Core i9-9900K vs Ryzen 9 3900X: Which should you buy? - driverriong1988

To outsiders, AMD's triumphant set up of Ryzen 3000 looks like total triumph with the only thing left to do is schedule the ticker-tape parade down Broadway.

Intel, meanwhile, has to seek an poor Carry Amelia Moore Nation to dump a truckload of 2019 CPU Champions shirts onto.

Fortunately, the truth is a lot more nuanced. And while we'd also name AMD's Ryzen 3000 the boilers suit champs, reality requires a lot more context on the CPU that's rightish for you.

So to keep you from having to sift through dozens of reviews and hundreds of forum posts, we'll sum up the strengths and weaknesses of these cardinal power house CPUs and when they're right for you.

If you do multi-rib work, buy…Ryzen 3000

This should come of no shock absorber to anyone who has watched AMD's Ryzen since the beginning. AMD essentially democratized Central processing unit cores with the first off Ryzen and hasn't stopped dragging down the be per thread ever since. Just to throw you an idea: Intel charged $1,723 for the 10-core Core i7-6950X in 2016. That worked out to most $86 per wind. Now, the 12-core Ryzen 9 3900X is $21 per thread.

IDG

Per thread costs based happening street pricing in June 2019

More cores typically translates into more performance. And more affordable cores, substance more performance than always before. Only information technology all depends happening whether you can function those cores or not. Today, IT's mostly 3D animation artists WHO can use it the near, on with those World Health Organization set video editing operating theatre video encoding. Other multi-rib apps ordinarily occupy the workstation arena for engineering, scientific or software development. This isn't ever the shell (you'd be surprised how many another workstation apps don't use to a greater extent than a couple of cores) but when it is, Ryzen 9 is departure to be your resolve 9 out of 10 times. So handily, we'd recommend Ryzen over Core for multi-threaded applications.

If you do single-threaded or lightly-threaded work buy…Core i9 or Ryzen 9

We canful go ga-ga terminated the massive amount of cores available now, but the harsh truth is the vast majority of applications still run on a single-core, operating theatre equitable a handful. Even tasks where you'd think many cores would issue, it usually doesn't. Adobe's Photoshop, for example, really doesn't use a lot of cores until you hit certain filters operating room tasks.

When you take the number of cores out of the equation, it comes down to it sunset standby of clock speed or megahertz, along with the efficiency of the chip. Efficiency basically denotes how good a CPU uses each time retick. Plain, the higher the efficiency and time speed, the better.

The go-to here is typically Intel, which has had an advantage in efficiency and an advantage in clock speeds over AMD's older chips. While Intel still has a decent clock advantage, the efficiency of Ryzen has greatly improved. In fact, we'd have to say that it's mostly a wash these days.

IDG

For example (above), when we use Cinebench R20 to measure the performance growth of both the Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 9 3900X victimization 1 wander to 24 threads, you fundament see the percent difference betwixt the cardinal chips.

We've done this kind of comparison before, and typically Intel is better connected light (lower thread count) loads, piece Ryzen is better on heavier (higher thread count) loads. In this sheath, AMD's Ryzen is dominating on the right side of the chart as was common. On the left side, where Ryzen would normally be completely underwater, it's losing by about 4 to 7 per centum, which isn't untold when you consider Intel still has a 400MHz advantage.

Thusly no surprise, it comes John L. H. Down to what you do. Dress you prioritize stinky clocks and CPU efficiency at all cost while non giving a blame about multi-threaded tasks beyond 16-duds? If this is you, then Core i9 is the better choice.

If, however, you actually need boatloads more multi-threading execution,and you'Re willing to release essentially single-digit public presentation in light and single-threaded lots then Ryzen 9 is the best choice.

Play on Ryzen 9 operating theatre Core i9: How to choose

When it comes to gaming happening high-end CPUs alike the Ryzen 9 or Core i9 it's easy to get confused with the answers you get. That's because it's non or so Central processing unit performance, it's also about how reigning the GPU is, the resolution you play at, and the refresh rate of the monitor.

First, we'll say that both CPU are absolute great gaming CPUs, and you really can't move out inopportune with either.

And yes nerds, we get a line you: If you only play games and don't necessitate the luxuriously-thread count of either chip, a Core i7-9700K (or lower) or Ryzen 7 3700X (Oregon lower) gets you far more bang for your buck.

This story, however, is about folks who need the multi-threaded execution of the Core i9 or Ryzen 9. Core i9 generally leads in gaming performance, just the Ryzen 9 typically trails away very thin single-finger's breadth frame rates, so information technology's going to be a wash for all but folks.

That standard, however, applies exclusive when playing games in situations where the GPU is not the limiting ingredien. For instance, while the Core i9 outperforms the Ryzen 9, it does that using a GeForce RTX 2080 Si and at 1080p resolution. If we use a GeForce GTX 1080, it's mostly a tie. If you tick the resolution capable 2560×1440, IT's a tie equally well, smooth with the 2080 Te. Acting at 4K? It's doesn't really matter which CPU you'Re using, because you're GPU-bound almost all of the time.

If you look at the graphic below, the Core i9's moment to glow is typically when you absolutely must have the highest frame rates possible. Some have got called this use case "eSports," which is probably a precise good option because eSports generally prioritizes ultra-high frames.

IDG (created on Canva.com)

This should help explain the situations where a Core i9 is likely the wagerer choice over a Ryzen 9 for play.

Ii factors we didn't don that should mentioned is that's by and large with a conventional play experience, without adding streaming into the mix, operating room what visual quality settings you like to play at.

If you program to stream video like a sho at the highest settings, there's an disputation for the greater core count of Ryzen. Some would say Core i9 performs retributive too at the most commonly used streaming settings. Still, we'd give the edge to Ryzen because if you have to blue-pencil that picture every bit a pennant, Ryzen's high-thread talents win the mean solar day.

Tom's Hardware

Intel has 15,000 developers doing computer software ontogeny out thither. Hate it all you want AMD fans, that probably substance better performance on Intel chips in applications where you might not expect IT.

If you use an app that likes Intel, then, buy up Intel

As you sample to filter direct scads of reviews and hundreds of forum comments, just remember that you'rhenium purchasing a CPU for your computer, not their computer. And if you use an application that plainly sings connected Intel microarchitecture, then your best bet is to stick to Intel. And yes, if you use up an app that runs better on AMD CPUs, stick with that.

We only require to show this out because most computer hardware reviews can really only give you a general sense, which may or may not match your needs and the specific applications that you attention approximately.

If you use Fast Synchronize…buy Heart and soul i9

One ace up Intel's arm has been its Quick Synchronise support, which is built into Intel CPUs with Intel integrated art. Quick Sync is Intel's fixed function encode support that accelerates video encoding tasks.

The speed difference is doltishly different, as you can see down the stairs where we used the x86 CPU cores to encode a video using HEVC vs. using the Quick Sync bear in the Core i9.

The chunky news report is if you use a video encoder or video editor in chief with Quick Sync tolerate, IT's worthy having it available.

IDG

Intel's Quick Sync sport (only happening CPUs with integrated graphics) puts conventional CPU-based encryption to shame.

Source: https://www.pcworld.com/article/397731/core-i9-9900k-vs-ryzen-9-3900x-which-should-you-buy.html

Posted by: driverriong1988.blogspot.com

Share this post