Which feels incredibly weird, but whatever. Instead, rumors are that future 10th Gen 14nm Comet Lake Intel processors will keep Intel's desktop playoff hopes alive. Intel's 10nm node is now shipping, and may ultimately prove similar or perhaps even superior to TSMC's 7nm, but it's only in laptop parts and that doesn't look set to change any time soon. Look no further than power use, where the 3700X topped out at 179W for heavily multithreaded workloads compared to the 9900K's 242W, or the 9700K's 208W. The Zen 2 architectural updates are definitely a factor in CPU performance, and TSMC's 7nm process gives AMD a manufacturing lead over Intel for the first time in. Video encoding at least has some bearing on streaming performance, though I still think amateur streamers are better off using GPU encoding, and pro streamers should have a dedicated streaming PC. They're also tools that the vast majority of people will never use (3D rendering in particular). 3D rendering and y-cruncher are great tools for using all possible CPU resources. If gaming is your number one priority, you're still better off with an Intel CPU (never mind the various security exploits that have been patched over the past 18 months).Īs I discussed in the 3900X review, it's important to remember what these CPU benchmarks really mean. In other words, like the 3900X, AMD can't lay claim to the gaming performance crown and in fact comes in behind even the older i7-7700K, depending on the game. The gap would be substantially smaller at 1440p and basically non-existent at 4K. Of course, that's when running games at 1080p with the fastest current GPU available. That makes the 9700K 10 percent than the 3700X, while the 9900K is 9 percent faster. What about Intel and its Core i7-9700K and Core i9-9900K? The 9700K actually tops the overall gaming performance chart-yup, Hyper-Threading isn't always beneficial for games. That's well within margin of error, and that's with an RTX 2080 Ti at 1080p move up to 1440p or 4K, or downgrade to a slower GPU, and the gap would almost completely disappear. Out of ten games tested, the 3700X and 3900X are pretty much tied, with the 3900X hanging on to a scant 0.5 percent lead in framerates. Besides the memory, I used a Gigabyte Aorus NVMe Gen4 2TB SSD for the main drive (another part of the AMD review kit), with a GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Founders Edition graphics card. It's the blessing and curse of increased competition.Īll of AMD's third-gen parts were tested in the MSI MEG X570 Godlike board (with similar results from Asus and Gigabyte boards). stock, and AMD's CPUs might get an extra 200-300MHz, which just isn't that exciting. Intel's Core i9-9900K might get an extra 400MHz vs. The days of massive gains via overclocking your CPU are largely behind us now. It's still only 200MHz extra at best, which means less than a 5 percent improvement, and often in the 1-3 percent range. You sacrifice boost clocks for higher all-core clocks, though with the 3700X there's at least a bit more gain from enabling Precision Boost Overdrive. That's because it generally doesn't help much. Every PC is on equal footing as much as possible, in other words.Īs with other Ryzen CPUs, I didn't do extensive overclocking tests on the Ryzen 7 3700X. That's sort of overclocking, and potentially helps AMD CPUs more than Intel chips, but this is the lightest/easiest form of overclocking around and all modern CPUs have easily handled the higher memory speeds. It's just not how I do things), all CPUs are tested with high speed DDR4-3200 CL14 memory, with XMP memory profiles enabled. Unlike some other sites (and I'm not faulting their testing protocols. All of the benchmarks that follow were done running the latest Windows update, with updated drivers and BIOS firmware.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |