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

  • dullard - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    Isn't the more interesting news here the 9400 and 9350KF? While the 9400 is only a slight speed bump over the 8400, it costs the same as the 8400 and is a line that larger OEMs (such as DELL) actually sell in bulk in the $600 price range for the system. Before this, you could only get the 9th generation from Dell by going the ultra expensive Alienware or XPS Special Edition routes. As for the 9350KF, it allows for 15% turbo boost over the 8350K for just $5. Seems like a nice choice to have. As for charging the same for a feature the people who read tech articles generally don't use, I don't think the extreme complaints are justified (worthless, ridiculous, etc).
  • cpy - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    I'm just glad we don't have to pay extra for removing iGPU.
  • DigitalFreak - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    If Intel were a telecom: $488 + a $20 die fusion fee
  • casperes1996 - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    Why would an OEM pick these instead of the non-F model then?
  • willis936 - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    To pay respects.
  • rocky12345 - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    So basically Intel is going to try to sell these CPU's with less features for the same price as the fully featured CPU's. Granted all they did was fuse off the iGPU to make it so it is not usable which most do not use anyway except for maybe testing. Yes there are a lot that use the iGPU but those are mostly the non K SKU's and are more main stream systems that do not require a dGPU installed.

    I also am fairly sure these will not over clock any better mainly because it is 100% the same CPU's as the ones with iGPU except the iGPU has been fused off to not work. They might run a tiny bit cooler if the iGPU is not getting powered up at all but that will be about the only plus and even then it might drop the temps 2-3 degrees at most.
  • Khenglish - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    I just want to say that there is 100% no way these chips can run cooler or overclock better than their iGPU counterparts with the iGPU disabled. The iGPU has its own power plan that is separate from everything else. When you disable the iGPU in BIOS you are fully powering down the iGPU. It will draw no power at all.

    Do not buy a KF series in hopes that overclocking or power draw will improve. It won't and physically they can't.
  • Qasar - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    if the iGPU is disable by intel.. wouldnt they do this in hardware ? say.. cutting the power to it? if thats the case.. then the iGPU wouldnt use any power what so ever.... while disabling it in the bios., could still use minimal power.
  • Spunjji - Thursday, January 17, 2019 - link

    "minimal power" in that context translates to "such a tiny fraction of overall power that it will make no difference to overclocking".

    Seriously, I'll happily wait for measurements to be proven right, but this will not appear to operate any differently than the standard CPUs
  • SharpEars - Wednesday, January 16, 2019 - link

    That's OK. When the Ryzen 3000 chips and the new Threadrippers launch, it's going to be fun to watch what Intel does next. I just hope AMD prices them low.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now