Is it better than the ally ? I'm also thinking of getting one More on reddit.com

The thing people forget is that, it took AMD a while to optimize performance on linux, through kernel patches. Intels problem right now is sceduling in linux on Meteor lake, likely Lunar lake and arrow lake. AMD with the 7 and 8000 series did not change the cpu architecture that much ( 8 equal cores + hyper threading on each). Intel has since meteor lake 3 different core types and all with different kind of performance some with hyperthreading whicht makes sceduling on linux more difficult. The Zen 5 Ryzen HX 3XX AI Chips will likely have some optimization down the road as well. In all those benchmarks especially the multicore ones I wonder what the core utilisation is are all 14 physical cores used or just the performance cores OR when multicore task is present does the benchmark only use the 8 efficiency cores? Anyways the reason why would choose intel over AMD would be more physical cores and still optimization potential. + lower power draw when close to idle. Since I mainly work with neovim and pdf on the side my power draw would be fairly low until I compile something. More on reddit.com

if its for gaming, I would just grab Ryzen 7600, games doesnt benefit from core count but from core quality. I like how Intel moved the "i5/ultra5" level of CPU, which is meant for regular user to the 14 cores... for a regular user 4/6 cores are enough, for gamer 6/8 cores are enough... More on reddit.com

Highest core number and highest gen number with ultra should be the best. I7 is better than i5, but i5 gen12 is better than i7 gen1 Yea thats confusing naming. More on reddit.com