Overclocked to 5.1Ghz the 9900K gets 2208 in CB. Stock all core boost runs around 4.7Ghz on the 9900K. Engineering samples usually clock a lot lower than final silicon.
The difference between 4.2Ghz and 5.1Ghz is 0.9% so add that to the 4.2 on the 2700X to bring it up a little bit to 1896. If we add in the expected 15% IPC gains on Zen 2 we are looking at a Cinebench score of 2180. So slightly under the overclocked 9900K. That's assuming Zen 2 can hit 5.1Ghz?
None of that matters. AMD still haven't found a way to interconnect their cores, so it will still run games and any other latency sensitive applications like shit, despite their 0.00001 nanometers and 10 gorillion cores.
Brayden Cook
/thread
Julian Morgan
at 447.38pts per ghz for the ryzen, it would have to be running at ~4.55ghz to score the same as the stock 9900k. It'll be interesting to see it run at 5ghz
Jaxson Anderson
>The difference between 4.2Ghz and 5.1Ghz is 0.9% what?
Landon Jenkins
fpbp
Angel Gray
t. intel shill
Anthony Campbell
i'm of the opinion that software have some catching up to do with bleeding edge hardware like ryzen's separate compute clusters
Noah Mitchell
>being this retarded It's 8 vs 8. They scored the same, therefore they have the same performance per core, regardless of memory speed or interconnect. Only difference is Ryzen 3 isn't gonna burn your house down.
Austin Ramirez
The more controversy a post creates, the more truth it holds.
