No it wasn't. There wasn't even any units to the frame rates chart so you have no idea how far behind it was. The only thing we knowed is that it got 266 and 283 fps for the 3800X and 3900X respectively in Overwatch. Get mid-upper 200s fps should already be more than enough frame rates for gamers, even for the more nit picky gamers who want ultra high fps for their fancy high hertz monitors.It was behind on Overwatch and GTA V, by a considerable margin, while keeping up on other games. So it didn´t rekt Intel like I was expecting (I should say, how I wished, not truly expect)..
Did you miss the part where the 3900X beat the 9900k in games such as COD 3, CS GO, and PUBG? It beat the 9900k in some games, was behind in some games, and was tied in some games. So yeh, it was basically keeping up with the 9900k.Simply saying "AMD had no problems keeping up with 9900k in high FPS gaming" is not entirely truth, becuase it still lagged on some titles shown, and we now need to know what will happen once independent reviewers test other games.
Then you clearly had unrealistic expectations, and now you're unfairly cherry picking ways to denigrate Zen 2 because you were disappointed.3 months ago if you asked me, I was expecting AMD 7nm to completly make Intel irrelevant. Thus the disapointment.
We don't even know what the units in the charts are. But if the charts are even remotely accurate to scale then the two should be comparable in fps that it shouldn't even matter much.Did you read what I said? I wanted a 1 PC only BUT at purely gaming 3900x still doesn´t beat Intel. It beats Intel at gaming + streaming. But that´s with already less performance than using Intel only for games..
Your speculation is nonsense because your numbers are based on the extremely faulty premise that the Zen 2 3900X only has ~72% of the fps of the 9700k. 160/220 = .727 So you're basically claiming the Zen 2 has even worse performance than Zen 1.Battlefield V with 9700k = 220fps...
Battlefield V with 3900x = 160fps...
Take a look at Techpowerup's 9700k review. Zen 1 Ryzen 2000 CPUs have 92% the fps performance of the 9700k in gaming at 1080p: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i7_9700K/13.html
So even Zen 1 Ryzen 2000 cpus should be getting over 200 fps if we take 92% of 220 fps, and that doesn't even factor in the fps that Zen 2 Ryzen 3000 would get. The 3800X was going toe to toe with the 9700k and the 3900X was going toe to toe with the 9900k if the chart sizes are even remotely accurate.