AMD Ryzen 7 9700X vs. Intel Core i7-14700K: 42 Game Benchmark

[Felusy]

It does not, like I already told. Benchmarks are for amateurs.

7900X3D offered more cores than 7800X3D so it had some use.

Make games to use only 3D cores and problem solved

Neither of those helps on servers, there AMD dominates.

Again, dual CCD does not matter on gaming because you could set game to use 3D cache CCD only.

Hahah, do you own a garbage 7900X3D? Only 6 cores with 3D cache, good luck forcing games to use 6 cores only and still get top tier performance. You won't.

7800X3D destroys 7900X3D and even beats 7950X3D in gaming, due to being single CCD. Even runs lower clockspeeds.

9800X3D will beat 9900X3D and 9950X3D again. Single CCD ftw.

 

[HardReset]

Hahah, do you own a garbage 7900X3D? Only 6 cores with 3D cache, good luck forcing games to use 6 cores only and still get top tier performance. You won't.

7800X3D destroys 7900X3D and even beats 7950X3D in gaming, due to being single CCD. Even runs lower clockspeeds.

9800X3D will beat 9900X3D and 9950X3D again. Single CCD ftw.

So Intel CPUs with only 6 P cores also sucks on games?

Like I sad, make game use only CCX with 3D cache and problem solved. Your "amateur" site didn't thought that one.

 

[ccccn]

Intel is a disaster . Stay away

 

[jdm1983]

People always mention AMDs lower power usage, however, AMD generally uses more in idle. Explain?

9700X uses 78w
14700K uses 59w

AMD uses 20-25 watts more than Intel, at all times, when you don't push the chip

This varies considerably between motherboards and BIOS settings. Guru3D reports 45w total system idle consumption with their configuration and a 9700X.
https://www.guru3d.com/review/review-ryzen-7-9700x-processor/page-27/

 

[Felusy]

So Intel CPUs with only 6 P cores also sucks on games?

Like I sad, make game use only CCX with 3D cache and problem solved. Your "amateur" site didn't thought that one.

Intel don't have inter CCD latency issues, so nah.

Lmao, so people have to fiddle around with process lasso to make games run well? 7800X3D is still a nobrainer over any other 7000X3D chip. Uses far less power and deliver top gaming performance withing fiddling.

Dual CCD for gaming is meh. And continues to be.

 

[Loadedaxe]

Intel is a disaster . Stay away

Do tell, what is disastrous about Intel?

 

[Felusy]

Do tell, what is disastrous about Intel?

AMD fanboys like to spread misinformation. Meanwhile Lunar Lake gets blazing reviews and Arrow Lake hits in a few weeks. Leaks are looking real good. Power usage down, performance up.

Intel is back with node advantage and it shows.

AMD already lowered Zen 5 prices even further:

AMD Ryzen 9000 "Zen 5" CPU See Further Price Cuts At Microcenter: 9950X $589, 9900X $439, 9700X $319

AMD's Ryzen 9000 "Zen 5" CPUs are now seeing bigger price cuts just a month after their launch at retailers such as Microcenter.

wccftech.com

This is the second time they lower prices, and Zen 5 is still not selling.

AMD needs to rush out 9000X3D ASAP. 3D cache should be able to save their huge F up, at least for gamers. AMD should never have cheaped out and went with 5nm and re-used their 7nm IO die.

AMD really dropped the ball with Zen 5.

 

[HardReset]

Intel don't have inter CCD latency issues, so nah.

Lmao, so people have to fiddle around with process lasso to make games run well? 7800X3D is still a nobrainer over any other 7000X3D chip. Uses far less power and deliver top gaming performance withing fiddling.

Dual CCD for gaming is meh. And continues to be.

Inter CCD latency issues can be mitigated using just one CCD.

You also need process lasso or similar for Intel to do well on productivity.

 

[Felusy]

Inter CCD latency issues can be mitigated using just one CCD.

You also need process lasso or similar for Intel to do well on productivity.

No you don't - You have zero experience with Intel.

Dual CCD issues presist to some degree no matter what. Imagine you have to use 3rd party apps to make your CPU work well. 99.9% of users won't be doing that.

Does not change the fact that AMD don't have a chip that does it all well. 3D is not optimal for applications and non-3D is not optimal for games.

