https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevang ... worse-now/Following outstanding investigative journalism by the likes of Gamers Nexus and Hardware Unboxed, the saga of Principled Technologies' flawed -- and now mostly corrected -- competitive testing of the Intel Core i9-9900K CPU has ended with a whimper. Why? I'll cut right to the chase. When the benchmarking house agreed to test the AMD Ryzen 2700X with all of its 8 cores and 16 threads actually enabled, Intel no longer holds a claim of being "up to 50% faster" than AMD's gaming flagship. That lead has been slashed to about 15% when averaged out across all games tested.
And the 9900K will still cost consumers 66% more than its Ryzen competitor. That's before you buy an adequate cooler for the processor, as the 9900K ships without one in the box.
Those Intel i9-9900K vs Ryzen 2700X Benchmarks Look Much Worse Now
- FlyingPenguin
- Flightless Bird
- Posts: 32784
- Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 11:13 am
- Location: Central Florida
- Contact:
Those Intel i9-9900K vs Ryzen 2700X Benchmarks Look Much Worse Now
Nice try Intel... you have to wonder, though, how they thought no one would notice.
Christians warn us about the anti-christ for 2,000 years, and when he shows up, they buy a bible from him.
Re: Those Intel i9-9900K vs Ryzen 2700X Benchmarks Look Much Worse Now
I don't understand why Intel thought this was okay or that nobody would check. 15% is still good. Having soldered heat-spreaders is also good. Is it worth a 66% premium? Not really. I still like the prospect of the new I5 6 core but the 2700K is also tempting.
I don't know if you can pre-order these processors or not but I'd expect a lot of cancellations.
I don't know if you can pre-order these processors or not but I'd expect a lot of cancellations.