Quote from: MorCorks on May 16, 2023, 03:23:53I really would have thought that the next generation of AMD processors would've had more cores. I wonder if there is a latency bottleneck? Or perhaps AMD is more worried about the thermal performance, as more cores means it's harder to keep those things cool. Especially with how thick the IHS is.
I had heard others claim that 16 cores was the max even most prosumer software could use, but I figure most programs are designed around what the software architects expect.
I believe they think they can get away with it one more time, which is probably true. Practically, most people don't need more than 16 cores right now, certainly not the office/gaming users, and prosumer software won't be awful on a 6/8-core that got a +20-30% generational boost.
The real problem is at the low-end IMO. Overpriced 6-cores and 8-cores competing with Intel's 6+8 and 8+8. Nothing cheaper than the 7600, which could be solved with Rembrandt or Phoenix APUs.
12-core Strix Point and 16-core Strix Halo have my attention.