(03-13-2015, 05:46 AM)RolloTheGreat Wrote:(03-13-2015, 05:21 AM)SickBeast Wrote: My point is that Intel can do whatever they want at this point. They could even only offer dual cores and they would be fine.Yet every couple years they give us higher performance, lower power, and have not raised (if anything lowered) prices in the face of very weak competition. Is your statement supposed to prove my point?
(03-13-2015, 05:21 AM)SickBeast Wrote: If AMD offered something faster than their quad cores, then they would be forced to offer cheap hexa and octa cores.You mean they would in essence become AMD?
(03-13-2015, 05:21 AM)SickBeast Wrote: Their monopoly status is the problem. You just don't get it. You just like arguing for the sake of arguing though, even if it's nonsense. I think you're probably only here to piss people off. You seem to enjoy it.
Sorry, I just like talking about PC hardware, and you might just be wrong?
How would an octa core intel chip be anything like AMD? It would be 4 times more powerful than anything AMD makes. You're really dense. You still don't get it.
If you call what we have from intel today "progress" then you are blind. The 2500k came out over 4 years ago now. Haswell quad cores are barely any faster. Yes, they are lower power, but most enthusiasts don't care much about that. 10% performance gains each generation are not progress IMO.