Speculation: AMD's response to Intel's 8-core i9-9900K

Page 39 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

How will AMD respond to the release of Intel's 8-core processor?

  • Ride it out with the current line-up until 7nm in 2019

    Votes: 128 71.9%
  • Release Ryzen 7 2800X, using harvested chips based on the current version of the die

    Votes: 30 16.9%
  • Release Ryzen 7 2800X, based on a revision of the die, taking full advantage of the 12LP process

    Votes: 17 9.6%
  • Something else (specify below)

    Votes: 3 1.7%

  • Total voters
    178

ozzy702

Senior member
Nov 1, 2011
841
137
136
I won't name too many older games, but for ones that are still actively supported/modded:

- Elite Dangerous PVP
- GTA V
- Subnautica
- Fallout 4
- ARMA 3
- Sins of a Solar Empire (DLC released last week for a game released in 2012??)
- Kerbal Space Program
- Planetary Annihilation

I am always CPU limited at 4k60 for these games because they are not benchmarked and I think that is the key. I play games with far more AI than they are benchmarked with.

Some games like Destiny 2, I can hardly maintain above 90fps during a Raid at 1080p. In R6S, I struggle at maintaining my 177fps cap at 180hz during Terrorist Hunt because my CPU is at 100%.

I basically listed nearly every game I play on this list and my CPU is the bottleneck in each scenario. There will be other people who play other games and will find even 4c8t completely overkill. There is no right answer in this scenario.

I can't wait for 4c8t to be resigned for budget CPU's, and it looks like Intel and AMD are doing just that.

And I don't think AMD needs to do anything. For the first time in years, I hear people talk about AMD who have basically no idea how to build a PC. Most people I have talked to laugh at the 9900k's price while seeing AMD's 2700X as the real value. I hope that changes with average Joe being hopelessly confused with good perf/$ options for both Intel and AMD.

If the next i7 is 8c16t at the same price as their 9700k, things would be a lot more interesting!

To be fair, Sins of a Solar Empire only uses one core so maximum single core performance is key. It plays great on my 9900k and so far I haven't noticed any slowdowns. We need a Sins2 with the Ashes engine. I'd pay good money for that after the 1000 hours I have in the original.
 

ZGR

Golden Member
Oct 26, 2012
1,789
34
106
To be fair, Sins of a Solar Empire only uses one core so maximum single core performance is key. It plays great on my 9900k and so far I haven't noticed any slowdowns. We need a Sins2 with the Ashes engine. I'd pay good money for that after the 1000 hours I have in the original.
It does use 1 main thread still, but they did add a big performance patch in 2017:

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2017/04/05/sins-of-a-solar-empire-rebellion-4gb-memory-support/


I just think it is weird seeing a game be supported for so long, especially when a nice DX12 engine is available; as you know.

If you want to make your 9900k struggle, try out the Crazy Mod for Sins (2x unit count) and the LOUD mod for Supreme Commander Forged Alliance. The LOUD mod actually supports over 10000 units now where vanilla Forged Alliance capped at about 2000.

That performance boost was purely from rewriting the LUA files for the game.
 

Similar threads



ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS