INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
Intel has been having a tough time recently trying to compete with AMD in the desktop segment, that's nothing new
been spotted by Wccftech, sourced via the Baidu forums
This slide makes claims about the Intel Core i5-9600KF and the Intel Core i3-9350KF, stating that they're better than the Ryzen 7 3800X and
The core reason Intel cites for these claims is that the boost clocks are higher, which isn't exactly news
However while we haven't tested the Intel chips in question, the Ryzen processors come pretty close to matching single-core performance in
So, is this a case of Intel just misleading consumers, trying to stop more people from jumping on the AMD bandwagon? Or are there some
legitimate claims being made?Because we haven't tested the Intel Core i5-9600KF and Core i3-9350KF ourselves, we can't actually make any
sweeping statements that Intel was wrong here
However, we have reviewed a few other Coffee Lake Refresh chips and plenty of AMD Ryzen 3rd Generation processors, so we can make a couple
they're helpful in showing the peak performance of each chip we run through them
The days of applications being single-threaded are over, so we think these tests are going to become more important, rather than the other
maybe we're wrong?Even in single-core workloads, the Intel Core i7-9700K doesn't pull as far ahead of the Ryzen 7 3700X as Intel may want
Now, Intel's chips are faster than AMD processors in pure single-threaded applications like games, but the gap is getting smaller and
chip is probably going to be the better option, but only just barely
We don't think a lot of people are using their computers, for one thing, these days, especially not at the price range of the higher-end
If all you need to do is play games, Intel is still probably the way to go
