NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 with AMD Ryzen 3900XT vs. Intel Core i9-10900K

[phill]

Thank you @W1zzard again for such a great review I know that Ryzen would be better 1440P/4k, and it's surprising to see it drop in some games, but for me, as long as it's smooth, playable and more so enjoyable, I will always like my Ryzen CPUs

That said, I've a few Intel CPUs as well, so to be honest, I'm not sure it will matter at all what I play on! Everything just runs well

 

[W1zzard]

Hey W1zzard
Any chance you could do a similar benchmark but with the 1st gen and refresh cpu's included?

No plans for doing it in that much detail, I think you can extrapolate most what you want to know from my CPU reviews

 

[simlariver]

We need to test with better memory, I was under the impresion that decent memory could make a difference on Ryzen. High end CPU and GPU can justify spending 50$ more on decent ram with sub 16 timings.

 

[HenrySomeone]

Intel is superior in most games, no surprise there, but 4 cores doesn't really cut it anymore.

Yeah going forward / as a today's buy, sure, but when the aforementioned were new, they were undoubtedly the better gaming-oriented purchases and you can still get by with either if you're not looking for the ultra-high refresh rates. It's also hilarious that after all the years of "moar coars" marketing, AMD's most competitive cpu (in its segment of course) is no other than the 3300X - yes, a quad core, lol!

 

[coozie78]

Damn, Anno and a couple others really don't like Ryzen...

It's something us Reds just have to live with.

Was really expecting Intel to pull out more of a lead at higher resolutions with the GPU restriction lessened, though, still, more than excellent work W1zzard-cheers mate.

 

[SL2]

Yeah going forward / as a today's buy, sure, but when the aforementioned were new, they were undoubtedly the better gaming-oriented purchases and you can still get by with either if you're not looking for the ultra-high refresh rates. It's also hilarious that after all the years of "moar coars" marketing, AMD's most competitive cpu (in its segment of course) is no other than the 3300X - yes, a quad core, lol!

For gaming, yes. There are other uses for a CPU tho. Looking at 12 -16 cores and up, Intel is the one that's NOT impressive in work scenarios in terms of bang per buck.
I don't think the 3950X ever been advertised as the ultimate gaming CPU.

 

[Chomiq]

No surprise here, if it would be any different I doubt Nvidia wouldn't opt in for using AMD platform to show their performance numbers.

 

[HenrySomeone]

For gaming, yes. There are other uses for a CPU tho. Looking at 12 -16 cores and up, Intel is the one that's NOT impressive in work scenarios in terms of bang per buck.
I don't think the 3950X ever been advertised as the ultimate gaming CPU.

Hmmm, I seem to remember themselves (re)naming the level 3 cache on that very one as "gaming cache" however that's besides the point; I've never claimed that Ryzens, especially higher core-count ones don't have their valid uses (although 3950x is in a weird spot - a "production"-focused cpu on a desktop platform), 3960x and 3070x in particular are good chips for their purposes, however also not exactly cheap anymore either...

Was really expecting Intel to pull out more of a lead at higher resolutions with the GPU restriction lessened, though, still, more than excellent work W1zzard-cheers mate.

 

[TheEmptyCrazyHead]

I am curious, what's the cpu load on both amd and intel and how it spreads across the cores? What's going to be the difference if they are operating on the same frequency? I guess things will improve for amd at low resolutions with the ports from the new consoles, being better multithread-optimized.

 

[SL2]

Hmmm, I seem to remember themselves (re)naming the level 3 cache on that very one as "gaming cache" however that's besides the point; I've never claimed that Ryzens, especially higher core-count ones don't have their valid uses (although 3950x is in a weird spot - a "production"-focused cpu on a desktop platform), 3960x and 3070x in particular are good chips for their purposes, however also not exactly cheap anymore either...

It was a direct response to this:

It's also hilarious that after all the years of "moar coars" marketing...

AMD have a long way to go and they have improved since the first Ryzen. The fact is that neither AMD nor Intel can beat Skylake in gaming with their respective latest architectures, for different reasons.

Threadripper may look expensive, until you look at Intels offerings..

 

[HenrySomeone]

I guess things will improve for amd at low resolutions? What kind of bizzaro logic is that?

 

[W1zzard]

can justify spending 50$ more on decent ram with sub 16 timings.

You mean these four kits?

