Honestly it just highlights how shitty most videogame engines are at scaling with more cores. On average there is just a 20 fps difference between a 4 core and a 10, like come the fuck on.
@@wile123456 Yeah, there are some games that benefit from more cores, and intense multiplayer absolutely benefits from more cores in my experience. But we are being held back by previous gen consoles. 8 threads is good enough for most at the moment. Thank goodness next gen is here this year, we will finally see many core optimized games starting to become more and more common as next gen progresses.
@@wile123456 f you look at these benchmarks look at the games with a larger gap in minimum framerates (not average FPS). Those are the games where more cores are being used (around 6c/12t or so). It is the 0.1% (0.1% are not in these benchmarks though) and 1% lows where you notice the difference in games that use more cores. Stutters and FPS drops happen easier on 4c/8t CPUs. My i7 was causing many in the newer games that use more cores, that is where you feel the difference. It is smoother in those games now with higher and more stable 0.1% and 1% lows. The next gen consoles will change that though. When next gen engines are much more complex and pushing PS5 and XSX to only 30 or 60 fps, then your PC CPU will also be taxed much more. But it will take time and won't happen overnight, so no point in upgrading if you are still happy with performance. The longer you wait the cheaper and better your next upgrade will be.
Around 420-450€ in Europe. So not a good price, even tho it performs like 9900k. You can literally buy a 3700x and a motherboard for the same price than just this 10700k.
@@kilner79 you are paying 100-150€ more with intel. And you get what, 10-20 more frames. Thats 10-15€ per frame. And only if you have 2080ti and you are playing on 1080p. If you have anything other than 2080ti or you use higher res just stick with Amd for the lot cheaper price.
@@kilner79 And if you do both gaming and work: Get AMD. If you game at proper resolutions: Get AMD and spend the difference on a bigger GPU. If your NVMe drive exceeds PCIe 3.0 transfer speeds: Get AMD.
Those little critters are NUTS for the asking price. And they overclock pretty decently... I just have the idea that they'll die on next gen games as both consoles are rocking basically a 3700X.
@@MaTtRoSiTy as somebody who got in PC stuff when Pascal launched, I have to say that it's not exactly right from the GPU perspective... but yeah, the 3300X is a pretty insane little proc for the price
@@abiola82 of course they never will, those cpu will just slowly disappearing from the market then in used market, they'll still be overpriced, target at users of the dead platform.
Probably because for just an extra $70 you get 4 extra cores. Which make a rather large difference in productivity. But the overall performance difference between it & the 3700X is so negligible. The cheaper 3700X makes more sense if you're on a budget. That's why the 3800X gets left out a lot. It's in the middle of two price brackets and the 3700X & 3900X make fair better purchase options given cost per performance. It's why most reviews & benches leave out the 3800X a lot of the times. Not that the 3800X is a bad CPU or anything. It's just in a weird spot. It's more logical to spend the extra $130 to go for the 3900X given what it gives you over the 3700X vs the extra $40 for what little the 3800X gives you over the 3700X. If that makes sense.
@@Peylix I only got a 3800x when it was marked down to where the 3700x was. At that point I was ok paying the same price for hopefully a better binned 3700x. Other than that it kinda only exists to make the 3900x look better at it's price point, but with it's price dropping soon there's really no reason to buy a 3800.
@Jeff T Are you kidding me? It's okay when AMD pulls shit? Did you not see the whole situation with Zen 3 support that literally happened just earlier this month?
Did anyone notice that the tech reviewers finally got real review kits (not black cardboard boxes) this time? Looks like Intel took a hint from Jayz and AMD. [deleted because people can't take an opinion, and because honestly it didn't relate to the original comment.]
@@randomgaming8616 my issue is that a nice z490 lga1200 mobo is maybe $100 more than a b450 tomahawk at least, then you also have to get water cooling, for another $100, and you already would pay $200 more for the processor not even including the processor itself. this means that if intel had a r7 3700x competitor, then it would need to price it at $150 at most for it to actually be competitive, which even at intel's silicon efficiency i doubt is very practical (intel won't need to worry about money though).
@@bananya6020 You can get away with a nice cheaper air cooler like the schyte towers, no one is forcing you to run the chips all core at 5Ghz and they really do seem to be very well behaved - the whole watercooling only thing got debunked pretty quick. Z490 is most certainly also a much better chipset than B450 and the comparison should really be made with an X570 board which have comparable pricing. I don't think the intel chips are great value at all but they're fine for a gaming only build and do deliver more performance than ryzen in most games. I'd get a 3600 or a 3700X for a pure gaming build or a 3900X if I was gonna spend 400$ though.
Yeah. Jay lost all credibility as soon as I saw him try to review a new CPU on a pre release motherboard. Then tried to say it's AMD's fault. He is the water cooling expert. But when it comes to actual PC tech I think he is a moron.
@@iDeagles Not realy 2080s @ 1080p with high shadows have on 15-20% more fps then 2080ti @ 1080p ultra shadows , but image quality r the same !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2019 : The Ryzen 9 3900X being a pain in the ass for Intel 9th gen's offering 2020 : The Ryzen 9 3900X being a pain in the ass for Intel 10th gen's offering
Going forward, 9700K will have worse 1% Low fps due to its lack of HT. Games will use more than 8-threads as next-gen consoles have Zen 2 8C/16T CPU releasing this year.
I'm going to be brutally honest here: I only watched this video because I like your channel and wanted to support you. I already knew how this part was going to perform, as it is close enough to being a 9900k that it pretty much had to perform like one. Honestly, I don't feel like I need to watch the 10600k reviews either, as I already know how a delidded 8700K performs. The only real question I had about any part other than the 10900k was how much they were going to cost this time around.
409 on newegg stock comes in then goes pretty fast. I bought one as I prefer intel based systems and I only really game so I want best performance. I think the I5 and I7 are decent buys despite ryzen because of the quality of their 490z mobos. What none of these reviewers are talking about is how much more overclockable these 10th gens are vs 9th. I wouldn't be surprised people are easily pushing 5.3 5.4 on the I7 without much issues.
@@dewaynethomas3122 Add in the cost for a 280mm AIO or custom water cooling. I don't think Noctua or Be Quiet has an air cooler than can handle the thermals of the new i9's. According to Jayztwocents he had trouble getting a stable overclock with the i9, I'm guessing it's due to bios teething pains, so expect to go through a couple of bios updates before all the gothchas are worked out. The price of the cpu's, motherboard and cooling aren't impressive enough to upgrade to it from my 9900k. Besides it would probably start a fire in my Louqe Ghost S1 from the heat output.
@@Phanbot01 der8auer managed 5.2ghz (in R20) on the 10900k on a 360mm custom loop. Overclocked to over 7ghz on LN2. So clearly very overclockable, if you can prevent it from torching itself...
@@simonp2465 Future generations will make documentaries about the time Australians didn't have Bunnings sausage sizzle, using terms like "loss of national identity" and "test of national spirit"
@@simonp2465 when I have had to go to Bunnings I have come home & made my own Sausage Sanga 😋🥪, it's my Energy Boost & Motivation to do Home Improvement 😁
Thanks for the review guys! Thorough as always. I am blown away by the 1 frame difference in the 7-game average between the 10700k and 10900k, and just how closely tied everything at the top is in general. I wouldn't have thought we were so GPU bound!
the I9 10900K is literally 200 bucks more expensive than the 3900x right now, with lower overall performance, nice intel, just nice. and the 10700k goes for 480 currently
And lets not forget, you need to spend at least 100 dollar for a good cooler with the Intel part. I feel that this is important which most reviewers does not include in the analyzis.
Great Vid Bro... I've been on the fence about switching to AMD For months... I think I'm finally going to do it. .. I can tell you put a lot of effort into these videos great job!
Actually it has been a HUGE upgrade the only thing that is barely an upgrade is the IPC and clock speeds they have been regularly upgrading core counts because of AMD which makes them better in multi core workloads even if AMD edges out in those sectors
Same, except gaming where it is a bit slower than Intel competition but I'm gaming at 1440p so the gap is even narrower and I would say completely unnoticeable without counting FPS
@@CobrazHD I am on a gsync 165hz monitor with 2080ti but fps in most games is well over 100fps so I don't notice any laggy feeling. I just remembered that I did notice significantly worse performance on GTA V with Ryzen but everything else I play is fine
Honestly Intel's engineering team has done some amazing things to this ++++++ generation. But they're obviously beating a dead horse and the R and D budget was better spent elsewhere when they could have just lowered prices.
I love your videos but, where are the thermals? where are FPS numbers for eSports titles like CS:Go etc... If we are talking gaming performance I would expect it to be more comprehensive...
It would have been if Intel ACTUALLY released CPU's with the same core counts as the latest Ryzen chips in the same price categories as that would have greatly improved their multi core performance and that is the only area where they are lacking vs AMD and the performance gap between them would either have been much much smaller or be in Intel's favor
I just want to say that I really like your graphs. It's a great balance of a decent number of CPUs for comparison and size of each bar for clarity. IMO the best on youtube. Only websites with interactive charts can offer a bit more.
Games not needing more than 6c/12t now, will definitely change soon once new consoles arrive and set the new baseline for game engines across the board. 8c/16t Zen 2 in consoles is going to make game engine so much more complex for gaming scenes, much more CPU hungry games will arrive in 2021 ported from consoles, you can guarantee this.
Nah, most new games are GPU bound and game devs would probably underutilize the power of the next gen cores for the first few years until they get enough experience with the new architecture to fully maximize all of its CPU power. This is what they always do.
Firstly not all 8 cores in consoles will be allocated to gaming, and secondly hyperthreading will be disabled when maximizing clocks. So 6c/12t won't be obsolete for a loooong time.
Intel's pricing is a joke my old Z170 motherboard died on me and to replace it it would cost more than a ryzen 2600+motherboard so guess who's now using AMD products
Glad I bought my 8700k when I did after it came out. It's still very close to the best in gaming. At 5ghz under water, it's still got a long life ahead of it.
@@Taurus_Play But unless you're buying an RTX 2080 Ti, you are better off saving the $100-150 (don't forget, no cooler) on a Ryzen 5 3600 & getting a better GPU, every single, damn, time. The i5 doesn't make any sense unless you are buying a flagship GPU (aka, where another +$100-200 in GPU $ won't do anything), in which case, why the fuck are you buying an i5?
@@Taurus_Play i would exactly call that beating they are basically the same your talking a 2 or 3% average fps difference at best but often with lower 1% lows
You guys were the only ones to test the new i9. I mean i7 so far. It's working as I had expected and I am glad. Intel is delivering similar performance for less money than last year. Good on Intel and Intel is Striking back. (:
Maybe we should mention the additional yearly operating costs at some point. Cause 300w power usage is off the chain man! Is that thing passively mining crypto in the background or something?!
@@rocka163 You call Dave a Bullshitter & say 250w MAX for i9-10900K, where do you get that, Dave is Quoting Steve's Graph for Power Usage at 6:50, Wake Up to yourself, You are the one that is talking Bullshit
I agree, The I9-10900K at 300w is a scary proposition compared to the R9 3900X for long term use, considering the R9 3900X is faster at Processing related tasks that a Business or Home Office would be using them for it seems a much better option
@@HaitiSpaceAgency i doubt it. if they do, then i'm not upgrading (like i need a 3080ti and 4950x for simple web browsing and homework anyways. i don't game)
@@mobeenpatrawala589 The prices started dropping a couple of days ago. Looks like Dr Lisa Su wanted to help Intel celebrate the 10th gen launch with some pro-consumer dance moves :P
@psykosonikwarrior I think your comparison is anything but "objective". In my region a 3900X is 420€, the 10700k is 440€. A decent cooler for the I7 is about 50€ on top of that. You want pcie gen4? You only get it with the 3900X! A 5-10% advantage in games is anything but "significant", especially since nobody uses a fresh installed Windows without any background tasks running and most people don't own a 1100€ graphics card. If you are really only focused on gaming, get a 3700X and spend the saved money on a faster gpu. But getting a 10700K would be only a waste of money, no matter how you look at it, at least in a realistic way.
The comments regarding the 10600K vs 10700K and 10900K are really interesting. Gaming is Intel's last bastion, and AMD just can't seem to get it together to finally dethrone them conclusively. But Intel are the ones dethroning themselves with the mid tier 10th gen parts. If you want just the best gaming performance possible, and games don't "need" more than, say, 8 solid threads, then a 6 core Intel chip is as good as a 10 core one. Nobody is going to buy a 10900K for productivity, and nobody is buying 10th gen for value at all. The only reason you'd buy 10th gen is for the best gaming CPU possible, and all Intel needed to launch to achieve that was the 10600K.
Intel needs more competitive prices, the 10700k is here 10% more expensive than a 3900x and it doesn't even include a cooler. It is better than the 9900k for sure, but to be really competitive this CPU should have cost around 350$. This just shows how bad value the 9900k was.
