Posts: 1,029 +875
I would expect that in many if not most games, a 3800xt would best the 3950x -- for much less money. Wouldn't that be a better comparison, especially since that chip is closer in price to the 10900K?
That's spot on. This review illustrates perfectly that the peformance increase between a 2080Ti and 3080 is the same at all resolutions, irrespective of the CPU being used. At this point wouldn't you just use the most popular CPUs for your reviews, which by all accounts are the Ryzens? I would have gone for a 3900X, as it's tons cheaper and about as fast. Can't wait for the midrange CPU scaling articleHonestly, for 10900k it is the same. Not everyone is buying 10900k. Most people buy some i5, maybe 10600k or at best 10700k. There are also a lot of people who still cling onto their older CPUs like me e.g. with my 6850k.
What they do here is to simply compare the best available on Intel side with best available on AMD side. It has no favouritism this way. But you are right, I would also, like many others I assume, see more of mainstream CPUs being tested even with 3080 and 3070. Like 10600k vs 3600x or 10700k vs 3700x/3800x.
You must have different prices where you live.I would expect that in many if not most games, a 3800xt would best the 3950x -- for much less money. Wouldn't that be a better comparison, especially since that chip is closer in price to the 10900K?
"Looking not so far beyond, we predict we’ll be moving to a Zen 3-based test system in a few months' time, so regardless of which way we went, having to do it all over again relatively soon is inevitable."Thank You TECHSPOT for the comparison.
based on your findings I will build my next desktop using an Intel CPU + my 3080.
every little bit of advantage is appreciated.
Didn't you just state in your last comment that they should be testing with a mid-range CPU?Of course I would have no issue, cause I would assume you tested with the fastest gaming CPU. For example, right now I have a 1080ti and I'm thinking about upgrading cause I can't really play metro exodus on my current resolution with max settings. But looking at your review, it seems like a waste of money to upgrade to a 3080 for that game, cause the gains are minimal. Little would I know that that is because of the CPU you are testing it with
Good question. Overall and price wise the 3950x is top of the game but am not sure about gaming in particular.But in this context, doesn't "top of the line" mean highest performance? I seem to recall both the 3800xt and 3900xt beating the 3950x in gaming benches, albeit slightly.
Odd, I didn't know Steam surveyed what their users were considering buying."the vast majority of our audience either already owns or are looking at buying a Ryzen processor over anything Intel."
Interesting statement, I assume that means that your audience behaves exactly the opposite to the people who use Steam.
Bro a few frames behind means jack anything over a 100fs is overkill to begin with you can't even tell at a point how fast the refresh is many will lie and say they can but their full of itIf I'm a serious competitive gamer, aren't high frame rates more important than higher resolution? However, I'm not a serious competitive gamer myself, but I play RuneScape, and I notice that on my 1080p screen, the interface is kind of cramped. So maybe 4K does have enough benefits that it's very important to get decent performance at that resolution.
Most of my Rigs on Steam have been AMD and Intel from Phenoms 965BE - FX 8320 -8350-3770k-6700K - 6850K 6950X -8700K-8086K- Ryzen 1600x-Ryzen 3700x and Ryzen 3950x."the vast majority of our audience either already owns or are looking at buying a Ryzen processor over anything Intel."
Interesting statement, I assume that means that your audience behaves exactly the opposite to the people who use Steam. I wonder who they are?