Support NeoGAF

[Coulomb_Barrier]

actually the 9900k is more expensive since you have to buy a cooler

Oh yeah I'll add that in there.

Maybe ryzen 4 will beat intel 9900k not that it matters as intel 10 series prolly be a lot better again.
How boring

No, next Intel desktop is 14nm next year, at the same time as Ryzen 4000. Intel hasn't seen any IPC gains since Skylake so this next 14nm++++ release will only have +100/200mhz gains and probably with higher rated memory support and adjusted prices. That's it.

Ryzen 4000 will have +2-5% ipc and +200/300Mhz clockspeeds so AMD will be even further ahead.

 

[PhoenixTank]

No, next Intel desktop is 14nm next year, at the same time as Ryzen 4000. Intel hasn't seen any IPC gains since Skylake so this next 14nm++++ release will only have +100/200mhz gains and probably with higher rated memory support and adjusted prices. That's it.

I did realise something since my first post in here, very likely that the 14nm 10 series will have hardware mitigations across the board for the first wave of Spectre vulnerabilities. If I'm reading the table correctly, hardware fixes for Zombieload, Foreshadow, Fallout and the like too. I'd welcome a refresh just for that, tbh. Whether there will be fresh vulns by 2020 is another story!

 

[Azurro]

That's my problem with it too. There is caveat when it comes to gaming with all the new Ryzen CPUs. If you spend $200 you have good performance for the cost today but will it hold tomorrow? If you're spending more than $300 on a CPU you simply get better gaming performance on Intel. And no CPU no matter how much you spend currently matches the 9900K in gaming.

You are such an Intel shill, it's beautiful. Any reasonable advice would be to go with the new Ryzen CPUs as aside from being cheaper, consuming less electricity and having basically parity single thread performance, if you literally do anything else aside from gaming at 720p, it's just irresponsible to recommend Intel.

 

[Leonidas]

You are such an Intel shill.

I'm not actually. I just don't get excited for products that fail to push new boundaries in terms of gaming performance.

 

[Ivellios]

I'm not actually. I just don't get excited for products that fail to push new boundaries in terms of gaming performance.

Then how can you get excited by Intel products? If not for AMD we would not have mainstream 8c/16t or 12c/24t CPUs at an affordable price.

 

[sonomamashine]

I'm not actually. I just don't get excited for products that fail to push new boundaries in terms of gaming performance.

Good for you, you kinda remind me of Samuel L. jackson in Django Unchained.

 

[Memorabilia]

I'm not actually. I just don't get excited for products that fail to push new boundaries in terms of gaming performance.

Laughable statements like this are pure shill. Intel hasn't innovated in years. They've coasted. Ryzen is far more efficient. Intel is admittedly better if you live in a northern climate and need a space heater.

 

[The Mad Draklor]

I'm not actually. I just don't get excited for products that fail to push new boundaries in terms of 720p gaming performance.

Fixed it for you.

 

[Spukc]

I'm not actually. I just don't get excited for products that fail to push new boundaries in terms of gaming performance.

word

amd fanboys are dreaming of AMD just blowing intel away this gen,
better luck next gen.

I am fine with getting an amd cpu but again this is not the gen.

AMD aka SOON™

 

[Leonidas]

Then how can you get excited by Intel products?

Because Intel is faster in gaming, it's really that simple.

They also have some pretty cool stuff in laptops this year which I find interesting.

 

[Memorabilia]

word

amd fanboys are dreaming of AMD just blowing intel away this gen,
better luck next gen.

I am fine with getting an amd cpu but again this is not the gen.

AMD aka SOON™

LOL You can't be a real person.

 

[Spukc]

LOL You can't be a real person.

lol you can't imagine people that want the best in gaming are getting intel this gen

LOL

 

[Memorabilia]

lol you can't imagine people that want the best in gaming are getting intel this gen

LOL

The only thing Intel is the best at right now is a CPU that doubles as a toaster oven and George Foreman grill.

 

[Spukc]

The only thing Intel is the best at right now is a CPU that doubles as a toaster oven and George Foreman grill.

blablabla same old shit it's still faster i don't care about power consumption/price i want the best

 

[Memorabilia]

blablabla same old shit it's still faster i don't care about power consumption/price i want the best

Did Intel re-hire the entire Prescott engineering team?

 

[Spukc]

Did Intel re-hire the entire Prescott engineering team?

why don't you wait SOON™

 

[Memorabilia]

why don't you wait SOON™

Wait for what soon? For Intel CPUs to contribute to global warming and melt an ice cap or two?

 

[Faust]

Let's stop calling other members "shills" for a difference in opinion. If you believe one is better than the other, then discuss why that is and the specifics as such. Continued insults will have you removed from the thread.

Thank you,
Faust.

 

[Azurro]

I'm not actually. I just don't get excited for products that fail to push new boundaries in terms of gaming performance.

It's a much better product in every single scenario, and the only place where you can see Intel beat AMD is in a test bench at 720p by like 2% or 4%, and in pretty much every single other workload AMD is way faster at a significantly lower price and power consumption.

I mean, I won't call you a shill, but your arguments are so dumb that your reasoning is irrational.

