Ryzen 3600 200$ 65w CPU btfo intel 9600k 95w housefire

>coping tech illiterate pajeet

>only 70% of the MC performance
can't math huh?

Intel is barely better and no one wll profit from it with GPUs that bottleneck anyway you fucking intel retard

>AMD manages to make 7nm look worse than 14nm
yikes

>worse multicore performance
>more expensive
>clear winner
Also, if it's like 1/2nd gen Ryzen chucking $20 more into the RAM would bump that single threaded performance up >10% easily.

My takeaway from your image is that Intel is still better. Who cares about multicore performance for home use.

5220 / 5796 = 11.03%

5796 / 5220 = -9.9%

Calling it 10% better single core is accurate.

27276 / 22602 = -17.13%

22602 / 27276 = 20.67%

calling it ~20% less powerful single core is roughly accurate.

There isn't even a 3900x on geekbench yet

See the pic in OP. ayymd managed to btfo an i9 even with a rinky dink biostar mobo and shitty ram.

Oh noooo I guess the 9600KS is going to have hyperthreading and be $25 cheaper

That's not an i9, dumbass.

it is if he pretends hard enough.

Rest in pieces SHITEL

>paid $200 for my 2500k 8 years ago
>easily overclocks to 4.5ghz at 1.33v
>average the same fps as drones with their $300 2700x

lmao

Attached: 04577F8F-1523-4BEA-A7D2-D0ADF451D0A2.jpg (1280x720, 80K)

kek, if you think the math is wrong, do it yourself retard.

9600k [1mhz = 1.260 ]@ 95w
r3600 [1mhz =1.242 ]@ 65w

Attached: 0218571257.jpg (1920x1080, 296K)

>he thinks efficiency has any meaning to a desktop user

It could be using 300w to AMDs 65w, and i'd still pick whichever seemed best for my needs.

For me, gaming performance, especially older games which rely far more on single core performance, is important to me.

I give zero fucks about the efficiency, especially when we're comparing 7nm to 14nm.

pls go back
sample with 0 tweak worst processor of line equals 9600k average setup p clock
SEETHIE

This is with literal lowballing. The Ryzen still won with a bad setup.

You're becoming worse than flat-earthers, really.

I mean, the 9600k shown in the OP isn't exactly showing it's full potential, it can clock to 5ghz all core if you wanted.

And you can throw faster RAM into a 9600k and see some benefit too.

Attached: 2019-06-05 12_40_28.png (897x1020, 53K)

>unreleased product beats 1 year old product

Wow impressive

9900k @5ghz [1mhz =1.242] @95w

B BUT MY IPC

Attached: 00912587127.png (900x1132, 277K)

Yes, we get it, you're retarded.

No need to keep proving it.

>that single threaded score

i was hoping it would be higher desu..

see 9th gen intel single core is simply on another level, even compared to the new Ryzens.

Will need to wait for official release to see reliable OC figures, but i'm hopeful with a solid OC it'll pass intel, or at least get close.

Attached: file.png (847x465, 17K)

stop ruining my dreams user, i want to get rid of my 2600k but i refuse to buy shit thats not massively faster, or has security holes up the asshole

Attached: 1558378370213.gif (125x125, 18K)

you bumbling idiot. The 9600K is running DDR4-3000 while the 3600 is @ DDR4-2133. This is literally the lowest-end of the 3000 series and we're comparing it to a K-SKU that's usually @ $50.00 more

not really.It's the same intel trick of BRUTE FORCE when cornered. This is the same shit they did with the Pentium 4 when the Athlon 64 was punishing it.

Kek. The Inturds probably don't remember that AMD had to create the PR system because their 2.4 GHz chips were BTFO'ing 3.6 GHz parts.

r3 = i9gen IPC

INTEL IS FINISHED AND POZZED AND GARBAGED AND HOUSEFIRED AND 14nm++++++++++++++ED PER SECULUM SECULORUM

I know that, which is why i'm not saying it's a fair comparison, i'm just posting it to show that it's not like the 9600k in the OP is going all out, you can OC it and pair it with faster RAM too.

The person i replied to was saying the Ryzen won EVEN with a bad setup, well the 9600k had a bad setup too, and it CLEARLY won single core performance score, when OC'd it goes even further for single core performance, something 3600 simply wont be able to compete with.

Hell, the fact a 3600 with 12 threads only managed to beat a 6 threaded intel by 20% in multi threaded bench, is pretty fuckin sad.

>intel's better single core performance is just a brute force trick
>amd could do it too, they just don't because AMD literally can't do anything wrong

suuuuure

please read the last part

>The 9600K is running DDR4-3000 while the 3600 is @ DDR4-2133
NNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOGGHHHHH

Attached: 1542027477262.png (807x745, 205K)

who cares if it can't actually clock high enough to beat the i9?

