Because there isn't a proportional performance gain, and the heat generated will degrade the computer, at what cost? A few irrelevant percentage points?
Most tech products that are the tip of the spear are bad value for money and less energy efficient than the ones down the range (Nvidia 3090 vs 3080 for example) as they pass the point of diminishing returns of what the design can do and what's cheap and easy to manufacture.
But they exist because there is a marke of enthusiasts for whom efficiency or price does not matter, they just want the best performance money can buy because maybe their business use case benefits from the 10% shorter render/compile times at the cost of 50% extra power consumption. Who are you to judge?
If that is true they should be comparing it to the Epyc 7763 or other CPUs that aren't meant to be reasonably priced. No reason a true enthusiast would pick this CPU over Epyc.
That just sounds childish.
Jokes are usually meant to be funny.
>I sometimes really wonder at the social skills of people on this website.
One's social skills are not defined by comprehension of poor attempts at snarky humor on the internet.
That's a server chip/line, no? And therefore will have significantly worse per-core performance, one of the most important things for non-embarrassingly-parallel compute tasks?
Edit: and after a cursory search, is it not also true that Epyc line is 4-8x higher priced than the 12900k MSRP?
Old doesn’t mean heat abused. Gaming laptops or ones with discrete GPUs often have issues and it’s always because of the GPU. If it posts it doesn’t mean that the GPU won’t die soon or is problem free, gaming laptops have the most heat abuse and are constantly dying and having issues. Performance degradation because it’s old is a different claim from saying heat damage doesn’t exist.