Performance was perfectly acceptable but for maximum performance the 9900K does deliver the best results.Next up we have Assassin’s Creed Odyssey and this is another title where Intel is a little faster on average but you’ll never notice the ~4% reduction in average frame rates when using the 3900X. Shopping Shortcuts: AMD … AMD says that Auto OC is designed to improve performance in single-threaded workloads, while PBO boosts heavily-threaded applications. 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. Pros. Bottom line: High-end desktop CPU performance. In either case, you can toggle both settings simultaneously for the best of both worlds.
Several motherboard vendors have told us that overclocking headroom is extremely limited on the Ryzen 3000 processors, and that exceeding the boost clocks, or even meeting them, isn't possible for all-core overclocking. The 9900K was faster overall but the 3900X was only 4% slower on average, so not a bad result for AMD.All testing took place at 1080p using an MSI RTX 2080 Ti graphics card to remove GPU bottlenecks. $500.
Incredible Value. But picking between the top two options isn't easy. That’s particularly true given the strong 1% low performance of the Ryzen processor.The Resident Evil 2 results are interesting: stock the 3900X was 6% slower on average, but provided stronger 1% low performance, beating the 9900K by 4%. Where the 3900X did surprise was in Monster Hunter World.
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3700X Review: Zen 2 and 7nm Unleashed ... would be interesting to see if the price tag for the 3800X over the 3700X is indeed worth it Reply.
We're not using the replay feature to measure performance, rather we're dropping into the same map at the same spot and measuring performance that way. In terms of 64-core performance at this price point, there is no threat from Intel. Our resident overclocking expert Allen 'Splave' Golibersuch has also spent time with early Ryzen 3000 samples and was unable to break the 4.1 GHz barrier without sub-ambient cooling.There was a problem. But lo and behold the 3900X was a smidgen faster, performance was basically the same overall, but we didn’t expect the 3900X to push average frame rates higher than the 9900K.We tested the latest version of World War Z which brings about a number of fixes and performance improvements. Overall the experience was much the same using either CPU.Another title where Ryzen seems to struggle is Shadow of the Tomb Raider and do note we’re not using the built-in benchmark which we believe would help out Ryzen's case. One thing for certain is that the Ryzen 9 3900X will perform better than the Ryzen 7 3800X, but the question is by how much it performs better during gaming, and whether opting for the Ryzen 9 3900X is worth the extra cost. We tested with multiple motherboards and met with the same result, which could boil down to the quality of our sample or motherboard firmwares. In terms of frame rates, for very low FPS (certainly not the case at 1080p with a 2080 Ti), 30 to 32 fps is a 7% increase, for example.