Intel CPUs are Still Better - Says Intel

9700K at 5.0+Ghz IS faster than 3600/3700x in all gaming scenarios even with the security patches. I'm just not sure the 9700k is worth it over the 3600. 3700x is a different story it gets a bit muddier there as you can justify both and they are relatively even in price.

 

Thats the thing. You are little faster in games and slower in everything else. You have to make sure you have all the security patches. You have to overclock the chip. You have to find gaming scenarios where ipc matters becouse if game can use more than 8 threads you are left behind. Its a bold claim saying Intel is "faster".

 

The Smartest people bought Intel 8700k Day 1 for gaming. 2. Smartest bought 9900k for gaming day 1.

Nothing is smart for gaming only today. Wait for next gen, and buy @ day 1.

Buy cpu for all kind of things today, Ryzen 3600 is the best by far, for the money

 

Good luck finding a cpu that beats overclocked 9700k with 4400mhz tweaked memory today for gaming only. There are people that use pc for gaming only.

Most people in this thread are using pc for Forums only


People can buy whatever they want. I don't care.
I buy everything and benchmarking the hell out of it

 

i just recently bought an i9 9900k over the ryzen 9 3900x due to a few factors.
Location : i live in south korea and man the price of current ryzen are expensive after converted from us dollars the mark up is anywhere from $40 to $90 dollars.
Secondly the x570 motherboards chipset drivers and bios is still slightly unstable and not sure when they will be stabilized. Also the motherboards are abit more expensive than z390.
There are certain games not working well with ryzen cpus and requires patching. I think anthem is the one recently got fixed.

So overall the x570 and ryzen 3 series cpu is great no doubt. Looking at benchmarks and reviews, most of them say they are really good, but its just abit unstable atm. Thats why i went with the intel i9 9900k, i gave it 5-6 weeks before i finalized my purchase and i really wanted the ryzen 9 3900x but the stability issues ultimately made me went with intel.

 

It's what Intel says.
Other thing is what numbers and real life performance shows, and yet another thing is what you pay with your own money and put to the tasks you really need.
Moreover, it's about one concludes after reading (really reading, now skimmed through) extensive reviews made by honest and unbiased hardware aficionados.

Think for yourself, then respond, if you really have something to say.

Really, as in lately some gurus feel the urge to get on their kiddie side and start calling names and act like toddlers who are missing their sleep and food.
Ladies and gentlemen, let's get out wits together and show some respect and appreciation to Hilbert, who in his will to share knowledge, allowed all of us to participate on this free forum.
I will say until it hurts: This forum is what we make of it. Let's do our very best to stay informative, respectful and unbiased.
Thank you in advance, and I'll invite everyone at the guru's pub for a pint who agrees with what's being said.
Cheers!

 

Seems like Intel is on crack as always.
I think that instead of 'Intel CPUs are still better' they wanted to say 'Intel CPUs are still better*'.

 

Far cry 5 can scale past 8 cores and the 9700k at stock is still faster. Only game I know of that may flip the script is AC but seriously who plays those games still?

 

intel says the truth, yet have a overclock possibility too and ryzen 3xxx not, and prices are close too, but a need a wc to work fine makes this cost more

 

AC yes but Tomb Raider, Division 2, BF5 also can use 12 threads or more. I feel like we had the same debate 2 years ago when first gen ryzen 1800x was fighting a 7700k and people said Intel is faster. You should watch the hardware unboxed revisit of those two, its interesting.

 

Well Intel is not lying in this case because they are faster in gaming. At the same time they are slower in MT scenarios against similar priced AMD CPUs. In the end their CPUs are still competitive in performance, the problem are the silly prices that destroy their value, making very hard to overlook AMD right now.

 

Intel CPUs are faster in gaming even when speaking in terms of clocks being the same. I would put this down to how the game are optimized on certain Intel cpus and compiler advantage might be there for most games too.

 

Sorry Intel... you missed the boat... I upgraded my old i7 970 to a new Ryzen 3900X system as right now it is a much better option for me... gaming / VR are more or less equal... but for everything else the Ryzen beats the crap out of Intel platform. Next upgrade in 5 years... give me a call won't you...

 

I fell for that old bag of tricks last time around, only looking at the gaming performance and not using my head.

 

as a 9900k owner can someone tell me how they "we're going to maintain that edge"
clock speed seems to be the hardest thing to handle, Intel is at the limit currently while AMD is not
Intel also must stop making CPUs with 16 pcie lanes that's 2000 technology now we need a lot more than that with nvme drives 10Gbit ethernet usb-c and everything else that requires a ton of bandwith the 9900k was the last cpu I buy with so few lanes, that's 1 gpu worth, on a high-end gaming computer really?

and if you compare ryzen and intel hedt prices there's no competition at all, who would buy a same-ish cpu for 2-3x the price, just for fun a comparison of 3900x vs i9-9980xe I just did for myself

3900x 12 cores (580$ for me)
9980xe 18 cores (2100$ for me)
source : https://www.cgdirector.com/cinebench-r20-scores-updated-results/
single thread cinbench r20
3900x-511 9980xe-448 : winner : amd +14%
multi thread cinebench r20
3900x-7100 9980xe-8791 : winner : amd -19%
wait...what ? how could amd win with -19% ?
9980xe has +50% cores and is only 19% faster that's not good, can't wait to see what the 3950x does with only 2 less cores than Intel this time

Ryzen 3000 serie is clearly more technologically advanced, Mhz for Mhz core for core it gives more performance than Intel or previous Ryzen 2000 and that's what I'm not seeing at Intel, do you think they have some hidden technology leap we don't know about coming soon ? I don't think so

 

3900X is more expensive than the 9900k here.

Not everyone does heavy multi-threaded. 9900ks have the overclocking advantage bringing them close to the 3900x in multi-threaded loads. My 9900k does 5.1Ghz all-core at 1.3v.

AMD has had vulnerabilities as well. Both companies have responded with fixes in software and hardware.

 

yes, and 9700k yet winning on these 3 games too

 

Games still love frequency. And Intel is still better at latencies.

 

Hey, Intel:

MIND THE GAP

 

In todays gaming industry these are now classed as surprise flaw mechanics.