DeathByGeekSquad: Why are we comparing two different generations of processor?

looking at effective cost/value ratios.
they show what the off set in power is, and compare that to the off set in price.

and for lots of use situations this data would give us the ability to make more value based choices, instead of just assuming to buy "the most power." because the way CPU power works is, you might be paying for a lot of power, but never really making any use of it.

For example if up time on a system is really for gaming, and little else. then the cost/value the game will get looks to be way better on a 7700x or 7600x, when we notice those chips run just a few FPS under a 7900x or 7950x, while costing a fair bit less.

some might prefer to cope wiht the lowly 150-160 FPS of a 7700x , keep that extra money in our pockets or put it into other parts of the PC, instead of pay out to get 160-170 FPS(sometimes less).

and also generally speaking on this specific idea"two different generations of processor"when it comes to the two most current gens of CPUs, they are often negligibly different for a whole lot of users.Anyone upgrading from several/many generations ago, like say an intel 7xxx series. for them the current last gen might be a negligible use difference and so the cost of the last gen could easily be a better value for them.Like this idea:if we know full well we'll never drive faster than 70  mph, we waste a lot of monye paying for an engine that can do 180.this kind of cost/power analysis shows us the real cost/value of the power we buy, and that data may show us, buying last year's hardware is a way better value for us.