The 2700x is about $15US cheaper (on amazon) than an i7-6700K, ~$50 cheaper than a 7700k, or ~$70 cheaper than an 8700k. And that's with 8c/16t vs 4-6c/8-12t on the i7s. Makes me wonder why, if it theoretically has 50-100% more processing power, and it includes a fan/cooler. The rough equivalent in cores/threads is the 2600X, which at $209 is cheaper even than the i7-6600k. I really don't understand their business model relative to Intel at the moment.

Looking at this analysis, you have to go way back to a 6600k before normies value the 2700X as a better buy, probably because even the aged 6600k is faster than the 2700x until you start utilizing more than 4 cores. Now, for us, 8c/16t vs 4c/8t is a yuuuge step up (on its face) as it's effectively double the distributed processing power. So why isn't every multiboxer drooling over the cheaper, more powerful AMDs? I'm probably getting off in the weeds here but there are some aspects of this that just don't make sense to me, perhaps because I'm missing data.