I’m tired of people thinking that gaming is all people care about. Some of us use handbrake and photoshop as well as editing software. Gaming AND streaming isn’t the same on an 8 core cpu….
@@STKReacts Most of the negative energy comes from competitive player incels, and are just noise. And games are great but hand me a Premiere project file and my Core Ultra and RTX card will eat it up like it's nothing.
Running Intel at 6000MT/s is basically criminal. Totally different product with different abilities. Turn up the RAM speed on Intel, the memory controller is better.
@@Felale I thought that too, and I still think that after doing the math but it's not as big as I thought. 6000 divided by 28CL = 214. 7600 divided by 36CL = 211. It is faster, and I don't regret my purchase, but there's a point of diminishing returns.
Got my Core Ultra 7 265K for $299 with Assassin's Creed game from Microcenter this 2024 Holiday. Insane how I've been eyeing for Core 9 Ultra 285K but it hasn't been available. But, with the sale, it's a no brainer for only 4 less cores.
@@007finness the 265K is not going to be noticeably slower in real life compared to the 285K. Because of the lower clock speeds, it would probably perform worse in real life with apps that don't use the full potential of the chip.
Thanks for the honest review, some of your larger competitors neglected to mention that performance at launch is rarely how new products end up performing. I really don't see how turning this into some kind of competition helps consumers and if Intel take their advice and drop out of the gaming/ home pc market completely that would be a bad outcome for everyone
@@robeytechzen 1 was more than just being a successful technology but was also cost effective. These new Intel CPUs are not cost effective and they are on a more cutting-edge node than AMD. This is not a "Zen 1 moment" for Intel.
@ actually Zen 1 wasn’t that exciting and it didn’t do particularly well. This is a pretty big architectural change, it’s not entirely apples to apples but it still is a fair comparison. However you are right, time will tell though.
@@robeytechthat is utterly untrue, see Meteor Lake was tile based but had poor performance outside of a narrow range failing to match 13th gen so desktop Core Ultra was cancelled it released late to laptop. Intel have released before other tile based CPUs like Sapphire Rapids and another line Emerald Rapids which reduced tile count, nevermind Ponte Vecchio. This idea that Arrow Lake is some totally new arch is nonsense, the P+E core are from ADL, the P core are a development of the Cove core line used in Granite Rapids & Lunar Lake, while the E-cores have been improved. But it is widely recognised now that developing 2 core arch was a mistake, Qualcomm and others are going with Big cores only on ARM and AMD cover the market better with Turin, TurinX and Turin dense with one ISA tuned to different customer needs. Intel's future chips are dropping P+E which was a hack to boost core counts on 10nm desktop using area efficient Atom cores.
@@nathanielchapman7675Zen1 was also actually a new architecture while Intel tiles have been in Meteor Lake and Sapphire Rapids so Arrow Lake is the follow up.
Finally, a review that talks to me and exactly with the 2 CPUs I had in mind to upgrade from a 8700K. Productivity numbers AND 1440p gaming numbers that tell me what to expect now that I'm gaming in 1440p for a few years. While I understand the 1080p numbers to avoid GPU bottleneck, it's still 1440p numbers that really counts to me because that's where I'm at. Now I see that I can either play Apex Legends at 300 fps or 250 fps depending of the CPU I will select. I'm glad to see that 250fps will be more than enough for me which also get me a huge boost in productivity which make more sense to me than adding an extra 50 fps I won't be able to notice neither enjoy the extra value at all and suffer from much lower productivity numbers. I get it the 265K is not top gaming but like you said so well @15:36 it really does not suck at gaming. You have the best review so far for me as I got the answers I was looking for. Kudos!
Reviewers found Core Ultra had stability problems and were expensive. A hard pass at this stage, because other chips are better value without needing expensive RAM and main boards. The 9950x is the productivity choice on a broad range of applications and games better. Of course you are free to pose an either/or question pitting 8c vs 20c on productibity tests that heavily favour more cores, but it's misleading.
@@RobBCactive The pcguide article? I usually don't buy a first year production but it's been almost two years I'm delaying. Also they will still sell hundreds of thousands and we all hope everything will smooth out in the coming weeks.
@@Rhialto 9950x 16c/32t was meant above. In general reviews say Core Ultra S is not good value, then retailers slashed prices on 12th-14th gen, with i9 12900k on offer @ $180 in one Best Buy promotion. Similarly AMD cut prices, the Ry9 9900 12c/24t is already below $400 & 9950x closing on $530 despite selling out immediately after Intel's launch event. The 9800x3D had very good SMT performance, if AMD launches a dual V-cache 9950x3D it'll be because it delivers for 32t mitigating bandwidth bottleneck the Ryzen 7 9700 likely had leading to lack lustre power efficiency with PBO.
Its good to see reviews such as this as you are giving context to the market and the benefits of what will work for you. I already ordered the 9800x3d and abit concerned because i had an AMD system in the early 2000s that constantly overheated. But i see that no one has that issue. All companies go through mess ups and intel will get through this but their shares are going to tank. That being said i feel that they are heading in the right direction. I dont know if i would go.back to them if AMD will be serving me well.. especially with using the same chipsets generation after generation
Thanks a lot for adding World of Warcraft to your comparison. I've played WoW passionately as my main game since early 2005, lately in WQHD. Looking at those charts, bying the 7800X3D for a reasonable price in summer was a great long-term investment. 👍
@@Satyrious i question those results, not clearing the wtf files, the game not recognising the cpu correctly, or being online at a busy time vs a quiet time, pointing the camera at a different thing. will know soon enough as i just purchased a 9800x3d. At 4k i get 80-100fps in dornogal between bank and flight area (busy area) will update when i upgrade
@@nathanmccormack6549 yeah, well WoW is notoriously hard to benchmark but this is just off. I ordered one as well. Right now I'm playing mostly ESO and coming from a 14600k. But I'm sure I will check out WoW again - I just hope the 9950x3d won't be that much better xD
yeah... for the ultra 7, the ultra series is good at ultra high speeds, which is why they are recommending the cudimm ram cards, but because they don't make 32 or even 64 gig kits for them yet, the cpu is bottle necked to oblivion in the slower speeds of current available ram speeds at decent gig ranges. That, and according to a few overclocking tests from a few reviewers, the cpu driver is confusing the efficiency cores for the performance cores, using them for performance instead, which is causing the severe bottle necking we are currently seeing. They are pushing updates to fix it, but I have yet to see anything about when that patch will come out, as of right now.
