- Nov 7, 2020
- 6 (0.05/day)
The point is though, AMD may have raised core counts, but for mainly gaming, they are irrelevant. Imo games still do not need more than a 6/8 core cpu at most. Everyone raved when Ryzen came out, oo ooo but it has 12 cores(well 6 with hyper) but games didn't use them anyway. Imo the one advantage of ryzen coming out was the big kick up the behind it gave Intel. They may have been caught with their pants down, but do not write them off(as every Ryzen fan seems to be doing) they have the budget, and experience to recover from this, even though it may take them a while after been caught snoozing.
Sure I agree, beside some fringe cases 6/6 or 6/12 is still fine. In fact with a mid-range GPU that's not bleeding-edge something like a i5 4570 still means you're not missing out on much in the majority of titles (that you can play with a 2-4 year old mid-range GPU). There are some newer games however that use 8+ cores and you could make an argument that 8 cores is a smart move due to next gen consoles if you're planning on a 3-4 year upgrade cycle. That may turn out to be something that seems to makes sense but isn't actually the case but it's not crazy to infer.
This isn't just about gaming though. I personally don't game and care about DaVinci Resolve performance more than anything else at the moment and this seems to be a great CPU for me. Although compared to a 3950X it would not be much of an upgrade.
Not writing Intel off by any means whatsoever, I'll be very much looking forward to their response. Give AMD some huge credit here though. I would have laughed in your face if you'd told me this was the current state of the CPU market during the Bulldozer era.