nizzen:

But Intel will still be faster in 99% of the games who is cpubound. 9900k is up to 20% faster than 3900x when both are maxed out on memoryspeed and core. So I guess 10 series is a good upgrade for GAMERS, who has an old platform. I you play Cinebench 24/7, 3900x/3950x is the better choice. Different products to different use 🙂

9900k is up to 20% faster than 3900x hahahaha more like 5-10%

kanenas:

more like 5-10%

I think AGESA 1.0.0.4 has something to say about that... And 4.7 Ghz boost Soon we will find out.

nizzen:

I you play Cinebench 24/7, 3900x/3950x is the better choice. Different products to different use 🙂

Cinebench 24/7? You know some strange people.

65w TDP for a 2c/2t CPU? wow...

nizzen:

But Intel will still be faster in 99% of the games who is cpubound. 9900k is up to 20% faster than 3900x when both are maxed out on memoryspeed and core. So I guess 10 series is a good upgrade for GAMERS, who has an old platform. I you play Cinebench 24/7, 3900x/3950x is the better choice. Different products to different use 🙂

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you stream and play the 3950x would be a lot faster then the 9900k, different products for different uses

my post was mostly because not everyone realizes that low pcie lanes means most of your motherboard is for show, you can't use all those slots unless you have what was called a HEDT plateforms...I said "was" because Ryzen made it the normal plateform now and I wanted to highlight that "era change" just saying that a low lanes "consumer" processor doesn't cut it anymore end 2019 not with what AMD brought to the table, so announcing new ones WITH a mandatory motherboard change seems crazy for me edit : and yep I'm waiting for the 3950x or the new x99 Intel

nizzen:

But Intel will still be faster in 99% of the games who is cpubound. 9900k is up to 20% faster than 3900x when both are maxed out on memoryspeed and core. So I guess 10 series is a good upgrade for GAMERS, who has an old platform. I you play Cinebench 24/7, 3900x/3950x is the better choice. Different products to different use 🙂

Depends on the games, but games prefer low latency access to memory to pull assets, as a work around AMD doubled the cache but their access to memory is around 75-80ns wheres Intels is around 55ns. In applications that don't require such low access to the memory subsystem Ryzen 3rd Gen comes out on top, where low latency access to memory comes into play. Games developers have also had a decade to optimise for Intel architecture because thats how old it is 10 years old. Sure every generation has a slight tweak here and there but there has been no major changes to it besides the change from DDR3 to DDR4 memory controller. It's no wonder Intel make so much money where other hardware makers do not, because all they are doing is refining the same thing over, and over and over again. I think the 9900K will overclock better than the 10700K because as is typical when Intel moves to a new Process node. My old 4790K (22nm) did 5GHz on all cores and when they had a die shrink they couldn't get to 5GHz intill 2 generations after with the 7700K.

kakiharaFRS:

my post was mostly because not everyone realizes that low pcie lanes means most of your motherboard is for show, you can't use all those slots unless you have what was called a HEDT plateforms...I said "was" because Ryzen made it the normal plateform now and I wanted to highlight that "era change" just saying that a low lanes "consumer" processor doesn't cut it anymore end 2019 not with what AMD brought to the table, so announcing new ones WITH a mandatory motherboard change seems crazy for me edit : and yep I'm waiting for the 3950x or the new x99 Intel

True although with PCIe 4.0 you can use lower lane count and get the same performance, PCI lanes are expensive to add is the main problem since it all comes from the same source doesn't really help either since they can charge whatever they want and we don't have a choice but to pay it.... Much like when Intel had 90% of the market. At least AMD chips have 24 PCIe Lines, although 4 are reserved for the chipset and another 4 are reserved for NVMe leaving 16x for Graphics and the other lanes comes from the chipset.

kanenas:

9900k is up to 20% faster than 3900x hahahaha more like 5-10%

I have 9900k and 3900x, and for me the difference is like that in BF V using 240hz monitor 🙂 Latency is 39ns VS 64ns. Can't fix that.... Can't wait for 1usmus fix for 3900x and the coming 3950x 🙂 Finally 4600mhz on 3900x 😀 https://twitter.com/1usmus/status/1190701909474258944

well is it 10nm or what? if not i dont see whats the point with all this, so much compromise relative to ryzen, just to get a modest boost in old games, or maybe they plan on undercutting amd prices? hah, not a chance in hell

O O F. The low base clocks will *not* favor them. And 5.1GHz for *1 core boost*? Come on... They do not look good at all. Sticking to a Ryzen 3800X for my next build.

EspHack:

well is it 10nm or what?

It is not

EspHack:

well is it 10nm or what?

It's 14nm+++++++ 14nm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadwell_(microarchitecture) 14nm + https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylake_(microarchitecture) 14nm +++ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaby_Lake 14nm ++++ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_Lake#List_of_8th_generation_Coffee_Lake_processors 14nm +++++ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_Lake#List_of_9th_generation_Coffee_Lake_processors 14nm ++++++ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Lake_(microarchitecture) 14nm +++++++ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_Lake I keep losing count... p.s. "leak" aka: Please don't buy ryzen, here what he got coming soon!

Why dont they just go full in and make those base clocks even lower... Say 100mhz. That way they can advertise 1 watt TDP. These fictional numbers.

If these leaks are accurate at least Intel is no longer withholding HT to just premium products. Wonder what the prices will be?

This shows Intel management is still in the days of "Mad Men". With AMD coming to the forefront as a serious competitor to Intel, Intel just keeps doing business as usual. Releasing cpu's that offer no advancement in technology, at the same silly premium prices, for the same applications that AMD has already advanced their technology for. Consumer confidence used to belong to Intel as a monopoly. This release will do nothing but yet again notch up AMD consumer confidence for them. And when the Intel fan boys get threatened all they ever offer for explanation is, Intel cpu's are better for gaming, lol. In this day and age where AMD and Intel cpu's both easily push fps past usable numbers, and are limited by refresh rate of the monitor anyway, that is no longer a valid argument for Intel's insult to consumers intelligence. Intel needs to step up, release something innovative that the consumer needs and wants. Putting new clothing on an old whore doesn't make her young and beautiful.

Unless you want 10 cores 20 treads i do not see why pc upgraders would be interested in this just the same old high priced stuff and having to buy a new motherboard on top, just a ripoff

nizzen:

But Intel will still be faster in 99% of the games who is cpubound. 9900k is up to 20% faster than 3900x when both are maxed out on memoryspeed and core. So I guess 10 series is a good upgrade for GAMERS, who has an old platform. I you play Cinebench 24/7, 3900x/3950x is the better choice. Different products to different use 🙂

What games are still CPU bound at 2560 x 1440 or higher resolution though? All the benchmarks just artificially induce CPU boundness by running something stupid like 2080Ti and 1920x1080 just to test it out (and make Intel pay-master happy?) - it is not a real world normal thing. At 2560 x 1440 or 4K resolution with a high end GPU there is no or negligible difference between a 9900k and 3900x in games. And then the 3900X beats the crap out of it for everything else productive.

geogan:

What games are still CPU bound at 2560 x 1440 or higher resolution though? All the benchmarks just artificially induce CPU boundness by running something stupid like 2080Ti and 1920x1080 just to test it out (and make Intel pay-master happy?) - it is not a real world normal thing. At 2560 x 1440 or 4K resolution with a high end GPU there is no or negligible difference between a 9900k and 3900x in games. And then the 3900X beats the crap out of it for everything else productive.

Battlefield V 🙂 Even a bit (min fps) in 3440x1440. Using 2080ti. I have both 3900x and 9900k, så I have tested it many times. I'm a performance fanboy, and overclocking cpu, memory and gpu. I don't do stock 🙂 For rendering, I use threadripper 😛 3900x is pretty good for gaming, but 9900k IS better. I don't care about name or color. I like the best possible performance. Prize comes last 😀

TLD LARS:

Ryzen 3950 should work on 350 and 370 boards.

Right. So I was confused because there are also reports of a new socket for AMD on their upcoming HEDT, which is interesting considering it looks like Intels new HEDT is staying the same. Honestly now that both the mainstream and extreme platforms are reaching such high core counts is really mudding the waters.

Intel has got to offer a board with PCIe 4.0 for me to upgrade. My i7-4770k and GTX 1080 play everything I throw at them at 1440p (even with 8GB of RAM). The only thing I don't have are the native slots and PCIe bus speed necessary to support the newest SSDs. Going AMD next time around is looking better and better everyday.