Not sure if serious. The 9900k is STILL the best gaming processor. It also is the best processor outside of multi-threading on the desktop, I believe.Otherwise, I'm not sure why anyone would get a 9900k/kfc (heh) at this point.
What percentage of 9900k buyers do you think actually do that? It is a small minority. Most people are just running defaults. Intel encouraged this with the 9900k (PL1 yay). AMD seems to be encouraging this with Matisse. If the 9900k has to retreat behind the seemingly-ubiquitous 5 GHz all-core OC to beat the 3700x, the 9900k has already lost. Then you have to consider the 9900k users that are staying within the 95W envelope (there are some of those!). Those guys will probably lose to the 3700x completely.In the real world, where buyers are going to be running 5GHz all core overclocks
The 9900K doesn't exist in a vacuum though, though I understand it's in the thread title. There is also the 9700K/8700K, both of which when overclocked to 5GHz will more or less match the 9900K for gaming at a significantly lower cost. Even the 9600K can hang with the 9900K in games once pushed to 5GHz: https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3489-amd-ryzen-5-3600-cpu-review-benchmarks-vs-intel@B-Riz
Keep in mind they are talking about X-Plane 11. There are some people who obsess over one title, and for those people, specific CPUs that might not be the best overall buy one could make wind up being the best purchase. So they are talking about an edge case.
Otherwise, I'm not sure why anyone would get a 9900k/kfc (heh) at this point.
exactly thats itThe 9900K doesn't exist in a vacuum though, though I understand it's in the thread title. There is also the 9700K/8700K, both of which when overclocked to 5GHz will more or less match the 9900K for gaming at a significantly lower cost. Even the 9600K can hang with the 9900K in games once pushed to 5GHz: https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3489-amd-ryzen-5-3600-cpu-review-benchmarks-vs-intel
I still think for the vast majority of users with mixed usage, AMD makes much more sense. I would ONLY recommend Intel for a high end gaming *ONLY* rig, with the reason being to actually see *ANY* difference between the competing CPUs, you would need a 2080 / 2080 Ti class GPU anyway, otherwise this whole discussion is pointless - there is no discernible difference between CPUs in gaming when paired with lower end GPUs. When you're spending $1000 on a GPU, however, and therefore around $2000 for a whole gaming system, an extra $100 - $150 to get the faster gaming CPU isn't the most outrageous idea out there.
Can you get away with pairing a 3600 with a 2080 Ti? Of course you can, and you'll still get an amazing gaming experience, though for the absolute 'best' high fps gaming experience the Intel CPUs are still that little bit better, especially when overclocked to 5.0GHz.
Yeah, I think a 3600 paired with a 5700/5700XT makes for a VERY potent upper mid range gaming machine - it's unprecedented value that we haven't seen in a while.exactly thats it
unless you are brute force pro gamer with high refresh monitor the way to go is not 8700K, 9700K, 9900K, 3700X or 3900X
it is 3600 with better GPU got from the money savings- 200EUR 3600+100EUR board gets you another 150EUR+ for GPU with pretty much zero difference in gameplay
and with absolute excellent power
man how I love that 3600
Some of that may just be the inefficient / buggy early UEFI / AGESA versions. I'm sure that they're "tweak" them going forwards, for a little more performance.I know I'm sounding picky here, Ryzen 3K are great chips, just not so much 'fun' for old school tweakers like myself unfortunately.
Aren't X-Plane 11's load times for flights heavily dependent on the multithreaded performance of a CPU along with hard drive speed? Would a 9900k load a flight much faster than a 9600k along with having a little higher frame rate than the 9600k in X-Plane 11?IMO if you are obsessed with that game go buy 9600K and OC it to 5GHz+
cheapest Intel gaming CPU
And nothing Intel has outside of their 14nm work does it either. Makes me wonder if what they did with 14nm was a fluke not likely to be repeated for a long time.I honestly wonder, though, about TSMC's 7nm process being the limit here. It seems that 3rd-Gen Ryzen, even being 7nm, doesn't seem to clock all that higher than 2nd-Gen.