Yes and no the heat output is higher and there hasn't been any efficiency improvements over the previous generation but they shaved down the silicon thickness and made the ihs thicker which makes the cpu more effective at moving the heat so as long as you have plenty of cooling capacity the die temps will be lower
Even after spending 410$ for that i7 people cannot use it out of box as there is no CPU cooler provided and that means the real cost will be much higher after spending on CPU cooler.
i still wonder why games like planet zoo/coaster or cities skyline are not in the lineup for gaming benchmark since these games are very cpu intensive.
Do you Remember? When Bulldozer hit 5ghz people be like,"Toaster sht, AMD Hot AF!" When Skylake hit 5ghz people be like,"Intel Quality chip! Fastest Gaming CPU" 🙄
it's not like that, most are pointing at that power consumption which is fine because the new 10th gen lose heat very efficiently, you just need a huge cooler I am happy that Intel did this and doesn't look like an easy feat
Could you do an IPC test, where you compare the 8700K vs 10600K and the 9900K vs 10700K all clocked at 5.0GHz maybe? Would be interesting to see how much impact those security fixes had or if there are maybe any improvements to the architecture at all. Thank you for your endeavour and comprehensive testing! 😁🏆
Funny it makes me happy I skipped the Ryzen 3000 series. I’m waiting for Ryzen 4000 series to see if maybe AMD can beat Intel once and for all in the only thing that matters to me gaming.
@@SamtheCanuck I got impatient sitting on my i5 6600 so I upgraded and since I'm not using a top of the line GPU I won't see much of any gains shown here anyway.
Sean O'Brien I get it I’m hanging in there with my 7700k but hyperthreading is helping that. My son has a 6600k and at times I notice the 4 C/T processor limiting him a bit but he doesn’t notice yet.
@@SamtheCanuck Coming from an FX-8370. The 3900X I just refreshed my system with was well worth it lol Some folks have been waiting longer to refresh than others.
Great content as always! Regarding the 10600K vs 10700K, I'd rather just buy B460/10700F than Z490/10600K, the single-threaded performance will be almost as good and you also get 30% better multi-threaded performance for similar price-point.
truest comment ive seen in a long time here. intel has its niche. and dont forget older games which are limited in core usage. amd is close to pleasing the 144hz 1080p market though. there are only a few engines where amd still cant deliver.
Due to gpu bottleneck. With the new 3000 series from Nvidia..the cap will be bigger. So..for a pure gaming pc..intel is still the way to go. Here in my contry the 3900x and 10900k are almost equal priced
@@krupp4000 not sure if true. probably in some engines like frosbite. if you want max frames always buy intel. if you just want 160ish then you can use amd for most engines. i myself have intel though.
@@krupp4000 ryzen 4000 and some memory tuning will close the gap in performance almost at all specially in 1440p even with 3080 ti (which i will take). Even now ryzen 3000 with tuned ram is equal to stock 9900k + simple xpm ~3200cl16-3600cl16. Ofc intel can oc ram too and quite well but you need to remember how much it would cost at the end of it all from the side of money and time spent. I'm not talking about powerdraw.
So.... The 10900k is basically damn pointless. The i7 is still games just as good as this "world's fastest gaming cpu" and a 120$ AMD CPU punching so high it is blowing my mind.
Just wondering if you will ever get around to testing the X570 motherboards in a case with the 3950x like you previously said in the video when you originally tested the motherboards?
Too bad 3800Xs are almost never benched. Would've been curious of the performance of those as well. Also jeez, it looks like everyone is benching with a 2080Ti, that's sooo misleading for the average buyer. Even people going for 3900/3950X/10900K CPUs won't be pairing them with such expensive a expensive GPU most of the time.
The pairing with the 2080Ti is done for the purpose of eliminating the GPU bottleneck and giving as best a reading of the performance of the CPU's themselves.
Incredible video as always. BTW, congrats for passing 500 K subs. You deserve far more than that for the amount of effort and dedication you put in your content
@@3XH1L Yes, but that comes at a cost premium, including the purchase of a new motherboard. The cpus you mentioned may not deliver the highest frames but they compensate with price-to-performance.
Intel looked at AMD's line up and added 20-25% to the prices, it would seem. All I hope this will slightly reduce prices on the Ryzen 3700X or 3900X, gunning for one of those, once MSI Tomahawk X570 finally releases. Need my upgrade, from my 1600, some of my edit programs are starting to choke, ever so slightly.
@@josephjuanaliagavalenzuela2345 well they do have their 4000 series chips coming q4 2020, getting a jump on clearing stock while also giving intel a kick in the balls seems like win win for AMD.
hello from turkey I would follow you ozcan . quality and curious, thank you for your product review down to the smallest detail. I do not have English, but I understand it with the translation in yotube, but I always open the audio of the video. I wish you continued success.
Thanks for this - good video! It made me see sense and stop thinking about the new intel chips. Instead i think im going to upgrade my R5 2600 to a 3700x/3800x depending on the prices when i am ready to commit to the purchase
I'm trying to decide between the i7 10700k and the r9 3700x to buy in about 2 weeks. 99% of the use will be gaming and some streaming. I do not use it for any real productivity. I'm leaning towards Intel but don't know if the extra cores/threads would be of any use to me on ryzen vs a few extra frames when I'll take all I can get. So I currently have a de lid 4790k 4.6 oc on liquid metal air cooler 32gb ddr3 1800. 1070ti running 1080 @ 144hz and a 970 running 2 additional monitors. Will probably not upgrade gpu till late this year or next and to a 2070 super unless I can find a deal on a 2080ti down the road.
My main PC is Ryzen and I'm sticking with it. My secondary PC is Intel. If I started again I'd be all Intel. Intel has my trust for reliability. AMD is currently proving flaky again to me. I'm sympathetic to Intel through experience, not marketing.
Companies send limited stick on purpose to make things look better and decieve their customers and shareholders. AMD does it too. "Oh it's sold out, must be good" type deal. Give it a few months and they will be over stocked.
I just don't understand why intel is so arrogant with their pricing.. they literally have a better chance to compete with AMD but the have choosen their " premium pride" over everyhing else.
At 6:50 power consumption, Amd with the 3700x setup consumes 164 W while the 10700K consumes 40% more power (+68 W) for having the same cores and threads. Isn't that impressive ?
Ryzen 3 3300X: Am I supposed to be here?
Intel Core i7 7700K: First time?
