Seems like Intel is on crack as always. I think that instead of 'Intel CPUs are still better' they wanted to say 'Intel CPUs are still better*'.

intel says the truth, yet have a overclock possibility too and ryzen 3xxx not, and prices are close too, but a need a wc to work fine makes this cost more

Loophole35:

Far cry 5 can scale past 8 cores and the 9700k at stock is still faster. Only game I know of that may flip the script is AC but seriously who plays those games still?

AC yes but Tomb Raider, Division 2, BF5 also can use 12 threads or more. I feel like we had the same debate 2 years ago when first gen ryzen 1800x was fighting a 7700k and people said Intel is faster. You should watch the hardware unboxed revisit of those two, its interesting.

Well Intel is not lying in this case because they are faster in gaming. At the same time they are slower in MT scenarios against similar priced AMD CPUs. In the end their CPUs are still competitive in performance, the problem are the silly prices that destroy their value, making very hard to overlook AMD right now.

Intel CPUs are faster in gaming even when speaking in terms of clocks being the same. I would put this down to how the game are optimized on certain Intel cpus and compiler advantage might be there for most games too.

Sorry Intel... you missed the boat... I upgraded my old i7 970 to a new Ryzen 3900X system as right now it is a much better option for me... gaming / VR are more or less equal... but for everything else the Ryzen beats the shit out of Intel platform. Next upgrade in 5 years... give me a call won't you...

as a 9900k owner can someone tell me how they "we're going to maintain that edge" clock speed seems to be the hardest thing to handle, Intel is at the limit currently while AMD is not Intel also must stop making CPUs with 16 pcie lanes that's 2000 technology now we need a lot more than that with nvme drives 10Gbit ethernet usb-c and everything else that requires a ton of bandwith the 9900k was the last cpu I buy with so few lanes, that's 1 gpu worth, on a high-end gaming computer really? and if you compare ryzen and intel hedt prices there's no competition at all, who would buy a same-ish cpu for 2-3x the price, just for fun a comparison of 3900x vs i9-9980xe I just did for myself 3900x 12 cores (580$ for me) 9980xe 18 cores (2100$ for me) source : https://www.cgdirector.com/cinebench-r20-scores-updated-results/ single thread cinbench r20 3900x-511 9980xe-448 : winner : amd +14% multi thread cinebench r20 3900x-7100 9980xe-8791 : winner : amd -19% wait...what ? how could amd win with -19% ? 9980xe has +50% cores and is only 19% faster that's not good, can't wait to see what the 3950x does with only 2 less cores than Intel this time Ryzen 3000 serie is clearly more technologically advanced, Mhz for Mhz core for core it gives more performance than Intel or previous Ryzen 2000 and that's what I'm not seeing at Intel, do you think they have some hidden technology leap we don't know about coming soon ? I don't think so

Undying:

AC yes but Tomb Raider, Division 2, BF5 also can use 12 threads or more. I feel like we had the same debate 2 years ago when first gen ryzen 1800x was fighting a 7700k and people said Intel is faster. You should watch the hardware unboxed revisit of those two, its interesting.

yes, and 9700k yet winning on these 3 games too

Hey, Intel: MIND THE GAP

alanm:

Not everyone games, and in multi-threaded scenarios Intel is in trouble. Secondly, who wants a system riddled with vulnerabilities that requires patches every so often?

In todays gaming industry these are now classed as surprise flaw mechanics.

Hyderz:

i just recently bought an i9 9900k over the ryzen 9 3900x due to a few factors. Location : i live in south korea and man the price of current ryzen are expensive after converted from us dollars the mark up is anywhere from $40 to $90 dollars. Secondly the x570 motherboards chipset drivers and bios is still slightly unstable and not sure when they will be stabilized. Also the motherboards are abit more expensive than z390. There are certain games not working well with ryzen cpus and requires patching. I think anthem is the one recently got fixed. So overall the x570 and ryzen 3 series cpu is great no doubt. Looking at benchmarks and reviews, most of them say they are really good, but its just abit unstable atm. Thats why i went with the intel i9 9900k, i gave it 5-6 weeks before i finalized my purchase and i really wanted the ryzen 9 3900x but the stability issues ultimately made me went with intel.

Don't you need a pretty expensive board to handle the 9900K OC? I've heard that great VRMs is the key here.

Well intel IS faster in gaming and that is all fine by me. The thing is...what about power draw and heat? I see many comments here saying oh i overclocked to 5.1Ghz!!! Well yeah that is cool and all but frankly i want a cool and quiet PC and at 5.1ghz there ain't no cool or quiet at all unless you get some beefy cooling that costs extra cash on top. I was intel until it started getting too expensive and a must overclock to get the full performance. Went with a R5 3600X (Yeah i could have skipped the X but the price was awsome when i got it) And right now it boosts nicely to 4.5Ghz WITHOUT me having to fiddle with overclocking,voltage and all that stuff. It just simply works and stays cool,quiet and doesn't draw power like a powerhungry dictator 😀. It does well enough for my 1440p gaming with my 2080 RTX card and it is nice on my multitasking and decompressing/compressing for the price. (Got it for 319$ i think it was) The CPU war is good for us as customers because in the end if AMD gets more and more marketshare Intel will need to reinvent itself and for once maybe us customers can profit from it by not having a 100% monopoly company charging whatever they want (Like Nvidia still can)

jwb1:

Games still love frequency. And Intel is still better at latencies.

