-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***
- Thread starter Jamin280672
- Start date
I did call it a guess.
- Leaked Userbench and Geekbench scores have Zen 2 level with Coffee Lake in single core. A lot of unknowns and a small sample size but that's what's actually been shown so far.
- I'm going to assume in reality Zen 2 is ahead but not by a great amount.
- The 9900K does 5GHz out of the box.
Clock for clock it would win, it's a question of if it can get there. We know nothing of headroom and binning yet. Zen 2 will also benefit in SMT friendly games such as Battlefield.
7-5% under on average feels about right, not like it's an amount that anyone should care about - but they will.
Assumptions are fine when part of rational discussion and logic is applied, it's just the baseless (almost blinkered fanboi) assumptions is when things go awry.
"The 9900K isn't going to be toppled so what's the point".
Utterly baseless and even small-minded. And that's when the arguments start.
Zen 2 needs to gain around 15% overall vs Zen + to match the 9900K, bar a few outlairs at 720P lowest settings that Intel will want the press to focus on.
"For real gaming" IE modern titles at 1080P or above with an RTX 2080TI its not a lot for AMD to achieve.
"For real gaming" IE modern titles at 1080P or above with an RTX 2080TI its not a lot for AMD to achieve.
To be fair things go awry when people are called blinkered fanbois and small minded.
I've posted the logic behind my assumption on the post above. I'm really not arsed who wins, I'm buying AMD regardless unless it's somehow a complete mess - which it won't be.
wtf is Real gaming ?? Guess excludes UNreal engine ??
You posted the logic at the same time I posted on an empty page. Your logic appears logical. Live long and prosper.To be fair things go awry when people are called blinkered fanbois and small minded.
I've posted the logic behind my assumption on the post above. I'm really not arsed who wins, I'm buying AMD regardless unless it's somehow a complete mess - which it won't be.
wtf is Real gaming ?? Guess excludes UNreal engine ??
Even Unreal Engine is being tweaked for Ryzen, Boarderlands 3 is an AMD title.
Its inevitable, all the game streaming services, Microsoft xCloud, Sony, Google Stadia are going AMD, all the next gen consoles are going to be using Ryzen + Navi, game developers need to and are getting on board.
AMD are everywhere.
No, "real gaming" is not wanting 20000fps at potato resolutions. e-sports and competitive play is not representative of the real world, and it's really only in these fringes do Intel still dominate.wtf is Real gaming ?? Guess excludes UNreal engine ??
So which is a better performance metric for you? 240fps at 720p medium settings or 90fps (ish) at 1440p maximum settings?
If the 9900KS does still outperform the AMD counterparts in gaming then you will start to see AMD price drops sooner rather than later if sales are slow on the uptake. But I highly doubt it will impact AMD sales at all.
8c16t 9900KS for £500+ or a 8c16t 3800X for sub £400 with a few FPS performance hit.
8c16t 9900KS for £500+ or a 8c16t 3800X for sub £400 with a few FPS performance hit.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2019
- Posts
- 617
In the real world gamers don't own 2080Ti in as large numbers as would be needed to justify it being referred to as being in the real world.
One size fits all. I bought a T-Shirt that said that once, I suppose it was kind of true since it was so massive it should fit anyone, but needless to say it wasn't what I really required or wanted to be living with as it was ill-fitting and frustrating to wear.
There are lots of visitors to these forums and threads, that only have a one track mind and assume people obviously must be like them, or think like them, but it is much like that one-size fits-all T-shirt I just mentioned - "I have this task, and this budget so the only option is this part" it's not right for most people but yes it will do the job if you can put up with it. A great deal of these comments come from people who may have had one system for over half a decade, or don't have any other interest, other that what suits them must be right, very few seem to have real world knowledge of the hardware they wax lyrical about or ever will, some may call a few of them evangelists of one brand or another.
It is irksome and a somewhat merry chase trying to follow the thread and the comments in it, when so many of them are postulation and with little excuse for existence of than to raise the post-count, or maybe even deliberately trying to antagonise others that may respond. Don't get me wrong, I love speculation and a little hype from time to time but the repetition and baseless assumptions using fake data, or single data points to prove facts is just a waste of bits and bytes being sent to my computer, slowly degrading my SSD just that tiny bit faster.
There are lots of visitors to these forums and threads, that only have a one track mind and assume people obviously must be like them, or think like them, but it is much like that one-size fits-all T-shirt I just mentioned - "I have this task, and this budget so the only option is this part" it's not right for most people but yes it will do the job if you can put up with it. A great deal of these comments come from people who may have had one system for over half a decade, or don't have any other interest, other that what suits them must be right, very few seem to have real world knowledge of the hardware they wax lyrical about or ever will, some may call a few of them evangelists of one brand or another.
It is irksome and a somewhat merry chase trying to follow the thread and the comments in it, when so many of them are postulation and with little excuse for existence of than to raise the post-count, or maybe even deliberately trying to antagonise others that may respond. Don't get me wrong, I love speculation and a little hype from time to time but the repetition and baseless assumptions using fake data, or single data points to prove facts is just a waste of bits and bytes being sent to my computer, slowly degrading my SSD just that tiny bit faster.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,172
- Location
- Scotland
For a "real" gaming scenario for anyone buying a 9900K I would honestly assume 1440p would be their normal resolution now. Unless they are a professional gamer who needs 240Hz for CS GO of course but even then a Ryzen system would max it out most likely.
At 1440p/Super widescreen/4k I really don't think there will be much difference at all.
Like people have said because of intels dominance of the past 10 years games have been optimiuzed for intel mainly the quad core's we had for so long,But now zen2 is going in nearly everything ps5/xbox that advantage is going to go AMD's way
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,172
- Location
- Scotland
You say that but AMD had the last generation of consoles too, with a Jaguar part as each cpu and a custom graphics card for both.
Jaguar (Bulldozer) was crap tho.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,028
- Location
- Billericay, UK
Correct but were consoles and PC's differ if software, the PC has been bogged down with bloated API's like DX 10 and 11 and revisions there off for years were as developers can code using API's for consoles that are much closer to the metal.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 5,223
- Location
- North East England
Wasn't the 'real world gaming' a dig at AMD only offering a selected few synthetic benchmarks?
All the talk of 2000fps at 720 has been made up on these forums (again)
I would agree with others it appears that AMD should be up there with the lack of ghz been offset by their IPC gains.
Not long to wait now.
All the talk of 2000fps at 720 has been made up on these forums (again)
I would agree with others it appears that AMD should be up there with the lack of ghz been offset by their IPC gains.
Not long to wait now.
There was a large thread on r/AMD saying AMD must be better in gaming because of this very scenario. Something along the lines of all the Twitch bois playing competitive shooters on 240Hz are a massive influence to the market.
For me once you go above 100Hz the gains are much harder to notice anyway so it really is a niche of a niche.
I'd like to know how many people on high end CPUs like the 9900K are still on a 1080p screen, it's probably higher than I think but honestly if you're not on a 1440p 144hz screen or higher you're doing it wrong.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 4,172
- Location
- Scotland
I know it wasn't great but going by the logic that the next gen will be Zen2 powered so therefore games will be optimised for it, so should this generation have been optimised for AMD products.