Honestly it just highlights how shitty most videogame engines are at scaling with more cores. On average there is just a 20 fps difference between a 4 core and a 10, like come the fuck on.
you make my day.....ahahah
@@wile123456 Yeah, there are some games that benefit from more cores, and intense multiplayer absolutely benefits from more cores in my experience. But we are being held back by previous gen consoles. 8 threads is good enough for most at the moment.
Thank goodness next gen is here this year, we will finally see many core optimized games starting to become more and more common as next gen progresses.
@@wile123456 It's extremely difficult to make games use multiple cores at once
@@wile123456 f you look at these benchmarks look at the games with a larger gap in minimum framerates (not average FPS). Those are the games where more cores are being used (around 6c/12t or so). It is the 0.1% (0.1% are not in these benchmarks though) and 1% lows where you notice the difference in games that use more cores. Stutters and FPS drops happen easier on 4c/8t CPUs.
My i7 was causing many in the newer games that use more cores, that is where you feel the difference. It is smoother in those games now with higher and more stable 0.1% and 1% lows.
The next gen consoles will change that though. When next gen engines are much more complex and pushing PS5 and XSX to only 30 or 60 fps, then your PC CPU will also be taxed much more.
But it will take time and won't happen overnight, so no point in upgrading if you are still happy with performance. The longer you wait the cheaper and better your next upgrade will be.
Around 420-450€ in Europe. So not a good price, even tho it performs like 9900k.
You can literally buy a 3700x and a motherboard for the same price than just this 10700k.
Yeah or faster/more ram and the 3700x..
Is it in stock in Europe?
@@kilner79 you are paying 100-150€ more with intel. And you get what, 10-20 more frames. Thats 10-15€ per frame. And only if you have 2080ti and you are playing on 1080p.
If you have anything other than 2080ti or you use higher res just stick with Amd for the lot cheaper price.
@@kilner79 And if you do both gaming and work: Get AMD. If you game at proper resolutions: Get AMD and spend the difference on a bigger GPU. If your NVMe drive exceeds PCIe 3.0 transfer speeds: Get AMD.
@@kilner79 youre likely the reason intel is still a company. hey man, keep buying that overpriced stuff! you got this!
if I learned anything from all those slides - is that ryzen 3 3300x looks to be the best bang for your buck by a mile
Yeah it really is a bargain, budget consumers have never had it better imo
Those little critters are NUTS for the asking price. And they overclock pretty decently... I just have the idea that they'll die on next gen games as both consoles are rocking basically a 3700X.
@@MaTtRoSiTy as somebody who got in PC stuff when Pascal launched, I have to say that it's not exactly right from the GPU perspective... but yeah, the 3300X is a pretty insane little proc for the price
4 cores 8 thread is shit change my mind
Still dominated by 1600AF at MSRP though. Actually up to around $110, 1600AF still wins for me.
10700K: “Hi, I’m 9900KS but cheaper”
cooler too, surprisingly
If intel doesn't drop the price of 9900k and KS then they just cannabalised their own line of cpus
9900KS: "Hi, i'm 9900K but more expensive"
@@abiola82 of course they never will, those cpu will just slowly disappearing from the market then in used market, they'll still be overpriced, target at users of the dead platform.
you forget that the z490 boards cost a lot more than z370/z390
You went crazy with the blu tack in this one 😁
Love your channel!
i like how we've all collectively agreed to ignore the 3800x's existence
Probably because for just an extra $70 you get 4 extra cores. Which make a rather large difference in productivity. But the overall performance difference between it & the 3700X is so negligible. The cheaper 3700X makes more sense if you're on a budget.
That's why the 3800X gets left out a lot. It's in the middle of two price brackets and the 3700X & 3900X make fair better purchase options given cost per performance. It's why most reviews & benches leave out the 3800X a lot of the times.
Not that the 3800X is a bad CPU or anything. It's just in a weird spot. It's more logical to spend the extra $130 to go for the 3900X given what it gives you over the 3700X vs the extra $40 for what little the 3800X gives you over the 3700X. If that makes sense.
@@Peylix Makes sense to me.
@@Peylix I only got a 3800x when it was marked down to where the 3700x was. At that point I was ok paying the same price for hopefully a better binned 3700x. Other than that it kinda only exists to make the 3900x look better at it's price point, but with it's price dropping soon there's really no reason to buy a 3800.
@Jeff T Are you kidding me? It's okay when AMD pulls shit? Did you not see the whole situation with Zen 3 support that literally happened just earlier this month?
@@canaconn2388 shh, don't get the fanboy even more triggered.
Did anyone notice that the tech reviewers finally got real review kits (not black cardboard boxes) this time? Looks like Intel took a hint from Jayz and AMD.
[deleted because people can't take an opinion, and because honestly it didn't relate to the original comment.]
@@randomgaming8616 my issue is that a nice z490 lga1200 mobo is maybe $100 more than a b450 tomahawk at least, then you also have to get water cooling, for another $100, and you already would pay $200 more for the processor not even including the processor itself.
this means that if intel had a r7 3700x competitor, then it would need to price it at $150 at most for it to actually be competitive, which even at intel's silicon efficiency i doubt is very practical (intel won't need to worry about money though).
nah it is just the Mainstream Plattform
@@bananya6020 You can get away with a nice cheaper air cooler like the schyte towers, no one is forcing you to run the chips all core at 5Ghz and they really do seem to be very well behaved - the whole watercooling only thing got debunked pretty quick. Z490 is most certainly also a much better chipset than B450 and the comparison should really be made with an X570 board which have comparable pricing. I don't think the intel chips are great value at all but they're fine for a gaming only build and do deliver more performance than ryzen in most games. I'd get a 3600 or a 3700X for a pure gaming build or a 3900X if I was gonna spend 400$ though.
They also got retail chips. I was surprised when I saw a tweet from Paul's hardware with a chip labeled 10900k instead of Intel confidential.
Yeah. Jay lost all credibility as soon as I saw him try to review a new CPU on a pre release motherboard. Then tried to say it's AMD's fault. He is the water cooling expert. But when it comes to actual PC tech I think he is a moron.
All these intel reviews just makes me more excited about Zen 3.
So we all gonna ignore the 3300X beating the 10700K in the AES-256 test? cool.
Yes, Because who cares.
Yes, because one test is worth ignoring
Like you ignore 7700k stock beating 3900x @ B5 1440p ... and ?
It's actually amazing that happened. The security fix intel made probably hurt performance a lot for productivity workloads
@@Taurus_Play look at the one percent lows lol it's trash dummy
This part would be a lot more appealing if it were $50 less. The premium is still too high for the little extra gaming performance you actually get.
You’re only getting that “gaming” performance with a 2080ti @1080p anyways so what advantage does it really have?
