@OxiCleansGaming I mean they are close enough. In 2021, Intel's 11th gen will outperform Ryzen 5000 series and later that year Ryzen 7000 series (or maybe 6000) will become better at gaming. This competition is a win for everyone. One area where Intel does need to innovate is Architecture. They need to stop making CPUS that can consume upto 300 W (OC) and have about double the TDP of their competitor.

@Gurjinder Singh They seem to be about the same in gaming, but Intel chips are better than AMD chips at gaming anyways, except for the ryzen 5000 series.

@OxiCleansGaming 3900X is worse than 10600K at gaming.

5900x is a lot better than 10900k though, 3900x is comparable to a i9 9900k

it's his merch I believe! Link in the description

because nobody is bying intel proccesors

@Cl0vxr This video talks about the value and how there is 'no contest'. Now, due to the new Zen 3 CPUs being priced at quite a premium, there is actually a contest. AMD created the contest themselves because of their Intel-like pricing. Also, using profanity is a poor way of getting your point across and only shows how underinformed you are when the only argument you can think of is 'b-but 5600x more fps than 10900k haaa Intel sux lmao'. Keep your mouth closed if you have no clue what you're talking about kiddo.

This did age well bitch Zen 3 murdered Intel even the 5600x gets higher fps than the 10900k

the all round performance and long term motherboard support is worth the price and i prefer 7nm+ than the 14nm+++++++++++++ and amd will jump to 5 nm technology soon.

they all have graphics onboard....

Yea for Intel fanboys AMD still wins no contest like the title

damn, it's been hard time huh.

@backslide311 I mean if you're only gaming and don't plan on streaming at the same time or running background applications like discord then yeah intels better for that. Ryzen is better for gaming if you plan to stream and have applications running the background because it has better multi core performance to handle those tasks without effects your fps. If you put ryzen and intel against eachother in game while streaming or running background applications ryzen would have better performance with more fps. But if you're just gaming alone intel has slightly better performance. So i get it, you're just gaming like an xbox so it makes sense ude want intel. at least until zen 3. and pcie4 does matter this generation, it didn't so much in the last one.

@Pabz Roz also power is cheap, I don't give a fuuuu about a few extra watts. Pcie 4 doesn't matter (yet) so that's moot

@Pabz Roz I built a gaming rig, Intel is better!

@backslide311 ​ Shouldn't of went with intel in the first place lmao .Ryzen has pcie4 doubling the bandwidth of intels pcie3, a much lower TDP, a 7nm process compared to intels 10nm which gives a 35% speed improvement using 65% less power, and a 3.3X density improvement, a better architecture, better security, faster supported memory at 3200mhz while intel is still at 2666mhz, more cores for the price, huge performance boost into multi threaded performance, all at a much better value. These are facts, every comparison chart, benchmark, or article says the same things and this all translates into better real world performance. The only thing Intel has that is faster is single threaded performance which translates into higher fps at lower resolutions like 1080p and 1440p but the new Zen 3 Ryzen processors launching at the end of the month show much faster single threaded performance than intel and a 25-30% overall performance increase compared to todays Zen 2. After October there will be zero reason to go with intel. So yeah, really bad purchase bro. Coulda got 15-20% faster gaming performance and up to 35% faster productivity performance.

@Pabz Roz if it's that good, I can just build another rig. Easy peesy

@Pabz Roz I actually saw quite a few videos about zen 3 and got quite impressed. AMD is crushing Intel now if Intel doesn't do anything, if possible. As long as the price is affordable not some 800 euro tech.

AMDs new ryzen zen 3 processors launching at the end of the month are faster than intel in gaming performance now. No reason to buy intel anymore.

ryzen dumass not rizen

10900k is not a competitor with a 3950x. the 3950x is in a league of its own. it has more cores and threads then the 10900k and is WAAAAY faster at workloads. gaming isn't everything you know that right? literally 75% of people buy these processors for workloads and the other 25% are gamers. intel has nothing that competes with amd's high model processors. educate yourself.

intel fanboy in denial alert lol amd is better. better value, better workload performance. intel only has a very slight edge in gaming performance but ryzen is literally right behind them. besides intel has nothing that can compete with there 3950x and threadrippers. intel is completely behind have you not educated yourself the past year? lol it's a well known thing...

Frontbattles well, idk about the ryzen, but since they’re competitors, they should have around equal performance

@Nnnmvbgdrj Ctgbugjv no you can get them for 800 already

Well, since a 144hz 4k monitor costs 1k+, you should just get a i9/ryzen 9

if you're playing 4k the cpu wont matter. you can literally put a i9 10900k vs a ryzen 5 3600 and you will get the same fps at 4k lol....

apple uses intel processors lmao

​@Tristan L Don't even bother. Intel fans just can't accept the fact they wasted money on their chips when they could have gotten better overall performance with AMD for less. They keep comparing Ryzen to the previous generation to justify their horrible choices but in reality it's denial. As we approach Zen 3 they have been getting even more outlandish and toxic refusing to accept the fact they're about to lose the only edge they have in gaming and single thread performance. If the leaked specs and benchmarks are anything to go by, there will be absolutely no reason to choose intel anymore. After launch if they see a comparison in 1080p where Ryzen is pushing out higher frames I seriously think a whole lot of them are going to be put onSucicide watch. I had an argument with some dude saying pcie4 and ryzens 7nm process was a gimmick and that the "specs" dont mean anything. It's about real world performance and intel has better multi core productivity performance and gaming performance. I nearly shit myself he swore to god he made sense and he was correct.

