New consumer lineup: >release in fucking 2020 >will STILL be at 14nm++++++++++++ when AMD will have Zen 3 in 7nm+ by then >just 10 cores when AMD will have had 16 for months >125W TDP - we know Intel's TDP numbers are full of shit so it's realistically a 175W TDP with 250W+ peak power draw -> gonna be a Pentium 4-level HOUSEFIRE again >new socket again ofc - a socket change a year keeps the goyim in fear!
New HEDT lineup: >18 piece of shit vulnerable Meltdown + Spectre cores >meanwhile based Mama Su will have given us 32 fast & secure Thirdreicher cores already >14nm+++++++++++++++++++++++++ & KNUCKLES >overclocked to death Skylake cores -> HOUSEFIRE!
expect more and more multithreading-optimized games
William Cruz
Currrent i5s can more than handle several workloads you fucking AMDrone. Besides next gen intel will have HT enabled on all chips and will utterly BTFO AMD at both price AND performance.
Keep it up, fag. Just embarrassing yourself at this point.
Ayden Flores
Mitigating CPU flaws is anti-semitic! Now be a good boy and disable those pesky security mitigations, will you? See, your Intel® i7™ CPU is still the fastest!
>benchmarks arent important >just this number representing a very short distance that i know has something to do with processors but otherwise don't understand at all >lower is better
Amd I'm sure the "average consumer" has a $1200 GPU and high refresh rate GAYMAN monitor too, right retard?
Asher Bennett
The average consumer doesn't buy AMD, he buys pre-built that comes with Intcel + Nvidia. Prove me wrong
Owen Sullivan
>LGA1200 So why DOES Intel change not only the chipset, which I can understand for platform feature improvements, but the socket itself EVERY generation? It has to cost them and mobo vendors extra money to redesign it each time and I'm sure corporate clients are pissed at the lack of upgrade support compared with AMD's offerings. Does constantly adding MOAR pins = less power or something?
>I'm sure corporate clients are pissed at the lack of upgrade support compared with AMD's offerings. Most corporate clients don't even touch the CPU or upgrade anything for that matter They just buy Dells or HPs leave them be until they break Upgradeability doesn't mean jackshit and intel knows this The only people who benefit from not having to switch sockets are PC enthusiasts and maybe small businesses who have small fleets and Intel is big enough to not care about either
Adrian Reed
>0.00000000000000001 fps more for a 500$ cpu compared to a 300$ cpu >still the best lul
Henry Bell
it's right there in the OP: >new socket again ofc - a socket change a year keeps the goyim in fear!
the only reason is more money for InTelAviv
Wyatt Ramirez
>release in fucking 2020
the original """leak""" didnt even had a release date
Intel is probably gonna recover and take over AMD at the end, they have much more money and 10x more employees to call on. I don't think mine ever reached more than 80C, i haven't really paid attention. If you use a stress tester and wonder why the temperature is high then, i don't know what to tell you. Hate Intel, but at the end of the day, people who bought an expensive Intel CPU did it because they could afford it which means they are more successful in life than AMDrones who try to find the best performance for price. But even if you use logic, Intel still makes the most powerful CPUs in the world (9980xe), and has the best single core performance which is what truly matters, whilst AMD keeps slapping on more cores to compensate for how weak they are on an individual basis. And AMD's 7nm is not really 7nm because they use TSMC's 7nm manufacturing. Apple also used to boast about having the first 7nm phone in their marketing.
But even if intel is "more expensive" and everything, The 9900k is $500 (the same as the 3900x), and much more powerful. How often do you buy a CPU? Once every 6-7 Years? Because it's high end.
Just saying, AMD always had a history of performing better in the benchmarks but worse in reality.
Don't read tech articles. Also, reminder that Moore's law died (basically) so we're gonna glue CPUs together to get better performance or something, same reason Intel is about to launch 14nm++++++++.
>wall of intel shill text >Don't read tech articles Are you ok, retard?
Henry Thompson
They're getting close but intel still has the single core advantage. There is no point 3900X and 3800X considering the 9900K is at the same price point as the former. Not an argument.
>unironically using geekbench kek, I guess Apple CPUs are the absolute best huh?
Camden Robinson
PS5 and Xbox Scarlett will be using Zen 2 8c/16t CPUs. They will be optimized for that type of hardware. IMO, if you're smart, you'll get an 8c/16t CPU now. Even a Ryzen 7 1700 would be useful
Not even the main factor since games are quite literally using using your 6cores and 12 threads RIGHT NOW, getting at least an 8 core is a much smarter buy even if all you do is gayme. I did that mistake with the 3570k thinking it was enough, but my needs soon changed even considering the 5820k at one point.
Elijah Campbell
>pre-release AGESA graphs >unironically
Asher Brooks
>if you buy overpriced trash it means you're successful in life ok Shlomo
>>will STILL be at 14nm++++++++++++ when AMD will have Zen 3 in 7nm+ by then and STILL it will have better single thread performance than poozen
Jace Torres
The fact that they're sticking with monolithic designs is impressive. Any talk about whether the new shit will be immune to the various security holes?
Logan Diaz
Yes, I need those 4 fps more in CounterStrike 1.6 provided by Intel's 14nm++ cores to be a pro gamer! Thank You Intel, You are my Greatest Ally!
>The fact that they're sticking with monolithic designs is impressive Yeah, I'm sure they will figure out glue vertically eventually. Remember when the Intel defense squad claimed Intel had a hidden architecture in case Zen was good? 3 years and we're still waiting for it.
user, don't you get tired of posting fps graphs? The same guy literally has the 3900x matching and even beating Intel on some games as well. How do you this entertaining?
Luke Anderson
>3900X gets 50 more fps over 9900k Nice gaming CPU kek
