We recently reported on the fact that a range of new mainstream Intel desktop processors are coming onto the market without the integrated graphics enabled. This processors, indicated by the ‘F’ designation (not to be confused with Intel’s chips with an integrated fabric, also called ‘F’), have had their specifications released for a short while, except for the price. Intel is now happy to fill that part in.

Intel’s pricing scheme is a little different to AMD. Rather than provide MSRP, or Manufacturer Suggested Retail Pricing, or SEP, Suggested Etailer Pricing, Intel provides ‘tray’ pricing. This value is the company’s list price for OEMs buying literal trays of CPUs, in batches of 1000. We usually write this as ‘1ku’, for one thousand units. OEMs, like Dell or HP or Supermicro, will happily buy thousands of CPUs, often with a single year warranty. This is in stark contrast to the end-user buying a retail unit obviously only wants one processor and often wants a longer (in most cases, the retail box has a three-year warranty).

The on-shelf price of the processor in a retail box, with or without a cooler, is not listed by Intel. The company leaves it up to distributors and then retailers to determine the market value of such a product. This is why the Intel Core i9-9900K, the current flagship of Intel’s 9th Gen Core desktop processor line, has a ‘tray’ price of $488, but actually came to market on Amazon at $582.50, before settling at its current price of $529. This is also why there has been a debate about whether our comparison between the AMD Athlon 200GE ($55 SEP) and the Intel Pentium G5400 ($64/1ku) is suitable, given that only certain regions with an oversupply seem to hit the Intel price point.

With all that being said, here is Intel’s pricing for the new ‘F’ CPUs:

Intel 9th Gen Core CPUs
AnandTech Cores Base
DDR4 TDP Price
i9-9900K 8 / 16 3.6 GHz 5.0 GHz UHD 630 1200 2666 95 W $488
i9-9900KF 8 / 16 3.6 GHz 5.0 GHz - - 2666 95 W $488
i7-9700K 8 / 8 3.6 GHz 4.9 GHz UHD 630 1200 2666 95 W $374
i7-9700KF 8 / 8 3.6 GHz 4.9 GHz - - 2666 95 W $374
i5-9600K 6 / 6 3.7 GHz 4.6 GHz UHD 630 1150 2666 95 W $262
i5-9600KF 6 / 6 3.7 GHz 4.6 GHz - - 2666 95 W $262
i5-9400 6 / 6 2.9 GHz 4.1 GHz UHD 630 1050 2666 65 W $182
i5-9400F 6 / 6 2.9 GHz 4.1 GHz - - 2666 65 W $182
i3-9350KF 4 / 4 4.0 GHz 4.6 GHz - - 2400 91 W $173
Relevant Intel 8th Gen Core CPUs
i3-8350K 4 / 4 4.0 GHz - UHD 630 1150 2400 91 W $168
i3-8100 4 / 4 3.6 GHz - UHD 630 1100 2400 65 W $117
i3-8100F 4 / 4 3.6 GHz - - - 2400 65 W $117

The only CPU in this list which doesnt have a non-F is the overclockable Core i3-9350KF, showing a 1ku price of $173, which is a few dollars more than the previous generation Core i3-8350K ($168/1ku), and has a turbo frequency. 

Normally when a part of a processor is fused off, usually cores, we expect to see a decrease in the listed price. In this instance, Intel is putting the same tray price on its GPU-free processors to make them also savings-free. Given how tray price is often not connected to the retail price, it will depend on how many processors actually make it to market or to retail (if any end up in retail packaging) to see if they will actually be sold at a lower price than the parts with integrated graphics.

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Kvaern1 - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    Intel graphics is more than good enough for the majority of the PC's in the world.

  • HStewart - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    That is true - but these are not mobile chips but desktop chips - most desktop users buy external Graphics card anyway.
  • PeachNCream - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    Not true. Many millions of desktops are purchased with only an iGPU because they are used for fairly mundane office tasks. Go check a few of the major OEMs and note how few business class desktops include dedicated graphics. My clerks, data entry clowns, and peon programmers don't need anything but the cheapest hardware to throw an image on a screen or two.
  • Gigaplex - Thursday, January 17, 2019 - link

    Most businesses seem to be moving to laptops instead of desktops when they don't need massive horsepower.
  • eva02langley - Thursday, January 17, 2019 - link

    Like the cheapest piece of trash of a car would be... it is not an argument.
  • CaedenV - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    Well... Intel really "F"d that one up
  • Ironchef3500 - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    Wish this was surprising.
  • ratbert1 - Thursday, January 17, 2019 - link

    I see what you did there.
  • Irata - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    Personally, I do not see where the iGPU is of much use in any of the higher end desktop CPU for most customers. I doubt too many run their 9xxx series CPU with the iGPU rather than a higher end external GPU, so there is really very little (if any) added benefit to it.

    For lower tier CPU (i.3, i5) which are run in office type systems, having the iGPU makes sense as it saves money by removing the need for an external GPU.

    As for pricing - if the iGPU block is completely removed (i.e. smaller chip), then it should be cheaper as manufacturing cost is lower. If it is simply fused off, then the cost is the same.
  • Exodite - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    The cost for Intel is irrelevant though.

    The 9700K is literally the same chip as the 9900K, only with HT disabled. The other high-end chips are the same silicon as well, only with cores fused off.

    No one expects to pay the 9900K price for their 9700K or 9600, as those lack features the first chip have. While the IGP may not be /as important/ as additional cores or HT for most users it still provides functionality above nothing at all.

    Ie. it's still product segmentation and should be priced accordingly, even if it's a lower cost reduction than some of the other features.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now