is.
zakats@reddit
What an asinine take.
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
The asinine take is hating those who have more than you.
zakats@reddit
Who is doing that?
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
Everyone who uses the word "billionaire" as a slur for enemies. (Which is most of the uses I see.) People who write totally sober, hinged, and admiring phrases like, "poor, poor dears with their meager billions of quarterly profit". Nope, no hatred there whatsoever!
The correct understanding of 'billions of quarterly profit' is, "producing more desirable things and helping more people than you or I will in a hundred lifetimes". If you find yourself saying 'billions of quarterly profits' with a sneer on your lip, that's weird.
zakats@reddit
You're odd, dude.
GIJared@reddit
Grandpa, you’re not supposed to be on the internet after 8 PM, you know this. You’re gonna get caught and miss out on bingo and jello night again. Just go to bed, ok?
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
Please don't insult the young by assuming only old people can recognize your failed envy-based ideology for what it is.
Shaq_Attack_32@reddit
They take a big loss at the start. Yield is at its lowest point and the cost of node development is huge. It all depends on the wafer agreement.
Exist50@reddit
That's not how their wafer pricing works. Also, N4 is an extremely mature node on the AMD side, and Intel 3 should be pretty mature for Intel.
Shaq_Attack_32@reddit
Before Intel internally split fab and design, they had no wafer agreement with itself. You could hide the cost of things like additional steppings, which resulted in a lot of waste.
Exist50@reddit
What does that have to do with my statement?
Shaq_Attack_32@reddit
I thought it'd be obvious. In some instances, there is no wafer agreement. Its not possible to know margins on a single product if your business units aren't separated out. Hence, wafer pricing doesn't always work like TSMC does it.
Exist50@reddit
But they are now.
Shaq_Attack_32@reddit
yes, it'll be the one year anniversary next month. But the previous 56 years, they just ran wafers and sold the chips for what they could. I guess I need to adjust my thinking to the new way Intel does it. Optoelectronics fabs/industry typically don't separate out their business units.
The better point that I should have made was that as yield improves, the cost per die decreases, even though wafer prices are steady.
6950@reddit
But the ~600mm2 Intel 3 die Hogs Wafers
Exist50@reddit
It's not like they have a shortage of capacity.
6950@reddit
But it takes time to ramp it
Exist50@reddit
They're not limited by that either. It's a demand limitation.
Plank_With_A_Nail_In@reddit
The high tech stuff that's in demand can easily sell at 10x margin just for the chip, something like Nvidia's bundled together servers are probably close to 20x margin.
Even those $0.0001 resistors sold on reels of a 10,000 are still making significant margin.
One day look up the prices of the chips on something like a USB hub, even the best won't be more that $4 of components sold in a device retailing at $80.
turikk@reddit
Looking at margin as cost of bill of materials vs retail price is misleading, even if an accurate use of the word.
It costs millions to develop the technology to create those things, millions to employ the people who get it out the door. None of these products could afford to be developed if the company charged what it cost to print the chips after all the research that goes into them.
AMD and other manufacturers are able to drop the pricing because they finally recoup the cost of developing those chips, or at least are getting closer to it. And it's usually a good sign that the next generation of products are significantly better and they have confidence they will sell. For parallel computing, it's very risky to sell old stock at a deep discount, since you can just use more of the older, cheaper chip. Like a gamer just getting an RTX 4080 instead of a 5070.
SirActionhaHAA@reddit
Like people said the list prices ain't real, major customers don't buy at anywhere close to those prices. Talkin about the "super duper mega margins" also ain't right because most of the cost of developing a processor comes from the r&d and not the material cost. The margins don't reflect the hundreds of millions in development costs.
king_of_the_potato_p@reddit
That or they need to unload it now or they'll have difficulty later.
We have no idea what their internal data shows.
tigger994@reddit
Seems weird when prices will go up fairly significantly with tariffs.
INITMalcanis@reddit
I can explain it: the big boys know that the AI bubble is due to pop (or at least start deflating) and they're looking to reduce stock in hand.
SERIVUBSEV@reddit
Every greedy corpo knows it's a bubble but wants to stay in until last second to maximize earning.
This seems more like it's already popped, and we will hear more about it in coming months from public announcements and earnings releases.
INITMalcanis@reddit
A plausible scenario. All I see are the ripples on the surface, not exactly what the big fish are doing down there.
Jeep-Eep@reddit
I mean the business press has been rife with folks smelling a rather rank fish for around a year now...
Green_Struggle_1815@reddit
If it's generating massive earnings it's not a bubble. So far it's looking nothing like a bubble. There's real usage, which only seems to accelerate.
MdxBhmt@reddit
Huh a bubble can generate massive earnings and still be a bubble. That's like, a major way to get people into a bubble.
What makes something a bubble or not is sustainability. Right now there is a major issue in monetizing AI while retaining users in face of the very expensive CapEx (it's a whole discussion on it's own).
Green_Struggle_1815@reddit
the monetization is already happening. The adoption speed and willingness to pay for e.g. AI coding tools is mind boggling. That alone is an enormous market.
The 'dot com' bubble pop due to slow adoption not the case here. Granted the spending pace probably dwarfs that of the 2000's
Then there's the whole national security concern. The US simply can not have US based AI research slow down and risk falling behind China. The GPU export restrictions show how serious they are about it.
MdxBhmt@reddit
The monetization is happening, yes, but sustainability is not clear.
I recommend this read.
lmao no. It's much more complex than that.
Again, this is not a sign that it isn't a bubble. The tulip craze is textbook example for this.
Just so we see eye to eye, I'm not saying it is one, I am saying we do not know. People always find new ways to delude themselves into a bubble, and out of very clear signs that it was one. Don't think you are above the many many investors, some good, that lost a lot by not recognizing a bubble.
Green_Struggle_1815@reddit
things usually are, but that's what it boils down too.
nor am i saying it doesn't have the chance of becoming one. Bubbles events usually are described with 'but this ones different', but in this case I do believe it due to the political implications, it's self fueling nature etc. If you are MS, google, facebook, usa, china... you simply can not afford to pull out.
Google learned it first hand how quickly their search was rendered near useless.
MdxBhmt@reddit
It's too empty of meaning to me but ok
That's a given, but that doesn't make it sustainable. Subprime crisis was a recent one that FI willingly invested on to everyone's detriment. There are signs already that AI is a race to the bottom profit-wise, it's a given the current rate of capex is not sustainable, that the market is probably oversaturated and that there are a chunk of hastily made AI startups burning VC cash. To be seen what market is left when investors want a return for their money.
Vushivushi@reddit
Server CPU demand has been negatively correlated with AI demand.
So it's not really a good leading indicator.
Jeep-Eep@reddit
And it will persist after the bubble I suspect; with all that excess GPU big iron lying about, they're gonna find ways to use it for tasks we'd use other silicon for normally I'd suspect.
Brilliant-Weekend-68@reddit
Ai bubble? If it was gpu prices sure, but this not that. Nvidia even sells their units with their own cous these days
Jeep-Eep@reddit
Eh, AI is liable to drag down tech and data center spend with it.
Brilliant-Weekend-68@reddit
Maybe, maybe not. Nvidida earnings tomorrrow might paint a clearer picture for us.
Jeep-Eep@reddit
Eh, I'm not sure we'd get that even then - the trains will be in motion, no matter earnings tomorrow or not.
CapoDoFrango@reddit
Source?
reddanit@reddit
For now it's got to all be either insider knowledge or inference from news. There is a bunch of things that could imply AI bubble popping somewhere around now or pretty soon, depending how you look at them and how much credence you are willing to give:
Strazdas1@reddit
GPT5 was underwhelming while all its competitors have been accelerating faster. I think its more indication of OpenAI loosing the leadership more than any soft ceiling. Look at what google is doing with Gemini/Genie for example.
INITMalcanis@reddit
Me reading the news and getting an impression of how things are shaping up.
CapoDoFrango@reddit
I'm the source
cambeiu@reddit
Carany in the Coal Mine for a recession?
reddanit@reddit
Maybe. Though my bet would mostly be on business as usual (large discounts on high margin products can and do happen).
Or also decently likely - it might be one of first signs that the AI bubble is popping soon. A bunch of companies in that space are playing chicken between themselves - under assumption that whoever "wins" the AI race will easily recoup their infrastructure investment. Meta is already reported to be seeking external funding for AI, presumably because they ran out of billions of dollars they could spend by themselves.
Jeep-Eep@reddit
The real winner is who rents centers without too much spend on the useless AI software crap; you can repurpose that big iron but that AI crap is a white elephant made of legal corium.
CammKelly@reddit
Maybe. There's been a lot of signs that there is a tech bubble however which would have popped a few years ago if it wasn't for the AI goldrush. We might now be looking at the AI bubble popping as well.
soggybiscuit93@reddit
Thr server CPU market has been heavily depressed because of AI, as datecenter spend has heavily shifted towards Nvidia.
A lot of Nvidia's recent growth has come, partially, at the expense of Xeon and Epyc.
noiserr@reddit
AI is a big part of it, but it's also post pandemic glut. People going back to office/school and less need for Zoom etc.
Strazdas1@reddit
yet after going back to office they still do online meetings even when everyone is present at the location because they learned its just simpler.
fkenthrowaway@reddit
Wallmart missed their earning for the first time in last 3 years.
asker509@reddit
Tbf Walmart was also priced and analyzed as a growth stock because they have started to sell online ads and have tons of online grocery deliveries.
Silent-Selection8161@reddit
That's more like a blaring red alert
EJ19876@reddit
No. Intel and AMD overestimated the growth in demand and have undoubtedly manufactured too many CPUs. Demand did increase, however, just not by as much as they had projected. It is better to discount product to sell it than to sit on the inventory for a year.
Much to Reddit's dismay, the sky is, in fact, not falling.
bogglingsnog@reddit
The canary has been dead for a few months now, we're just counting how many miners are missing after each shift and chalking it up to nature
soggybiscuit93@reddit
2023 was when the server CPU market saw it's biggest contraction. The market is still growing, but hasn't yet gone back to 2022 levels.
glizzytwister@reddit
Why would this be the canary?
TritiumNZlol@reddit
Loss leaders are pretty common in comoditised products like cpus.
Strazdas1@reddit
loss leaders in server CPUS (the most profitable kind)?
InsanePacman@reddit
And also kickbacks from the manufacturers
anival024@reddit
Those aren't real prices. Real prices are what you get from AMD / Intel directly, or what you get when buying through Dell / HP / etc.
If you're buying these chips at "retail", then you're paying over double the actual market rate to begin with.
Strazdas1@reddit
what you get from AMD/Intel directly is wholesale, not retail. Newegg and the like is retail.
bubblesort33@reddit
AI bubble collapse incoming?
MdxBhmt@reddit
Would CPUs drop first? Maybe I missed a recent drop in GPU prices for datacenters ?
bubblesort33@reddit
Are GPU data center prices public? I think all we have is speculation on what Nvidia charges for their most in demand stuff.
Strazdas1@reddit
the accelerators themselves have public prices like the server CPU does, and neither case reflect actual install cost for the big players.
Invest0rnoob1@reddit
They’re probably releasing new chips in a few months.
Exist50@reddit
Neither Venice nor Diamond Rapids are due for a year or more.
Invest0rnoob1@reddit
Supposed to come out sometime in 2026.
Strazdas1@reddit
H2 of 2026 so a year or more.
Exist50@reddit
Think Intel's publicly said H2 for DMR, and it's very unlikely (though not impossible) AMD meets H1 for Venice.
996forever@reddit
Venice Dense on N2. At the very least the Zen 6C versions will not come until late 2026.
Exist50@reddit
N2 is, at least on paper, ready end of this year. Don't think that's necessarily the limiting factor.
996forever@reddit
but do we know about volume
Exist50@reddit
The dates TSMC gives are for volume. Historically, that's even meant iPhone levels of volume.
Invest0rnoob1@reddit
Haven’t seen a date for DMR
Professional-Tear996@reddit
Nothing new is coming until H2 2026. Even then, retail availability doesn't mean it has to coincide with an upgrade cycle of an organisation that might be interested in buying them.
noiserr@reddit
AMD's new server CPU is coming out on 2nm. It was taped out back in April: https://www.hpcwire.com/off-the-wire/amd-tapes-out-1st-hpc-product-on-tsmc-2nm-process-with-venice-epyc-cpu/
So that release is imminent.
Professional-Tear996@reddit
Theoretically, yes. But I don't recollect AMD launching EPYC in the first half of any year, other than maybe Milan-X IIRC, so it is unlikely. But I have no doubt that Venice will be the first product of any kind - HPC or mobile - on N2.
SteakandChickenMan@reddit
Kinda nice though. You usually have to go through official channels to get these kinds of numbers (though I’m sure it’s even cheaper for them now).
-LaughingMan-0D@reddit
Data center demand dropping?
jameson71@reddit
Spending all their money on GPUs for AI most likely.
Vo_Mimbre@reddit
Retailers are setting up for Q4 sales, and they need to rotate out old stock to make way for new stock.
Retail shelf space is limited. But seasonal buying is a behavior that goes back to millennia of farmer’s markets. While nowadays it’s much less about retail shelf space (because of e-commerce) and these new prices are likely more about corporate buying than individuals, two things remain true.
What makes me think this is the case is the final paragraph of the article:
Thorusss@reddit
It is not about shelf space, but leading edge hardware loses value by just sitting in a warehouse, due to progress of technology.
GemmyBoy999@reddit
This is normal and happens very frequently, maybe just not by 50%, then again, it's
"up to 50%" so that may explain it.
