3900X 0.38% slower than 9900k in gaming

Based on the size differences in the graph.

Attached: difference.png (443x296, 9K)

Other urls found in this thread:

pcworld.com/article/3401086/amds-ryzen-9-3950x-is-a-16-core-cpu-aiming-to-topple-intels-gaming-dominance.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>running CSGO faster than a 9900K
big if true

and the 3950x is slightly higher clock?

100Mhz more.

That's 2%. Whoa...

at 4k lul? I gues at 1080p it is fucked

probably wont even match a $150 9400f lmao

This is 1080p.

Attached: 3900x vs 9900k.png (1850x978, 1013K)

were mitigations applied in intelaviv? didn't think so.

>$500 CPU to gay'm at 1080p.

Attached: 1534082206382.jpg (400x400, 19K)

wait then intel is fucked no? I remmeber ppl talking about csgo being optimizated for intel hardware

they cherry picked games that handle multi-threading well. I mean, seriously, Black Ops 3 lmao, that games is 3 years old.

Attached: wojinko smol braino.jpg (720x843, 73K)

Considering the hardware that the new consoles are going to be sporting, it's pretty safe to say that games in the future are going to very quickly be geared towards multi thread utilization.

They're fucked if they don't lower prices.

If single-core performance is the same, You'd have to be a special kind of retard to buy a 500$ 8-core over a 500$ 12-core.

this is what those who are currently shilling the 9400F don't understand.

Imagine how funny it would be to say PCMR when you have less cores and less performance on your PC.

such as CS:GO

Attached: 1int.png (303x311, 178K)

Exactly, game performance is going to be perfected on Zen 2 due to the architecture being the same on sony and MS's consoles. Not to mention the architecture being the same up and down their product stack, unlike intel.

Effectively AMD only has to do 1/10th the work to get the tuning intel has to work towards, at least until intels next arch comes out!

that frame rate implies 4k though, does it?

No 1080p. If AMD's claims about productivity performance holds up, there will be no reason to buy Intel.

Attached: COMPUTEX_KEYNOTE_DRAFT_FOR_PREBRIEF.26.05.19-page-035b.jpg (2053x1025, 220K)

what kind of shit gpu was used that 70 fps is the average in cs go? also your image dosen't even show fps. image in op must be 4K for sure

To clarity, the numbers you see are centimeters from measuring the graph. It was the only way to get the percentage difference since they didn't give the FPS for both in the presentation.

>To clarity, the numbers you see are centimeters
LMAO

>3800X 2.66% slower than 9700k.
>3600X 0.46% slower than 9600k.

Attached: difference2.png (543x558, 16K)

HAHAHHA HOLY SHIT THIS METHOD

AMD btfo even though it uses half the energy

>muh gaming

Grow up manchild.

Is this a joke?

lol this kid

if true, entire thread is garbage. test fundamentally flawed

csgo is into high clocks not into Intel CPUs.

I'd like to hear more about the 3700x. The 2700 only turboed to like 3.5 on all cores while the 2700x did 3.9 to 4Ghz. The 3700x seems to be much closer to the 3800x than the 2700 was to the 2700x despite having the tdp respective TDPs, 65 vs 105W. The 2700x was almost 20% faster at all core boost but this is 7%. Makes the 3800X not look like a good value whatsoever

ok someone measure the pixels i don't care enough to do that

based

that was just an excuse for amd's poor performance.

i game sometimes but who the fuck in the general public that games needs 200fps?

I mean as long as the graphs are scaled properly, it should be a decent indicator. Lisa wouldn't manipulate the graphs would she?

Attached: 1560182910506.jpg (1280x720, 92K)

Not clock for clock.
Amd has higher ipc.

Yeah but in the light of the actual performance numbers, that doesn't help much.

>cs:go
>multi threading
Did someone hit you on the head with a boulder?

It does when it comes to power consumption. Watch the enterprise market devour every EPYC chip they sell.

No. AMD stated in to the press that they did not apply Intel's mitigations, nor were they running the latest version of Windows 10 with improved scheduling for AMD Ryzen CPUs, so in reality AMD is way out in the lead. Problem is, Intel is threatening to stop sending free hardware to reviewers unless they sign contracts and promise to not benchmark with mitigations installed, and only using certain Intel approved versions of Windows 10.

Attached: 1538946055977.jpg (720x794, 117K)

It does so for many applications. Nevermind the endless intel security vulnerabilies, amd is speed binning those chiplets to such a fine degree. Intel will have to take massive losses on the 14nm node to get golden 5ghz yeilds. Details confirm they already are.

