Ask HN: Why are modern Intel CPUs not getting a lot more cores?
AMD tried and failed. Multiple cores is what the FX is all about. What&#x27;s the one type of application that drives processor sales on the desktop? Right, games. What&#x27;s one of many types of applications that do profit more from fewer stronger cores than from more slower ones? Right again, games.<p>That said, over the last 5 years processors did get beefier. They just did not got more cores. The i5-2500K (from 2011) is slower than the i5-6600K, both have 4 cores though. But if we go back 10 years, we are looking at the Core 2 Duo, those had only two cores.<p>And games are also changing. Not too long ago you could still play games (like Fallout 3) with a single core. New games (like Fallout 4) rely on the processor having multiple cores, some don&#x27;t even start with a dual core (Hyperthreading is needed then and saves the i3). And games supporting DX12 (and probably Vulcan) work better on the FX processors than those using DX11. More cores become more useful now, and processors will have to add more of them also in the consumer desktop area soon.