 

[The Mad Draklor]

It's a much better product in every single scenario, and the only place where you can see Intel beat AMD is in a test bench at 720p by like 2% or 4%, and in pretty much every single other workload AMD is way faster at a significantly lower price and power consumption.

I mean, I won't call you a shill, but your arguments are so dumb that your reasoning is irrational.

Not to mention that those percentages are within margin of error, so the difference is not statistically significant.

 

[KungFucius]

How fucking retarded do you have to be, to be a fanboy of a CPU company?

I can see 2 reasons that are not pathetic. The first is that you work for that company and/or actually contributed to the technology. The second is that you worked for the other company and hate their fucking guts. In some cases I would accept someone who bought a defective product from the other guy and wasted a ton of time troubleshooting and dealing with customer-unfriendly RMA processes that leave them without a PC for weeks as having a non lame reason to be a fan of the other guy.

With all techs there are trade offs. AMD wins in some areas, Intel in others. Claiming they didn't achieve anything by actually becoming a solid choice is asinine. With new AMD CPUs you get PCIe gen4 NVME drives and better mulitcore performance. With Intel, you get 37 fucking chipsets and CPU combinations just to make sure you pay extra for the option to OC to get a little better gaming performance that may or may not matter in a few years.

 

[Leonidas]

It's a much better product in every single scenario, and the only place where you can see Intel beat AMD is in a test bench at 720p by like 2% or 4%

If you actually believe it's only 2-4% at 720p, then you clearly are ignoring the reality. I've not seen any reviewer claim 2-4%, then again I look at reviews from non-biased sources, and will never fall for fanboy hype and graphs you seem to have been mislead by.

 

[Myths]

Regardless of what the price/performance is, whatever statements are made in the face of statistical data and evidence, consumers are going to choose what they want at point-of-sales. This is indistinguishable from the on-going console wars, time and time again.

Let's stop calling other members "shills" for a difference in opinion. If you believe one is better than the other, then discuss why that is and the specifics as such. Continued insults will have you removed from the thread.

Thank you,
Faust.

Thread was in dire need of ordinance. It’s clear there’s brand loyalty on both ends, so I’m unsure why one is pointing the finger at the other. I personally have an Intel based build atm but will be assembling an AMD/Ryzen based one in the future (because I’d like both and because I can). Any upvoting I’m doing is purely out of hilarity in the contents of the posts really regardless of who’s on what side. (And also because people are steadfast to their choice anyway).

 

[Luffytubby]

butwhy.gif?

First Look at AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen CPUs for Video Editing

AMD's new Ryzen 3rd generation CPUs just launched with terrific performance improvements across the board. While we don't have the full lineup tested just yet, we wanted to give a first look at what we are seeing in Premiere Pro, After Effects, DaVinci Resolve, and other applications commonly...

www.pugetsystems.com

TPU does that too.

Dude, 9900k consumes nearly twice the power of 3700x, to beat it at those couple %. in certain tasks.
Even the first Zen beat Intel at perf/watt.

I have not really kept up with the latest Ryzen chips. The latest I had seen from Pudget was the 2019 AE roundup they did in their current hardware recommandations, where results were this; Pudget System 2019 AE Hardware recommendations

With them saying; "Does After Effects work better with Intel or AMD CPUs?
At the moment, an Intel CPU should always give you better performance in After Effects for your dollar. The exact amount varies by CPU, but in general, you can expect 20-40% better performance with an Intel CPU over an AMD CPU."

 

[sonomamashine]

blablabla same old shit it's still faster i don't care about power consumption/price i want the best

if it wasn't for AMD you will still be rocking 4 cores 8 threads i7, guess AMD saved us all.

 

[Ivellios]

Pretty interesting video about this whole discussion.

 

[Spukc]

if it wasn't for AMD you will still be rocking 4 cores 8 threads i7, guess AMD saved us all.

yup def not ignoring that fact.
amd is great for making intel better

 

[sonomamashine]

yup def not ignoring that fact.
amd is great for making intel better

Or AMD forced Intel to finally give you what they should of a long time ago, slavery at it best.

 

[Spukc]

Or AMD forced Intel to finally give you what they should of a long time ago, slavery at it best.

amd would have done the same freaking thing if intel was holding all the cards,
that is how tech works man,

look at all the extra shit xbox owners got this gen cause microsoft fucked up,
that would have never happened if xbox was not behind playstation.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Here we can see what I've been talking about regarding core count and future-proofing.



So assuming I wasn't upgrading already, I would be super happy I invested in my 6-core 5820K back in the day. I could be playing Assassin's Creed Odyssey now and not be having these awful frame time spikes, not that I am because I haven't bought it but everyone says it's good so maybe I should.

We've already seen the limits of the 8c/8t 9700K in my previous post, so right now you should be thinking minimum 6c/12t and better to have 8c/16t for a mainstream CPU because you know the PS5/Xbox Two are going to be 8c/16t CPU's. And then there's me, I got 6 cores when everyone else is getting 4. So now I'm going to get the 12-core 3900X while everyone else is thinking 8 cores and I have a feeling when the new consoles are on 8 cores, PC's will need 12+ cores to keep up because of all the shit that goes on PC in the background on Windows plus you know multitasking, streaming, and content creation.

