In an Intel partner connect presentation, some baffling slides have been shared. These detail how Intel communicates its business with its partners. In the slides, Intel tries to explain that whatever AMD releases, just does not matter.
These presentation slides are the real thing but might be a bit dated as we have no idea why otherwise intel talks Gen 9 and not Gen10 CPUs. But you can see how Intel markets its products. In the first slide you can see that Intel talks about the market landscape, immediately highlighting AMD Zen2 7nm products where they admit that 'the competition is intense', which is pretty much the only fair assessment in any of the slides you're about to see:
Right after that Zen2 snippet , they add 'with performance claims highlighting core/thread count and Cinebench performance'. This is weird as pretty much any benchmark that is not Cinebench also has shown that AMD has the upper hand.
According to Intel, having more cores and threads and performing more in Cinebench does not make AMD processors better, but what matters most are daily tasks like Powerpoint, Chrome, Word, WinRAR, outlook, Skype, and so on:
Intel here is saying that looking at performance in applications like Illustrator, Premiere, After Effects, and Cinema4D is not important because they are not used frequently. Next slide:
Based on that logic, Intel then mentions that it is will not be worth it buying a Ryzen 9 3950X for $750 because its performance in applications such as browsing the web or the Microsoft Office suite is less than that of an i7-9700K. Question, would you spend $750 on a 16-core, 32-thread to use it for Office, Word, and check Twitter?
And then a comparison of the 9th Intel Core Generation vs. 3rd. Generation of AMD Ryzen. According to this slide, there's no AMD processor out there that competes against a Core i9, as Intel positions Ryzen 9 processors at Core i7 level.