Also 265k has quicksync, for anyone who uses premiere day in and day out its a must to work with. You can spend 100 bucks and add an arc card if u need to on amd. I kind of feel for production workloads the 265k is the sweet spot for price. 3d smokes it in games we all know that.
I am jumping to AMD for the first time ever. I used to build my own Intel PC's back in the day, then bought a gaming laptop that has lasted me 6 years. Time to build my own again but in a SFF case since I have found I really don't travel with this beast. One concern is that Intel has not publicly committed to the new LGA-1851 socket (or any rumors to do so) going beyond just one generation and AM5 is going to be supported for awhile. Another concern is cooling in a tiny form factor. I want gaming but some support for productivity. I watched for the Intel Ultra release and reviews. Not compelling. I thought I was going to a Ryzen 9 chip (with compromises on gaming) until I saw the 9800X3D news. Waited for those reviews. Yep, sold! I will be buying that CPU when retailers start listing them. I am betting that future releases of higher end Ryzen 9 X3D will kick butt and I can still use my same motherboard/socket. This is fun stuff and I hope that Intel can improve on their current new architecture and give AMD a scare. Competition is a good thing to have for us consumers.
Some points: -I don't know of any microcode update for the Core Ultra series as of now. Not saying you're wrong just can't find it anywhere on the web. -There are more to production than just PS and PR and the 9800X3D is actually faster in PS. -FPS is just one factor. There are 1% lows and 0.1% lows where the X3D chips especially the 9800X3D is a lot superior. Same with frame time. -When benchmarking FPS games, the most CPU intensive points in the game matter the most. So, unless you chose those areas to benchmark, the true strength of the 9800X3D won't be seen. -At 4k, the GPU is taking the hit so it's the least indicative of true CPU performance. Once newer faster GPUs hit the market, then the differences would become more noticeable. -Currently, there's hardly any reason to purchase the Core Ultra series. In intel fan is better off with 1200, 1300 or 1400 series chips. They are better at gaming most of time and great for production workloads without having to fork over any money for a new motherboard and memory. -The 9950X3D will very likely wipe the floor with anything intel has in terms of productivity and gaming.
All valid points, we try very hard to make things simple and the data we show, shows your points. Simply put the x3D is an uplift in gaming across the board at all resolutions. Here are approximately what the uplift is like and it’s up to you to determine if that’s good. For the price point these are the chips that people consider the most (based on purchase data) and here are the pros and cons. Sure I can make this longer, but HUD and GN are already doing much deeper dives.
What if you are not planning to buy new gou anytime soon as you have 4090. Why people always look for the future that is like zero chsnce to predict accurately
if add actual benchmark for hard cpu places in game with lot of characters and objects and that's will perfect, just for avoid frame counting benchmark, that have no sense today at any resolutions. but add different resolution is good start:)
In France, the Core Ultra 265k price is 430€, while the 9800X3D price is 600€. Do you think it is still worth it to buy a 9800X3D (with a new motherboard and DDR5 RAM), or should I buy the Core Ultra?
I bought the Core Ultra 265k due to the current processor prices in Poland. The processor cost me $445.95, and the motherboard was $272.53. In the case of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, the cost is $581.97, while for the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, prices range from $619.38 to $792.80, plus a motherboard at $297.30. Therefore, Intel is significantly more cost-effective. In terms of performance, Intel comes close to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, with some deviations from this rule. However, you need to remember that you’ll never fully utilize this CPU at 100%. You’d need an RTX 4090 for the processor to bottleneck your GPU. In a typical scenario where you have an RTX 4080/4070 or future models like the 5080/5070, the GPU will still be the limiting factor for your performance. Because of this, there’s no point in overly focusing on benchmark data; its main purpose is just to show the processor’s potential. It’s also worth mentioning that Intel has already released two new microcode updates that improve processor stability. Reportedly (though this is still a rumor), another microcode update is coming, which may boost performance. This would explain why, in some cases, this processor performs 2X FPS lower than the Ryzens, even those without 3D cache (Far Cry 6). Many testers point to issues with Windows and drivers as contributing factors. It's important to recall that similar problems with Windows occurred during the launch of the Ryzen 9000x series, which were eventually resolved. For this reason, this processor still has the potential to match the performance of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. At current prices, Intel seems like a very good choice, as you won’t fully utilize the power of the Ryzen 7 9800X3D anyway, unless you have an RTX 4090/5090.
I'm getting a 9800x3d but I'm unsure whether or not to go wit a 4070 ti super or a 4080 super. I wanna make my system last as long as possible. I know they got the same vram so ion know mane lol
Zero regrets on my 265K. Running on air with no thermal throttling, 7600mhz XMP out the box, 4K gaming smooth as silk, and Intel QSV transcoding that AMD can't match. Premiere runs like I've never seen it before.
@@parm2-x7h I've got a 2145 Cinebench 2024 score which matches 14900K with 32 threads and I only have 20. All while cooling on air with less heat. Not a fanboy, just stating the facts. These are great chips that will only get better with software updates coming in December. Cry about it
@@s550bargenn3 probably because it is new, typically what we see after a launch is game designers mb manufacturers windows and the chip manufacturers themselves do firmware/ software optimisations that allow the new product reach it’s full potential, this usually takes a few weeks to a couple of months
@abaj006 Intel has a big advantage with quick sync in Adobe premiere decoding h264 footage. It's hard to compare to amd but from what I read it makes the difference.
If you're not going for a 4080/7900XTX or higher as far as gaming. The Intel Chip would be a good choice, but keep in mind 9900X3D and 9950X3D are still yet to be released and if the 9800X3D has shown, this should also beat its vanilla counterpart at productivity.