Hmm AMD 95 and 65 Watt TDP versus Intels 100+ watt TDP is a massive yikes I must say when chips with higher TDPs tend to actually run hotter then those with lower ones. So stop being bias. Also shitty TIM on Intel chips only further worsen the thermals. If your ryzen cpu is overheating then the fault either lies with you applying the cooler wrong or the environment the computer is sat in, not the processor as its TDP means it doesn't put out as much heat as a 100+ watt TDP chip will and does. I have a ryzen 5 2600x and I have never hit above 72 c using the stock cooler with a stable OC of around 3.8 at a voltage of about 1.5. Ryzen doesn't put out much heat and the idea that AMD thermals are bad is flawed. Sure FX's thermals and performance were bad but ryzen isn't FX so stop acting like it is. I've literally have had zero issues with AMD overheating even when I had a FX system(ryzen was only annouched after I got this system) with a shitty cooler as a entry into PC gaming. Stop shitting on AMD for problems that are either the fault of the user or the environment(news flash components will run hotter on hotter days and it isn't limited to AMD). You can like Intel all you want but don't suck their dick as they have major fucking problems as well.

thats due to bad coolers bro what r u even talking about hahah intel processors run way hotter than ryzens because they consume a lot more power. it depends what cooler you have, clock speeds, and case variables. where do you get this crazy thinking from? jesus this comment section is full of completely false ignorant comments.

but they are behind? run benchmarks against each brands comparable processor. in workloads amd smokes every chip that intel has using LESS power at a much better value. not to mention amd has the 3950x and the threadripper series which intel doesn't even have a competitor for... intel is completely behind? wtf are u talking about hahah what did you think the past 2 years of everyone going crazy over how good ryzen is and all the tech youtubers saying intel is behind was not real? where the fuck have you been? lmfao

@leeroy jankins Thanks for the reply. Heat issues at lower % usage, ram issues, driver issues. lack of versatility have plagued AMD for the last 10 years. Intel has its share of problems too, however I like the stability of Intel.

@A Dillpickle AMD: More cores same price, pcie4, 7nm process, lower TDP, faster productivity, affordable motherboard keeping AM4 chipset, Better security, evolving architecture, faster supported memory, great gaming performance, better value. Intel: More fps at 1080p........................................................................*crickets* **cricket**

Guys he's a troll don't even bother arguing with someone who is ignorant. He hasn't shown a single article or any piece of proof showing that ryzen has all these issues and intel is better because every article and review shows amd out performs Intel. He can't back up what he's saying because none of it is true lol. Which is why we can back up what we say because guess what! It's true. He knows he's wrong, he know's AMD is better, He knows he can't back up anything he's saying but he says it anyway. That's what trolls do.,,,, I meanRetards do that too so maybe he'sRetarded? who knows.

@A Dillpickle ​ So you're saying AMD is paying 80% of the PC community to lie about their facts and reviews? That's a stretch buddy. You really sound like you're in denial here. Why doesn't Intel sponsor and pay everyone to manipulate what they say then? Ryzen makes up 93% of processors sold since 2020. So 80% of the PC community says you're wrong with actual facts. 93% of the cpus sold in the past year are AMD. But still Intel is better because Ryzen has all these issues but no facts backing that up... Sounds like denial to me.

@Peter Jackson I think you should buy AMD then. Nobody trying to stop you at all. Just telling what I have direct knowledge of. Do whatever blows your skirt up

how do you explain jayz2cents, LTT, GamerNexus, and every other tech youtuber and online article saying the same things about amd? I guess the entire internet is being payed by AMD then too huh? Why are intel fanboys in such denial that their favorite company is falling behind? I don't get it. It's like you see the facts a million times but refuse to believe it. It's kinda sad. edit: by the way you realize your 5-10% in gaming performance only counts in 1080pp right? and 1080p is dying...

@Pabz Roz Well i just refer to Gamer nexus that say that for the new 10th Gen u will need at least a 240 AIO , of cause talking here about the high end sector

i agree with everything you said except for the 240 aio. lol that's just not true... doesn't make much sense either. kinda dumb.

All around pc go with amd. great with gaming, streaming, editing, workloads, best overall pc. if you want to strictly game and don't mind over spending for 5-10% better gaming performance ONLY in 1080p go with intel.

Gaming is intel. Idk what amd is for

cuz they basically throw them in the box for free. they're horrible lol

amd

no

they don't mean anything. way to many variables that give those numbers you saw.

Merlin thanks I appreciate it

I'd say upgrade.

AMD is cheaper

INTEL

They are only worse in efficiency and pricing. Other than that they are better.

they hate you too

If you only care about gaming and want every fps possible get the Intel. But if you do other workstation activities get the AMD. At higher resolutions you start noticing less and less fps differences in games between the Intel and AMD, at that point your GPU is becoming the bottleneck. So if you game at 1080p you probably want the Intel but if you game at 2k/4k I would get the AMD.

@John Smith Only people who do drugs think that everyone else does. Game engines are not genuinely multi-threaded. While they might offload secondary tasks such as sound, none of them are able to divide up the primary game loop into equal sized work loads. 64 cores does absolutely nothing for a game but 3% faster clock speed does.

Put down the crack pipe, games have been multi-threaded for awhile now. They just won't use every single thread available unless the game/engine is designed to.

Intel already is a better value. Check the Passmark Single Thread Performance chart. 10th gen chips rule.

It is until you get to higher resolutions, then they get within 5-10 fps of each other because the GPU becomes the bottleneck at that point.

It's not price gouging, it's supply and demand.

@bill wiley true

AMD fanboys were spouting the same stuff back in the Athlon days but you see what Intel did to them back them, put them right back in their place as a distant 2nd place chip maker for over a decade. Never count Intel as being down and out. History is well known for repeating itself.