So Jow Forums is the 9900k worth the additional cost in terms of performance compared to the 2700x?

You already got called out in the other thread. Stop repeating your lie.

Attached: 23423424.png (1278x718, 64K)

What are you using it for? The 9900k really only starts to make sense if you're running a very high end gaming machine and just want the absolute fastest processor no matter what. But even then with the bad thermals it's hard to recommend, and when you remember that the 8700k nips at its heels for significant less cash it just isn't a reasonable chip all things considered.
If you're doing productivity then HELL NO. AMD is the way to go there.

Attached: 1472441833876.jpg (551x434, 206K)

get 2700x and switch to zen 2 in 2019. It's almost certain to be faster than 9900k

>Even with 13% IPC improvement, it will put it around Haswell, nowhere near enough to match Coffee Lake
lol

Attached: untitled-14.png (674x800, 53K)

But Intel runs at a much higher frequency than AyyMD, so what's the point of this chart?

that's only because intel has a better process node.
That's going to flip with zen 2.

too obvious

Because AMD are steadily closing the gap in clock speed as well. If AMD are ahead in IPC and the clockspeed difference closes to around 10% or so, all at a lower price for the AMD parts, then intel are in serious trouble.

Right now Intel is about 30% faster in single core speed. No matter how much AyyMD improves, they won't come anywhere near that.

that was meant for

Is this a genuine paid shill?

Attached: awesome.jpg (150x150, 6K)

No.

>if you slow down your Intel by 40%, an AMD is almost as fast

I bet if you crushed your intel with a hammer, an AMD would actually be faster.

That's some impressive delusion. Just matching Intel's clocks would put them ahead with the IPC boost, and there's little doubt that the new 7nm process will at least match 14nm+++++++ in that regard.

>brainlet from /v/ has no idea what IPC is

Lmfao what the fuck is that packaging

Nah mate, this isn't even including the cost of the refrigent water chiller to maintain 5GHz stable. Meanwhile you can at least do 4GHz stable on the 2700X with the free stock cooler.

>30%
no it's 23.5% in single core cinebench benchmark (much less in games).
ryzen 2700x has a 4.3Ghz boost, 9900k 5ghz
that's 16.2% just from clocks
a ~13% improvement in ipc means at 5Ghz boost zen 2 is going to be faster by ~7% from 9900k

>30% faster in single core speed
which can be attributed to memory issues and clock speed. both of which will be fixed with zen 2. intel literally cannot improve their performance without a die shrink which is nowhere on the horizon, ryzen's raw ipc disadvantage is less than 5%

Reducing CCX communication and memory latency to Intel ring-bus levels would already get parity. The difference is not anywhere close to 30% unless Ryzen is being severely bottlenecked with random memory accesses (e.g. object-oriented brainlet code with massive quantities of dynamic heap allocations.). When it's actually performing useful work, it's at more or less complete parity with Intel's latest, with an obvious exception being AVX2 and AVX512 instructions.

It's 30% bro. It's actually 32 but I rounded it down to 30 out of pity.

Attached: 1536933295046.png (1109x3646, 376K)

>buying AMD rubbish
>ever
If you want price/performance just get a 9700k, it shits all over anything AMD has to offer.

the variance in 8700k results should tell this comparison is worthless
I just checked out a new benchmark
youtu.be/C42GUH_8NKc?t=274
exactly 23.59%

This, it's a whopping 5% faster in most games.

Attached: Comb10102018092249.jpg (641x2895, 365K)

>base clock speed listed as the actual speed
nice benchmark you have there

this, but unironicly.

Utter bullshit results. My stock 2700X gets a higher single-threaded score than that, and I'm using an X370 board so don't even have access to PBO.

Attached: cinebench.png (2560x1440, 143K)

>AyyMDrone complaining about bullshit charts

Attached: 1511413424585.jpg (625x626, 36K)

>The intel shills are now playing good cop bad cop

Attached: 1466401946023.jpg (500x619, 69K)

You can be a shill all you want but be a fucking hypocrite somewhere else. Intel commissioned fake fucking benchmarks where they slashed 2700x's cores in half. There's no greater jewry than that

>oh fuck, he posted a chart showing that AMD is 30% slower in single core speed, better spam the thread with funny images I found on google

Attached: 1536756546155.jpg (400x400, 10K)

ok retard

Attached: chrome_20181009_102225.png (1366x768, 405K)

What about posting 4K ultra benchmarks to compare a CPU's performance in gaming?

Even in 1440p intel offers very little fps advantage.

>inb4 "1080p, what do you need 720p for?"

Attached: perfrel_2560_1440.png (500x970, 49K)

>AMD Unboxed

Not even going to waste time replying.

you could probably buy a 2700x now and a 4700x when it comes out with the same money that you would need to get a 9900k + cooler so not worth at all, that chip was made for CS:GO autism

/thread

1080p high refresh rate is absolutely a thing

No you won't, because you're dumb as shit.

boingboing.net/2018/10/10/intel-accused-of-commissioning.html

Attached: 1539298890020.png (713x2098, 275K)

The games where you actually benefit from 144+ framerates also have no difficulty pushing them out

>AMD has never fixed benchmarks
>AMD doesn't pay dozens of Youtube channels like AMD unboxed to spam GPU bottlenecked benchmarks

What a pathetic attempt at a response.

Well there's more than CS:GO and Forknife out there, but for the most popular handful that may be true.

>GPU bottlenecked benchmarks
aka real world performance

was this intel shill neglected or maybe even abused by his parents to make him sperg and lie out of frustration?

the "i have never built a pc" website

>AMD doesn't pay dozens of Youtube channels like AMD unboxed
Dare I say correct?

delete this: the post

It's funny how mad AyyMDrones get when you post actual CPU benchmarks and not cherrypicked GPU bottlenecked charts from AMD Unboxed.