>AMD stated in to the press that they did not apply Intel's mitigations, nor were they running the latest version of Windows 10 with improved scheduling for AMD Ryzen CPUs, so in reality AMD is way out in the lead

Why would they do that?

Enterprise wont fall for that crap unless they have details ironed out in contract. AMD EPYC preorders are monstrous.

How do you achieve 429 fps in csgo? I thought the engine had it capped fps at 300.

forreal. this looks like a gpu bottleneck, but if it runs a high fps title better than intel, then some shit must be up

And it still gets BTFO by a $149 9400f

embarassing

Attached: 1552407706738.png (269x195, 68K)

1) purposely sandbagging so that when some honest reviews come out, it makes AMD look better to the educated buyer
2) so that retards don't think AMD lied when they visit Anandtech and see the Intelaviv approved benchmarks

Speaking of which, Anandtech used this image for their story on AMD's Ryzen APUs today, to make them look like garbage.

Attached: AMD Ryzen APUs.jpg (678x546, 77K)

And to add to that, Intel took the bait and is screaming out of their lungs that they still have the best gaming performance, which probably won't be true with the migrations.

Attached: 1440250578330.jpg (499x499, 54K)

200IQ move by AMD

>AMD winning in CSGO
NOOOOOOOO HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN

>Using a 9900K or 3900X for 1080p gaming
uhhhhhh no. 1440p minimum where GPU matters more

>Inntcelturds always moaning about "muh 720p benchmarks"
>suddenly they start talking about 1440p as if that would somehow save them from embarrasement
kek, just wait till third party benchmarks drop with mitigations applied

To show that they are ahead of kiketel even when the playing field isn't fair. And to secure a nice surprise for reviewers.
Remember how intel was sperging about "only my benchmarks matter!" ? This is a direct response to that pathetic attempt at damage control.

you can uncap it

It is to show the performance of the CPU, since higher resolutions are GPU limited

who the fuck cares? Did you know a light bulb flashes at 60 fps? Bet you can't see the flickering you dumb shits. Just game at 60 fps at you have to and quit pissing your lives away worrying about the minutae of some dumbass piece of tech that will be irrelevant in 10 years anyway.

>Source2
>not multithreaded

Why do you AMDjeets think that AsianMicroDicks didn’t apply mitigations?
They’ve embarrassed themselves.

>average 65 FPS
what is this? did they test it with a 1060 or what

fps_max 0 in console.
Retarded Rypoo

tell that to 1080p 240Hz autists

Prolly 4k retarded shitter

CS:GO is isn't source 2.

Jokes in you loser. I'm buying a 3800X. Oh, and I'm switching from an Intel CPU haha cope harder

>still coping this hard
see but keep trying to hit your sales quota before 7/7 anyways, shill

What’s the point of testing in 4K, where it will be GPU limited by for sure?

because AMD can't win in ST/IPC vs intel without cheating

>pcworld.com/article/3401086/amds-ryzen-9-3950x-is-a-16-core-cpu-aiming-to-topple-intels-gaming-dominance.html
>All of the performance testing you’re seeing today, AMD officials tell us, are done without the updated Windows scheduler in place. AMD also tells us it didn’t install the latest security mitigation for Intel’s chips either.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

come on sirs please let us win sometimes...

Attached: 1560090428223.jpg (679x758, 54K)

Average FPS doesn't necessarily indicate great gaming performance. 1% low very important.

I made a thing too. An overclocked 3950X beats the 32-core Threadripper at stock speeds.

Attached: 2019.06.11_11.28.52.jpg (521x358, 73K)

>CPU's don't matter!

AMD were running a non-patched Windows to give Intel the best possible chance.

Is this bait? 60FPS is "smooth" compared to 30, but it's noticeably bad verses 120-144. Anyway, even if you only have a 60Hz screen, rendering more frames (200+) helps ensure you get the latest data.

Who even plays games in current year? Its all liberal and globalist companies pushing sjw agendas in their games, if you play video games you are retard if you alsi spend ludicrous amounts of money on latest gear you are a good goy too

But in fairness, what you said is true for casual play. For those interested in having a competitive edge they'll have to dish out the money for the right equipment.

Without security mitigations applied for Intel*

>intel losing CSGO
CSGO will finally be dropped as a benchmark now.

hype reengaged but what memory was amd using for those results. i have 3200cl14 already, not buying faster memory for the 3900x.

>what memory was amd using for those results
5000mhz

oh.

I doubt it'll matter much. With first generation the faster the RAM was the less it was worth the money. Going for the cheapest was a mistake, sure, but going for the fastest was also a mistake.

>black ops 3
>multithreading