Yeah and you need 200usd cooler
Yeah and games like Far Cry 5 won't be made anymore, they will be more and more multi core.
@@kyoudaiken AAA games, anyway.
@@iDeagles Not realy 2080s @ 1080p with high shadows have on 15-20% more fps then 2080ti @ 1080p ultra shadows , but image quality r the same !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2:20 Color - Sliver??
SLIVER ♥️
that's a major fuckup right there
And "aluminum" lol
It's on the newegg product page too LOL
@@TheAppleKid2011 American way of saying Aluminium
Buy a new processor
Buy a new motherboard
Sell your kidney
Get 5-10% fps
What a joke
@@RAYSGT
yes like the Ryzen 9 3900X
@@pramod119
indeed but with lower frequencies
Don't want it? Don't buy it. I know, it's tough.
@@benfr2744 butthurt?
u forgot u need a 280mm cooler $$$
2019 : The Ryzen 9 3900X being a pain in the ass for Intel 9th gen's offering
2020 : The Ryzen 9 3900X being a pain in the ass for Intel 10th gen's offering
2022 : The Ryzen 9 3900X being a pain in the ass for Intel 12th gen's offering
@@abijithnair3412 aged like milk
Lesson learned: 'if you want better gaming performance, disable hyper threading' I mean look at 9700k! Still beating the 10700k at some games
You can disable HT on any core you like with 10th gen. Which is probably all i like about it
menco106 wait you can pick which cores have it and which don’t?
TeCh ExPlOiTs jup
Going forward, 9700K will have worse 1% Low fps due to its lack of HT. Games will use more than 8-threads as next-gen consoles have Zen 2 8C/16T CPU releasing this year.
I have an i7-9700F... 8 cores/8 threads... my hyper threading is permanently disabled... but I do get good gaming performance!
Technically an I9 9900K 100 Dollar less and more advance overclocking support.
But for average consumer..... yeah, I call it FX Lite.
Verpal Factor in the new mobo requirement and it might not be cheaper.
I'm going to be brutally honest here: I only watched this video because I like your channel and wanted to support you. I already knew how this part was going to perform, as it is close enough to being a 9900k that it pretty much had to perform like one. Honestly, I don't feel like I need to watch the 10600k reviews either, as I already know how a delidded 8700K performs. The only real question I had about any part other than the 10900k was how much they were going to cost this time around.
409 on newegg stock comes in then goes pretty fast. I bought one as I prefer intel based systems and I only really game so I want best performance. I think the I5 and I7 are decent buys despite ryzen because of the quality of their 490z mobos. What none of these reviewers are talking about is how much more overclockable these 10th gens are vs 9th. I wouldn't be surprised people are easily pushing 5.3 5.4 on the I7 without much issues.
@@feeblemind Good luck overclocking your I9, lol. Hope yuh kept up on your homeowner's insurance.
@@dewaynethomas3122 Add in the cost for a 280mm AIO or custom water cooling. I don't think Noctua or Be Quiet has an air cooler than can handle the thermals of the new i9's. According to Jayztwocents he had trouble getting a stable overclock with the i9, I'm guessing it's due to bios teething pains, so expect to go through a couple of bios updates before all the gothchas are worked out. The price of the cpu's, motherboard and cooling aren't impressive enough to upgrade to it from my 9900k. Besides it would probably start a fire in my Louqe Ghost S1 from the heat output.
@@Phanbot01 der8auer managed 5.2ghz (in R20) on the 10900k on a 360mm custom loop. Overclocked to over 7ghz on LN2. So clearly very overclockable, if you can prevent it from torching itself...
@@feeblemind there is another intel coming soon right? because in a couple months the new ryzens gonna prob destroy these...
Oh well off to Bunnings to get a $30 heater instead.
No sausage sizzle... big downer
@@simonp2465 Future generations will make documentaries about the time Australians didn't have Bunnings sausage sizzle, using terms like "loss of national identity" and "test of national spirit"
it'll probably be more energy efficient too 😁
@@simonp2465 when I have had to go to Bunnings I have come home & made my own Sausage Sanga 😋🥪, it's my Energy Boost & Motivation to do Home Improvement 😁
Thanks for the review guys! Thorough as always. I am blown away by the 1 frame difference in the 7-game average between the 10700k and 10900k, and just how closely tied everything at the top is in general. I wouldn't have thought we were so GPU bound!
the I9 10900K is literally 200 bucks more expensive than the 3900x right now, with lower overall performance, nice intel, just nice. and the 10700k goes for 480 currently
AUS pricing suck
How much does 3900x cost lol?
@@Saigonas 400 now, down from 500 after i9 came
can't wait to get my hands on a heavily discounted 3700X in a few months.
exactly!!!!
I bought this and its awesome. You will love it and it will be a very good buy.
They only do in the end of the year. I got my 2700x last December for $210CA
Ryzen 7 3700x is already much cheaper than at launch at $280 usd, and the Ryzen 7 3800x is at the price of the 3700x when it came out at $330 usd
Its an amazing processor been using it from last 6 months
And lets not forget, you need to spend at least 100 dollar for a good cooler with the Intel part. I feel that this is important which most reviewers does not include in the analyzis.
Also, boards and power draw will both cost you more.
Same shit for Ryzen if you want to OC it 4.3+ all cores , on defult cooler it gona throtle even in games .
With Ryzen too. You need good cooler to benefit of PBO.
I don't think you go higher end Intel for cheapness.
@@Taurus_Play there is no need to use ryzen 3000 other than stock, 100-200mhz more with max oc is nothing
Great Vid Bro... I've been on the fence about switching to AMD For months... I think I'm finally going to do it. .. I can tell you put a lot of effort into these videos great job!
Barely an 'upgrade' over 9th gen
Barely an upgrade over 6th gen lol
@@drewhinners8793 Still have 6700k and still trying to justify upgrading.
@@JediAcademyLeague You'll get a reason to upgrade when Ryzen 4000 launches :P
I`m impressed how well they can compete against AMD with 7nm node.
Can`t wait first 10nm intel cpus with new architecture "willow cove"
Actually it has been a HUGE upgrade
the only thing that is barely an upgrade is the IPC and clock speeds they have been regularly upgrading core counts because of AMD which makes them better in multi core workloads even if AMD edges out in those sectors
I have 3700x and it's an overkill for everything I need
This
Same, except gaming where it is a bit slower than Intel competition but I'm gaming at 1440p so the gap is even narrower and I would say completely unnoticeable without counting FPS
@@MaTtRoSiTy Or playing with high refresh rate monitor. You will see every fps dip if you get used to higher frame rates.