>stop posting charts from CPU benchmarking sites, go look at the Hardware Unboxed Youtube channel for some real performance charts

Well now we ended up talking about games and not IPC
Don't play the Intel shills game people

Attached: 1284543221317.gif (584x488, 182K)

For braindead retards, maybe. You know 8K monitors are going to be the norm soon, right?

geeksultd.com/2018/10/8k-tv-market-in-2020/

tweaktown.com/articles/8749/geforce-rtx-2080-ti-nvlink-8k-60fps-gaming-now-reality/index.html

>pissmark
You might as well post specint 2006cpu benchmarks.

Attached: 6597_07_microquill_smartheap_overview_improve_your_spec_cpu2006_scores.png (589x952, 207K)

csgopedia.com/csgo-pro-setups/

Literally every single pro gamer plays at less than 1080p

Uh actually you're only supposed to post charts from Hardware Unboxed.

No way.

And why should 99% of people care? Also why do they use such a high resolution if fps is more important, wouldn't 480p be magnitudes better?

Attached: 1492016705583.png (622x336, 14K)

>Are you poor?
>'No, Just mindful of money matters'

>Are you rich?
>'PFFF! INTEL 'N' NVIDYA ARE DA BEST YO!'
>I did not ask for your opinion on the brands.
>'IT GOES TO 11'
>Wait. what?
>'QUIT KVETCHING!'

>For braindead retards, maybe
Well enjoy being miserable on your high horse that is your brain. In the mean time the retards are going to have amazing looking experiences.

>You know 8K monitors are going to be the norm soon, right?
No I do not. I don't even know that 4K monitors are now.

This was a good one I'll give you that. Made me chuckle quite the bit.

no it's not, it's because of length of the operations. AMD can do 6 full operations in a cycle while Intel can do 4full + 2 short..

Intel IPC advantage at the moment is like 3 to 5%.

Zen 2 will actually have higher IPC than Intel, plus it will get a clock speed boost.

Zen 2 is literally the end for Intel, all they had left was single threaded performance, but now they are going to lose that too.

>"I love eating shit from my own hands"
>"therefore everyone should"

statista.com/statistics/422314/4k-display-market-worldwide-revenue/

We'll see. As long as whatever work load you have uses less cores than however many maxes out the capabilites of the bingbus, Intel is going to trade blows I think

That is the point. Intel only has a frequency advantage for the moment. Zen 2 will bring clock speeds up and have enough IPC increase and other tweaks that it will make Intel's 9900K look very silly indeed. Not just in performance and price but in lower power usage and less heat.

For about 3 people.

Low resolution + high frequency monitor gaming is a tiny minority.

Most people have a 60Hz monitor.

>all this 4:3
what the shit
why do those people do this
I've been playing tf2 for a while and seen people do it too and claim it makes it easier to aim when it obviously doesn't

>why should people care

And this is how you know an AyyMDrone has been BTFO.

Who are you angry with? You're the one who seems to want everyone to go to 4K
I don't have a dog in this fight. I just know high refresh rate 1080p is a thing.

Go team intel!

Attached: 1539965136296.png (1000x746, 235K)

>Most people have a 60Hz monitor
Absolutely. My point was just that the 1080p benchmark is relevant to include.
A bunch of those 60Hz monitors are down in that res as well.

Pretty much this.

It's probably less than 1% of people who play games with a high frequency monitor at low resolutions.

Attached: 11544.jpg (642x858, 144K)

I love how AyyMD's entire narrative consists of being good "value for money", but as soon as they think that they can squeeze some shilling out of it, then all of a sudden EVERYONE SHOULD BUY AN 8K MONITOR

And this is AMD in a nutshell. No philosophy, no consistent vision, their entire model is based around shilling just about hard enough to meme one or two retards into getting an AMD instead of an Intel.

AMD
>'We offer the BEST value products in terms of price, features and price!'

Intel and Nvidia
>'Ours goes to 11'

youtu.be/uMSV4OteqBE?t=78

Attached: yNwZ4Bj.gif (431x125, 466K)

Then forget the high refresh rate monitors.
This tells me the point about wether to include or not include 1080p in gaming benchmarks when testing a CPU, is still good.

Attached: 1080p.png (1359x1044, 107K)

But it's not relevant to include, because any Ryzen processor can run modern games at 1080P at 60Hz with no issues.

You can't see the difference in a game running at 140fps if you only have a 60Hz monitor.

>Hardware Unboxed are the *NEW* AdoredTV paid AMD shills! I won't listen such anti-semitism!

Oy vey!'

You realise that if you have a 60Hz monitor at 1080P that you won't see any difference if the game is running over 60fps right?

Yes, us gamers listen only to the REAL benchmarkers like Linus Tech Tips. Now let's get some Mountain Dew and Doritos bro!

Isn't that then a question of what games to test with?
Certainly there are games out there where the lows dip below 60FPS even at 1080p if you crank up the settings.

NO YOU ABSOLUTE BRAINLET IT WILL HAVE 13% IPC IMPROVEMENT. IPC=INSTRUCTIONS PER CYCLE. NET IMPROVEMENT = IPC DELTA * CLOCK SPEED DELTA.

All those CS:GO 'professional' gamers out there eh? I mean. It's like EVERYONE will continue to play at 1080P for the forseeable future. It will REALLY make a difference to all of those people buying a 9900K + dual RTX 2080 Ti's to play at 1080P in CS:GO on their 500 FPS gayman monitors. All 50 of them.

kek

Linus Shill Tips also benchmarks at 4K ultra.

Intel doesn't need to shill because they have the best CPUs. You shill when your product is shit and are trying to meme retards into buying it.

>You shill when your product is shit and are trying to meme retards into buying it
The irony.