 

[HardReset]

No you don't - You have zero experience with Intel.

Dual CCD issues presist to some degree no matter what. Imagine you have to use 3rd party apps to make your CPU work well. 99.9% of users won't be doing that.

Does not change the fact that AMD don't have a chip that does it all well. 3D is not optimal for applications and non-3D is not optimal for games.

I have more than enough experience. Hybrid Cores just suck.

They don't persist if you use software. So problem is not CPU but software. With Intel you also need to use software, or CPU works very poorly.

Intel CPUs are not optimal for anything either.

 

[Felusy]

I have more than enough experience. Hybrid Cores just suck.

They don't persist if you use software. So problem is not CPU but software. With Intel you also need to use software, or CPU works very poorly.

Intel CPUs are not optimal for anything either.

Nah Intel and Microsoft works together, unlike AMD and Microsoft.
Intel hybrid is flawless these days. Gaming performance is lower when you disable e-cores, shows enough.

Intel deliver far better allround perf than AMD. Their only problem has been power draw, which is now fixed thanks to TSMC 3nm and 18A is up and running soon as well.

Bad times are coming for AMD. They dropped the ball, like they always do eventually.

 

[HardReset]

Nah Intel and Microsoft works together, unlike AMD and Microsoft.
Intel hybrid is flawless these days. Gaming performance is lower when you disable e-cores, shows enough.

Intel deliver far better allround perf than AMD. Their only problem has been power draw, which is now fixed thanks to TSMC 3nm and 18A is up and running soon as well.

Bad times are coming for AMD. They dropped the ball, like they always do eventually.

Oh now you Must disable E-cores to have good performance? Guess what, 99% of users won't do that.

Wtf is "all round performance"? Again, without any tweaks Intel application performance is horrible.

 

[Felusy]

Oh now you Must disable E-cores to have good performance? Guess what, 99% of users won't do that.

Wtf is "all round performance"? Again, without any tweaks Intel application performance is horrible.

You can't even read I see.

Intels chips perform better in gaming WITH E-CORES ENABLED. E-CORES OFF lowers performance. LMAO!

Meanwhile you have to use process lasso for AMDs dual CCD 3D chips because AMD cheaped out and used 3D cache only on a single CCD. Which they will repeat for 9000X3D.

9800X3D will beat 9950X3D just like 7800X3D beat 7950X3D in gaming.

7900X3D and 9900X3D will be useless because of only 6 cores with 3D cache.

 

[HardReset]

You can't even read I see.

Intels chips perform better in gaming WITH E-CORES ENABLED. E-CORES OFF lowers performance. LMAO!

Meanwhile you have to use process lasso for AMDs dual CCD 3D chips because AMD cheaped out and used 3D cache only on a single CCD. Which they will repeat for 9000X3D.

9800X3D will beat 9950X3D just like 7800X3D beat 7950X3D in gaming.

7900X3D and 9900X3D will be useless because of only 6 cores with 3D cache.

Games that don't benefit from more than 8 cores runbetter with E-cores enabled because of what?

AMD wanted to offer 8 cores for gaming and 8 for other software. If AMD put all 16 cores with cache, gamers would say they won't need more than 8 cores and no-one would have bought it.

6 cores are enough for many.

 

[TempleOrion]

AMD fanboys like to spread misinformation.

The irony here is so palpable it must be the Dunning-Kruger effect in action...

 

[Felusy]

Games that don't benefit from more than 8 cores runbetter with E-cores enabled because of what?

AMD wanted to offer 8 cores for gaming and 8 for other software. If AMD put all 16 cores with cache, gamers would say they won't need more than 8 cores and no-one would have bought it.

6 cores are enough for many.

There's benchmarks confirming this all over. E-cores disabled lowers performance, including 8 p-core chips.

They are off loading p-cores.

Beside, Arrow Lake got a 68% IPC gain for e-cores. This is why HT was not needed.

AMD is going to copy this very soon with Zen 5c so you better get used to e-cores.

6 cores is not enough for most AAA games, if paired with a high-end GPU, has been true for many years, since 8 cores perform better. AMDs 6 core chips are close to their 12 core chips in gaming, due to dual CCD issues again. 7800X3D is AMDs best gaming chip, single CCD, 8 cores soon replaced by 9800X3D tho, since its rushed forward.