Use a 1440p 144hz monitor with a 3700x and a Titan Xp, works wonderfully.
@@CobrazHD I am on a gsync 165hz monitor with 2080ti but fps in most games is well over 100fps so I don't notice any laggy feeling.
I just remembered that I did notice significantly worse performance on GTA V with Ryzen but everything else I play is fine
2:30 color - sliver. Was that meant to be silver?
oof
lol well -spotted- soptted
Love the coloring in the graphs great video man
Harbour Boxed looking out for us consumers as always
I now appreciate the footnoted timeline on your recent videos. Keep up the great work.
I'll be sticking with AMD, I see no need to worry over a few frames difference for an expensive CPU that isn't power and heat efficient.
If you do any real work and play games after it, stick with AMD. Much better value.
Most definitely.
Very professional review. Thank you. You are extremley good at this. Keep at it guys.
3:06 - SLIVER? Really, Gigabyte?
I was looking for this comment! I was afraid I'd have to make it myself 😂
Maybe they could have got away with it if it read:
Colour: Sliver
Material: Aluminium 😂
Well, that doesn't seem as bad as Intel's "cock speed" for it's 10600k.
@@gbnq2513 "You gonna need mo thermal paste baby"
still rocking my 10900k, absolute beast after nearly 3 years.
Who else was bothered by "color - sliver" misspell?
Honestly Intel's engineering team has done some amazing things to this ++++++ generation. But they're obviously beating a dead horse and the R and D budget was better spent elsewhere when they could have just lowered prices.
its not that they've had delays with their 10nm fabs which won't be ready until 2021
I counted it out this really is 6 +s now, 7th time around on 14nm.
I love your videos but, where are the thermals? where are FPS numbers for eSports titles like CS:Go etc... If we are talking gaming performance I would expect it to be more comprehensive...
Bought a 10700KF at $298 in May of 2021 and paired it with a Gigabyte Z490 Vision G. Couldn't resist it at that price
As R5 2600 user, I'm in awe on how well 3300X holds its own...
Thanks for the review Hardware Unboxed. Still proud of my 3700X purchase. Satisfied my work and 1440p gaming need. At a rocking price of only $290.
That's a steal
Can't wait for 10600K Benchmarks! :D
Please don't lower your standards, ever. You folks are setting the bar for quality, trust-worthy reviewing on a daily basis. Well done!
Intel 10th gen isnt that good in my opinion..
Except that improved thermal design In the CPU other than that nothing is impressive
It would have been if Intel ACTUALLY released CPU's with the same core counts as the latest Ryzen chips in the same price categories as that would have greatly improved their multi core performance and that is the only area where they are lacking vs AMD and the performance gap between them would either have been much much smaller or be in Intel's favor
@Ca9ine C0mic , thought I would like to see how the die holds up long term with repeated thermal cycles and high heat density given it’s now thinner.
Because there isn't a 10th gen. It's just 6th gen.
The best Intel chip is a ryzen
I just want to say that I really like your graphs. It's a great balance of a decent number of CPUs for comparison and size of each bar for clarity. IMO the best on youtube. Only websites with interactive charts can offer a bit more.
R9 3700x newest processor no one has ever heard of
Apu Mollik Same. Can’t wait!
Games not needing more than 6c/12t now, will definitely change soon once new consoles arrive and set the new baseline for game engines across the board. 8c/16t Zen 2 in consoles is going to make game engine so much more complex for gaming scenes, much more CPU hungry games will arrive in 2021 ported from consoles, you can guarantee this.
You guys said this same thing when faildozer arrived.
@@CobrazHD it's retarded for you to compare zen 2 to bulldozer
Yup. The 4700X is going to be the CPU you want going forth.
Nah, most new games are GPU bound and game devs would probably underutilize the power of the next gen cores for the first few years until they get enough experience with the new architecture to fully maximize all of its CPU power. This is what they always do.
Firstly not all 8 cores in consoles will be allocated to gaming, and secondly hyperthreading will be disabled when maximizing clocks. So 6c/12t won't be obsolete for a loooong time.
was waiting for this as soon as I saw GN's i5 vs R7 and R5 coverage. Good Guy Steves.
Intel's pricing is a joke my old Z170 motherboard died on me and to replace it it would cost more than a ryzen 2600+motherboard so guess who's now using AMD products
Glad I bought my 8700k when I did after it came out. It's still very close to the best in gaming. At 5ghz under water, it's still got a long life ahead of it.
For current selling price, 3700x is a competitors for i5 10600k than i7
yeah and you see that 8700k beating 3700x @ gaming ... so 10600k
Dr Lisa Su is helping Intel celebrate 10th gen launch with festivity sales on 3600X, 3700X and 3900X :P
@@Taurus_Play But unless you're buying an RTX 2080 Ti, you are better off saving the $100-150 (don't forget, no cooler) on a Ryzen 5 3600 & getting a better GPU, every single, damn, time. The i5 doesn't make any sense unless you are buying a flagship GPU (aka, where another +$100-200 in GPU $ won't do anything), in which case, why the fuck are you buying an i5?
@@Taurus_Play i would exactly call that beating they are basically the same your talking a 2 or 3% average fps difference at best but often with lower 1% lows
You guys were the only ones to test the new i9. I mean i7 so far. It's working as I had expected and I am glad. Intel is delivering similar performance for less money than last year. Good on Intel and Intel is Striking back. (:
Maybe we should mention the additional yearly operating costs at some point. Cause 300w power usage is off the chain man! Is that thing passively mining crypto in the background or something?!
300 watt is bullshit. 250 max at 10900k.
@@rocka163 Lol, yeah right. I've seen tests hit over 320 stock.
@@rocka163 You call Dave a Bullshitter & say 250w MAX for i9-10900K, where do you get that, Dave is Quoting Steve's Graph for Power Usage at 6:50, Wake Up to yourself, You are the one that is talking Bullshit
I agree, The I9-10900K at 300w is a scary proposition compared to the R9 3900X for long term use, considering the R9 3900X is faster at Processing related tasks that a Business or Home Office would be using them for it seems a much better option
Unfortunately for intel ryzen 3000 price have drop
When
They are going to stay put and 4000 series will come in well above it. Same things going to happen with Ampere
@@HaitiSpaceAgency i doubt it. if they do, then i'm not upgrading (like i need a 3080ti and 4950x for simple web browsing and homework anyways. i don't game)
@@mobeenpatrawala589 The prices started dropping a couple of days ago. Looks like Dr Lisa Su wanted to help Intel celebrate the 10th gen launch with some pro-consumer dance moves :P
dam saleh the Ryzen 9 already dropped down to 399 for the 10th gen launch.
