| Burning Typhoon said: As far as the CPU is concerned, if all you do is play PC games, and don't do any sort of multi-tasking, these new CPUs don't mean much for you. Most of these newer CPUs aren't going to do anything good for gaming. Some of them, will even hurt gaming performance. Just because it's new doesn't mean it's going to be the greatest.. Even if you spend 2000 dollars on one. |
That is the same argument people used during the Core 2 Duo era. Those who bought Core 2 Quads got the last laugh.
People said that there is no point getting 6 cores when the Nahelem based 990X dropped... Yet those CPU's can still handle every game you throw at it.
| Captain_Yuri said: I actually called this a while ago where I said intel would be either lowering their current gen cpu prices or their next gen cpu prices to match Ryzen + $100 or so due to increased performance and features and bam. There it is! |
Zen's die size is actually smaller than Skylake as well at 44mm2 vs 49mm2 for the quads.
And AMD has 12 metal layers verses Skylakes 13.
The 1800X is 195mm2 with 4.8 billion transistors... While the Intel i7 6950X is 246.3mm2 with 3.2 Billion transistors.
AMD was not only able to have more cache than Intel, it was able to pack it more densely.
And because AMD is using an older, cheaper and more mature fabrication process based on a 20nm BEOL... Combined with smaller die sizes, less metal layers... AMD should be able to have an advantage in terms of pricing/costs. So once Intel drops it's high-end LGA2066 chips, I fully expect to see a pricing war, which is bad for AMD but good for us... But at-least AMD should have the profit margins to handle it.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
