Sunday, June 9th 2019
Intel Challenges AMD to Beat it in "Real World Gaming"
AMD is on the verge of launching its 3rd generation Ryzen "Matisse" processors that are widely expected to take the performance crown from Intel. At its Computex 2019 reveal, AMD CEO Dr Lisa Su claimed that these processors beat the competition in all areas, including gaming. Motherboard manufacturers threw their weight behind AMD by pulling out their most premium brands for the AMD "Valhalla" desktop platform that consists of these processors, mated with an AMD X570 chipset motherboard. Ahead of its E3 2019 keynote Monday afternoon, Intel has come out with a challenge. Chipzilla dares AMD to beat it in "real-world gaming."
At its "gaming performance for the real world" address in Los Angeles Jon Carvill, VP of marketing, challenged AMD to beat it in real world gaming with its upcoming processors. "So you're going to hear a lot about gaming CPUs this week," he began. "They may or may not come from certain three letter acronyms. That said, here's what I want to challenge you. I want to challenge you to challenge them. If they want this crown come beat us in in real world gaming, real world gaming should be the defining criteria that we use to assess the world's best gaming CPU. I challenge you to challenge anyone that wants to compete for this crown to come meet us in real world gaming. That's the measure that we're going to stand by."
AMD's latest stab at Intel is the "Zen 2" microarchitecture at the heart of the new Ryzen 9 3900X 12-core/24-thread processor, leading a gaming-focused processor lineup that also includes the Ryzen 7 8-core/16-thread, and Ryzen 5 3600X 6-core/12-thread. These processors feature a 10% increase in clock-speeds, and a whopping 15 percent increase in IPC over the current "Zen+" The processors, when combined with motherboards based on the AMD X570 chipset, also put out a total of 40 PCI-Express gen 4.0 lanes. Unlike previous generations, much of AMD's engineering effort has been focused on shoring up gaming performance. The company is explicitly marketing these processors as "Gaming CPUs." The processors launch on the 7th of July.
Source:
PCGamesN
At its "gaming performance for the real world" address in Los Angeles Jon Carvill, VP of marketing, challenged AMD to beat it in real world gaming with its upcoming processors. "So you're going to hear a lot about gaming CPUs this week," he began. "They may or may not come from certain three letter acronyms. That said, here's what I want to challenge you. I want to challenge you to challenge them. If they want this crown come beat us in in real world gaming, real world gaming should be the defining criteria that we use to assess the world's best gaming CPU. I challenge you to challenge anyone that wants to compete for this crown to come meet us in real world gaming. That's the measure that we're going to stand by."
96 Comments on Intel Challenges AMD to Beat it in "Real World Gaming"
While clearly it isn't The Gospel, that information is, BY FAR, the best we have to show what people are gaming with it. I also don't see any mobile anything in Steam stats (though I may have missed it).
I don't have time to go look for it... sorry. Maybe later link it up. :)
www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Computers-Accessories-Computer-CPU-Processors/zgbs/pc/229189
The FX 8350 is still in there as a top seller.. is THAT a gaming CPU? Its a ridiculous slug in gaming...
Also, look at that list closely...I see mostly 6c and less CPUs in that list. Im certain outside of the 9900Ks and Ryzen 7s, the rest of the lower core count and less expensive CPUs make up what was sold of the flagship models from each company. This also doesn't include the majority of PC owners who buy canned systems too.
How you can make the leap from CPUs sold on Amazon to more core utilization in games is beyond me. Correlation is not causation, remember. ;)
If AMD performance is within spitting distance of Intel performance, nobody but the most hardcore Intel fanbois will buy Intel. Why? Because if one can get performance within three to four percent of Intel at half the cost, people are going to buy AMD. This will force Intel to bring prices down which will spark a price war and in the end, it doesn't matter if AMD or Intel wins; the consumer will win with lower prices.
As for NewEgg, unless you want to pay up you're going to have to wait for the slow boat to deliver your stuff.
YIKES!!! :fear:
Or if you're really lucky, live within driving distance of a Microcenter which I do. I live half an hour away by highway from a Microcenter.
I would like to see something similar, on today's CPUs - now when Intel also 'discovered' that i3 could have 4 true cores and i5 even more, would be nice to see how many the popular games use - for a very long time Intel is a champion because single thread domination - if we have the same, or pure-clock-based results, such a review would show what is 'optimal' number of cores where further ones means a little or nothing.
Perhaps the test could be done not only on GTX2080xtxtxt or Titan XXX, but on some more affordable GPU. The usual 'to minimize the GPU influence' somehow means a little to me - what guarantees that 800g card will perform scalable to 300-400g (or less)? While there, we *know* that Ultra setting are just for showing off and difference between Ultra and next-best often can't be noticed, and especially player who don't look at FPS but what actually happens in the game on blind tests haven't noticed at all the difference, or said that next-best have better quality.
Wizzard, please take a note and perhaps do a comprehensive test between CPUs / GPUs and Ultra/next-best... when the new Ryzens come out.