There's only one single AMD CPU I would recommend, the 7800X3D which is pretty much just good for strictly gaming. And that's not even their own tech, that's TSMC's. Still only 8 cores.
No. Intel is not good for any real use. For gaming, AMD is better. For gaming and something else, AMD is still better because of Intel's Thread director. Putting background tasks on slower cores is about stupidest thing ever seen on desktop PC's. That's also reason why Intel only puts hybrid crap on desktop. On servers something like that would be laughed out. Intel's Hybrid crap only exists because it looks good on benchmarks.
You can't be serious? This very site has performance benchmarks in it's review of 14th Gen that paint a different picture:
www.techspot.com
Yes. AMD Dual CCD is worse than hybrid cores for gaming. Higher average fps doesn't mean it's a smoother experience. You have to hunt very specific and much slower ram kits down because everyone wants the same ones for 1:1 infinity fabric. X670E is very very expensive. If Intel was truly good for nothing then the market prices would show them way under AMD and they aren't.
This is one of those silly perspectives about power draw. You had a 6950XT and your talking about what's more efficient. Lol it's a power beast.You can't be serious? This very site has performance benchmarks in it's review of 14th Gen that paint a different picture:
Intel Core i9-14900K, i7-14700K and i5-14600K Review
Intel is launching today their latest-gen Core desktop CPUs with three new models: the Core i9-14900K, Core i7-14700K, and Core i5-14600K, all sound familiar, maybe too familiar....
For gaming, absolute fastest is undeniably the 7800X3D right now. The fact it's 8 cores is a weak argument, just LOOK how it benches. If you happen to have the dual CCD 7950X3D, it looses about 5-7% on peak FPS, but not all the time - As in some games and apps it's perf is identical to the 7800X3D. Now just look at how it looses ZERO ground to Intel's i9-14900K in non-gaming workloads.
While using a lot less power, runs cooler and is cheaper to buy.
If I needed my PC to double as a workstation and gaming rig, the 7950X3D is a better pick over the i9 any day of the week right now. It looses to the i9 in 2 of the 7 productivity benches, and absolutely trounces it in all but one of the gaming ones.
Lastly on a side note, before anyone else comes at me for shilling AMD - My longest serving CPU I have ever owned was my trusty i7-4790K. Ran that CPU all core overclocked to 4.8 24/7 at only 0.025mv above stock voltages from 2014 until 2022 when I moved to Ryzen 7 5800X3D. The 4790K was a great CPU of it's time, and was only retired because I swapped from a Radeon RX 5700XT to a RX 6950XT and couldn't get anywhere close to utilising the GPU to 100%. I buy whatever's best for me at the time. It was Intel in 2014, and was AMD in 2022.
Um, Intel has 8 P-cores, AMD has 8 cores with 3D cache. How is AMD worse? Intel Crap cores are useless for games anyway.
I still have the 6950XT, I don't upgrade often and it's still my current GPU. I like it, nothing wrong with it's performance almost 2 years later. I realise I'm in a very small minority using this card, but it's power use is no different to it's competing RTX 3090/Ti of the same release year.
Cause AMD was first to market with DDR5, PCIe5 and Wifi7 right? What are you even talking about there with X670E? Too far ahead? Like what are you even trying to say.
Your perspective on why power draw matters is silly is what I'm getting at. Saying you got a Ryzen CPU and one of the reasons is power draw/efficiency but then you run an extremely power hungry GPU. It's contradicting. Like if you actually cared about that aspect of your system you would've went with a smaller GPU.
The fixes are to literally run it within Intel's spec. Not outside the spec like mobo makers default to.
Like what are you even asking? PCIe configuration AMD vs Intel:
It makes sense to have more cores but again, even Intel does not offer more than 8 "big" cores on one cluster and AMD chiplets have 8 core CCX so hoping for more is pretty much futile right now. Again, X3D tech has nothing to do with amounts of core on CCX.
Idk bout DOA... As if pcie5 nvme drives are extremely necessary right and will be within the next 2 years..
Proof that these chips are being pushed to their limits and straight off the cliff.
Intel LGA1700 platform cannot take advantage of PCIe NVMe 5.0 drives and cannot do that in future. That means LGA1700 is both DOA and not future proof. Intel's next platform will likely support PCIe 5.0 NVMe. As usual, Intel is way behind AMD on IO side.
