| > I'm not sure what we're comparing them to. They should be capable of higher clock than the E cores. Oh, just higher clocked than the E cores. Yeah that's true, but if you're using that many cores at once you probably only care about total speed. You said 12 core with higher clock versus 8, so I thought you were comparing to the performance cores. > I thought all the AMD cores had the ability to hit the max frequency (but not necessarily at the same time). The cores under the 3D cache have a notable clock penalty on existing CPUs. > And some of the cores might not be able to take advantage of the 3D cache, but that doesn't limit their frequency, from my understanding. Right, but my point is it's misleading to call out higher core count and the advantages of 3D stacking. The 3D stacking mostly benefits the cores it's on top of, which is 6-8 of them on existing CPUs. |
Interesting. I can't find any info on that. It seems that makes sense though since the 7900X is 50 TDP higher than the 7900X3D.
"Right, but my point is it's misleading to call out higher core count and the advantages of 3D stacking"
Yeah, that makes sense. I didn't realize there was a clock penalty on some of the cores with the 3D cache and that only some cores could use it.