>The fact that they're almost equivalent to those two at 5nm when Intel is at 14nm+++++++++ Only when it comes to single core. And even then Intel has to spend

>The fact that they're almost equivalent to those two at 5nm when Intel is at 14nm+++++++++ Only when it comes to single core. And even then Intel has to spend 2x silicon - Zen 3 CCD at 7nm with a die size of 80.7 mm² while Intel's 10th gen 8C die is 170mm2. Of course it isn't silicon itself which is costly, it is the processing of each wafer what is the cost here, and getting 2x less cores per wafer is bound to affect the margin/profit/etc. And of course Intel has no chances of putting out 16C chip into normal desktop like AMD does with 3950x and 5950x (those chips successfully go into the territory of 2x Xeon workstations costing arm and leg)