Would GPU Acceleration in Premier Pro and other adobe softwares flip these graphs? Since we can shift the workload from CPU to GPU for rendering and scraping timeline so i would like to know what sort of changes would be see in these results. 🤔🤔
i mean if you got a 7800, and game above 1080, theres no reason to go out and get 9800 honestly unless you care about the uplift in productivity is what im gathering.
And price in some countries in europe where 7800x3d is about a hundred euro more than 9800x3d or i General if you find a 9800x3d for cheaper or same price or like 10 dolars more
This is the complete edition review for me. But anyone can explain why there are so many dislikes? Is it just a fanboy haters or something? lol BTW 2K and 4K are shockingly good performances but I'm looking for 9950x3D for my big upgrade from 6700K But good to see X3D gen 2 performing like a monster even in high resolution // clap to AMD
Idk for $80 saved I don't feel bad at all about going Intel, I don't game a ton besides just a few tittles and I do some editing. And like you said its still improving! I also would love to see these test done with CUDIMM with Intel and AMD to make it fair since it seems the Core Ultra's love Fast Clocked Ram. I'm happy to see AMD and Intel offering good efficient CPU's. Btw where do you find the micro code update?
For Intel did you go with the 265k? If so how it been any crashes/errors or has it been smooth for the most part. I cant decide between 265k or 9800X3D? I watched so many videos about the two just to get an overall performance.
Personally, I think Intel and Nivida work better together, but I went with a X870P MB and 64GB 6400MT/s RAM and the 9800X3D for now as I mainly do flight simulators as I can't get a straight answer if I need more cores.
For casual windows, youtube and web browsing, 9800x3d is more than enough... also I don't have to worry it can't properly run future games smoothly... It can be cooled on air, cheap mobo cheap ram...
I just ordered a 9800x3d and ROG strix x870e-E motherboard today, looking for best ram and cooler to match, Is there anything I need to change in BIOS to get optimal performance apart from setting EXPO profile?
thx for the video. is it still so that with amd you use a 6000 MT/s EXPO profile or is it possible to run reliable more with the new asus nitro path feature?
Did you mentioned how often, if any, the Intel CPU crashes? or to say it another way, does it suffers from the same illness as the 13th and 14th gen CPU's? I commend you for your analysis, but all those numbers mean quack if Intel can't guarantee they are not selling subpar Silicon prone to failure.
My friend I have Ryzen 9 7950x3D pair it with RX 7900XTX 24GB which is much better than 9800x3d in multicore scenario's I do not have 1080P or either 1440P Monitor , I only Use QD-OLED 4K 240HZ Is it better to Upgrade to 9800x3d for 4k since it's better in Gaming? , or I will not gain any benefit's in Gaming? What about DLSS,FSR ,,,ETC is it will fix the GPU bottleneck or not ?
5:32 “AMD couldn’t quite close the gap” 😂 multi core cinebench 9800x3d = 23,020 vs Intel 265k @ 34,703 and you say “they couldn’t QUITE CLOSE THE GAP”??? The mile-wide “gap”? I get that Intel is burning, but the AMD glazing is crazy.
On top of that, there is definately some software issues affecting the performance of the intel ultra range. Give it time I reckon the ultra cpus will have some serious performance boosts. Its a brand new platform at the end of the day and Intel cpus are now on a more efficient node compared to AMD. The ultra 9 is the most powerful cpu so far according to cinebench so it has some serious potential.
After -5 percent Ultra series i see a lot of smaller channels trying to defend Intel especially after 9800x3d destroyed everything in gaming.And previous king of gaming was ironically Amd 7800x3d so Amd just beat itself and Intel is 2 generations behind.Damage control is real but major channels don't fall for that anymore.
So... no CUDIMM RAM? JaysTwoCents showcased the 285k with CUDIMM RAM, had a major uplift in both production and gaming. Yes, its hard to get, yes, its more expensive. But when you are doing a performance benchmark or comparison, the price should be a con, not discarding a significant portion of the performance because of the price. And that CUDIMM paired with E core overclock showed significantly better numbers to Jay. I wonder why no other reviewer tried it.
When you consider the price of these chips and what most people are buying right now at this price range this configuration makes sense. I am not working to make one or the other better. As prices change and compatibility we may do an updated video.
I bought the ultra 7 265k on its release, but i can return it and its motherboard and get the 9800x3d instead. Should i do that, or should i go with intel. I both game, edit videos, and stream on Twitch
Same, and I'm keeping it. My big thing is Intel QSV...this thing absolutely tears through video transcoding. I converted a 2hr 4K movie to 1080p in 9 minutes with Handbrake. I game in 4K so the difference is minimal, and as we see here, better temps.
@@NeBeg0gla , gaming results are very poor for 265k tho , well 14700k and 7900x are $350 and both have better gaming and multicore performance , i looked at gamernexus and hardware unboxed reviews . Am5 platform is better its supported untill 2027 , intel changes socket every gen , little worried here . even picking up old 12900k for cheap will be better than 265k , i just dont see why anyone buy 265k other than just being intel fanboy .
Help me out here please... 9900x or core ultra 7 265k. 40% usage is general work tasks.... outlook, word, excel, youtube, web browsing. 30% photoshop, 10% adobe premier pro, 10% Adobe audition, 10% other misc. Very rarely do I do any gaming. Building new rig from ground up. Will pair with 4070 super or 4070 ti super. Not being partial to AMD or Intel, this has been tough to decide.
Damn in the same situation and cant choose between those two, I do a good mix off AI with python, 3D with Blender and mixed gaming that im gonna pair with my 4070 ti super. After some research they look to perform very like but with mixed general task i think the 20 cores from the intel are beneficial.
@@loqal690 Yeah I was on the fence for 2+ weeks and pulled the trigger on the 9900x because it needed less power. I just finished the build yesterday and so far so good. Breezes through adobe photoshop and premier pro without blinking.
@@robeytech but the performance? In my country, they have similar prices and I am interested in which one gives me more performance after effects, fast previews in heavy projects
At least if you have a 7800X3D you might be able to claw some money back by selling the 7800X3D. And you will get a better all-round PC. But If you are all play and no work I do not think you will see much difference
The gaming is the reason wich move the hardware to the levels of protuctivity and power wich we have today. That's why it's good that Intel doesn't ignore the gaming industry. Intel can make 1-2 models CPU which to be specialy for gaming and make a LOT of money,but they are stupid... 😄 That why,after soo many years with intel I order no 9800X3D.
None of the above. Steal a AM4 and save a couple hundred. Put the extra money toward a killer monitor and video card. Once the AM5 fully developed and Intel stops eating themselves and the prices come down… You might consider AM5.
yeah, that score seams fishy ... I can see in other places that the 265k it´s getting around 2,250 points in this single core test, it´s weird because the multicore one it´s very similar (around 35,000), maybe some weird behaviour of this new platform ...
Neither. They're both too expensive for a 1-2k build I wouldn't even bother. You could grab a 5700x3d or a 12700k and expend the extra money on other things
Yeah and be happy with early end support of windows… i wasfine eith 6700k but big companies decided to make less relevant by dropping the support for w11
Pretty much yes, they are pretending that and a whole lot of other things. For some people it's extremely hard to admit defeat, and many Intel fanboys will never recognize themselves in the mirror. That's why absurdly convoluted and biased video like this one are made: to appease them.
Congrats bro, its not like x3d is good only for gaming, oh wait it's indeed only good for gaming. If you want productivity, why even talk about x3d? Just pick the non x3d
wonder what the point of this comment is, if you wanted productivity focus you're in the wrong place. Its like I look at a sports car review and get butt hurt when they don't include a ton of off road tests or focus more on it. The cope for intel from the few fanboys left is real these days (XD)
I’m tired of people thinking that gaming is all people care about. Some of us use handbrake and photoshop as well as editing software. Gaming AND streaming isn’t the same on an 8 core cpu….
@@STKReacts Most of the negative energy comes from competitive player incels, and are just noise. And games are great but hand me a Premiere project file and my Core Ultra and RTX card will eat it up like it's nothing.
@ exactly!!! These kids don’t understand anything other than “fR@m3s”
Running Intel at 6000MT/s is basically criminal. Totally different product with different abilities. Turn up the RAM speed on Intel, the memory controller is better.
@@Felale I thought that too, and I still think that after doing the math but it's not as big as I thought. 6000 divided by 28CL = 214. 7600 divided by 36CL = 211. It is faster, and I don't regret my purchase, but there's a point of diminishing returns.
I wish you would compare the Core Ultra 7 265K to the Ryzen 9 9900X as well, I think they are more similar than the R7 9800X3D
Got my Core Ultra 7 265K for $299 with Assassin's Creed game from Microcenter this 2024 Holiday.
Insane how I've been eyeing for Core 9 Ultra 285K but it hasn't been available. But, with the sale, it's a no brainer for only 4 less cores.
im also eyeing the 285k or the 265k to upgrade to! how's the 265k from your experience?
@ItsNifer i like it so far. Runs cool. Waiting for a 9000mhz ram kit to unleash is potential along with oc the chip once I get the ram kit.
@@007finness the 265K is not going to be noticeably slower in real life compared to the 285K. Because of the lower clock speeds, it would probably perform worse in real life with apps that don't use the full potential of the chip.
Thanks for the honest review, some of your larger competitors neglected to mention that performance at launch is rarely how new products end up performing. I really don't see how turning this into some kind of competition helps consumers and if Intel take their advice and drop out of the gaming/ home pc market completely that would be a bad outcome for everyone
Intel isn’t leaving gaming. Core Ultra was their Zen 1. It will just take time.
@@robeytechzen 1 was more than just being a successful technology but was also cost effective. These new Intel CPUs are not cost effective and they are on a more cutting-edge node than AMD. This is not a "Zen 1 moment" for Intel.
@ actually Zen 1 wasn’t that exciting and it didn’t do particularly well. This is a pretty big architectural change, it’s not entirely apples to apples but it still is a fair comparison. However you are right, time will tell though.
@@robeytechthat is utterly untrue, see Meteor Lake was tile based but had poor performance outside of a narrow range failing to match 13th gen so desktop Core Ultra was cancelled it released late to laptop.
Intel have released before other tile based CPUs like Sapphire Rapids and another line Emerald Rapids which reduced tile count, nevermind Ponte Vecchio.
This idea that Arrow Lake is some totally new arch is nonsense, the P+E core are from ADL, the P core are a development of the Cove core line used in Granite Rapids & Lunar Lake, while the E-cores have been improved.
But it is widely recognised now that developing 2 core arch was a mistake, Qualcomm and others are going with Big cores only on ARM and AMD cover the market better with Turin, TurinX and Turin dense with one ISA tuned to different customer needs. Intel's future chips are dropping P+E which was a hack to boost core counts on 10nm desktop using area efficient Atom cores.
@@nathanielchapman7675Zen1 was also actually a new architecture while Intel tiles have been in Meteor Lake and Sapphire Rapids so Arrow Lake is the follow up.
Never thought this day will come. The CPU market has flipped.
Robey, why does every other reviewer have the Core Ultra cpus dominating in Single core performance but you have it significantly behind?
My guess is 6000MT memory he used for both platforms.
@@ttcustompcs because it's cool to dog on Intel rn.
Finally, a review that talks to me and exactly with the 2 CPUs I had in mind to upgrade from a 8700K. Productivity numbers AND 1440p gaming numbers that tell me what to expect now that I'm gaming in 1440p for a few years. While I understand the 1080p numbers to avoid GPU bottleneck, it's still 1440p numbers that really counts to me because that's where I'm at. Now I see that I can either play Apex Legends at 300 fps or 250 fps depending of the CPU I will select. I'm glad to see that 250fps will be more than enough for me which also get me a huge boost in productivity which make more sense to me than adding an extra 50 fps I won't be able to notice neither enjoy the extra value at all and suffer from much lower productivity numbers. I get it the 265K is not top gaming but like you said so well @15:36 it really does not suck at gaming. You have the best review so far for me as I got the answers I was looking for. Kudos!
@@Rhialto super glad you enjoyed it and I appreciate the very kind words!
Reviewers found Core Ultra had stability problems and were expensive.
A hard pass at this stage, because other chips are better value without needing expensive RAM and main boards.
