Soldato
His wee face.
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
His wee face.
One thing I think some people are overlooking - there is a national security angle for the US with Intel along with wider economy/financial implications - they'll almost certainly be propped up if it comes to it in a way other companies wouldn't. Which may be part of why they are in the mess they are.
Umm, he clearly doesn't know the history very well, it is a lovely idea that these genius entrepreneurs created everything all on their lonesome, but it is not actually true. Not that I like the idea of throwing Intel billions of $$$ while they fire 15,000+ people either.Intel's Stunning Troubles Underscore The Folly Of Government Welfare For Corporations
Steve Forbes explains how the CHIPS and Science Act, championed by President Biden and supported by a bipartisan group of lawmakers, has caused major problem...www.youtube.com
Umm, he clearly doesn't know the history very well, it is a lovely idea that these genius entrepreneurs created everything all on their lonesome, but it is not actually true. Not that I like the idea of throwing Intel billions of $$$ while they fire 15,000+ people either.
yep, just his take on it.True, though the counter side of that is correct in that more often than not when it isn't their money at risk people/companies tend to become fat and lazy.
Bulldozer took AMD under $2. They bet the company on Ryzen.$19.83 a share now, jesus thats low, dmg is done
Intel 13/14 gen is way overpriced, AMD is undercutting them on all fronts. It's no wonder intel diy/retail market is dead, especially with the chips killing themselves.
Have you actually looked at the price and performance spread? outside of maybe pure gaming there is no clear winner. At the lower end of medium range the 14600K is generally faster than closely priced AMD CPUs, the 14700 is rarely that far behind the much more expensive 7950 CPUs except some specific tasks. When speccing approx. equivalent motherboards for each the AMD ones at the moment are slightly more expensive as well so whole system costs often are a more complicated story.
unstable chips on a dead platform, rightHave you actually looked at the price and performance spread? outside of maybe pure gaming there is no clear winner. At the lower end of medium range the 14600K is generally faster than closely priced AMD CPUs, the 14700 is rarely that far behind the much more expensive 7950 CPUs except some specific tasks. When speccing approx. equivalent motherboards for each the AMD ones at the moment are slightly more expensive as well so whole system costs often are a more complicated story.
unstable chips on a dead platform, right
7950X: £510
14900K: £520
7900X: £360
14700K: £380
7700X: £300
14600K: £290
Pricing is quite even tho i would argue the 7950X and 7900X are better CPU's, the 14600K is better for productivity.
What Intel don't have is a gaming Halo CPU.
7800X3D: £330, it is the fastest gaming CPU there is, its very reasonably priced and it sips power, its insanely efficient.
From my perspective i wouldn't buy any of these Intel CPU's anyway, because of the hybrid architecture, its still not without its problems, these are still games that don't like them or you have to make adjustments to make them run games as well as they should.
With all that said the main problem with them is....
unstable chips on a dead platform, right
i'm talking real world (not Intel PR)I'm talking about aside from this issue - if they are as broken as the claims then it wouldn't even be about overpriced they shouldn't even be on sale.
On the face of it, but once you add the extra cost of case, PSU and cooling etc not so much.