*low latency for high fps

Intel is right, whats not right about it ?

all amd needs to do is match them for clocks and intel is done.

Tsenng:

Well intel IS faster in gaming and that is all fine by me. The thing is...what about power draw and heat? I see many comments here saying oh i overclocked to 5.1Ghz!!! Well yeah that is cool and all but frankly i want a cool and quiet PC and at 5.1ghz there ain't no cool or quiet at all unless you get some beefy cooling that costs extra cash on top.)

it all depends on your real usage, I decided to run mine at 5.1ghz (1.36v) is it 100% stable ? no but for gaming ? yes and not hot because if you check live gaming datalogging like on those two really useful youtube channels : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCVhtNzcTr0jWhOCZ_71Y4Q https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCncuMsyOBwyiTv-6rc8mq0Q you will see that the cpu is barely used in games so you keep the clockspeed advantage but without the heat generation from running stress tests/benchmarking most of the time mine @5.1Ghz is around 50-70°C with AIO Corsair H150i pro (fans running at near silent 1000rpm for most games) honestly if I have noise it's from the gpu because while games using a high-end cpu @98% don't really exist, you can easily max your gpu usage with maxed settings, using reshade/enb and other post-processing or high res texture mods when I play my modded skyrim I'm basically running furmark gpu benchmark for hours (90-98% gpu usage @Max clock nonstop) for that I have to crank up all the fans

alanm:

Not everyone games, and in multi-threaded scenarios Intel is in trouble. Secondly, who wants a system riddled with vulnerabilities that requires patches every so often?

True, but the argument works both ways. The vast majority of people don't need more than 4c/8t, and AMD keeps throwing out more cores as though everyone runs Cinebench every day. Both Intel and AMD are touting products that nobody but enthusiasts care about, and ironically, they're only preaching to their own fanbases. As of right now, Intel's greatest mistake is stubbornly maintaining their currently overblown price point. A 6% performance increase in games is not worth all of the performance losses in other tasks, or the higher price tag, and it's getting a little embarrassing if Intel seriously thinks otherwise. As for the vulnerabilities, Intel is pretty quick to get them patched, and most of the vulnerabilities are all related to the same fundamental problem. In other words, it's not like their CPUs are riddled with security holes, it's more like a few holes that just keep getting bigger. However, it does really irritate me that Intel barely budges their price points despite the noticeable performance losses.

nizzen:

The Smartest people bought Intel 8700k Day 1 for gaming. 2. Smartest bought 9900k for gaming day 1. Nothing is smart for gaming only today. Wait for next gen, and buy @ day 1.

I agree with most of this. I still find the 8700K to be the best CPU for gamers. Too bad it isn't made anymore, and there was no real replacement. Sure, it wasn't cheap, but it didn't have a laughably high price tag either. However, I definitely disagree about the 9900K. That is a terrible value no matter what your priorities are, even if you ignore AMD. I'd rather spend a little extra and get a 7900X, which has more PCIe lanes, is known to be a great overclocker, more memory channels, and ECC RAM support. Either CPU is heavily overpriced so it doesn't make sense to gripe about the higher motherboard cost. All that being said, the 7900X isn't exactly a great value either, but at least you're not being so blatantly ripped off. Anyway - I sort-of agree there are currently no current-gen CPUs that would be the best for gaming. There's nothing that gives you the best performance for a decent price. But... I really don't understand why people care so much about a few FPS here and there when you're already in the hundreds. Sure, the 3600(X) doesn't give you the best performance, but does it really matter? Who are you trying to impress? Who are you kidding if you say you can see the difference between 110FPS vs 118FPS? I'd say it's a smart choice. But, I do agree that you're better off waiting for next-gen parts (from either brand) if you want the best all-around option.

Witcher29:

Intel is right, whats not right about it ?

Of course they're right, but that's like saying the Dodge Challenger Demon is the fastest RWD production car in the world because it can go from 0-60 in a straight line faster than anything else, while ignoring the fact that it'll be heavily outperformed by less powerful vehicles on a track. Dodge technically isn't wrong, but it's very misleading, and frankly a bit dumb to use that as the selling point.

Is this out of box performance or Intel specified settings?

For gaming they are. Although personally i would not buy a 8 threads cpu in 2019 unless it was a cheap core i3 for a web browsing and getting mails machine. With the next gen consoles rumored to have 16 threads cpu by 2020 i would definitely not invest in a 8 threads cpu today. Right now the only cpu by intel i would be comfortable buying is the 9900k and it is indeed a fantastic cpu.

As "proud" owner of 9900K. i can say that it nice for little fireworks.. of generic Z370 VRM - which are running at 120C after 10 minutes of high load.. at a bit out of specs intel special 165 W in load not overclocked. That is not flag ship, its leaky ship, i had 8700K before it was fine.