The 9950x is the productivity choice on a broad range of applications and games better.
Of course you are free to pose an either/or question pitting 8c vs 20c on productibity tests that heavily favour more cores, but it's misleading.
@@RobBCactive The pcguide article? I usually don't buy a first year production but it's been almost two years I'm delaying. Also they will still sell hundreds of thousands and we all hope everything will smooth out in the coming weeks.
@@Rhialto 9950x 16c/32t was meant above.
In general reviews say Core Ultra S is not good value, then retailers slashed prices on 12th-14th gen, with i9 12900k on offer @ $180 in one Best Buy promotion. Similarly AMD cut prices, the Ry9 9900 12c/24t is already below $400 & 9950x closing on $530 despite selling out immediately after Intel's launch event.
The 9800x3D had very good SMT performance, if AMD launches a dual V-cache 9950x3D it'll be because it delivers for 32t mitigating bandwidth bottleneck the Ryzen 7 9700 likely had leading to lack lustre power efficiency with PBO.
If it hasn't been said, turn off the internal iGPU and your temps and wattage will drop a bit.
Its good to see reviews such as this as you are giving context to the market and the benefits of what will work for you. I already ordered the 9800x3d and abit concerned because i had an AMD system in the early 2000s that constantly overheated. But i see that no one has that issue. All companies go through mess ups and intel will get through this but their shares are going to tank. That being said i feel that they are heading in the right direction. I dont know if i would go.back to them if AMD will be serving me well.. especially with using the same chipsets generation after generation
Thanks a lot for adding World of Warcraft to your comparison. I've played WoW passionately as my main game since early 2005, lately in WQHD. Looking at those charts, bying the 7800X3D for a reasonable price in summer was a great long-term investment. 👍
Glad it helped!
Any Idea what causes the big gap? The 9800X3D should at least be up there with the 7800X3D
@@Satyrious i question those results, not clearing the wtf files, the game not recognising the cpu correctly, or being online at a busy time vs a quiet time, pointing the camera at a different thing. will know soon enough as i just purchased a 9800x3d. At 4k i get 80-100fps in dornogal between bank and flight area (busy area) will update when i upgrade
@@nathanmccormack6549 yeah, well WoW is notoriously hard to benchmark but this is just off.
I ordered one as well. Right now I'm playing mostly ESO and coming from a 14600k. But I'm sure I will check out WoW again - I just hope the 9950x3d won't be that much better xD
@@nathanmccormack6549 I question them too. They looked crooked.
yeah... for the ultra 7, the ultra series is good at ultra high speeds, which is why they are recommending the cudimm ram cards, but because they don't make 32 or even 64 gig kits for them yet, the cpu is bottle necked to oblivion in the slower speeds of current available ram speeds at decent gig ranges. That, and according to a few overclocking tests from a few reviewers, the cpu driver is confusing the efficiency cores for the performance cores, using them for performance instead, which is causing the severe bottle necking we are currently seeing. They are pushing updates to fix it, but I have yet to see anything about when that patch will come out, as of right now.
For this being Zen 1 for Intel new architecture, I think it's in the right direction.
Also 265k has quicksync, for anyone who uses premiere day in and day out its a must to work with. You can spend 100 bucks and add an arc card if u need to on amd. I kind of feel for production workloads the 265k is the sweet spot for price. 3d smokes it in games we all know that.
I am jumping to AMD for the first time ever. I used to build my own Intel PC's back in the day, then bought a gaming laptop that has lasted me 6 years. Time to build my own again but in a SFF case since I have found I really don't travel with this beast. One concern is that Intel has not publicly committed to the new LGA-1851 socket (or any rumors to do so) going beyond just one generation and AM5 is going to be supported for awhile. Another concern is cooling in a tiny form factor. I want gaming but some support for productivity. I watched for the Intel Ultra release and reviews. Not compelling. I thought I was going to a Ryzen 9 chip (with compromises on gaming) until I saw the 9800X3D news. Waited for those reviews. Yep, sold! I will be buying that CPU when retailers start listing them. I am betting that future releases of higher end Ryzen 9 X3D will kick butt and I can still use my same motherboard/socket. This is fun stuff and I hope that Intel can improve on their current new architecture and give AMD a scare. Competition is a good thing to have for us consumers.
Yup, and later down the road if you need more power for productivity the 9950X3D should top the charts on everything.
AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Burns Out On MSI X870 Motherboard 🥵
Some points:
-I don't know of any microcode update for the Core Ultra series as of now. Not saying you're wrong just can't find it anywhere on the web.
-There are more to production than just PS and PR and the 9800X3D is actually faster in PS.
-FPS is just one factor. There are 1% lows and 0.1% lows where the X3D chips especially the 9800X3D is a lot superior. Same with frame time.
-When benchmarking FPS games, the most CPU intensive points in the game matter the most. So, unless you chose those areas to benchmark, the true strength of the 9800X3D won't be seen.
-At 4k, the GPU is taking the hit so it's the least indicative of true CPU performance. Once newer faster GPUs hit the market, then the differences would become more noticeable.
-Currently, there's hardly any reason to purchase the Core Ultra series. In intel fan is better off with 1200, 1300 or 1400 series chips. They are better at gaming most of time and great for production workloads without having to fork over any money for a new motherboard and memory.
-The 9950X3D will very likely wipe the floor with anything intel has in terms of productivity and gaming.
All valid points, we try very hard to make things simple and the data we show, shows your points. Simply put the x3D is an uplift in gaming across the board at all resolutions. Here are approximately what the uplift is like and it’s up to you to determine if that’s good. For the price point these are the chips that people consider the most (based on purchase data) and here are the pros and cons. Sure I can make this longer, but HUD and GN are already doing much deeper dives.
What if you are not planning to buy new gou anytime soon as you have 4090. Why people always look for the future that is like zero chsnce to predict accurately
@@robeytech , where is micro code update you mentioned that uplifted 265k performance , i cant find it , are you missleading ?
great review as always. looking forward to your 9800X3D build.
@@macc_azarraga_ama soon (TM)
Great review Robey!
Thank you!
