#5144129

kloquio

2015-08-19 13:18

If only Intel would remove the graphics processor, there would be room for 4 extra CPU cores...

#5144134

Denial

2015-08-19 13:23

If only Intel would remove the graphics processor, there would be room for 4 extra CPU cores...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117404

#5144180

Chillin

2015-08-19 14:37

If only Intel would remove the graphics processor, there would be room for 4 extra CPU cores...

And it's not that simple (I assume). Either way, 90%+ (and I'm being on the low-side) of people buying a CPU (or a system with a CPU) are going to be using the iGPU. You already have an enthusiast platform without the iGPU, leave the mainstream alone.

#5144206

rl66

2015-08-19 16:03

If only Intel would remove the graphics processor, there would be room for 4 extra CPU cores...

it is true... but the chipset cannot handle it (source intel ark) for more than 4 the only solution for now is to go to the E branch (where there is no limit of core)... they will not kill the golden egg's hen 🙂

#5144212

semantics

2015-08-19 16:07

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117404

Yup intel segments the market, 8 core is enthusiast, x99 is enthusiast, z170 is mainstream 6600k is mainstream(although the high end up mainstream). No reason for them to change when AMD doesn't compete with them at all in enthusiast market and at high end mainstream.