Intel

just use a noctua cooler

Just apply chiller bro

>56c112t for 400w and insanely expensive due to monolithic architecture
>meanwhile the AMD EPYC 7742 is 64c128t to the tune of 225w 256MB L3 cache, shit loads of PCIe 4.0 based lanes for 50% the cost due to AMD's new scaling architecture

Intel is going to have to learn how to get prices down or start straight up sucking dick to keep contracts. Their chips are less efficient, more expensive, with less features, more security holes, AND use a shit load of power compared to their competition.

Attached: EPYC-7742.png (1221x755, 53K)

Do companies reall care about performance per dollar? I would expect performance per watt to be more important.

Just buy Intel for games bro

Attached: Ryzen-3900X-3700X-review-Hitman-2.png (1800x1200, 79K)

I'd imagine they care about both when they're buying hundreds or thousands chips

You can't.
Any performance advantage Intel has is from their swiss-cheese internal security.
It's either-or: either they have faster, but pozzed, chips (like they do now - but by only the barest of margins) - or they have slow, but secure, chips.
I don't see how they can dig themselves out of this - but I'm not a CPU designer.

>Any performance advantage Intel has is from their swiss-cheese internal security.
That's bullshit thought, the new arch used on 10nm (mobile only so far though) has both better IPC and fixed security problems of previous archs.

And also tops out at 1.something gigahertz, IIRC.

Once again, it's only low power mobile chips so far. But that doesn't change the fact they do have a new both faster and more secure (at least in same sense as AMD - that is no holes found YET) arch.