Idle wattage was one of the major factors for me. I went intel. I highly doubt I will be disappointed after assembly.
if add actual benchmark for hard cpu places in game with lot of characters and objects and that's will perfect, just for avoid frame counting benchmark, that have no sense today at any resolutions. but add different resolution is good start:)
So build an Intel PC for the recording and editing and build a AMD PC for the actual game.
I like your channel very much very high tech
Thank you!
In France, the Core Ultra 265k price is 430€, while the 9800X3D price is 600€. Do you think it is still worth it to buy a 9800X3D (with a new motherboard and DDR5 RAM), or should I buy the Core Ultra?
vous avez trouvez une réponse ? je me pose exactement la même question ...
@ Pour l’instant je me dis qu’il vaut mieux attendre un mois pour voir si le prix change, sinon le choix va être compliqué.
Ich gehe mit Intel
Werde ich auch so machen
I bought the Core Ultra 265k due to the current processor prices in Poland. The processor cost me $445.95, and the motherboard was $272.53. In the case of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, the cost is $581.97, while for the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, prices range from $619.38 to $792.80, plus a motherboard at $297.30. Therefore, Intel is significantly more cost-effective.
In terms of performance, Intel comes close to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, with some deviations from this rule. However, you need to remember that you’ll never fully utilize this CPU at 100%. You’d need an RTX 4090 for the processor to bottleneck your GPU. In a typical scenario where you have an RTX 4080/4070 or future models like the 5080/5070, the GPU will still be the limiting factor for your performance. Because of this, there’s no point in overly focusing on benchmark data; its main purpose is just to show the processor’s potential.
It’s also worth mentioning that Intel has already released two new microcode updates that improve processor stability. Reportedly (though this is still a rumor), another microcode update is coming, which may boost performance. This would explain why, in some cases, this processor performs 2X FPS lower than the Ryzens, even those without 3D cache (Far Cry 6). Many testers point to issues with Windows and drivers as contributing factors.
It's important to recall that similar problems with Windows occurred during the launch of the Ryzen 9000x series, which were eventually resolved. For this reason, this processor still has the potential to match the performance of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. At current prices, Intel seems like a very good choice, as you won’t fully utilize the power of the Ryzen 7 9800X3D anyway, unless you have an RTX 4090/5090.
Will be pairiNg 9800x3d with 4070ti super later.
I'm getting a 9800x3d but I'm unsure whether or not to go wit a 4070 ti super or a 4080 super. I wanna make my system last as long as possible. I know they got the same vram so ion know mane lol
@@JayDaDon_7 Wait for rdna 4 and rtx 5000 series
Zero regrets on my 265K. Running on air with no thermal throttling, 7600mhz XMP out the box, 4K gaming smooth as silk, and Intel QSV transcoding that AMD can't match. Premiere runs like I've never seen it before.
what air cooler are you using?
@go-togordoncomputerservice6529 Thermalright Phantom Spirit 120
Yeah i like my oremiere feels optimal and i game solely 4k
lol, fanboy much ? benchmarks says otherwise 265k is underwhelming , its ok tho you are intel hardcore fanboy ,
@@parm2-x7h I've got a 2145 Cinebench 2024 score which matches 14900K with 32 threads and I only have 20. All while cooling on air with less heat. Not a fanboy, just stating the facts. These are great chips that will only get better with software updates coming in December. Cry about it
Any idea why the 9800x3d is so far behind the 7800x3d in the WOW benchmark?
This has me bothered as well. It will get most WoW time vs other games I play.
@@s550bargenn3 probably because it is new, typically what we see after a launch is game designers mb manufacturers windows and the chip manufacturers themselves do firmware/ software optimisations that allow the new product reach it’s full potential, this usually takes a few weeks to a couple of months
Yep what he said
Wow is nearly impossible to benchmark due high variety of areas. Others are cpu and gpu bound. They should exactly tell where they benchmark it.
And in towns when you benchmark depends alot if alot ppl around
Very helpful thank you. Seems 265k is for me as a video editor that may try gaming a bit.
Why not get the 9900x then, it's faster than 265k in gaming and productivity.
@abaj006 Intel has a big advantage with quick sync in Adobe premiere decoding h264 footage. It's hard to compare to amd but from what I read it makes the difference.
@@MattCookOregonGood luck to you then, I hope it works out for you.
If you're not going for a 4080/7900XTX or higher as far as gaming. The Intel Chip would be a good choice, but keep in mind 9900X3D and 9950X3D are still yet to be released and if the 9800X3D has shown, this should also beat its vanilla counterpart at productivity.
You should wait 9900X3D and 9950X3D
Would GPU Acceleration in Premier Pro and other adobe softwares flip these graphs? Since we can shift the workload from CPU to GPU for rendering and scraping timeline so i would like to know what sort of changes would be see in these results. 🤔🤔
Somebody concerned about how many fps above 200 a CPU can provide is the definition of a first world problem. I'll stick to playing pong on my Vic-20.
That is a valid viewpoint and why only you can determine value. It’s your experience
i mean if you got a 7800, and game above 1080, theres no reason to go out and get 9800 honestly unless you care about the uplift in productivity is what im gathering.
And price in some countries in europe where 7800x3d is about a hundred euro more than 9800x3d or i General if you find a 9800x3d for cheaper or same price or like 10 dolars more
This is the complete edition review for me. But anyone can explain why there are so many dislikes? Is it just a fanboy haters or something? lol
BTW 2K and 4K are shockingly good performances but I'm looking for 9950x3D for my big upgrade from 6700K But good to see X3D gen 2 performing like a monster even in high resolution
// clap to AMD
Idk for $80 saved I don't feel bad at all about going Intel, I don't game a ton besides just a few tittles and I do some editing. And like you said its still improving! I also would love to see these test done with CUDIMM with Intel and AMD to make it fair since it seems the Core Ultra's love Fast Clocked Ram. I'm happy to see AMD and Intel offering good efficient CPU's. Btw where do you find the micro code update?
That’s why we have choice. It you are happy who cares 😎
The CUDIMM will 100% boost core ultra performance at a hefty premium.
@@bmockegWe don't know that yet and from what I hear it won't cost much more if anymore at all over standard RAM at the same speed.
