NhonhoIntel and AMD need to place the memory controller (IMC) on the same die as the x86 cores to get the lowest possible RAM access latency. When they are on separate dies, RAM access latency increases significantly, requiring them to include a large amount of cache memory (SRAM) in the CPU to mitigate the high latencies, which greatly increases the chip's area (in mm²) and the manufacturing cost. They are well aware of this; I don't understand why they don't do it.

If the x86 cores and the memory controller were on the same die, made with the most advanced lithography available, the memory controller would heat up less and the CPU would likely support higher clock speed RAM more easily.

What should be placed on the same die as the x86 cores:
- PCIe controller
- Memory controller
- iGPU (RDNA5!)

All other components could be placed on a separate die, made with cheaper lithography.

Ignoring what consumers want is a sure way to lose sales and market share. Intel did this for many years and is now reaping what it sowed.

chrcolukAnother pointless chip, dont release something until it is significantly better than the previous model.

AleXXX666team red is another BS they give you that "longterm" socket and then some cheaper mobos don't have "BIOS/UEFI update without CPU" lol

Hecate91That happened once with AM4. AMD even lent out CPU's for free to update the UEFI.

MondoMikeI'm no Hardware Engineer far from it really but if what you said improves performance and most importantly to them manufacturing costs are reduced there is no chance they haven't thought of it, either it's not that easy or it doesn't improve performance and reduce manufacturing costs... What reason would they have to not implement this if it's doable, increases performance and reduces price? If neither are doing it to get an edge on the other it's not as easy or provide what you mentioned.