Arbeitsspeicher (RAM) Speicher mit Übertragungsrate ab 3733MT/s, Column Address Strobe Latency (CL): 14/15 Preisvergleich Geizhals EU

Preisvergleich und Bewertungen für Arbeitsspeicher (RAM) Speicher mit Übertragungsrate ab 3733MT/s, Column Address Strobe Latency (CL): 14/15

geizhals.eu

That are like 5x as expensive as the typical 3733 CL19 kits?

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

Another thing to consider that since this 3000 series card is a PCIe 4.0 card, intel is still beating AMD on PCIe 3.0. What will the cards performance look like with an Intel CPU that supports PCIe 4.0 and a motherboard to go along with it?

 

[HenrySomeone]

Going by W1zzard's testing at least, it would still beat them even on Pcie 2.0 , though that also (most likely) means performance won't be noticeably better when they go to 4.0

 

[dragontamer5788]

Another thing to consider that since this 3000 series card is a PCIe 4.0 card, intel is still beating AMD on PCIe 3.0. What will the cards performance look like with an Intel CPU that supports PCIe 4.0 and a motherboard to go along with it?

Bottlenecks don't work like that. For now, PCIe 3.0 x8 (or ~8GBps) seems to be the inflection point, even at 4k resolutions.

Seems like PCIe 4.0's main benefit will be SSDs, not the GPU (unless you're doing scientific compute, where the improved bandwidth may be beneficial)

 

[Bubster]

Intel gen 8 and 9 still got at gaming and amd zen 7's are better for productivity...let's see what AMD Zen 4 is gonna be like?

 

[SL2]

Intel gen 8 and 9 still got at gaming and amd zen 7's are better for productivity...let's see what AMD Zen 4 is gonna be like?

Zen 3 launch is only 3 weeks away tho.

 

[DemonicRyzen666]

That's not the only weird thing. Look what happens when running 1440p, the fps doesn't change with either CPU..
View attachment 168879

W1zzard always has great reviews.

This really pictures shows a interesting problem with Zen2. That either ALU/ALG and FPU could be maxing out. Then when people push to 5.0ghz on extreme there is almost no gain. Sure they need to lower Infinity clocks on cold, but that really shouldn't be probably to be around 1500mhz and still have the same performance. I really don't think infinity fabric can be that big of a bottleneck.

 

[lexluthermiester]

No plans for doing it in that much detail, I think you can extrapolate most what you want to know from my CPU reviews

Question, would you be interested in doing a run of benchmark to show the difference with a PCIe 2.0 based CPU? It would be interesting to see what the differences are...

 

[SL2]

Question, would you be interested in doing a run of benchmark to show the difference with a PCIe 2.0 based CPU? It would be interesting to see what the differences are...

You mean like this? Edit: Or you mean an actual PCIe 2 CPU?

 

[lexluthermiester]

You mean like this? Edit: Or you mean an actual PCIe 2 CPU?
View attachment 168905

Yeah, I saw that article and it is very interesting for sure, but a real world test with actual platform parts would be more informative.

 

[jonup]

Seems like PCIe 4.0's main benefit will be SSDs, not the GPU (unless you're doing scientific compute, where the improved bandwidth may be beneficial)

People keep repeating this like it is true. PCI-e 3.0 x4 for storage is not bottlenecking the system performance. I'm not saying there aren't scenarios that can benefit from it, just like there are scenarios the GPUs benefit from 4.0 x16. But in the scenarios where it doesn't bottleneck the GPUs it won't bottleneck the NVMe's.

 

[SL2]

People keep repeating this like it is true.

I thought even Nvidia said so.

 

[Selaya]

W1zzard always has great reviews.

This really pictures shows a interesting problem with Zen2. That either ALU/ALG and FPU could be maxing out. Then when people push to 5.0ghz on extreme there is almost no gain. Sure they need to lower Infinity clocks on cold, but that really shouldn't be probably to be around 1500mhz and still have the same performance. I really don't think infinity fabric can be that big of a bottleneck.

No. It's an entirely memory-related bottleneck because games (or rather, their fps) rely on large chunks of data being fetched in a timely fashion. Ryzens with their chiplet design with IF and shit are just inherently disadvantaged to Intel's monolithic approach. That being said, you can bottleneck your Intel CPU with bad memory just as well as your AMD:

 

[SL2]

Yeah, I saw that article and it is very interesting for sure, but a real world test with actual platform parts would be more informative.

I'm afraid they're too old (9 years) to be considered for review.