For Intel did you go with the 265k? If so how it been any crashes/errors or has it been smooth for the most part. I cant decide between 265k or 9800X3D? I watched so many videos about the two just to get an overall performance.
@@TheAkechetai agree on thst as i love to have my cpu with integrated gou for testing pirposes
You know what is also a good soup? A soup that is done cooking when served
Personally, I think Intel and Nivida work better together, but I went with a X870P MB and 64GB 6400MT/s RAM and the 9800X3D for now as I mainly do flight simulators as I can't get a straight answer if I need more cores.
Not really for gaming, even flight sims
Please make a detail video on how to buy a used GPU in layman language
For casual windows, youtube and web browsing, 9800x3d is more than enough... also I don't have to worry it can't properly run future games smoothly... It can be cooled on air, cheap mobo cheap ram...
Yep
I just ordered a 9800x3d and ROG strix x870e-E motherboard today, looking for best ram and cooler to match, Is there anything I need to change in BIOS to get optimal performance apart from setting EXPO profile?
"Which is best for you?" - The one that will make my enemies weep and gnash their teeth, please!
I find it hilarious that people are comparing the core ultra 7 265k and Ryzen 7 9800 x3d when they aren't even in the same price bracket
awesome gj rob
Appreciate it!
Why would anyone give Intel their money after they refuse to replace all the defective 13th and 14th gen CPU's?
They are replacing them?
Decent card for energy effecient productivity loads
i keep my 12700K i got it new for 218💲 fiew months ago runing at 5 ghz more than enough with 6400mhz ram
thx for the video. is it still so that with amd you use a 6000 MT/s EXPO profile or is it possible to run reliable more with the new asus nitro path feature?
Did you mentioned how often, if any, the Intel CPU crashes? or to say it another way, does it suffers from the same illness as the 13th and 14th gen CPU's? I commend you for your analysis, but all those numbers mean quack if Intel can't guarantee they are not selling subpar Silicon prone to failure.
No. This is fixed in Arrow Lake.
My friend I have Ryzen 9 7950x3D pair it with RX 7900XTX 24GB which is much better than 9800x3d in multicore scenario's
I do not have 1080P or either 1440P Monitor , I only Use QD-OLED 4K 240HZ
Is it better to Upgrade to 9800x3d for 4k since it's better in Gaming? , or I will not gain any benefit's in Gaming?
What about DLSS,FSR ,,,ETC is it will fix the GPU bottleneck or not ?
Yes, but you'll need a 4090 first. 9800x3d doesn't run well on 4080 and below.
14700k to 9800 worth for 4k gaming ?
More than 100+ fps in Call of Duty and Fortnite XD compared to the previous X3D
Yep it’s a a beast in gaming
The prices in my country for 9800x3d are beyond mental: 800+ euros while 265k is 420 euro. So yeah, math for me is very simple here towards intel
i have socket 1700 i hope intel will give us the Bartlett lake S 12 P -cores only :-)
I play 4k games only , waiting 1year for the 15th intel, what can i do, i see for 4k is not such a problem, who plays in 2024 up to 240fps on 1080
12700K if barthled lake comes i buy that
i am go to Core Ultra 7 265k i`m not going to de paying double or triple msrp for the Ryzen 7 9800x3D or the Ryzen 7 7800x3D on eBay in uk
5:32 “AMD couldn’t quite close the gap” 😂 multi core cinebench 9800x3d = 23,020 vs Intel 265k @ 34,703 and you say “they couldn’t QUITE CLOSE THE GAP”??? The mile-wide “gap”? I get that Intel is burning, but the AMD glazing is crazy.
On top of that, there is definately some software issues affecting the performance of the intel ultra range. Give it time I reckon the ultra cpus will have some serious performance boosts. Its a brand new platform at the end of the day and Intel cpus are now on a more efficient node compared to AMD. The ultra 9 is the most powerful cpu so far according to cinebench so it has some serious potential.
Not sure what you on about, he said it exactly like it is.
I'm waiting for AM 6.
After -5 percent Ultra series i see a lot of smaller channels trying to defend Intel especially after 9800x3d destroyed everything in gaming.And previous king of gaming was ironically Amd 7800x3d so Amd just beat itself and Intel is 2 generations behind.Damage control is real but major channels don't fall for that anymore.
I just hope 265k price to drop 😂 and i will be super happy
Amd all the way .... if you game 7800x3d/9800x3d if you do productivity and game 7950x3d 9950x or wait for 9950x3d
So... no CUDIMM RAM? JaysTwoCents showcased the 285k with CUDIMM RAM, had a major uplift in both production and gaming. Yes, its hard to get, yes, its more expensive. But when you are doing a performance benchmark or comparison, the price should be a con, not discarding a significant portion of the performance because of the price. And that CUDIMM paired with E core overclock showed significantly better numbers to Jay. I wonder why no other reviewer tried it.
When you consider the price of these chips and what most people are buying right now at this price range this configuration makes sense. I am not working to make one or the other better. As prices change and compatibility we may do an updated video.
I bought the ultra 7 265k on its release, but i can return it and its motherboard and get the 9800x3d instead. Should i do that, or should i go with intel. I both game, edit videos, and stream on Twitch
Same, and I'm keeping it. My big thing is Intel QSV...this thing absolutely tears through video transcoding. I converted a 2hr 4K movie to 1080p in 9 minutes with Handbrake. I game in 4K so the difference is minimal, and as we see here, better temps.
@bradenabbott2707 I'm not that deep into editing, but I'll probably keep it too. I have a 3070ti, and in any case, my fps will be the same in games
I have the same thought, a lot of bad news about these Intel Ultra 200. I dont game that much, thats why I picked Intel.
@@NeBeg0gla , gaming results are very poor for 265k tho , well 14700k and 7900x are $350 and both have better gaming and multicore performance , i looked at gamernexus and hardware unboxed reviews .
Am5 platform is better its supported untill 2027 , intel changes socket every gen , little worried here .
even picking up old 12900k for cheap will be better than 265k , i just dont see why anyone buy 265k other than just being intel fanboy .