This isn't a cell phone or laptop, we don't give a fuck about efficiency since we aren't constrained by a battery.

>Hell, the fact a 3600 with 12 threads only managed to beat a 6 threaded intel by 20% in multi threaded bench, is pretty fuckin sad.

Where do all these retards come from?
Do you even know what threading does?

Where do all you faggot retards come from?

You come in, toss shit about someone else being retarded without providing any evidence to the contrary, people are just supposed to trust that you're right and the other person is wrong, with again, ZERO evidence.

If you want to prove it's wrong, fucking prove it instead of crying like a shill baby
>waaaa DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT THRAEDING IS!?!!?

Grow the fuck up and explain yourself if you actually want to convince anyone of anything

r3 btfo i9gen in performance and price and wat and . . . everything
L O L

ahh yes, the clear explanation of your average AMD shill

lovely.

you can not be this dumb

for the thousandth time. Nigguhertz and OC do not matter anymore because PBO now exists and for non-monolithic architectures, it is a better technique overall.

The problem is that people like you favoring single-core is the exact reason why intel slept on its back. The real reason why Multi-core setups

>inturd falseflags like an idiot.

>i9gen
why are you calling all 9th gen CPUs

i9?

i9 is specifically the 9900k, not anything else.

u have literally all evidence he's talking about shown in thread
see

Attached: retard_72.png (300x200, 33K)

i stands f or intel . . .

>The problem is that people like you favoring single-core
Nigger, it ain't people like me, it's programmers fault if anything, not MY fault all the shit I actually fucking do with my computer is single core oriented.

I'm not encoding, i'm not rendering, i'm not pretending i need a 16 core 32 thread thread ripper like half the AMD shill retards on this board.

>IPC is everything
kill yourself, IPC doesn't mean dicks if it can't clock up to compete with intel.

Explain why i'm wrong with math if you honestly think you can.

So you're being fucking retarded on purpose? Sick.

if you say i9, EVERYONE is gonna assume you're talking about the i9 9900k.

no one is going to assume ahhhh i9, HE MUST MEAN intel 9th gen.

That's fucking stupid.

Def not a false flag, that dude is a legit moron.

Attached: 2019-06-05 13_03_48.png (245x60, 2K)

i shills 2018
r+ IPC SHIT LOL
i shills 2019
IPC DOES NOT MATTER

LOL

i dont give a shit if apes can understand me or not

The real reason why non-monolithic multi-core architectures like Zen are taken differently is because they scale differently from intel's monolithic architecture.

Sure older programs take more advantage of Intel's design because of its linear scaling, but in the future, where multicore setups are more widespread, and API's now have actual multi-core implementation, the advantage will be made clear.

>IPC doesn't mean dicks if can't clock up to compete
Then explain how a 2.4 GHz Intel Core Duo has better performance than a 3.6GHz Pentium D.

>Then explain how a 2.4 GHz Intel Core Duo has better performance than a 3.6GHz Pentium D.
You're misunderstanding, i'm not saying that current ryzens need to clock beyond intel, i'm saying they need to clock fast enough that WITH their IPC advantage, they beat intel in single core.

That currently doesn't happen.

Maybe with a nice OC and a 3800x we'll see it. But that'll have to wait for the launch on 7/7 before we get any reliable numbers.

Lmao, and that's with gimped ram.
Intel dead and buried.

Attached: 1552968379031.png (1920x1080, 1.77M)

It's because they're clocking the Ryzen at stock, dumbfuck. Both of them are running at stock.

The fucking clues are fucking there. Turbo boosts at 4.6 GHz are possible.

9600K has a 4.3Ghz all core boost you retard.

Nigger...you can't be serious.

The 3600 isn't an X CPU, so it wont have PBO, just XFR.

And further, AMD hasn't even said what their stance on PBO/XFR is for the new 3000 series Ryzen chips.

OFFICIALLY AMD doesn't even support PBO on The 2000x series chips, it's up to motherboard manufacturers to enable it.

ALSO, I still think you'll need an X series CPU (3600x/3700x/3800x, etc) just to have a chance to hit intel single core performance with an OC.

AMD states equal or better IPC at computex, benchmarks prove that, what's not clear

>he believes AMD slides after literally YEARS of history showing over-promise and under-deliver.

>a marketing presentation states
ooooook

literally backed up by random early benchmark in worst case scenario
not everyone runs their business like intel

>OFFICIALLY AMD doesn't even support PBO on The 2000x series chips, it's up to motherboard manufacturers to enable it.
>most of the X570 boards are literally reinforced as hell
you tell me, retard.

