Uh oh, 9900K drama, looks like intel fluffed the numbers to make the 9900k look better.

[omega552003]

https://www.patreon.com/posts/21950120

 

Essentially Intel paid a company to generate some benchmarks. the chip they compared the 9900k to was the 2700x which is close specs wise, but what they did was run the ryzen in "gaming mode" which disables the CCX on the ryzen and shutting down half the cores. This gives the perception that the 9900k is significatly more powerful that a 2700x.

 

 

[DVA]

I am so surprised

 

(sarcasm) 

 

It's a scummy, but normal business practice at this point =/

[AntiTrust]

tbh, I don't trust any marketing material from any component manufacturer anyways,

 

this is why channels like LTT, GN and HU exist

[Princess Luna]

you're late to the party:

 

[Snipergod87]

While I agree with that they should have used all the same hardware, seeing as Intel doesn't benefit nearly the same way as AMD does from RAM speed i am willing to overlook that part, though using gaming mode on AM4 was a bad move.

 

Either way its obvious without benchmarks that it will outperform the 2700x

[TahoeDust]

Intel did not fluff anything.  Intel hired a independent company (Principled Technologies) to test their CPU and their competitors.  Principled Technologies did a grossly incompetent job.   Intel's mistake was publishing numbers they should have known would be torn apart for testing inconsistencies.  Steve at Gemers Nexus did a scathing video about it.  What is more interesting is that Gamers Nexus is apparently like 25 minutes away so they drove over there to talk to them about their testing.  GN just posted this...

 

 

 

 

Here is their original video about the benchmarks...