7900X3D sales numbers have been miniscule. Huge failure of a chip.

7950X3D was better, but still don't make sense for 95% of people.

7800X3D was the chip to get. 9800X3D will be the chip to get again in 9000X3D series.

Single CCD just work, no hassle with 3rd party apps, uses far less power, is cheaper and performs better in gaming. No need to buy a 3D chip unless you primarily play games, making 12-16 core versions useless for most people. Thats just reality.

I bet 7800X3D stood for 80-90% of 7000X3D sales.
7900X3D barely sold, even with a price close to 7800X3D, due to only having 6 cores with 3D cache.

 

[HardReset]

There's benchmarks confirming this all over. E-cores disabled lowers performance, including 8 p-core chips.

They are off loading p-cores.

Beside, Arrow Lake got a 68% IPC gain for e-cores. This is why HT was not needed.

But why? If you don't need more than 8 cores, then adding more cores doesn't help. And using E-cores will increase traffic from P-cores to E-cores that lowers performance. What you are saying makes zero sense. Benchmarks are often wrong so stop using them as a "proof".

In other words, you admit that Alder Lake E-cores are total trash. Thanks.

AMD is going to copy this very soon with Zen 5c so you better get used to e-cores.

6 cores is not enough for most AAA games, if paired with a high-end GPU, has been true for many years, since 8 cores perform better. AMDs 6 core chips are close to their 12 core chips in gaming, due to dual CCD issues again. 7800X3D is AMDs best gaming chip, single CCD, 8 cores soon replaced by 9800X3D tho, since its rushed forward.

7900X3D sales numbers have been miniscule. Huge failure of a chip.

7950X3D was better, but still don't make sense for 95% of people.

7800X3D was the chip to get. 9800X3D will be the chip to get again in 9000X3D series.

Single CCD just work, no hassle with 3rd party apps, uses far less power, is cheaper and performs better in gaming. No need to buy a 3D chip unless you primarily play games, making 12-16 core versions useless for most people. Thats just reality.

I bet 7800X3D stood for 80-90% of 7000X3D sales.
7900X3D barely sold, even with a price close to 7800X3D, due to only having 6 cores with 3D cache.

AMD still didn't "copy" it with c-cores. And AMD solution is much better because there is no difference between core architecture from software standpoint and that eliminates many compatibility problems.

6 cores are not as much as 8 cores but also cheaper. Not for everyone but for some still.

For sales, once again, Zen5 is server first chip. It's not primarily for gamers. Something like Techspot didn't understand* at all.

*Not mentioning AVX a single time on article leaves absolutely no excuses.

Of course for gaming only single CCD works just fine but I some want more. Double cores is much better and losing some single digit performance hardly matters.

 

[Felusy]

But why? If you don't need more than 8 cores, then adding more cores doesn't help. And using E-cores will increase traffic from P-cores to E-cores that lowers performance. What you are saying makes zero sense. Benchmarks are often wrong so stop using them as a "proof".

In other words, you admit that Alder Lake E-cores are total trash. Thanks.

AMD still didn't "copy" it with c-cores. And AMD solution is much better because there is no difference between core architecture from software standpoint and that eliminates many compatibility problems.

6 cores are not as much as 8 cores but also cheaper. Not for everyone but for some still.

For sales, once again, Zen5 is server first chip. It's not primarily for gamers. Something like Techspot didn't understand* at all.

*Not mentioning AVX a single time on article leaves absolutely no excuses.

Of course for gaming only single CCD works just fine but I some want more. Double cores is much better and losing some single digit performance hardly matters.

14900K easily beats 7950X in most applications, due to E-cores and higher ST perf.

Lets see:

Intel Core i9-14900K Review - Reaching for the Performance Crown

Core i9-14900K is Intel's new flagship with clock speeds of up to 6 GHz. It's actually clocked even higher than the 13900KS, thanks to an extra 100 MHz when more than two cores are active. Our review confirms that Raptor Lake Refresh is amazing for both applications and gaming, if you can live...

www.techpowerup.com

"Faster in productivity than any other AMD CPU"

Using 2 years old arch.
Benchmarks are not wrong LMAO. Reality calls.