@@Greali No better with AMD, AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Burns Out On MSI X870 Motherboard an isolated case I hope for them remains to be seen the rest
Are the MW3 extreme and basic benchmark the wrong way round?
Nope. No upscaling in Basic.
Help me out here please... 9900x or core ultra 7 265k. 40% usage is general work tasks.... outlook, word, excel, youtube, web browsing. 30% photoshop, 10% adobe premier pro, 10% Adobe audition, 10% other misc. Very rarely do I do any gaming. Building new rig from ground up. Will pair with 4070 super or 4070 ti super. Not being partial to AMD or Intel, this has been tough to decide.
Damn in the same situation and cant choose between those two, I do a good mix off AI with python, 3D with Blender and mixed gaming that im gonna pair with my 4070 ti super. After some research they look to perform very like but with mixed general task i think the 20 cores from the intel are beneficial.
@@loqal690 Yeah I was on the fence for 2+ weeks and pulled the trigger on the 9900x because it needed less power. I just finished the build yesterday and so far so good. Breezes through adobe photoshop and premier pro without blinking.
@@EliteEventAZhow it’s 12 core but good?can u tell me the difference
Nice superb 🎉
Thank you!
intel 265k or ryzen 9900x for premier an after effects ?
Depends on your budget. Both are great! Core Ultra is cheaper and easier to cool?
@@robeytech but the performance?
In my country, they have similar prices and I am interested in which one gives me more performance after effects, fast previews in heavy projects
@ the 9900x has better performance.
265k+z890($500)
x870E+9800x3d($1000)
Love that AMD cpu! ❤ It's amazing! Gaming is all, the you have real life 😂😂 so I choose gaming 😂
Totally a valid choice
At least if you have a 7800X3D you might be able to claw some money back by selling the 7800X3D. And you will get a better all-round PC. But If you are all play and no work I do not think you will see much difference
Yeah, easy sell I would think
The gaming is the reason wich move the hardware to the levels of protuctivity and power wich we have today. That's why it's good that Intel doesn't ignore the gaming industry. Intel can make 1-2 models CPU which to be specialy for gaming and make a LOT of money,but they are stupid... 😄 That why,after soo many years with intel I order no 9800X3D.
which one? huh? is it even a question at this point?
Make a video in 2k and use an rtx 4070 - 4080 and it won't be that much of a difference for intel vs amd.
None of the above. Steal a AM4 and save a couple hundred. Put the extra money toward a killer monitor and video card. Once the AM5 fully developed and Intel stops eating themselves and the prices come down… You might consider AM5.
pc not always means game
Core Ultra 7 265k with intel igpu
How come 7800x3d is better in world of warcraft ? It deff error or bad testing it shouldn't be like that
5:48 Dang, 265k nearly double the score!
Anyway, Will be gug friendly sooner or later, also oxidate😂
Yep, it’s why I show the comparisons
Gg Robey
Thank you!
Nice One*
new amd great for gaming! if you can afford it
Yeah, that whole pesky money thing
@@robeytech what's that? 😆
Uh, should this video be out?
Yes?
300 vs 600$ 100% more Price for 20% more Performance 🤣
If You need better multi core performance, and you don't trust Intel just wait for other X3D CPUs Like 9950X3D
Always an option!
Why are the WoW results so terrible?
@@Mystikalrush games architecture can have an impact.
@@robeytechI really hope Blizzard can patch it, the 7800X3D results are insanely higher. I want this CPU and about half my PC gaming is in WoW.
Welcome to the Inteltech channel, pls consider buying an intel CPU so that they keep sending us free samples, pretty pls?
Obvious mistake for the 265k in single threaded cinebench
@@traitretrudeau2367 nope.
@@robeytech wait, you serious? hahaha what a clown
@@robeytech how can the multicore be higher than 20x the single core score? 🤡🤡🤡
@@robeytech 265k has 2300 score in cinebench r23 🤡🤡🤡 from nanoreview, cpu-monkey, rankbench... as I said, OBVIOUS MISTAKE
yeah, that score seams fishy ... I can see in other places that the 265k it´s getting around 2,250 points in this single core test, it´s weird because the multicore one it´s very similar (around 35,000), maybe some weird behaviour of this new platform ...
RIP Intel 😢
Neither. They're both too expensive for a 1-2k build
I wouldn't even bother. You could grab a 5700x3d or a 12700k and expend the extra money on other things
Yeah and be happy with early end support of windows… i wasfine eith 6700k but big companies decided to make less relevant by dropping the support for w11
Why are you pretending that 9900x does not exist? It's cheaper and faster than 265k in both gaming and productivity.
Pretty much yes, they are pretending that and a whole lot of other things. For some people it's extremely hard to admit defeat, and many Intel fanboys will never recognize themselves in the mirror. That's why absurdly convoluted and biased video like this one are made: to appease them.
That's not true. They're about the same. In blender and premiere the ultra 7 beats it
@@HereAfterNow In a 400+ set of benchmarks, the 9950x was 17% faster (geo mean).
@abaj006 yeah but you said the 9900x. The 9950x is in a whole other price range
too bad I don't like amd, gonna buy an ultra 9 285k cuz they promised to fix it and intel has never let me down before, key word being ME
AMD Great for the Gaming .
However AMD does not recommend for Video editing and Adobe protect.
Intel and Nvidia are good.
AMD is better and more all around but if the focus is editing this statement is true. In regards to AMD x3D chips.
@@robeytech Thank you for your reply. I had the worst exprance with AMD GPU now switch to Nvidia.
The gaming, glazing bias for AMD is unreal.
Congrats bro, its not like x3d is good only for gaming, oh wait it's indeed only good for gaming. If you want productivity, why even talk about x3d? Just pick the non x3d
wonder what the point of this comment is, if you wanted productivity focus you're in the wrong place.
Its like I look at a sports car review and get butt hurt when they don't include a ton of off road tests or focus more on it.
The cope for intel from the few fanboys left is real these days (XD)
@@dawienel1142 exactly, they act as if 9950x is dogshit or something
just get 13600K 👍🏻
Goodbye intel arrow lake
AMD or Intel ... leave it to profesionals like userbenchmark, they are always right, if you flip what they recommend :D