The real 9900k Test

[Big Head Tech]

I figured out how to get 3000MHz ram to work with 4 sticks, but for the test I ran 2x16GB

 

So I will spoil this for everyone who is not subscribed to my channel.  I got my hands on a 9900k today paired with a 1080 TI FTW and I am quite disappointed.  The only gave that I any gains was GTA V.  Just a few things to note.  I do real world gaming test which includes Discord, HW Monitor, GPU-Z, MSI AB, Chrome with 4 tabs open including YouTube.  I tweaked GPU settings after a few runs to try and remove any GPU Bottleneck and gain some separation.  Also the Cryorig R1 cannot handle the 9900k at 5.0GHz, so I left the auto boost function as I did XFR2 for the Ryzen chip too.  It ran all cores at 4.7GHz with 2 cores hitting 5.0GHz.  My 2700x was hitting between 4050-4100 all core with boosts up to 4.3GHz.

 

Here were the specs:

 

Ryzen 7 2700x
Asus X470 Pro
Cryorig R1 Universal
2x16GB @ 3000MHz (Corsair LPX)
EVGA GTX 1080 TI FTW
Seasonic Focus Gold 850W
Full tower Phanteks case (forget the model)

 

vs

Intel I9-9900k

Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master
Cryorig R1 Universal
2x16GB @ 3000MHz (Corsair LPX)
EVGA GTX 1080 TI FTW
EVGA G3 650W 80+ Gold
Fractal Design Meshify

Using a Samsung external SSD.

 

Results:

 

Rise of the Tomb Raider (1440p max settings, Motion Blur off)
Ryzen 7 2700x: 118.25
I9-9900k: 118.98

 

GTA V (1440p, max settings, AA & Motion Blur off)
Ryzen 7 2700x: 119.02
Intel I9-9900k: 138.56

 

Ghost Recon Wildlands (1440p Very high)
Ryzen 7 2700x: 85.23
Intel I9-9900k: 90.09

 

For Honor (1440p Max Settings)
Ryzen 7 2700x: 124.92
Intel I9-9900k: 126.89

 

Ashes of the Singularity (1440p Extreme - CPU portion of GPU Test)
Ryzen 7 2700x: 112.3
Intel I9-9900k: 121.8

 

FF XV (1440p High Settings)
Ryzen 7 2700x: 7982
Intel I9-9900k: 8130

 

Time Spy (CPU Portion only)
Ryzen 7 2700x: 30.91
Intel I9-9900k: 37.31

 

Cinebench SC:
Ryzen 7 2700x: 175
Intel I9-9900k: 213

 

Cinebench MC:
Ryzen 7 2700x: 1827
Intel I9-9900k: 2025

I am quite disappointed as I was hopeful with that HUGE SC difference.  The 9900k is about 16% faster but 21% higher single core performance.  But in reality that did not translate in these games.  Unfortunately I did not have time to test WoW.  Wish I did.  But there were a few outliers, his case had better cooling than mine and his power supply is better too.  But if anything that should have shifted the difference his way.  I expected that the 2700x would have gotten smoked by 25-30% to be honest.  I also did not realize that many games with enough GPU power, I could push 1440p 144Hz.

[Firewrath9]

Games aare mostly gpu bound, however, on games like csgo 1080p, it can get severely single core bound

[Big Head Tech]

1 minute ago, Firewrath9 said:

Games aare mostly gpu bound, however, on games like csgo 1080p, it can get severely single core bound

But as I have mentioned many times, that is not relevant.  The question is, if you're gaming on a 9700k/9900k at 1440p, how much better is it when pushing for 100+ FPS.  The answer is it's really not.  Look at the MC Cinebench difference, less than 10% but 16% higher clock speeds.  Even GTA was not a big difference that I was expecting.  Neither was Ashes.  The main take away for me was, I recommended Intel for 144Hz gaming, well clearly Ryzen can easily do it to.

[Jurrunio]

well because the gains are only significant at 1080p or below? This has been the case even for the 8700k when going against 2nd gen Ryzen 7, explained using GPU bottleneck.

[Big Head Tech]

1 minute ago, Jurrunio said:

well because the gains are only significant at 1080p or below? This has been the case even for the 8700k when going against 2nd gen Ryzen 7.

Well then, I cannot even recommend Intel anymore then.  In the real world, they offer no real advantage over AMD except not as good multitasking performance.

[Jurrunio]

1 minute ago, Snaeb said:

In the real world, they offer no real advantage over AMD except not as good multitasking performance.

That's the point isnt it? For example, remember how Premiere Pro's Quicksync export acceleration shook Ryzen fanboys? 8700k beat 2700x easily despite less multicore performance. With the 9900k, it should benefit from advantages on both sides at once (with a price of these two CPUs in one as well)

[Big Head Tech]

Just now, Jurrunio said:

That's the point isnt it? For example, remember how Premiere Pro's Quicksync export acceleration shook Ryzen fanboys? 8700k beat 2700x easily despite less multicore performance. With the 9900k, it should benefit from advantages on both sides at once (with a price of these two CPUs in one as well)

the 9900k is beating my customers 1950x in Adobe, hence why we changed the platform.  I just really expected even in a real world test, to see 20-25% increase.