 

[PhoenixTank]

I have not really kept up with the latest Ryzen chips. The latest I had seen from Pudget was the 2019 AE roundup they did in their current hardware recommandations, where results were this; Pudget System 2019 AE Hardware recommendations

With them saying; "Does After Effects work better with Intel or AMD CPUs?
At the moment, an Intel CPU should always give you better performance in After Effects for your dollar. The exact amount varies by CPU, but in general, you can expect 20-40% better performance with an Intel CPU over an AMD CPU."

We are in a Intel thread, so fair enough for not keeping up to date.
Based on that 3600 result I think it is fair to say that advice is obsolete. I'm glad it is improving on that front.

 

[TaySan]

Unless you are gaming at 1080p on a 144hz refresh rate with no adaptive sync I don't see much of a reason to go with the 9900k over the 3900x or even the 3700x.

 

[Soltype]

Pretty interesting video about this whole discussion.

Yeah, very interesting time right now, next few years are going to be something else.Kind of off topic, but that big guy is gross.Saw him in another LTT video and he was distracting there too.

 

[Ivellios]

Yeah, very interesting time right now, next few years are going to be something else.Kind of off topic, but that big guy is gross.Saw him in another LTT video and he was distracting there too.

You mean Anthony? I like his videos and the way he explain things.

 

[gatti-man]

Same here, will upgrade my haswell to a Ryzen 3000 CPU.

I honestly dont understand why some people hate AMD so much, when their new CPUs have a vastly superior price/performance according to trusted reviewers.

Do they though? Intel CPUs have always been an excellent value for me and very reliable. I always bought the cheapest version of their higher end core i7s. Usually around $220 or so. Polish the top with a piece of glass and fine grit sand paper. A good sealed water cooling cooler and ramp it up to 4ghz.

Is AMD still putting out poor overclocking CPUs like they used to? For those that know Intel has always been the true value leader unless that’s recently changed.

 

[Ivellios]

Do they though? Intel CPUs have always been an excellent value for me and very reliable. I always bought the cheapest version of their higher end core i7s. Usually around $220 or so. Polish the top with a piece of glass and fine grit sand paper. A good sealed water cooling cooler and ramp it up to 4ghz.

Is AMD still putting out poor overclocking CPUs like they used to? For those that know Intel has always been the true value leader unless that’s recently changed.

Yes, the vast majority of reviews are saying this. Ryzen 3000 has a far better price/performance than anything Intel has.

As for overclock its not something i do, but from what i read Ryzen 3000 CPUs are still not overclocking well.

 

[gatti-man]

Yes, the vast majority of reviews are saying this. Ryzen 3000 has a far better price/performance than anything Intel has.

As for overclock its not something i do, but from what i read Ryzen 3000 CPUs are still not overclocking well.

You kind of side stepped my point. Base clock for clock is not a value proposition at all. It never has been. Most (by most I mean every single one over the last 20 years sans 1 which was a notoriously bad overclocking cpu) of my intel CPUs gave me a 50-70% overclock turning a $200 cpu into an $800 cpu without any issues of longevity or stability.

So if reviewers are comparing base clock to base clock and ignoring overhead then talking about value it entirely misses the point of value in the first place.

If Ryzen 3000s aren’t overclocking well they lose the entire value argument if intels still do overclock well.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

This just further incentivizes devs to not take advantage of anything more than that. Only 2% have 8-cores. Thats pathetic.

all next gen consoles are likely to be 8 core ryzen

i am not starting this dumb ass list wars with you plenty of info to find online why the 9900k is still king in gaming.

9900K

- 5% faster only when you game at 1080p with a 2080 Ti.

5% is nothing even under these unrealistic settings. That's literally its only 'advantage', which is what's desperate about the whole thing.

lol you can't imagine people that want the best in gaming are getting intel this gen

It depends on what memory the ryzen are tested at. At 3600Mhz ram, performance can be 20-50+% higher depending on game vs at lower or higher ram memory speeds.

However, above 3600MHz a divider kicks in to reduce the Infinity Fabric speed, so as far as I'm concerned, above this is the realm of extreme overclockers since you won't see any extra benefit from the Infinity Fabric as it will be maxed out. In fact, using 3733MHz memory actually saw my system offer slightly worse performance as the divider meant the fabric was operating at a slower frequency. So, my advice for anyone building a new system is to use a 16GB dual-channel kit of 3,600MHz memory, ideally with a C16 latency, although most 3466MHz kits I've tried readily overclock to 3,600MHz anyway. -forbes antonyleather

Considering tests at memory speeds other than 3600Mhz have ryzen within 5-10% of 9900k, it would be interesting to see proper tests vs ryzen at 3600Mhz ram, it may still be below but it may be closer in some games.

If Ryzen 3000s aren’t overclocking well they lose the entire value argument if intels still do overclock well.

not if ryzen can nearly match or in some cases exceed overclocked intel.

In some games at 4k framerate advantage actually reverses and goes to amd.