• RamRabbit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yep. Intel sat on their asses for a decade pushing quad cores one has to pay extra to even overclock.

    Then AMD implements chiplets, comes out with affordable 6, 8, 12, and 16 core desktop processors with unlocked multipliers, hyperthreading built into almost every model, and strong performance. All of this while also not sucking down power like Intel’s chips still do.

    Intel cached in their lead by not investing in themselves and instead pushing the same tired crap year after year onto consumers.

      • nokama@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        And all of the failures that plagued the 13 and 14 gens. That was the main reason I switched to AMD. My 13th gen CPU was borked and had to be kept underclocked.

    • wccrawford@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      All of the exploits against Intel processors didn’t help either. Not only is it a bad look, but the fixes reduced the speed of the those processors, making them quite a bit worse deal for the money after all.

      • MotoAsh@piefed.socialBanned
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Meltdown and Spectre? Those also applied to AMD CPUs as well, just to a lesser degree (or rather, they had their own flavor of similar vulnerabilities). I think they even recently found a similar one for ARM chips…