If they put it in workstation laptops then im fine with it. if its for gaming or mainstream it makes no sense.

TheLostSwedeI think you forgot quite a few Intel processors, as you don't seem to have any Pentium or Celeron models in that 27 count, nor any of the T or P models...

Also, it's much, much worse on the mobile side...

I suggest you count again using this list, although right now it seems to be a bit hard to count, as Intel has some wide discrepancies between the 6, 7 and 8-series in terms of available SKUs - s21.q4cdn.com/600692695/files/doc_downloads/cpu_price/2017/Oct_15_17_Recommended_Customer_Price_List.pdf

Also, Intel's cheapest dual core has a list price of $42.

I was only comparing the Current 8Gen Models that are competing directly with AMD.
Pentium and Celeron are not Gen 8.

I want to compare apples with apples and not apples to oranges...

HoodIt's very intelligently thought out, with each SKU having a specific place and purpose that makes perfect sense to those who can see the "big picture" and understand that not everything has to fit their specific narrow viewpoint. This is Intel's gift, that they strive to cover all bases and fit customer's needs more precisely. If that costs more, that's because excellence is never cheap. If Intel's recent CPU lineup confuses you, perhaps PC hardware is not your strong point, and you should just enjoy your nice Z87 system, as I enjoy my Z97. Things are changing, and that's a good thing, not something to be upset about. Would you want them to take the cheap way, and be like Ryzen/Threadripper, where every SKU is off the same die, binned failures making up the lower chips? You should thank Intel for being there for those who really care about performance, not bitching about naming schemes.

It is very intelligently thought out to make to customer bleed!

Does it really make perfect sence to have an HEDT CPU that is the same exact same thing as a normal i7? same dual channel, same PCIe Lanes?Seriously? So what is it for?

Also doesn't make any sence in financial terms because the prices are overpriced for every single one of them!!

Maybe you work for Intel or you are a fanboy, and I touched a nerve... but unfortunately the first CPUs of the HEDT family are just for money grabbing and to deceive the end customer... they offer no gains against the lower socket CPUs. And there will be even fewer gains on HEDT on Laptops.

HoodThis is Intel's gift, that they strive to cover all bases and fit customer's needs more precisely.

First... too much fanboyism... :laugh:

Second... would having more (64) PCIe Lanes be bad for customers? or support for Quad Channel? why would you not have these features on HEDT CPU? ONE answer - because these are the same exact CPUs from the lower socket modified to work on this socket....

AMD has got all HEDT with 64 lanes and Quad Channel and all of them are cheaper than the competing Intel Ones... so all arguments of manufacturing cost are worthless. Actually is more expensive to manufacture lots of different CPUs with small differences like Intel is doing than doing all with same specs...




Also, if you want a clue on who is moronic or not, look at how many likes your post has Vs mine.....

Also, if you want to have a look WHO is money Grabbing, just look at core count.
Performance line - AMD has 8 cores and Intel i7 has 6 cores.
If you want Intel with more than 6 cores you HAVE to buy the more expensive line of 2066 Socket boards (that will have features disabled for 4, 6 and 8 core CPUs). You have no option on 8 Cores with socket 1151 (so much for your Gift argument - "cover all bases to fit customer's needs" ... muahahahaha)

Anyone else who wants to argue the tired debate of AMD vs Intel in this thread any longer, find a different thread.