That second number....
:: needing to fertilize a tree intensifies::
this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2026
610 points (99.7% liked)
PC Gaming
13146 readers
922 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I really wanted one of their new CPU's with self cooling.
Idk what ever happened to that.
One can only dream about people fleeing x86-64 and going ARM or, even better, RISC-V.
But no, it's only changing the collar to the dog. But the dog stays the same.
Why though? X Elite lags x86 on battery life, performance and compatibility (and you can't really run Linux on X Elite).
I am not a fan of Intel, AMD, Nvidia, but what's the point of moving to ARM for the sake of moving?
Unlike most, I actually have been running ARM on home server for almost a decade. For that use case it makes sense because it's cheap and well supported.
It would be better to switch to RISC-V because it has no problems with patents and everyone can build a RISC-V CPU, not only 2 companies.
I would be happy to, but it's currently not an option for desktop/laptop.
Would be great for an SBC where the OS and apps are open source and performance is less of an issue.
ARM has all the same drawbacks as x86 and it's not a Deus Ex machina that gives high performance at low power consumption because of magic.
Imagine Europe pushing RISC-V and sharing upgrades with China¹. The power of the flagship would soon reach ARM or even x86-64 in a few years.
¹ China is already using RISC-V as much as they can.
load more comments
(1 replies)
One thing that may or may not have something to do with people leaving Intel might be related to their relationship with Israel. Not trying to make this political, but it's something I've seen some folks mention before.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Yep. Intel sat on their asses for a decade pushing quad cores one has to pay extra to even overclock.
Then AMD implements chiplets, comes out with affordable 6, 8, 12, and 16 core desktop processors with unlocked multipliers, hyperthreading built into almost every model, and strong performance. All of this while also not sucking down power like Intel's chips still do.
Intel cached in their lead by not investing in themselves and instead pushing the same tired crap year after year onto consumers.
They really segmented that market in the worst possible way, 2 cores and 4 cores only, possibility to use vms or overclock, and so on. Add windoze eating up every +5%/year.
Remember buying the 2600(maybe X) and it was soo fast.
load more comments
(6 replies)
All of the exploits against Intel processors didn't help either. Not only is it a bad look, but the fixes reduced the speed of the those processors, making them quite a bit worse deal for the money after all.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Worse product and worse consumer practices (changing sockets every 2 generations) made it an easy choice to go with AMD.
load more comments
(7 replies)
I've been buying AMD since the K6-2, because AMD almost always had the better price/performance ratio (as opposed to outright top performance) and, almost as importantly, because I liked supporting the underdog.
That means it was folks like me who helped keep AMD in business long enough to catch up with and then pass Intel. You're welcome.
It also means I recently bought my first Intel product in decades, an Arc GPU. Weird that it's the underdog now, LOL.
Love my 3DNow! K6-2, also my starter.
Oh man, I'd forgotten all about 3dnow!
I decide every upgrade which one to go with. Try not to stay dedicated to one.
Basically - Buy Intel cause it's the best last I checked... Oh, that was two years ago, now AMD should have been the right one.
Next upgrade, won't make that mistake - buy AMD. Shit... AMD is garbage this gen, shoulda gotten Intel. Ok, I'll know better next upgrade.
Repeat forever.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
I remember, it was a huge issue for programs. Developers were just not supporting other chipsets because Intel was faster than the competition and mostly cheaper. Then they got more expensive, did some shitty business to MINIX and stayed the same speed wise.
So now we see what actual competition does.
I do want them to stay alive and sort themselves out though. Otherwise in a few years it will be AMD who will start outputting overpriced crap and this time there will be no alternative on the market.
They're already not interested in seriously putting competitive pressure on NVidia's historically high GPU prices.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Pretty wild to see. Glad to see it though. Hope to see the same thing happen with GPUs against Nvidia as well.
load more comments
(1 replies)