The year 2019 was a great year for AMD, with the launch of new CPUs and graphics cards, which garnered attention from industry and hardware fans alike. But this is not to say that there is no stiff competition in the two camps. Its new Raizen 3000 CPU is the best priced Intel, but how do they compare on performance?
With the new hardware in hand, there is a very good comparison for us to make a new range of Ryzen chips. At the top end, for about $ 500, we have the Core i9-9900K vs the Risen 93900X. Which would be the best chip among them all?
Only eclipsed by its 16-core successor, the Ryzen 93900X is a very powerful mainstream CPU packing superb specifications. Core i9-9900K However, there are no other numbers, but they are quite comparable.
|Intel Core i99900K||AMD Ryzen 9 3900X|
|L2 / L3 Cash||2 MB / 16MB||6MB / 64MB|
|Base clock speed||3.6GHz||3.8GHz|
|Increase clock speed||4.7GHz (all cores) |
5GHz (one core)
|4.1GHz + (all cores) |
4.6GHz (one core)
|The graphics||Intel UHD Graphics 630||No|
The 3900X has more cores and threads, while Intel’s chip has a stronger clock speed, especially when it comes to single-threaded workloads. Most games now use a handful of cores, so unless you are overclocking, you will not typically see 5GHz frequencies when gaming at 9900K.
The 3900X can boost 4.6GHz on one core, but will be closer to 4.1GHz if all cores and threads are used at the same time. AMD’s automatic overclocking can take it up to 4.3GHz in some cases, although it is very dependent on your motherboard, BIOS modification, and cooling.
The 3900X has a large increase in instructions per clock for its second generation predecessors, so it is more powerful than the 9900K clock for the watch. Its massive L2 and L3 cache also effectively eliminate memory latency concerns from second generation chips.
Intel has gained a performance edge in gaming for over a decade, and even with AMD’s stunning first and second generation Risen CPUs, which is true. But not now.
In our gaming tests Fortnite, Civilization VI and Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, The 3900X defeated the 9900K – a CPU previously formulated as the best gaming chip – on almost all settings, showing a slight lead. AMD fans may not expect this to be a crushing number, but this is the first time that a high-end AMD CPU beat Intel competition in gaming in more than 10 years.
The 3900X showed a nice edge in 3DMark, while in Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, It matches 9900K at high settings and surpasses it at low settings. In Fortnite, The 9900K shot ahead of the 3900X with higher settings, but with over 250 fps in all our tests, this difference hardly matters.
We saw the hardest difference Civilization VI. Across high and low settings, the 3900X beat the 9900K. Most grand strategy games stress CPUs more than GPUs, as the processor handles AI-powered opponents and many interconnected systems. With all Fortnite, Both processors delivered over 150 FPS in our test. AMD increases in both tests – not in one test, as was the case Fortnite – Gaming shows its potential as a CPU.
Price is an important factor, however. Although the 9900K was more expensive than the 3900X at the time of launch, it is now a bit cheaper (a new location for Intel). You can usually find 9900K for $ 400. The 3900X is more expensive, but not too high, usually selling for $ 430.
It is important to consider the problems Intel faces with CPU performance hindered by specter mitigation. New bugs are found in the future, where AMD’s chips are usually more robust against such feats.
Heavy multipurpose productivity functions such as video transcoding and editing have been AMD’s wheelchairs for the past few years, pulling its Raijen and Threadiper chips directly ahead of the competition and even Intel’s more expensive alternatives. With the 3000 Series, and specifically the 12-core, 24-thread 3900X, AMD has not only defeated Intel’s mainstream chips (9900K included), but will also be pasturing its older Threadripper cousins.
At E3 2019, AMD provided figures for its 3900X, which is more than twice the price: 12-core, 24-thread, $ 1,200 Intel Core i9-9920X. And it still cleared up.
When we received the 3900X for testing, we pitched it against its real rival: The 9900K. Unexpectedly, the new AMD CPUs proved effective once again.
At Geekbench and Cinebench, the 3900X reduced the 9900K in multithreaded performance, though its reduced speed meant that it was embarrassed by Intel competition in single-threaded tasks. In real-world handbrake 4K transcoding testing, the 3900X proved to be about 25% faster than the 9900K – a huge advantage delivered by the core / thread with the addition of an AMD chip.
Efficiency is not as important on desktop chips as it is with laptops, as there is no battery life to consider. But heat is an important factor, and the more power the CPU requires, the more heat is produced. From here comes the TDP data driven by marketing to some extent.
By numbers, Intel’s 9900K is a more efficient chip, with a TDP of 95 watts, while the 3900X has a TDP of 105 watts. But this is not the whole story. Intel’s TDP ratings are related to its base clock rather than its continued growth. AMD is very close to the power it pulls at its highest clock speed.
Research into power demand from Intel’s 9900K around launch showed that it was pulling far more power than its TDP rating. Tom’s hardware reported that when it was subjected to TDP during gaming, it could require over 200 watts, with a heavy workload for a long time. This number can increase to 250 watts when overlocked.
We did not test the 3900X’s power draw, but other reviewers have, and Anandtech found that it did not pull more than 142 watts when fully loaded. This makes the chip even more efficient than 9900K. And this is AMD’s big selling point with Zen architecture: more performance per watt.
3900X is the new CPU king
We were excited for the 3900X before launch, based on prerease numbers and speculation. Now we can report that after the test, we are even happier.
The 3900X provides comparable performance to the 9900K in gaming and limited thread tasks, eclipsing it in some cases and skewing it across multithreaded workloads. Also, the 3900X has a lower TDP, meaning less heat and less need for beef coolers.
The 3900X is the best mainstream CPU AMD has ever built and makes a return to top-tier performance that we haven’t gotten to AMD since the days of the Athlon 64. Intel now finds itself in stark contrast to the situation it has enjoyed. For more than a decade. In retaliation, it has lowered prices to help it stay competitive and the new generation also has faster CPUs to counter AMD’s best.
Unfortunately, for now, that price hack does not save its eight-core 9900K in this scenario. Although $ 20- $ 40 is more expensive, the 3900X offers more cores, more threads and better performance in more cases. The only drawback here is that AMD’s chip does not include integrated graphics. At this price, however, it is unlikely that will be an issue for most PC builders.