Again, we still don't know SHIT about it, how far will it allow them to clock, how badly does the voltage increase with clockspeed, etc, etc.

Pulling shit out of your ass claiming it's gonna wreck intel is just fucking fantasy land bullshit.

WAIT for it to fucking come out, THEN use real fucking evidence instead of guessing. Or, more likely, realize intel still has single core performance advantage, just not as much as with the 2000 series.

>runs their business like intel
>he doesn't remember bulldozer
>he doesn't remember Piledriver

Isn't that pretty bad, its only "beating" it by 200 points in multi core, despite having 6 more threads. Just check out the Single core score though, AMD is getting rekt by over 500 points.

>posts in Jow Forums
>only uses pc for web browsing
Jow Forumset out.

>Isn't that pretty bad, its only "beating" it by 200 points in multi core, despite having 6 more threads.
?????

Why's the fact that 12core24thread @
4.6GHz w CPU with same or better IPC for 499$ with included cooling [cheaper than 9900k 8core 16 thread + 50 vulnerabilities - cooling @100celsius] still not enough for itards ?
hmm

I mean, not sure what he's smoking, but it's only beating intel by 20% in multicore despite having twice as many threads, clearly that's not exactly ideal.

I'll wait for realworld benchmarks. These artificial ones don't mean anything to me. I don't even play outdated games like cs:go. So single core means nothing.

thread is literally worth 25% of the real core

Depends entirely on the workload.

AMD's SMT is usually ~40-50% of a real core, intel's HT is about ~20-30% of a real core.

because a 9900KS hits 5.0Ghz, and with a good sample you can even get 5.1 or 5.2Ghz on 1 or 2 cores.

Even if a 3000 series Ryzen can get to 4.6Ghz, it will struggle to go beyond that.

I'll be excited if they manage to hit 5Ghz, but from what we've seen so far, they're not there yet.

again with the Core Duo vs Pentium D, Pentium D wins logic.

>i can't handle that AMD still isn't as good at intel so i choose to believe otherwise.

okay then

>I'll be excited if they manage to hit 5Ghz, but from what we've seen so far, they're not there yet.
true. i do hope we'll see XFR/PBO working better on this new silicon, not expecting it to hit 5Ghz but i'm kinda optimistic that we get a nice boost on a single core or even 1 core per CCX/chiplet if thermals allow it. power isnt even a problem when you check the new x570, most of them look stellar.

You're literally going to be shilling the Ice Lake CPU's next year, kid. One of the points will be lower clocks , but higher performance. So better get ready to eat your words next year.

47 vulnerabilities is better
worse power efficiency is better
non included cooling solution is better
fuck those amd shills bro

I have nothing against AMD, what I do have an issue with is AMD shills on this board pretending AMD is better than they are.

I WANT AMD to do better, I WANT AMD to beat intel, competition is good.

HOWEVER, pretending AMD is beating intel at things they're not, is just fucking stupid.

look at a mirror, kid.

>B-BUY THE the i9 9900KYS Edition™ GOYS

Anyone bringing up the vulnerabilities like you are just showing themselves to be blatant AMD shills.

If you knew anything (and you do), you know most of the vulnerabilities aren't going to affect MOST peoples workloads. Especially the MDS vulnerability stuff where retards just like yourself keep trying to tell people you HAVE to disable hyperthreading to be secure, which is just blatant misinformation.

I'm not telling anyone to buy a 9900KS, i'm only using it as an example.

You can OC most 9th gen chips to similar levels, the 9900KS just ships with 5ghz all core at stock.

since you're new here: gookbench is hardly a valuable bench to begin with. i want (((techtuber))) reviews.

>gookbench is hardly a valuable bench
Yeah no shit, but i didn't make the thread.

The intel chip does win in IPC, but by a VERY slight margin.
The ryzen would give a 5717 score if running at the same 4.6Ghz as the intel part.

So you're saying vulnerabilities are irrelevant and should not be taken into consideration ?
absolute state

>I can believe that every K series 9th Gen can clock to 5.0 GHz, but have trouble believing all Zen2's can reach 4.6 GHz

Lmao, for the average home user on Jow Forums? Sure.

For an enterprise customer? Look at your workloads, figure out what vulnerabilities are actually a concern for your environment, then decide which (if any) vulnerabilities you need to be worried about.

The MDS stuff in particular regarding hyper threading is really only a concern for virtualized environments, not something your average home user needs to concern themselves with.

I said most not all, but hey, go head and invent an argument if you want.

So basically if I run system simulations with Hyper-V, I'm fucked?