So I found some good Z390 boards on sale for $109 shipped, I got the ASRock Steel Legend for $105 actually. So 8 core 9700 non-k 65 watt, beats 90% of games in AMD by a good 10 fps while staying cool, and costs $329, same as AMD's cheapest 8 core offering, which only beats it in two mainstream games. Then we look at ram, you really need 3600 ram for Ryzen to shine or 3200 b die. cas 14. Cheapest of which is $140 right now, yet i got my 3000 cas 14 ram for $95 and it will do great on intel, probably ok for AMD too but would need to risk OC'ing it, etc as AMD really needs 3200 cas 14 min to do well. Cheapest X570 board is $170... so your looking at 45 more for the ram, and 65 more for the mobo, all so you can get less FPS in games, and Destiny 2 doesn't even work with Ryzen CPU's yet and they still haven't figured out a fix. So if Destiny 2 doesn't work on Ryzen, how many older games from 10 years ago have people not played yet, but when nostalgia hits them and they load up the game... only to find out not supported. Hopefully there are not that many, but if one modern game didn't pass the cut or cut corners and only focused on intel, guess what? I bet more did too but no one has time to play 4000 games to see which ones work and which don't.
I could even argue the i5-9400f at $149 on Amazon right now and a cheap $80 H370 mobo - several youtube comparisons show the 9400f on several games tying or beating the ryzen 3600... which again is $170 mobo and $200 CPU minimum, not to mention you need to throw in much more expensive ram where as the 9400f will do those numbers on 2666 $65 ram just fine.
Peoples obsession with threads is overblown, especially if all you do is game.
If you do more than game, than by all means go AMD because I agree those threads do count then. Just not sure why Intel has such a bad marketing team, seriously not sure why everyone is fawning over Ryzen 3000 when its still getting beat in gaming and that's with the security patches... and same price or cheaper for the Intel parts minus threading... I mean to each their own. I just know I prefer higher FPS no matter what, and if I can do that cheaper too... then I mean alright sure. Great thing about the 9700 non-k is the 65w, it won't run hot even if I set all cores to boost to 4.7 and no downclocking in the BIOS.
Just curious why I seem to be the only one having these thoughts? Even Linus is gushing over Ryzen (even though he has intel in his new rig he built a few weeks ago). If I was recommending a budget build right now, it would be 1660 or 1660 ti, i5-9400f, cheap 2666 ram, and a 144hz VA 1080p 24" panel for $150. Literally will be Ryzen in 90% of games and still save ton of money. No I am not an Intel fanboy... just presenting the facts. I owned AMD for a solid decade straight, from flashing my 6950 BIOS to a 6970 and having a blast, to the ATI AGP days of upgrading just so I could play WoW on launch day. AMD will always be special to me, I just don't understand the hype I guess this round, seriously 3 generations of Ryzen and still not beating Intel in gaming, why is no one else frustrated at this? Not to mention some games don't work at all with Ryzen, and GamersNexus reminded people in his most review of 5700 XT that the drivers crash all the time for him for his 5700 XT, etc... I honestly don't miss those days.
