48 cores with no HT available,(reply>)," @Lothar Scholz <a href=""https://www.networkworld.com/article/3318361/servers/intel-responds-to-the-epyc-server-threat-from-amd.html"">https://www.networkworld.com/article/3318361/servers/intel-responds-to-the-epyc-server-threat-from-amd.html</a>",(reply>), @Plasmaboo 64 core 7nm was just announced mate,(reply>), @Thomas Richter Also the current implementation state of threading is stupid a cache miss still makes the core idle for hunderts of cycles. Thats so stupid and the result of a 15 year old hyperthreading implementation. A good new CPU should now come with 1000 cores and do what Sun did in 2009 with 256 cores in a 65nm CPU, fine grained threading with 8 threads per ALU/FPU (throughput computation). This will be the future for a new design generation in maybe 10 years. Also it's insane to enforce cache coherance on all memory on such systems. Going away and restrict it to say one core die (aka 8 cores share the same cache - that means max. 8 core per OS process) you can save tons of transistors and io for access. A lot is possible and comming soon.,(reply>), @Thomas Richter Watched it and he was explicitly saying that this is solely his own speculation. And i think he is sitting in his technical ivory tower. Power consumption of hyperthreads is not that high.  Themo throtteling is easy and well implemented. Again INTEL MARKETING will not give up and they have a higher say in this game then the technical stuff. Simple fact of life.  Wasting a 48 higher number on a sales add is devastating. You seem to have nothing learned from Intels 5Ghz stunt they used on us to go against AMD.,(reply>), @Lothar Scholz  It's not just about die surface. There are many reasons they are going to ditch HT this next Platinum, You can serach for the latest AdoredTV video talking about it.