Funnily enough, besides the X3D chips or the non X AMD chips (equivalent to non K Intel chips), most 14th gen Intel chips actually run cooler.
That depends if you mean under full load or just gaming because the Intel CPUs are absolutely hotter under full load (assuming you don't have them power limited of course).
It's more like some of the Intel CPUs are cooler than some of the AMD CPUs in select scenarios, it's a lot more nuanced than you imply.
Mind most of the Intel CPUs are less power efficient (particularly towards the high-end) and as a result output more heat.
You're making a lot of assumptions about what OP wants or what is relevant. How do you know he's "just trying to get his feet planted in gaming"? AFAIK he's taken a break for three years.
Everyone here is making a lot of assumptions here including yourself and that's down to the fact that the OP never stated their exact use case / desired performance. I specifically mention in my comment where I do make an assumption. Not a single person asked the use case or desired performance before my comment.
As someone who owns Zen 4 X3D, RAM subtiming tuning is one of the most time intensive tasks that exist.
It can be but you are excluding the fact that motherboards have built in tuning profiles. Mine for example you can change sub-timings between basic, performance, and competitive. People who want to spend the extra time for tuning like me and you can but someone doesn't have to.
In certain RAM reviews testing quick OC (set higher MT with stock timings), depending on the game and resolution, @ir_cow has seen 10-30% improvements in FPS, so it's not the simple 0-3% you'd like to throw around.
10-30% is without a doubt a great example of cherry-picking, it doesn't remotely represent what one should expect to gain performance wise of going from 6000 to 7200. You don't gain anywhere near that level of performance from upgrading from a gen old CPU, let alone tuning the RAM.
My number was an average, to present a complete picture of the data and not just one off instances.
Game benchmarks are also done with a 4090 and 14900K/7800X3D, which is what my 0-3% figure accounted for. OP is not running the absolute top of the line and therefore any minute RAM benefits they may have gotten are further reduced.
We already know that games tend to need more and more multicore performance. Cache is also beneficial, but it don't know how it could make up lack of multicore performance, so I wouldn't mix both here. One thing is sure - 7800X3D will lack multicore performance sooner than 13/14th gen i7.
There's no basis for that conclusion. The cache could very well allow the AMD to keep it's cores feed better into the future allowing them to complete more work overall in games than the Intel CPU.
A good example of cores not always being the end all be all is the FX CPUs. More cores but they were completely underfed and as a result additional gaming performance never materialized as a result of those cores.
There are a lot of factors that can impact performance outside of core count, it's impossible to say more cores = better future performance.
Besides, most benchmarks are done with the (offline) game running and pretty much nothing else.
Perks of the E cores (which do not lower performance except in edge cases with very old games for instance, but this is easily worked around) are that you can put every single background task on them, discord, browsers, messaging, steam, etc. Have all the P cores purely for gaming or foreground tasks.
Software isn't exactly getting less bloated as time goes on, Windows 11 and all the AI crap is testament to that.
That's not a perk of e-cores, that's a perk everyone with a 6-core CPU or greater has had for a long time now.
What have I been doing all this time running a 24/7 AV1 handbrake encode (which jumps between 30-70% CPU usage by itself) while playing games buttery smooth on my 7800X3D then? Discord, steam, and everything else in the background to boot.
Would you suspect AM5 bringing generational uplifts similar to AM4? And it supporting that many generations?
Generational uplifts yes. Supporting it for as many generations as AM4? Not sure, AMD has stated that it'll get support through 2025 (so until end of 2025). This means that AM5 will almost certainly include Zen 5 as well. That's 3 full generations but technically AM4 had 4 generations, one of them being Zen+ which was only a refinement. A 4rth gen on AM5 would not be guaranteed.
But I don't know if OP cares.
