Intel i7 10700K or AMD Ryzen 9 3900X — which CPU is best for gaming?

[Citizen Cook]

PC gamer claims that the intel CPU is better for gaming than the AMD alternative. What say you?

[r.linder]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Abisha:

7 nm CPU is better then Intel, just do to physics along.
buy the AMD you will absolute not regret it. i have and it's a absolute monster

Lithography means nothing, and both TSMC and Intel stopped naming nodes after the actual width.

Intel's 14nm is actually 24nm while TSMC 7nm is actually 22nm. It's just marketing.

Aside from that, it means nothing for performance, only power consumption if the manufacturer uses smaller and more efficient transistors.

Der8auer was one person that found all of that.

[Abisha]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Escorve:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Abisha:

7 nm CPU is better then Intel, just do to physics along.
buy the AMD you will absolute not regret it. i have and it's a absolute monster

Lithography means nothing, and both TSMC and Intel stopped naming nodes after the actual width.

Intel's 14nm is actually 24nm while TSMC 7nm is actually 22nm. It's just marketing.

Aside from that, it means nothing for performance, only power consumption if the manufacturer uses smaller and more efficient transistors.

why is it called 7nm then if it's 22?.
bit of false advertisement

efficient transistors means less heat buildup so it's matters a lot.

[_I_]

nm doesn matter
they are not measuring any specific part anymore

[Ad Hominem]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย _I_:

nm doesn matter
they are not measuring any specific part anymore

The measurements also aren't directly comparable between different processes, at least is what I've heard.

[hawkeye]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Abisha:

why is it called 7nm then if it's 22?.
bit of false advertisement

efficient transistors means less heat buildup so it's matters a lot.

It's the spruikers. It's all about selling cpus. Pushing their preferred choice gives them a sense of importance. The more people that you stack under you, the higher you rise in your own self-importance. And preaching to masses makes money.

One thing the spruikers never mention is that more cores = more heat.
Weaker instruction set = more work to achieve the same result = more heat.
Bigger cpu = improved heat transfer.
Use of more cores = more heat.
Intels 14nm is slightly denser than AMD's 10nm. Intels 10nm+ is AMD's 7nm.

So there are more variables than just "nanometers".

Science is about real world measurements. If you are concerned about heat, look up an actual measurement.

[Sir Gnomag]

I'd look at some of the Alienware specs and reviews as they are purpose built gaming consoles.

[Blaquicat]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Abisha:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Escorve:

Lithography means nothing, and both TSMC and Intel stopped naming nodes after the actual width.

Intel's 14nm is actually 24nm while TSMC 7nm is actually 22nm. It's just marketing.

Aside from that, it means nothing for performance, only power consumption if the manufacturer uses smaller and more efficient transistors.

why is it called 7nm then if it's 22?.
bit of false advertisement

efficient transistors means less heat buildup so it's matters a lot.

I have an old xeon 2687W which give the perfect example..
Its a 32nm processor with 150w TDP..
Still kicks until today on games, very close to an i7-3770 (which have slight better single core)
But the xeon have 8 cores and 16 threads and 20m cache, better overall.
Its a 2012 cpu, handling barely well on 2020 i guess.

The point is, does not matter what is the technology applied, what matters is what that technology can do.

[Citizen Cook]

So I decided to wait for AMD next month, now I hear intel are releasing new CPU's in March 2021.
When should I pull the trigger?

(I want a CPU that will kick the Xbox Series X's ass and last me 7-8 years)

[vadim]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Citizen Cook:

I want a CPU that will kick the Xbox Series X's ass

Every CPU will do the trick. Even the cheapest.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Citizen Cook:

and last me 7-8 years

Nobody can predict the future, but it is well known that 10th generation mobile Intel CPUs (Tiger lake) have biggest performance advantage over previous generation since Sandy Bridge. About 18-20%.
So, most probably future Rocket Lake will be also significantly faster than Comet Lake.
Thus, regardless on Zen 3 success (we don't know anything about these processors) faster CPUs will be available in several months.

[Grimy_RIck]

There is always something better around the corner, i have been waiting a number of months for RTX30 and Zen3, got my Strix OC 3080 on order just waiting on Zen3 next month, so i personally will be hitting the trigger then, there is no way i can wait till March, but if you can put up with what you have till then, then it way be worth the wait.

[Citizen Cook]

So if I do wait until March... That would be the optimum time to buy a CPU?

[r.linder]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Citizen Cook:

So if I do wait until March... That would be the optimum time to buy a CPU?

There's not really such a thing as the best time to buy a CPU, unless you're focused on getting the best price/performance.

The R5 4600 will obviously overtake the 3600, and the 3600 will become a better value depending on how far the prices drop. Same goes for the 2600/1600 AF unless they become discontinued from manufacturing.

[Grimy_RIck]

No one can say we can not read the future, but if you wanted to be able to compare all the latest chips from both AMD and Intel then yes, waiting is the best idea, you could wait till March and decide that you prefer one of the Zen3 options that have been out for months, but it gives you the widest of options.

[r.linder]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Grimy_RIck:

No one can say we can not read the future, but if you wanted to be able to compare all the latest chips from both AMD and Intel then yes, waiting is the best idea, you could wait till March and decide that you prefer one of the Zen3 options that have been out for months, but it gives you the widest of options.

For raw performance it is better to wait if there's no rush, because according to some pretty reliable information, AMD is working on 8-core CCXs, which would drastically reduce latency in Ryzen 3 through 7. That on top of another sizeable IPC improvement and higher clocks with an improved boost (they're allegedly aiming for boosts that last much longer) would mean that AMD would close the gap in gaming and stomp all over Intel elsewhere.

Most users would be fine with what's already out though, they don't need to wait. Zen3 should really only matter to enthusiasts at this point in time.

[Citizen Cook]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย vadim:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Citizen Cook:

I want a CPU that will kick the Xbox Series X's ass

Every CPU will do the trick. Even the cheapest.

Really? So the Xbox Series X's CPU is based on custom Zen 2 architecture. It has 8 cores and 16 threads with a peak 3.8GHz frequency.