Well, this review might shed some light.The 8700K/9700K also beats it, though by slightly lesser margins: https://static.techspot.com/articles-info/1869/bench/Cost_1.png In terms of gaming, the Ryzen 3000 chips are about equal with the 9600K, according to that chart.
You're right, the boost clocks (and potential overclocks, it seems) are somewhat underwhelming, but even if it boosted (or overclocked) to 4.5GHz hypothetically, it's still not a 9900K killer like many here had claimed.
My 8700K overclocks to 5.0GHz, frankly if there is a Ryzen 3000 chip that can beat this for gaming purposes, I will gladly upgrade to it. Heck, even if it beats a stock 8700K I'll probably jump onboard just because I'm bored of Intel (been using them since Core 2, mainly because they always lead in gaming) and just want an excuse to build an AMD gaming rig, apart from a lower price for equivalent cores/threads.
Was really looking forward to Zen 3000, but apart from 'more cores' (useful of course, just not so much for gaming) there really isn't any reason for me to 'upgrade'.
Once you start stretching the envelope this way to "more or less match" and "can hang with", now you have to include R3 since it meets that criteria. You can't have it one way.The 9900K doesn't exist in a vacuum though, though I understand it's in the thread title. There is also the 9700K/8700K, both of which when overclocked to 5GHz will more or less match the 9900K for gaming at a significantly lower cost. Even the 9600K can hang with the 9900K in games once pushed to 5GHz: .
No 5Ghz gaming results? No lights shed I guess, same IPC means same performance @ stock that happens at around same clocks. Except one CPU has 600-700Mhz headroom more.Well, this review might shed some light.
Uhh not quite. Maybe you should actually check the numbers again at GN, the 5GHz 9600K is within margin of error to the 9900K in most titles. The Ryzen 3K chips, even overclocked, aren't quite at that level.Once you start stretching the envelope this way to "more or less match" and "can hang with", now you have to include R3 since it meets that criteria. You can't have it one way.
Uhh, some have the 3900K taking the gaming crown from the 9900k. Even the ones that don't AMD is just a few frames behind. Reel it in a little.Uhh not quite. Maybe you should actually check the numbers again at GN, the 5GHz 9600K is within margin of error to the 9900K in most titles. The Ryzen 3K chips, even overclocked, aren't quite at that level.
I just watched Joker's and TechYesCity's Ryzen 3700X / 3900X / 9700K / 9900K benchmark videos, and at least on one of them, they also had the 9400F in the gaming benchmarks, and while he didn't audibly mention that CPU, it seemed to score higher than the 3700X on several games. So possibly for gaming, that might be a consideration. (*If someone does ZERO productivity, video-editing, or 3D-rendering, or streaming, just PURE gaming, and @ 1080P, and on a severe budget.) Though, I would still pick the Ryzen, because it's more well-rounded, and even the R5 3600 should be more in the same ball-park price-wise, maybe slightly more, but you can pick up a B450 board for $100-120, whereas comparable Z390 boards (to allow for DRAM OC / faster than 2667 DDR4), start at like $170 and up. So that kind of negates the savings of a $140-150 i5-9400F, as compared to a $200 R5 3600. (Which, if you buy it at MC, you can get a $30, or is it now $50, discount with a board. So, save even more compared to Intel, and blow it away in productivity.)I am more interested in 9400F versus 3600 type of match up, ultimate battle of budget 6C.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|I||Question AMD Rembrandt/Zen 3+ APU Speculation and Discussion||CPUs and Overclocking||42|
|Discussion Speculation: The Rise of RISC-V||CPUs and Overclocking||17|
|Question 9900K upgrade to 5800X||CPUs and Overclocking||9|
|D||Discussion AMD Cezanne/Zen 3 APU Speculation and Discussion||CPUs and Overclocking||327|
|L||Question Speculation: XBox series S SoC info...||CPUs and Overclocking||16|