Lunar and Arrow Lake already is considered a comeback. Lunar even beats both AMD and Qualcomm in efficiency. You are living in denial. No-one cares what you think.

Zen 5C is e-cores. AMD is copying Intel. AMD will remove SMT too in a few generations, and Zen 5C will replace it. E-cores beats SMT when looking at total performance and performance per watt.

Dual CCD is mediocre for gaming and uses way more power for less performance. No point at all, which is why 7800X3D outsold 7900X3D and 7950X3D with ease. 7800X3D is king of gaming right now. Arrow Lake will beat it, 9800X3D will come out to disrupt. No dual CCD chip will come close. Why do you think AMD rushes 9800X3D ahead? Duh.

Double core is much better? For who? Not gamers. Dual CCD issues presist.

AMD is still behind on enterprise sales. Intel did 3 billion USD in data center revenue last quarter. Only down 3% YoY. AMD only did 2.8 billion and you claim AMD is doing much better? LMAO! Even when Intel is at its worst, it is beating AMD in sales.

Clearwater Forest on 18A is going to be huge. A true next gen chip.

Intel stock is up 20% in a month. I wonder why.

 

[HardReset]

14900K easily beats 7950X in most applications, due to E-cores and higher ST perf.

Lets see:

Intel Core i9-14900K Review - Reaching for the Performance Crown

Core i9-14900K is Intel's new flagship with clock speeds of up to 6 GHz. It's actually clocked even higher than the 13900KS, thanks to an extra 100 MHz when more than two cores are active. Our review confirms that Raptor Lake Refresh is amazing for both applications and gaming, if you can live...

www.techpowerup.com

"Faster in productivity than any other AMD CPU"

Benchmarks are not wrong LMAO. Reality calls.

Like I have proven many times, those benchmarks are BS. Also with those settings, CPUs broke down. Something those amateurs didn't even thought ""

Lunar and Arrow Lake already is considered a comeback. Lunar even beats both AMD and ARM in efficiency. You are living in denial. No-one cares what you think.

Zen 5C is e-cores. AMD is copying Intel. AMD will remove SMT too in a few generations, and Zen 5C will replace it. E-cores beats SMT when looking at total performance and performance per watt.

Dual CCD is mediocre for gaming and uses way more power for less performance. No point at all, which is why 7800X3D outsold 7900X3D and 7950X3D with ease. 7800X3D is king of gaming right now. Arrow Lake will beat it, 9800X3D will come out to disrupt. No dual CCD chip will come close.

Double core is much better? For who? Not gamers. Dual CCD issues presist.

Arrow Lake, that broke down during use, was a comeback? Epic fail in other words.

Zen5c is not copying, but better solution than Intel has. Perhaps AMD will ditch SMT, but we will see about that. Btw. it was Intel who introduced SMT on desktop CPUs.

Like I said, for pure gaming single CCD is better. But those who want more than just gaming will be fine with dual CCD. Again, single digit performance decrease might look big on benchmarks but in reality no-one cares.

 

[Felusy]

Like I have proven many times, those benchmarks are BS. Also with those settings, CPUs broke down. Something those amateurs didn't even thought ""

Arrow Lake, that broke down during use, was a comeback? Epic fail in other words.

Zen5c is not copying, but better solution than Intel has. Perhaps AMD will ditch SMT, but we will see about that. Btw. it was Intel who introduced SMT on desktop CPUs.

Like I said, for pure gaming single CCD is better. But those who want more than just gaming will be fine with dual CCD. Again, single digit performance decrease might look big on benchmarks but in reality no-one cares.

Lunar Lake gets top reviews FYI. Beats AMD and Qualcomm with ease on performance per watt, which is an important metric for mobile

You keep grasping at straws I see.

Arrow Lake looks great in leaks, which is probably the reason for AMD rushing forward 9800X3D. Only a few more weeks.

Zen 5c is E-cores: Smaller size, lower clockspeeds, reduced cache. The exact same thing as Intels E-cores.

Fitting 4 E-cores on the same space as 1 P-core will result in better MT perf. Intel knew this. Benchmarks shows this and AMDs wants it too. The result is Zen 5c.

