Yah, i should have worded that better.

In general, single performance per core matter,but they arent the selling point like the old days where a single core would have x.x and the rest would throttle. Idk if im explaining it right.

Also, you are 100% right, intc is chasing that, the same way amd was before the ryzen series, but as mentioned above, it wont matter as much from a few .x difference, unless the architect could actually use it. Look at the 8350, or the 9000 series amd cpus that could easily overclock, but their performance per value was lackluster since their architecture was shit. Idk if Im explaining that right, but thats what was going through my brain in my prior reaponse.

They changed the naming convention a while ago, due to more stable release launch window and a specific project name. For ex. Skylake i3, vs coffee lake i3. They are different generations, but anyone can easily know its an i3. While the pentium was long running with many, many variations, if i recall, and they used to figure that out with ghz since it was a one and done core processor or dual core, etc.

Actually, amd had the same thing. They would just call their processors, zhambezi, or some weird name no one understood, but it was always ghz based due to oc and how many cores, even when the core processing sucked.

Personally, ghz matter little now, specially since most applications already use multiple cores and threads. Singular core stuff is more ghz related, and honestly, its good we made it past that stuff.

O, right, i remember those when i had psn. I didnt actually use it when I first played it.

Sekiro is always online on pc?

I didnt even know it had an online on consoles.