10700K it's still too expensive imo
the price would not be a limit , just it matters if the $ budget is a fact.
Intel gotta protect dem margin$$$
like all the upper range gpus
@psykosonikwarrior I think your comparison is anything but "objective". In my region a 3900X is 420€, the 10700k is 440€. A decent cooler for the I7 is about 50€ on top of that.
You want pcie gen4? You only get it with the 3900X!
A 5-10% advantage in games is anything but "significant", especially since nobody uses a fresh installed Windows without any background tasks running and most people don't own a 1100€ graphics card.
If you are really only focused on gaming, get a 3700X and spend the saved money on a faster gpu. But getting a 10700K would be only a waste of money, no matter how you look at it, at least in a realistic way.
poor peasant
In canada an amd and Intel cpu are basically the same price tier, they're not cheaper in the high end.
Intel love their CPU refreshes lol.
More like a refresh of their refresh of a refresh.
its 14nm+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ so not a refresh
The comments regarding the 10600K vs 10700K and 10900K are really interesting. Gaming is Intel's last bastion, and AMD just can't seem to get it together to finally dethrone them conclusively. But Intel are the ones dethroning themselves with the mid tier 10th gen parts. If you want just the best gaming performance possible, and games don't "need" more than, say, 8 solid threads, then a 6 core Intel chip is as good as a 10 core one. Nobody is going to buy a 10900K for productivity, and nobody is buying 10th gen for value at all. The only reason you'd buy 10th gen is for the best gaming CPU possible, and all Intel needed to launch to achieve that was the 10600K.
Intel needs more competitive prices, the 10700k is here 10% more expensive than a 3900x and it doesn't even include a cooler. It is better than the 9900k for sure, but to be really competitive this CPU should have cost around 350$. This just shows how bad value the 9900k was.
broteh cooler doesnt matter, if ur buying a 400 $ cooler, ul buy a cooler ,what this nonsense of ppl saying ButAmDBringS cooler, like wtf.
Really good review i really like your channel from 2 years :)
Ryzen 7 3700x is the sweet spot and best all around value.
As a gamer, I'm still really happy with my 9700k I got for $250. I was affraid it was going to be destroyed by this gen..But intels gotta intel
Buy Intel!!
if playing Far Cry New Dawn is the only thing that you do on your desktop..
Gaming performance of 9900K and productivity of 3700x - it could be MVP of consumer CPUs, if not for the high price.
9900k outperformce 3700x @ productivity
Oh well, prices of Zen 2 might drop when Zen 3 comes out so it might be harder for Intel.
Did you forget to include temps? Apparently these 10000 series cpu's are a lot colder compared to the previous gen
Yes and no the heat output is higher and there hasn't been any efficiency improvements over the previous generation but they shaved down the silicon thickness and made the ihs thicker which makes the cpu more effective at moving the heat so as long as you have plenty of cooling capacity the die temps will be lower
Even after spending 410$ for that i7 people cannot use it out of box as there is no CPU cooler provided and that means the real cost will be much higher after spending on CPU cooler.
Also new motherboard!
i still wonder why games like planet zoo/coaster or cities skyline are not in the lineup for gaming benchmark since these games are very cpu intensive.
Do you Remember?
When Bulldozer hit 5ghz people be like,"Toaster sht, AMD Hot AF!"
When Skylake hit 5ghz people be like,"Intel Quality chip! Fastest Gaming CPU"
🙄
it's not like that, most are pointing at that power consumption
which is fine because the new 10th gen lose heat very efficiently, you just need a huge cooler
I am happy that Intel did this and doesn't look like an easy feat
Bulldozer hit 5ghz and makes 90C @ games with bests coolers and still makes shitty FPS .
9900ks @ 5ghz 35-55C in games and makes TOP fps on market ...
Could you do an IPC test, where you compare the 8700K vs 10600K and the 9900K vs 10700K all clocked at 5.0GHz maybe? Would be interesting to see how much impact those security fixes had or if there are maybe any improvements to the architecture at all.
Thank you for your endeavour and comprehensive testing! 😁🏆
Lol this video just makes me feel better about getting a 3700X 😂
Funny it makes me happy I skipped the Ryzen 3000 series. I’m waiting for Ryzen 4000 series to see if maybe AMD can beat Intel once and for all in the only thing that matters to me gaming.
@@SamtheCanuck I got impatient sitting on my i5 6600 so I upgraded and since I'm not using a top of the line GPU I won't see much of any gains shown here anyway.
Sean O'Brien I get it I’m hanging in there with my 7700k but hyperthreading is helping that. My son has a 6600k and at times I notice the 4 C/T processor limiting him a bit but he doesn’t notice yet.
@@SamtheCanuck Coming from an FX-8370. The 3900X I just refreshed my system with was well worth it lol
Some folks have been waiting longer to refresh than others.
@@SamtheCanuck buy a new pc for your son , and send pc to some 3rd world country ...
Great content as always!
Regarding the 10600K vs 10700K, I'd rather just buy B460/10700F than Z490/10600K, the single-threaded performance will be almost as good and you also get 30% better multi-threaded performance for similar price-point.
agreed, but u need to buy discrete
@@edward3709 How many people with these CPUs use the iGPU, though? This argument makes sense on low-end, but here, it's almost useless IMO.
"There are no bad products, just bad prices." Anandtech
Great Review and very comprehensive.
1080p - meeh some point in intel for 144-240hz
1440p - no point in intel
4k- you know
truest comment ive seen in a long time here. intel has its niche. and dont forget older games which are limited in core usage. amd is close to pleasing the 144hz 1080p market though. there are only a few engines where amd still cant deliver.
4k - 6 year old intel CPUs beter then AMDs new ones ?
Due to gpu bottleneck. With the new 3000 series from Nvidia..the cap will be bigger. So..for a pure gaming pc..intel is still the way to go. Here in my contry the 3900x and 10900k are almost equal priced
@@krupp4000 not sure if true. probably in some engines like frosbite. if you want max frames always buy intel. if you just want 160ish then you can use amd for most engines. i myself have intel though.
@@krupp4000 ryzen 4000 and some memory tuning will close the gap in performance almost at all specially in 1440p even with 3080 ti (which i will take). Even now ryzen 3000 with tuned ram is equal to stock 9900k + simple xpm ~3200cl16-3600cl16. Ofc intel can oc ram too and quite well but you need to remember how much it would cost at the end of it all from the side of money and time spent. I'm not talking about powerdraw.
