Having tested 3rd-gen Ryzen processors with the RTX 2080 Ti extensively, our idea behind this new feature is to add mainstream and budget GPUs to the mix in a benchmark run that reflects more settings and resolutions gamers will likely use when tuning their PCs for gaming: we've picked the RTX 2070 Super, RX 5700 and Radeon RX 580.
A battle that needs no further introduction, we're pitting the new Ryzen 9 3900X head to head against the Core i9-9900K in 36 games. There's loads of results to go over and this article is solely focused on PC gaming performance.
Expanding upon all the testing we performed in our day-one 3rd-gen Ryzen coverage, today we'll be running a clock-for-clock comparison benchmark. IPC can be a good indicator of a processor's architecture efficiency, so we're pitting the new Ryzen 3900X and 3700X against Intel's Core i9-9900K.
First things first, you need to choose sides. Whether you're going AMD or Intel, there are loads of motherboards to choose from. If you've followed our previous motherboard buying guides covering Z370, B450 and X470 motherboards, you're probably in for a surprise once you see how this one turned out.
Today we're revisiting our original Core i9-9900K review and updating it with 95 watt TDP limited results, basically results based on the official Intel specification. For better context about this please read our opinion article from earlier this week titled "Do We Need to Re-Review the Core i9-9900K?".
Benchmarking the i9-9900K with unlimited and 95-watt limited results might show two very different sides of the same CPU. Since the Core i9-9900K reviews went live, a few strange anomalies have been spotted, mostly relating to its power and thermal performance...
Having reviewed Intel's latest Core i9-9900K and Core i7-9700K processors, we saw very high stock temperatures using high-end coolers, basically killing their overclocking potential. We know that soldering CPUs works a lot better than the paste method Intel's been using to cut costs, so we wanted to know how much better is the solder method used by the 9900K than the paste of the 8700K/8086K?
Today we can finally show you how Intel's new octa-core 9th-gen processors perform. On hand for testing we have the Core i9-9900K, an 8 core/16 thread processor that operates at 3.6 GHz, boost as high as 4.7 GHz on all cores with a max single core frequency of 5 GHz. We also have the i7-9700K which is essentially the same CPU, but crucially, with Hyper-threading disabled.
When a PC gaming site published early Core i9-9900K results today we were a little surprised. The title read "Intel's Core i9 9900K is up to 50% faster than AMD's Ryzen 7 2700X in games," right away many of the results looked very suspect to me, having spent countless hours benchmarking both the 2700X and 8700K, so we looked into it some more.
After our long look at the new Threadripper 2990WX and 2950X processors, many called us out on benchmarks that only ran a single application at a time. We had already planned to make a separate multi-tasking focused benchmark, and so here we are after a few additional days of testing with more results to discuss.
Time has finally come. Today we are bringing you our full review of the Threadripper 2990WX and Threadripper 2950X. Although these two CPUs share the same basic DNA, you should know they are very different processors, targeting completely different market segments.
Who would have thought a year ago that we'd see AMD dethrone Intel at the high-end CPU segment? It's an exciting time to be a PC enthusiast and after extensive testing, we've come up with this quick guide to bring you the best CPU choices available right now.
Finally the Skylake-X series is complete. We now have Intel's new 16- and 18-core processors on-hand an while we don't doubt Intel had planned to release Skylake-X all along, did they really plan to offer something higher than a 12-core part before catching wind of AMD's Threadripper?
