> it should be painfully obvious that "i9" is just a reaction to the threat of ThreadRipper from AMD Maybe the branding but the HEDT lineup has been around si

> it should be painfully obvious that "i9" is just a reaction to the threat of ThreadRipper from AMD Maybe the branding but the HEDT lineup has been around since 2010. Shockingly, this lineup escaped the notice of AMD loyalists, or was assumed to be equivalent to Bulldozer's CMT (which is much more like a SMT/hyperthread than most people would admit at the time) - however they have always been excellent at gaming, particularly compared to Bulldozer's miserable IPC. The high-core-count lineup are probably a reaction to Threadripper but these chips have been around in the Xeon lineup since forever and really should have stayed there. These chips (including Threadripper) are really multi-socket-in-a-package and don't perform particularly well in gaming workloads (despite AMD advertising them for such). Games don't scale well given the latency. They will be nice for things like CAD rendering workstations but that's a much narrower niche. The i9 branding also slices off ECC, which is a significant feature for many things these will actually be good at. Threadripper will be at a significant advantage for actual server usage (even home-server) as a result. Intel is trying to avoid cannibalizing sales in their more expensive Xeon lineup but it does kill a bunch of the utility of the processor as a result.