I never understood how various mindsets are formed ... every user with an internet connection comes in saying "well I read on the internet ...." So before we go any further I play this video.
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DZbSlkFoSU
I didn't want to clog the post with a video link so copy / paste the link and get rid of the space after the h on http.
If i hear anything about cores, nm whatever, I just say stop. The ONLY thing worthy of discussion is "how fast does it run your apps ?" ... not benchmarks ... not things you do once a year, noth things that run while you're sleeping ... just stuff that you do on a routine basis.
If you are building a pure gaming rig, no I just don't see AMD with a place here. Where AMD has really nailed a market niche, it's best market niche in terms of potential sales numbers is the gamer / video editor / streamer hobbyist. If you are making a living doing video editing, time is money and spending $2,000 for a CPU will have a payback period of 4 - 6 weeks.
> $ 1.000 budget - or hat I like to call the "cost doesn't matter, I'm gonna make money by spending it" category, got give the video editing to Intel. Here any gaming that is getting down is "after hours, blow off some steam" kinda thing.
@$ 750 Budget Here the only thing that make s sense is the 2950X ... tho not for someone who's a gamer. The 3900x would make more sense at $455 for better gaming. This vategory really doesn't make a lot of sense but wanted to have something between $ 500 and $ 1,000.
@ $ 500 - Lotta candidates here and, at 1st glance, which to pick would depend on how much gaming versus how much editing. The two top contenders are the 9900KF (no one is seriously gaming on a IGP) and the 3900X. A 1.6 % edge to the 3900x in video editing, versus a 1.6% edge to the 9900K in gaming @ 1440p. However, with the 9900Ks better overclocking, even more based upon user reports, for the KF, to my view, Intel takes this category. What it proves here however is that while you can find synthetic utilities and apps that will do better w/ more cores, contrary to popular belief a) video editing is not one of them and b) most things that most folks do are not among them. That being said ... it's hard to make an argument against either the 9900k or the 3900X "by the numbers"
@ $250 - The obvious candidates are he 9600k and 3500, tho can't throw out the older generation 2700x. An argument could be made that ...
The 2.27 % increase in video editing speed of the 9600k isn't worth the 22% increase in price
The 3.31 % increase in gaming speed of the 9600k isn't worth the 22% increase in price
This is a bogus argument however as the CPU doesn't accomplish this on it's own. Adding the cost of a decent cooler to the cost difference .. we are likely talking $1290 versus $1200, we are looking at about a 7.5% increase in price. Personally, I would go Intel for the overclocking ability but again, I don't see a valid argument to be made against either choice.
There's an anecdote from the political spectrum in the story of "Joe the Plumber". Joe was an average dude thrust into the spotlight when he spoke up on the campaign traul saying the a specific candiates tax plan was no good for him ... he said that people in specific tax brackets would be negatively affected and that folks in a specific tax bracket would also suffer. Joe soon found himslef effectively on the campaign trail so to speak as journalists would continue to ask him questions. It turned out that Joe was not a business owner ... Joe was not in that tax bracket and as he researched more on thiese topics to put him in a better position to answer questions, he realized that the tax plan he had been speaking against actually would significantly improve his lot in life and he switched sides ... but Joe's 15 minutes of fame ended as he'd been show to speak passionately in favor of proposals whiuch were not in hos own interest.
The point here is that all too often uses make a component list by making emotional choices rather than ones that make the most sense for **their** actual usage. More cores / threads is no a panacea ... smaller die sizes do not necessarily bring anything to the table. It's all fine and good to search for information on the internet ... but it's the numbers that matter not. I gave my reasons why I would make a specific choice ... but in all but the top tier, whose going to get top dog status depends more upon one's individual actual usage than the dominance of one CPU over another ... and cores or nm is not in the running for being the "significant factor". What I think or anyone else thinks is in essence immaterial as only "the numbers" for your apps ... how you use your PC every day is relevant to your particular choice.
"Siri auto turns on when she hears a zipper" LOL talk about sketchy as hell. 
