Intel actually more efficient for gaming?

[Poneros]

Some great work done here & interesting findings by capframex:

https://www.capframex.com/blog/post/Efficiency comparison between Intel and AMD

https://cms.capframex.com/api/assets/capframex-com/82084ed6-c893-425b-863f-fc62da240266/grafik.png

**Do Not Hotlink Images **

Maybe people have started underrating Intel too much since Zen 2.

 

[Poneros]

I don't know why some people have such a hard time understanding very simple things. This is a test about efficiency while gaming, not let's max out the OC and see what happens. RTFA

Since AMD has the advantage of a better process node on its side, there is sometimes the thought that Intel CPUs might consume an excessive amount of energy and get hot. Among other things, this is reinforced by the fact that Intel has pushed the clock limits further and further and also raised the TDP. The current mainstream top model, the i9-10900K, boosts up to 5.3GHz with TVB and is allowed to consume 250 watts within the PL2 (maximum allowed power consumption), although this is short-term at 56 seconds (Tau) and depends on other factors like cooling or the specific implementation of the motherboard manufacturer.

How efficient are the current top models from AMD and Intel in reality? We looked into this question and restricted ourselves to gaming workloads. The results were quite surprising and are far beyond the expectations we had at the beginning of this article.

A note on text comprehension in advance. It is important that the reader not only studies the graphs, but also reads the accompanying text. This is always important, of course, but this time we explicitly point it out because the texts in this article are essential in order to be able to interpret the data correctly.

 

[Poneros]

Jesus, some people are straight up pathologically paranoid. Intel is paying people on blogs with 20 views to spread propaganda? Ooof! At least do basic research about who capframex is first.