jkflipflop98
Distinguished
[citation][nom]V8VENOM[/nom]10 cores, oh boy just what no ONE needs ... 8 more CPUs just stilling idle 95% of the time while Intel collect your cash.Geez, is no one getting it yet???Intel can easily produce a 5Ghz or 6Ghz dual core processor that would run circles around their 6 core processors ... AND in real world games and applications you would see a huge benefit. So why don't they??? Because they keep feeding us BS about needing more cores ... reality is, most applications can barely run make use of 2 cores, let alone 10 cores.Why Intel will NOT produce a 5Ghz or 6Ghz dual core processor is because it would invalidate their move to more and more and more cores. Afterall who would be a 10 core 3Ghz CPU when a 2 core 6Ghz CPU out performs it in EVERY single aspect in real world games and applications.THINK ABOUT IT PEOPLE!! Stop accepting more cores as the "Future" and start to realize that Intel doesn't go much about 3Ghz. An NO it's not an heat issue and it's not a power consumption issue, it's just a decision Intel made so they wouldn't have to invest time and money in making a 5 or 6 Ghz dual core ... with today's current die size it would run circles around 10 core CPUs at 3 Ghz.Ugh!We DO NOT NEED MORE CORES.[/citation]
This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever seen here. Intel would LOVE to produce dual cores and charge current prices for them. For the manufacturer die size is what counts, and more cores take up more space and therefore cut into profits.
This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever seen here. Intel would LOVE to produce dual cores and charge current prices for them. For the manufacturer die size is what counts, and more cores take up more space and therefore cut into profits.