What about the thermals?
£425 on Amazon :D Yeah, no thanks. Waiting on Ryzen 4000, their 8 core CCX and 20% IPC improvement.
Just what I was looking for...uploaded 2 hours ago....sweet timing
So.... The 10900k is basically damn pointless. The i7 is still games just as good as this "world's fastest gaming cpu" and a 120$ AMD CPU punching so high it is blowing my mind.
What if you wanna game at the sweet spot of 1440p and 144hz?
Steve, why didn't you show temperatures?
Well this proves it. . .
Intel knows how to make a I9-9900k. . .
Now it just has more + signs behind the 14nm and is a bit cheaper.
Just wondering if you will ever get around to testing the X570 motherboards in a case with the 3950x like you previously said in the video when you originally tested the motherboards?
According to Wikipedia, launch prices for i7's (they seem to be mixing & matching 1K unit and actual retail pricing):
i7 920 - $284
i7 2600K - $317
i7 3770K - $332
i7 4770K & i7 4790K - $339
i7 5775C (lol) - $366
i7 6700K - $339
i7 7700K - $350
i7 8700K - $359
i7 9700K - $374
i7 10700K - $374
...ya an i7 isn't really an i7 anymore.
the prices definitely increased, but you should take inflation into account for a part of that difference
Thing about the 10600k is you need at least a Mugen 5 to maintain it with an unlimited PL2. Maybe even a heftier cooler.
Too bad 3800Xs are almost never benched. Would've been curious of the performance of those as well.
Also jeez, it looks like everyone is benching with a 2080Ti, that's sooo misleading for the average buyer. Even people going for 3900/3950X/10900K CPUs won't be pairing them with such expensive a expensive GPU most of the time.
The pairing with the 2080Ti is done for the purpose of eliminating the GPU bottleneck and giving as best a reading of the performance of the CPU's themselves.
I totally agree with you, the mania of doing the tests for 4 that have a 2080ti
Incredible video as always. BTW, congrats for passing 500 K subs. You deserve far more than that for the amount of effort and dedication you put in your content
Always go for Ryzen unless you got a high end Gpu like 2070super or above, below that even 3300x will give you same perfomance while comparing to i9
...unless you pro 740p player
@@metregogi156 at 1080p the i5 10700k has significantly better preformance than 3300x or 3600
@@3XH1L Yes, but that comes at a cost premium, including the purchase of a new motherboard. The cpus you mentioned may not deliver the highest frames but they compensate with price-to-performance.
@MoCk_My_SoCk probably in 10-20 years it will become rare
@MoCk_My_SoCk If it weren't for high refresh rate screens being cheap it would be dead already. 4k 144hz is where I have my sights on next.
Barely keeps up with the 3700X
Think I'll wait for the 4000 series to come out and switch to team red
With what's been leaked about the 4000 series... it looks deadly in all respects.
Intel looked at AMD's line up and added 20-25% to the prices, it would seem.
All I hope this will slightly reduce prices on the Ryzen 3700X or 3900X, gunning for one of those, once MSI Tomahawk X570 finally releases.
Need my upgrade, from my 1600, some of my edit programs are starting to choke, ever so slightly.
Amd already announced a discount for the 3900x, now the msrp is 410$.
@@josephjuanaliagavalenzuela2345 well they do have their 4000 series chips coming q4 2020, getting a jump on clearing stock while also giving intel a kick in the balls seems like win win for AMD.
AMD already slashed the price of the 3900X to 410$. So it's basically a steal.
Welcome back to harbor unboxed.
hello from turkey I would follow you ozcan .
quality and curious, thank you for your product review down to the smallest detail. I do not have English, but I understand it with the translation in yotube, but I always open the audio of the video. I wish you continued success.
what speed was the 10700k ran @ ? stocknor max oc?
Thanks for this - good video! It made me see sense and stop thinking about the new intel chips. Instead i think im going to upgrade my R5 2600 to a 3700x/3800x depending on the prices when i am ready to commit to the purchase
I'm trying to decide between the i7 10700k and the r9 3700x to buy in about 2 weeks. 99% of the use will be gaming and some streaming. I do not use it for any real productivity. I'm leaning towards Intel but don't know if the extra cores/threads would be of any use to me on ryzen vs a few extra frames when I'll take all I can get.
So I currently have a de lid 4790k 4.6 oc on liquid metal air cooler 32gb ddr3 1800. 1070ti running 1080 @ 144hz and a 970 running 2 additional monitors. Will probably not upgrade gpu till late this year or next and to a 2070 super unless I can find a deal on a 2080ti down the road.
Such a beautiful Gigabyte 490 mobo it's a bummer it's an Intel mobo...
I "wonder" why they're more beautiful...
@@bananya6020 i wonder how, i wonder why, yesterday you told me bout a blue blue sky
As an owner of a 10700K-i7, It is fucking fast and I run everything in 1440p on max settings without a hiccup, so...Its a fucking beast and I love it.
lol already out of stock, people are honestly sheep to bigblues advertising
My main PC is Ryzen and I'm sticking with it. My secondary PC is Intel. If I started again I'd be all Intel. Intel has my trust for reliability. AMD is currently proving flaky again to me.
I'm sympathetic to Intel through experience, not marketing.
@@Safetytrousers I've had more trouble with Intel TBH, I guess it all boils down to luck
It's more the fact that it's a paper launch more than anything
No, it's because it's a paper launch. Do 't be suprised if your region only gets 10 of these CPU's. Intel can't make a lot and they won't sell a lot
Companies send limited stick on purpose to make things look better and decieve their customers and shareholders. AMD does it too. "Oh it's sold out, must be good" type deal. Give it a few months and they will be over stocked.
I just don't understand why intel is so arrogant with their pricing.. they literally have a better chance to compete with AMD but the have choosen their " premium pride" over everyhing else.
At 6:50 power consumption,
Amd with the 3700x setup consumes 164 W while the 10700K consumes 40% more power (+68 W) for having the same cores and threads. Isn't that impressive ?
UserBenchmark sees a clear Intel win in efficiency there
@@davidpinheiro5295 Who needs reality anyways.
Please add a frames/ performance per $ chart as well :)
good review as always.. will be waiting for zen 3.
Dramatic snap zoom: “it won’t be perceived for the most part..”
Is this a review for the 3900x? Nice orange highlight!
I would like to see Fortnite at Low settings tested in CPU benchmarks because it's really demanding believe it or not.
Fortnite on Epic is actually pretty hard on the PC... On low it gives 500fps easily.