Intel CPUs are Still Better - Says Intel

Sorry bro but all the games you listed don't really scale past 8 threads (just because they can use them doesn't mean they need them). Look I like the Ryzen CPU's, just built my nephew a 3700x/2070s system and I can't really tell the difference between it and my system with a 8700k @ 5Ghz/1080ti system (but I didn't get that much time with it). However the numbers don't lie. In strictly gaming Intel has the edge for now and the 9700k is not a bad buy in that aspect.

 

Actually, I think it'd make product differentiation substantially easier. The whole product lineup would basically be universal, except you pay more for more cores. It can't really get a whole lot more straight-forward than that.

 

always make smile when someone post like this
talk about secure-system, while u using windows and all apps/software within windows that most of those patched monthly, even driver, nvidia did patch security issue last release right?

that just about windows, no even any talk about open-internet u using, secure/private-vpn connection? encrypted-dns? so do u care about security that much ?

 

I'd say there's a difference between being inherently vulnerable due to something you have no control over, vs being vulnerable because of your own life choices. It's like the difference between living on a mountain, only to find out it is an active volcano, vs deliberately moving to the ghetto because it's closer to work. Sure, the volcano is unlikely to explode into your livingroom, but if it does, there's nothing you can do about it. In an attempt to spare your home from total destruction, you might have to build a giant ceramic wall and sacrifice the view you wanted so bad. Either way, it would be fair to be pissed off at the retailer for either not telling you about this, or, for not doing sufficient research.
If you move to the ghetto, you know what you're getting yourself into. Lock'n'load I guess lol.

 

Are people posting in this thread that Intel is better for gaming than AMD serious.I mean really I have AMD /Intel systems and game on AMD 3600X only but I do not play the game and think,man I wish I had a 9700K/9900K where I could get the extra 5 FPS,what a difference that would make.Stop being stupid and trying to sell CPU's.
The truth is they all suck and hold back gaming ,so suckers will keep buying more CPU's.They are almost at the end of the line for performance squeezed out,bring on the next real CPU's already.

 

I find posts like this ironic. By this logic, you might as well leave your door unlocked when you leave your house, since no house is absolutely secure. You should also use "password123" for all your logins as well, since online servers can be hacked at any time. No need to bother with security since we're all vulnerable, right?

Microsoft patches security exploits in Windows precisely because security is important. The same goes for any other company who sells tech products - ignoring a known exploit is the height of irresponsibility. Although there is no way to be 100% secure, you should try to protect yourself as much as possible. A door lock isn't foolproof but it's better to have it than not.

 

You are the one making "bold" claims. Faster in games is faster. It doesn't matter if it's just a "little faster" it's still faster. And your claim that intel is "slower in everything else" is patently ridiculous. There are some professional programs that are multithreaded very well and in those the higher core count of amd is a huge boon. But "everything else?" Come on, that is just pure bs.

The vast majority of computer users will never use those multithreaded apps so the extra cores are not going to help the common computer user much.

 

Spoken like someone who truly has no experience with ryzen. But then again it's the intel paparazzi employee police that's stating it, so not too surprising. What's more surprising is how you're still not banned.

 

"May not reflect all publicly available security updates."

Sysmark 2018 : 3% faster on 9700K; 7% faster on 9900K
SPECrate2017_int_base_1T : 6% faster on 9700K; 9% faster on 9900K.

I wonder how would results of those lovely non-multithreaded tests go if they run them at same time and added some lovely long running NVMe benchmark.
It is not uncommon for people to copy large files in background while doing something else on desktop. (Like playing YT videoclip for music and playing some game.)
I really dislike those highly synthetic tests that will tell me that something is wonderful while it does not live up to it under my hands.

Thanks for honesty. But seriously, put some fan there.

Thing about fewer cores is that all is fine till you need them. 4C/4T are still doing OK in benchmarks. Their average framerate in games is not really bad. But stutter if you play with uncapped fps and not limited by GPU, that's something else. And if one was to take framerate at which game plays comfortably, then nobody would advise anyone to buy low core count CPU.
Bare minimum should be 6C/12T for gaming. That's unless gamer wants to gave some frustration and need to replace CPU much sooner than needed.

It should be noted that performance per core race is kind of stagnant. That's why intel sells those 5GHz (tm) chips instead of selling improved IPC.
(Oh I almost forgot, they sell both at same time as they still call IPC as "Instructions per core" and they mean operations per unit of time at variable rated clock.)
But stagnation in IPC really brings everything that demands more to multithreading.