 

[HardReset]

Lunar Lake gets top reviews FYI. Beats AMD and Qualcomm with ease on performance per watt, which is an important metric for mobile

You keep grasping at straws I see.

Arrow Lake looks great in leaks, which is probably the reason for AMD rushing forward 9800X3D. Only a few more weeks.

Zen 5c is E-cores: Smaller size, lower clockspeeds, reduced cache. The exact same thing as Intels E-cores.

Fitting 4 E-cores on the same space as 1 P-core will result in better MT perf. Intel knew this. Benchmarks shows this and AMDs wants it too. The result is Zen 5c.

Efficiency does not matter on mobile. If it does, current Intel would not sell at all.

Makes no sense for AMD to delay 3D versions too much. Despite what Intel does.

AMD c-cores have SAME architecture than "normal" cores have. E-cores have different architecture. Latter causes unnecessary crashes.

Fyi, AMD started designing c-cores long before Intel said anything about hybrid architecture. It was Intel that copied.

60+% IPC increase mean larger chip too.

 

[Felusy]

Efficiency does not matter on mobile. If it does, current Intel would not sell at all.

Makes no sense for AMD to delay 3D versions too much. Despite what Intel does.

AMD c-cores have SAME architecture than "normal" cores have. E-cores have different architecture. Latter causes unnecessary crashes.

Fyi, AMD started designing c-cores long before Intel said anything about hybrid architecture. It was Intel that copied.

60+% IPC increase mean larger chip too.

Intel had no problems with effiency on laptops. Lunar Lake just have breakthough x86 efficiency and AMD is far behind: https://www.yahoo.com/tech/amd-processors-far-behind-qualcomm-150005261.html?guccounter=1

Zen 5c are not the same as Zen 5, they are smaller, lower clocked, less or no cache. E-cores. Zen 5c entered AMDs roadmap in 2022, Alder Lake came out in 2021.

AMD did not start talking about c-cores before Intel went hybrid. Just stop.

Nah 68% IPC comes from new arch and going TSMC 3N. Intel can still fit 4 e-cores per 1 p-core and this is why they don't need HT with next gen stuff. E-cores deliver better performance per watt. HT/SMT is not free, it uses more power, raises temps, might reduce clockspeeds. That power is better spent elsewhere.

4 e-cores will beat 1 p-core any day in MT workloads. P-cores is for ST perf.

big.LITTLE is the future for x86 and the only way x86 can compete with ARM.
You like to talk data center marketshare. You know whats gaining here? ARM.
x86 needs e-cores to compete with ARM.

Intel saw that.

AMD wants that.

 

[erickmendes]

I think it's so fun the cherrypicking...

"Power usage doesn't matter, let's talk about performance"
Then
"It's not only gaming, it's about productivity too"

Then the future performance prophecy:
"Intel 200 series will cook your dinner while AMD 9000 is crap"
(yesterday was AMD 9000 will crush Intel 14th)

Let's not forget that Intel is dealing with the 13/14th gen crisis. If I was building a new system I would avoid even Intel 200 series while I don't have at least some long term input about it's stability, and even if I choose AMD I would consider AMD 7000 because 9000 don't offer much more BUT the AM5 platform will make it future proof for the next 5 years (at least that's what is expected).

Also let's not forget that Intel 200 series is a new platform, new chipset and so on... AMD had it share of growing pain when AM4/AM5 launched, what will prevent Intel from having the same early adopter issues? (mem instability I.e.)

Gaming I would go with 7700x/7800x3D, productivity 7900x. I think there's not much else. I'm not an AMD fanboy but I can't trust Intel for now, I wouldn't risk my money.

 

[Felusy]

I think it's so fun the cherrypicking...

"Power usage doesn't matter, let's talk about performance"
Then
"It's not only gaming, it's about productivity too"

Then the future performance prophecy:
"Intel 200 series will cook your dinner while AMD 9000 is crap"
(yesterday was AMD 9000 will crush Intel 14th)

Let's not forget that Intel is dealing with the 13/14th gen crisis. If I was building a new system I would avoid even Intel 200 series while I don't have at least some long term input about it's stability, and even if I choose AMD I would consider AMD 7000 because 9000 don't offer much more BUT the AM5 platform will make it future proof for the next 5 years (at least that's what is expected).

Also let's not forget that Intel 200 series is a new platform, new chipset and so on... AMD had it share of growing pain when AM4/AM5 launched, what will prevent Intel from having the same early adopter issues? (mem instability I.e.)

Gaming I would go with 7700x/7800x3D, productivity 7900x. I think there's not much else. I'm not an AMD fanboy but I can't trust Intel for now, I wouldn't risk my money.

You think AMD is perfect? 7800X3D were burning up on release as well, still a top gaming chip, replaced by 9800X3D soon tho. 7800X3D stock already vanished. Production halted. 9800X3D takes over in a few weeks.

Intel 13-14 Gen Crisis? There is no lawsuit. AMD got hit with a class action lawsuit back when they lied about FX CPUs having 8 cores, when in reality, it was 4. That is how a crisis is detected; A class action lawsuit.

Intel handled it, and there will be no lawsuit. They learned and Lunar Lake gets top reviews all over, zero issues, while being a brand new arch. Delivering a breakthrough in x86 effiency.

I would never buy AMD 7000 series now. Yes for 50% off maybe. Else no thanks.

Ryzen 9000 and Arrow Lake is the new generation. Could not care less about 2 year old tech at this point.

9800X3D will probably be the gaming chip to get.

Arrow Lake will come close in gaming but win easily outside of gaming. Delivering much better all-round performance, for people that needs this.

13th, 14th gen, Ryzen 5000 or 7000 series. Don't care. Old news.

9700X is already much better post 105W AGESAs and firmwares, beating 7700X by 10-15% now. Also several Windows bugs has been ironed out. You will see when X870E and X870 boards launch next week and reviewers re-test using newest firmwares.

Ryzen 9000 performs better than 7000 series while using less power. Thats a win.

9800X3D is rumoured to get alot higher clockspeeds than 7800X3D. Low clockspeeds was the reason 7800X3D dropped behind i5-13600K in some games that prefer clockspeed over cache. Starfield for example. Starfield is a highly CPU bound game. Go see Gamers Nexus, and you will see that i5-13600K beats 7800X3D here. 3D chips are not perfect, they might be with 9000X3D if they can hit higher clockspeeds on the CCD with 3D cache.

This also once again shows dual CCD chips are inferior for gaming. 7800X3D beats 7950X3D by 10% or so in the video here.

Dual CCD chips makes no sense for gamers. If you need CPU power outside of gaming, then maybe, but then Intel deliver better allround performance.

 

[HardReset]

Intel had no problems with effiency on laptops. Lunar Lake just have breakthough x86 efficiency and AMD is far behind: https://www.yahoo.com/tech/amd-processors-far-behind-qualcomm-150005261.html?guccounter=1

Zen 5c are not the same as Zen 5, they are smaller, lower clocked, less or no cache. E-cores. Zen 5c entered AMDs roadmap in 2022, Alder Lake came out in 2021.

AMD did not start talking about c-cores before Intel went hybrid. Just stop.

Nah 68% IPC comes from new arch and going TSMC 3N. Intel can still fit 4 e-cores per 1 p-core and this is why they don't need HT with next gen stuff. E-cores deliver better performance per watt. HT/SMT is not free, it uses more power, raises temps, might reduce clockspeeds. That power is better spent elsewhere.

4 e-cores will beat 1 p-core any day in MT workloads. P-cores is for ST perf.

big.LITTLE is the future for x86 and the only way x86 can compete with ARM.
You like to talk data center marketshare. You know whats gaining here? ARM.
x86 needs e-cores to compete with ARM.

Intel saw that.

AMD wants that.

Zen5c has same Architecture as Zen5. Same instruction set, same number of units etc.

Why AMD would need to talk about them? FYI, Zen4c must have started development somewhere around 2019. Before there was information about Alder Lake. As said, AMD made better solution too.

4 E cores for space of one P core? So what? AMD could fit 8 cores on 70mm2 and almosthalf of it is cache. Die size savings rarely make any difference here.

x86 needs cores designed for smaller clock speeds vs ARM. Nothing else. As Zen4c showed, requiring only 3.x GHz instead 5.x GHz means 40% die size reduction.