Why can't Amd get better per core performance? surly it

>>59249853
They just did get just that.

>>59249853
Why can't you make your own CPU?
surly it can't be that hard

>>59250193
it really couldn't You see I have straight A's in highschool guy. Thet's a greater accomplishment than anything AMd has ever done

>>59250193
how can i make a cpu without a cpu factory

>>59250620
you give the spreadsheets to the cpu factory?

>buy intels current best cpu
>copy it
>undercut intel with $20
>rinse and repeat

are AMDicksuckers really so stupid they dont know how the rest of the world is doing business?

>>59251067
that sounds expensive

>>59251138
poorfag

File: exit vim.jpg (121KB, 818x536px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 818x536px

I wonder if it's possible to become useful programmer if you start learning at 29? Note that i have just enough knowledge to create webscraper program that finds used cars on a site and displays the results in gui. But most of those things were reverse-engineered, i don't really know any of it

>>59251515
wrong thread, sorry

>>59250620

Either get a bunch of 7xxx series logic ICs or get an FPGA

>>59249853
Largely due to placing priority over number of cores over per-core speed. However, the new processors from AMD (Zen microarchitecure) is almost on par with another new microarchitecture (the lakes) it was designed to compete with.

>>59251619
85% the speed per core