 

* get out chair and sit down with popcorn and soda *

then never ending debate continues, personal I think it price to performance that more important at this point and AMD win that while still performance pretty close to intel. I still game at 1080p and still 60fps and even when I upgrade to 1440p or 4k it will still be 60 fps,pretty sure AMD is perfectly capable of do this now

 

I bought best MB, which was available at the time - only Z370 were - https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/Z370-AORUS-Ultra-Gaming-rev-10#kf , its intel problem that to see better than i is cheating with TDP out of box. My standard MB sensor is fine, but my MB has VRM specific sensor too..
Im not telling that Gigabyte MBs are great as Asus, or probably MSI, EVGA etc.. but they have best feature set for me.. and they are still only ones (except HP O.E.M stuff) with primary GPU slot selection feature as far is i know.. If someone running lastest Win10 and Linux only these stuff probably doesnt matter..

 

They are already fan at the back of of case and some in the front to make AIR flow, but it doesnt help to notice.. There is other options, sensor is reporting wrong values, i dunno where exactly it its.. but at touch there is nothing extremely hot.

 

If you can try touching the back of the board behind the vrms, just to check the VRM heasinks are connected properly.

 

Intel was shocked on how fast AMD cought up too them that fans are blind sided by fps in games,its no different then nvidia selling raytracing and dlss and everyone buying it that being said let's start, 9900k for real world or even the 9700k really if your only playing games and nothing more I couldn't recommend a 9700k or 9600k to anyone over a 3700x you can do alot more with more cores to start with a 3600 is by far a better choice then what Intel is offering at this point in time,now I seen a few post on here 720p 9900k and 2080ti they are benchmarks in a controlled room Environment tell me who's going to play tombraider 10 plus times no one battlefield ok but we are looking at a user base on what they do in real life and the types of games they play, let's recommend a 9900k and 2080ti to everyone because why not is blowing it out of the water crap, or let's try this note we are only talking about ryzen 3000 and intels 9xxx here, I'm looking to build a PC to game/render/stream at the same time for low money and I bet you couldn't point me to anything AMD because Intel fans are just like that and will only say buy a 9900k and a 2080ti if your looking for all that. So what's the real point of anyone talking about Intel is the gaming king because they give you maybe a few more fps,we as gamers/streamers/content creaters go with the flow because that how it is. if AMD had far better ipc then the 9900k and ram problems would you buy it or would you sit there and come up with randomness as to why Intel is still better when AMD is charging less, I own the first ryzen and I know first hand about the ram problems but you know what I rather deal with that then Intel charging a arm or leg to get more cores and if AMD didnt push that loving 9900k would be a 4c8t or even a 6c12t if no one is willing to take the steps needed we would never be here fighting on who's the best so give thanks to AMD for taking the leaps needed for everyone to get cpus with more cores, and to this I say vote with your wallet and not because benchmarks say it's better buy what you want and be happy.

 

Yes. I have a Ryzen 1800x with a gtx 1070 and i get 60 fps in most games at 2k without having to reduce gfx quality much (when i have to).

 

I am a long term amd user, 880k stil rocking. Other pc is i3 8300 with a pentium G5400 being tested. Due to Ryzen issues intel seemed the lesser of 3 evils and my pentium runs windows 7 on a H310 board.

Whatever is the best option at the time. I dont wave flags.

 

Just read his posts for sh!ts and giggles and ignore it mate. I think at this point everyone knows he’s an Intel troll.

I for one am loving the fact that I’m more or less getting best performances out of the box without having to tinker much (me trying to “OC” seems to only make performance worse lol).

Really for the majority of us buying higher end rigs who’s actually running 720p at low IQ settings just to get the max fps the CPU allows? OTOH I am loving the fact that I can have 3 different photo editing programs running with crap loads of tabs open in Firefox and still running smooth with my new 3700X setup.

 

I might have gone to Ryzen 2300X or 2500X but they were oem only and Coffee Lake runs 8.1, Ryzen issues all over the shop its not my fault i went intel, amd gave me no choice but im happy with what i chose

 

No, your statement is quite bold saying "slower in everything else", for NVRs intel still is a better buy than AMD out of iGPU/power consumption, people using Adobe Premiere also benefit from igpu, and like this are cases where AMD is not faster, by this im not implying that intel is a better buy for everyone, but for some scenarios, aside from gaming, intel is still faster.