Originally Posted by pony-tail
A 12 core would have done me , just not worth the cost of a motherboard ( claimed to have upto a 30% price increase ) suitable ram , and CPU also significantly increased price .
AMD money grab ( while they can ) with a weakened Intel .
I will keep my Aussie micro Dollars thanks .
5 ghz on a stock CPU was always a pipe dream - overclocked some might make it .
16 core is held back for marketing reasons - apparently .
Time and unbiased benchmarks will tell .
My gear is good enough for another year - They would have sold 2 systems if they did not get so greedy .
I have multiple systems , some are upgraded annually others only when needed .
AMD isn't being greedy you really need to take a long step back and review Intel pricing scheme for the last 7 years. How is AMD going to recoup costs and additional money for R&D to continue to battle Intel if they aren't rewarded handsomely for there efforts. We always see this, AMD releases a product superior to Intel and everyone expects it to be dirt cheap. AMD's prices are still superior to when Intel had the lead.
My understanding is 16 core was held back to build yields.
Motherboard prices could be a little cheaper, that I agree with.
Last edited by Nightingale; 06-12-2019 at 02:30 PM.