Not necessarily - if they get bigger chips next year, then they can target higher level of performance tier that is much more reasonable to expect to be paired with faster CPUs.
Yea, and its rumored to be 70% higher performance.
It shows noticeable overhead using 9800X3D, which all the big initial reviews were based on. How would a potential 70% improvement help in that regard? 70% improvement would mean the bottleneck would shift from mostly 1080p to 1440p and even 4K!
For bottleneck to be considered "resolved" you would need the original pie-in-the-sky claims of Intel's Royal Core having 2x the perf/clock over the cores in Alderlake.
Are you wondering if there is some secret sauce with all team blue test systems?
Yea I think people are making this argument based on things like E cores existing, and considering limited Intel CPU benchmarks which show poor performance as well, and that the drivers only really care about fast single thread CPUs it would not care one bit about E cores.
And Intel platforms are even more expensive to upgrade for budget conscious folk because you have to buy CPU and motherboard. No matter what AMD CPUs are saving Intel's GPUs right now.
I mean, that's why Intel priced it as low as they did, I am sure without this driver overhead issue they would've priced it at idk if 300$ but maybe 269-279$ or something like that.
Maybe they would have had B770 out right now without the overhead issue. In that hypothetical scenario, the B580 could have been priced at $229 because the B770 is a higher performance tier and being able to play in the $400 market is higher margins and profits.
So you get the double whammy benefit of B580 stealing marketshare with a really attractive price while B770 is an icing on the cake that actually brings in real profits.