SERIVUBSEV@reddit
No it's not normal.
EPYC 9565, a 10 month old chip, is at $5.7k PER UNIT at retail, when MSRP is $10.4k PER 1000 UNIT.
I'm guessing AI spending has been curtailed massively by one or more companies recently.
nanonan@reddit
Perhaps they finally realised people might actually buy them in small amounts if they didn't have artificially jacked up prices that are discounted by slimy salesmen.
Morningst4r@reddit
Maybe they’re trying to cash in on smaller users building AI servers. It sounds like historically no one paid anywhere near full price.
spicesucker@reddit
Every so often Jensen Huang probably wakes up in a cold sweat from a bad dream where AMD didn’t tank ATI Radeon to fund Ryzen.
Then he looks at the stocks app he leaves open on his bedside table and collapses back into peaceful sleep.
MrMoussab@reddit
You provide no argument to why it's not normal though
InsanePacman@reddit
Yes he does. Per unit vs bulk unit buying makes a big difference and it’s not normal for discounts to be this great on SINGLE units of this class of chip when MSRP was so much higher on specifically bulk orders.
BlueGoliath@reddit
Gotta love "up to 50% off" sales. It's always like 1 item no one wants that only has 1 left.
Plank_With_A_Nail_In@reddit
Do manufacturers normally explain why they are cutting prices? The world must be so confusing to this headline writer if they really think this is inexplicable lol.
sysKin@reddit
I think it's not manufacturers who are expected to explain it, but analysts / journalists / pundits / etc.
usdrpvvimwfvrzjavnrs@reddit
Hopefully Threadripper will be next, it would be really nice to be able to afford one of those.
VivienneNovag@reddit
There is a possibility that those chips have mallard in them and need to be moved fast, or the ones coming after have mallard in them and the rest of the stock has to be cleared.
Just considering the 10% buyin of the us government into intel
zoson@reddit
Now do the w7 2500 and 3500 cpus!
Limit_Cycle8765@reddit
I wonder if there is about to be a 3rd competitor in this area and the price decreases are meant to damage the new comer.
Unlucky-Context@reddit
I want this to mean Hetzner will now offer Turin and Granite Ridge in their dedicated line...
HilLiedTroopsDied@reddit
RAm for 12 channel memory costs more than the massive CPUs now. I do wish I had a 12 channel epyc gen 4 or 5, or a granite rapids 12 channel with AMX for local inference.
Zenith251@reddit
I genuinely would love to know how many $5k, 8k, 10k, and 10k+ CPUs consumer oriented retailers like Newegg move per year strictly through their consumer facing store.
Like.... Just how many people or companies are getting their 5k+ CPUs through consumer channels versus through large enterprise contracts, commercial wholesalers, large SI's like Supermicro, or smaller SI's like Falcon Northwest.
So far I can only imagine it's a fraction of 1% of the units moved. Anyone have any insight?
Vushivushi@reddit
*Seasonality
*Intel is actively ramping Granite Rapids
*Price war for market share
*Intel channel stuffing to keep the Intel 4 fabs hot
*Muted server CPU demand due to AI compute spend
Possible-Put8922@reddit
Clearing off the shelves for new models.
HorrorCranberry1165@reddit
Maybe they realized that reached planned profit level, so now can sell without profits
floydhwung@reddit
The Chinese are not buying, that’s all.
msolace@reddit
more supply than demand. too many other arm options, and more of a push toward gpu solutions. its not really something that should be that hard to understand
sirspate@reddit
Data processing is one of the easier things to outsource, once you strip the PII (or more likely, have the appropriate licensing agreements). This sale is probably an indicator that companies are building out surplus processing elsewhere instead of in the US.
ACiD_80@reddit
Probably hecause high inventory because everyone's budget is going to AI...
xternocleidomastoide@reddit
So basically this was an add for a couple of retailers having a random sale. LOL
MehImages@reddit
nope. when I check price comparison websites locally they were always for sale significantly below MSRP and have not dropped significantly recently. they shot up in price for a few weeks in july, but came back down end of july already.
Epyc 9565 for example was 7400 when it released and dropped to 5100 already end of april. now it's at 4800
CapoDoFrango@reddit
lol, smart add
kingwhocares@reddit
It's always Low sales.
dezerx212256@reddit
Yeah super margins, think that 5090 is value....
AutoModerator@reddit
Hello Emerson_Wallace_9272! Please double check that this submission is original reporting and is not an unverified rumor or repost that does not rise to the standards of /r/hardware. If this link is reporting on the work of another site/source or is an unverified rumor, please delete this submission. If this warning is in error, please report this comment and we will remove it.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.