AMD Faked 9900K Benchmark During E3 Conference

Who remember their comparisons of 9900k vs 3900x doing CPU encoding Slow preset and streaming?
According to AMD 9900K was doing 2FPS a SECOND, 2FPS!


After the presser ended Russian tech channel did a test in ever worse conditions, they opened a skype, one in USA on E3 and another guy in Russia, overlayed it on top of Division 2 [Stock 9900k +1080ti]
OBS was doing CPU encoding [Slow preset] and run a Division 2 benchmark
The benchmark ended at 44FPS

The settings copied from AMD test, you can see them during the conference: Division 2, FHD, 10000Kbps CBR, Slow Quality Preset

P.S. The 12 Core Ryzen is a good CPU for good price but such dirty tricks doesnt add anything

 

Sure thing.

 

Do you know the exact conditions of the AMD demo ?
What GPU was used in the AMD demo ?
What CPU clock is the Russian demo using with their i9900k ?
Are they using the exact same in-game settings as the AMD demo ?
You trust 2 Russian guys, but you don't trust AMD ?
Did Intel pay you any money to post this ?
Did Intel pay the two Russian Guys to make this video ?

 

This shilling looks hilarious, I speak 3 languages so yes i trust people I can understand.
AMD never posted what settings they used, they posted a horrible comparison: 2fps for 9900k vs i dont remember how many for Ryzen 3900x
If you honestly believe that 2fps is the right number, well that's your prerogative.

As I said before, their 9900K wasn't overclocked it was fully stock, they even showed their ram 16gb 3200Mhz and 1080ti.
All the settings they used are in their video, they even explained how AMD made the 9900K do 2fps, both can be tested at home, if you have 9900K and Division 2

P.S. Intel pays me 50 shekels per post, dont judge i need to eat.

 

I’m still gonna buy a 3700x

 

This is about 3900x.
And im buying it too, guess what I have right now? 9900k
I wanted the 16 core but AMD cheated and wants people like me to double dip, buy 12 core now and 16 core in September and i might do it if the 12 is good and holds its value for 2 months, why not

 

lmao, they did tests benefitting intel, like not using latest windows 10 may update or not using the latest firmware. And now you come with that blind claim.

 

It's a giant marketing convention. How can anyone trust what is said when every single company will spin what they what you to see...not what would actually represent real life scenarios. When the reviews hit, that is when all that hype being culled is put through the usual litmus test.

 

Explain me how 2fps benefits Intel

 

haha "shekels" then you are from israel the same location for the research lab that discovered the horrible "RYZEN FALL" vulnerability P.S intel has their office there too

 

oh I'm sorry. I took this as a anti AMD post.

 

Waiting on Hilbert's reviews, and probably some others just to be sure. 'nuff said.

 

So until now you have made almost $56 by stating something you have no proof off, with the sole purpose
of discrediting AMD and make Intel look great.
What you fail to understand is the scope of all this. For years I and others have been begging Intel to give us more than 4 cores. They wouldn't.
We have been standing with cash in hand almost willing to give our first born child for more than 4 cores.
The gave us the middle finger. Then Ryzen comes along and suddenly everything is possible, 6 and even 8 cores are now
readily available. Then comes meltdown, spectre etc. and Ryzen is looking better and better. Then Microsoft releases Windows 10
build 1903 with an improved scheduler giving all Ryzen chips, with more than 4 cores, around 6% better overall performance.
Now Ryzen is looking really good. Then comes Ryzen 3xxx with an IPC uptake of ~15% which is amazing. I get it, I really do. I understand why
some Intel users are being jealous and but-hurt. But point the finger at Intel not AMD. AMD did an amazing job and the 3600X will sell like crazy.
I will replace my 2700X with a 3900X and I will be happy about it.

 

not talking about this particular test.... they even showed that Intel crashed at DMC 5... they just tested it raw af

 

Really? After all these years.. you expect these big tech company's to be truthful? Like watching someone talk about AMD's new GPU.. there AT E3.. and so many times AMD would have to get back to them. just didnt have that info.

Jealous and butt-hurt? Relax dude.. 1st you flip out .. all upset... you do exactly what you say INTEL users arent doing. Drama.. pffft

 

I'm not the one accusing a company of FAKING a demonstration.
When you do that you better have solid evidence and I haven't seen any, yet.

 

Gamers Nexus tweeted about this yesterday:

https://twitter.com/GamersNexus/status/1138567315598061568

Basically, AMD forced the 9900K into a situation where it would perform very poorly and gave the impression that it was bad at streaming. GN considers the parameters to be unrealistic, saying that nobody would use them because of how slow it is (and because the IQ difference is a placebo).

 

Just look at the fanboys here, some are outright insane.
These Russian guys even kept the same quality settings, exactly what AMD showed, same preset, bitrate and all, and made the benchmark worse by overlaying their Skype on top.
Basically it was one setting that made Intel run at 2FPS, AMD set the Encode to 60fps instead of limiting it to realistic number, anything from 45 to 55fps works

 

Intel have had more than 4 core cpus for years.

 

How about you start by learning to read, maybe? I bet you have no idea what we are talking about here, you just jump shill for AMD.
They faked the streaming benchmark by imputing high FPS limit and flooding the CPU, an encode with same quality setting just limiting the FPS to 45 -55 works fine 100%, its a fact deal with it.


P.S. I dont know what you begged for, Intel had 6 core CPUs for a long time, 5820k was great affordable CPU way back in 2014 with Quad Channel memory support
Then 8700, then 9900k.