it is.its that simple.only real game which is modern isnt a amd benchmark tool and uses the cores to proper effect which masses play is bf1.i7 7700k will be better ingaming on avg than anything else. including ryzen.now the thing is multicore is more useful for some but many gamers just want the best performance across the board.intel 7700k has that.doesnt matter if its 3 fps or 5 if its quicker and priced similar they will buy it. amd chips will do well they marketed them very cleverly this time.often they not done this well. by limiting any kind of real benchmarks and cranking up the hype you can see people are buying blindly across the world.
so well played amd.very good sales plan.7700k will still be better for gaming though.
Again from the links in the previous post, pcgamer has the 7700k even overclocked showing a 5fps gain on a 3Ghz base clock, 3.5Ghz single core boost 6950k. So where do you think a 3.6Ghz base clock 1800x will end up?
In the other link, at lower resolution and settings, in DX11 the 7700k loses at both resolutions, in DX12 the 7700k wins in 720p but loses in 1080p.
But that is one of two wins(if you can call it a win) the 7700k shows. However across say 10 games, it loses the majority of games. It's that simple, most gamers don't in fact play a single game and winning in most games, and winning more of the most modern games is simply showing that more than 4 cores is not just a waste, but provides the best performance.
As for the ridiculous biased nature of what you're saying, the only one of all those games that isn't an AMD benchmark is BF1 lol... like Civilization, Fallout 4, Far Cry, The Witcher 3... sure, all AMD benchmarks.
haha